This article is from 2016. As compelling as arguing for a low-refined carb diet is, this all seems oversimplified. Can anyone weigh in?

It's a single article claiming a magical preventative for something that plagues a lot of people. As a rule of thumb, you're safe if you ignore those as the hogwash they usually are.

Have you actually read the article? Do you have any worthwhile to say in direct response to the article?

The person I was responding to asked someone to weigh in because they had difficulties discerning how to evaluate the article. The rule of thumb I gave doesn't just apply to this article, it applies to all articles belonging to a set.

What is it about this article (as in which particular text contained in it) that makes it belong to a set?

In recent years a consensus has developed among the scientists that refined carbs are harmful for a number of different reasons. This article adds one more I was unaware of.

There is no consensus about nutrition, aside from the consensus that we have no real idea what is truly the golden standard. Certainly there are no movements that are seriously backed by good science and also claim that some huge overhaul of a standard diet is required. If there was, you would see it in the recommendations of the WHO for dietary habits.

Oh, so refined carbs in huge doses are all good then?

Water in large doses also kills you. Dilluited drugs can get you killed as well.

Interesting to put this together with the recent story about possibly gingivitis bacteria being responsible for Alzheimers. It could be true that there is a multi-factor relationship, and yet focusing on one particular "cause" isn't going to be successful.