Here's the full paper we're discussing here: https://insight.jci.org/articles/view/95913

On this forum, from experience, we know carbs cause obesity, i.e. carbohydrates stimulate insulin stimulate excess fat accumulation. We know this not from a hypothesis, but from direct observation and experiments.

In the paper we're discussing here, it says in the introduction "Glucose is the primary energy source for the brain, which consumes more glucose (~60% of total glucose-derived energy) than any other organ in the body (3).", but this directly opposes the facts we know about carbs and obesity and the effect of low-carb on all of it. Facts trump hypothesis. Facts win. Glucose is not the primary energy source for the brain.

In this paper, check Table 2, it's much more pertinent than anything else. See ghrelin and leptin. From personal experience, I promise that ghrelin is a very, very, very potent stimulator of hunger. Leptin opposes ghrelin, it shuts down hunger, causes satiety, and absolutely effective for leptin deficiency (doh!), but completely ineffective for leptin resistance (doh?). And check insulin too, it's ridiculously ridiculous high for T2DM subjects.

Now check Figure 3. It reminds me of the graphs from the 7 Country Study by Ancel Keys. Can't see any tendency at a glance, must be drawn on top based on statistics. Red flag. Too few subjects. Red flag. I could imagine they didn't have enough money for hundreds of subjects, but it was financed by Pfizer and Regeneron where there's literally tons of money for that kind of crap. Call me cynical.

I was about to write something smart, but the experiment and results are just too complicated for me, they don't fit what I know. I prefer simple to explain it all, like money from big pharma.