His bias shows clearly in my view. He complains about large scale epidemiological studies (in the links you provided) and then uses what seems like a relatively

His bias shows clearly in my view. He complains about large scale epidemiological studies (in the links you provided) and then uses what seems like a relatively small study to back up his claims (in the parent story). Large scale epidemiological studies may have problems but they are enough to tip the burden of proof towards those who would disagree with them. It is certainly better than relying on some notions of the diet that our primitive ancestors may have had - especially considering that our current circumstances are very different and our life spans are already greater. To me this is a case of naturalistic fallacy.