That may be what he's claiming, but I think he slams Taubes because Taubes dared to criticize nutrition "science" - and more and more research is accumulating that the low carb diet isn't the dangerous diet it was portrayed (by nutritionists!) to be. I think it just sticks in the craw that Taubes might have been right about anything, that he might have valid points - both about the causes of obesity and the quality of nutrition research.

I notice that when a commenter on his blog suggested a potential conflict of interest, the doctor responded that the conflict didn't exist. But he couldn't leave it at that. He had to make a snarky remark implying the commenter was 'mad' at the doctor.