You are imagining his explanation of the biochemical pathways is the sole supporting science. That's incorrect. There are many studies supporting the direct e

You are imagining his explanation of the biochemical pathways is the sole supporting science. That's incorrect. There are many studies supporting the direct effects of sugar, including measured lipids in students who are asked to drink sugar-laden soda vs controls. Given the many studies, he gives his hypothesis on the pathways that contribute to metabolic syndrome. Full-blown diabetes does not have to be present for there to be bad effects. Studies on the effects of hyperinsulinemia and increased insulin receptors suggest a whole list of bad outcomes, including a cellular environment that fosters cancers. He does not claim obesity is the main disease. It's another sequella of the underlying issue: excessive fructose metabolism.