Interesting how they referenced Aseem Malhotra in the vested interests section of the article without even offering what his supposed vested interests are. Perhaps they were going to mention his book The Pioppi Diet, until they discovered that he doesn't actually collect any profits from it.

And of course, it's not like the noses of critics like Walter Willett and David Katz are completely clean, either. How does that old saying go? "Always accuse your opponent of that for which you yourself are guilty"?