It's amazing how many HNers link this charlatan's op-ed thinking it's evidence. Presumably you don't like linking to our best human outcome research on the subject because it never pans out well for saturated fat–not for atherosclerosis, not for nonalcoholic fatty liver disease, not for glucose sensitivity, and so on.
So you link to the equivalent of a reddit post 'summarizing' the space. I see this link every week on here and every time, the person who linked it thinks they just had a mic drop moment like you.
I think discussing this topic with too much fervor is a waste of energy. Nutrition science is hard because performing valid studies at large scale is close to impossible, so I’m left performing an argument from nature, being that eating things that were invented decades ago might be worse for us than things we’ve eaten for millions of years.
So you link to the equivalent of a reddit post 'summarizing' the space. I see this link every week on here and every time, the person who linked it thinks they just had a mic drop moment like you.