Yes, but you're cherrypicking changes based on what feels like should be relevant. A good deal has changed in the last 50 years, we can't (and don't want to) roll everything back, and it's unclear what should be rolled back.

Seriously, there's a reason epidemiology is a field smart people dedicate lifetimes to. This shit is difficult.

Anyway, my point wasn't that current levels of sugar consumption are fine, it's clearly not. I'm saying that the article is being dishonest which should be relevant even if their recommendations are good.