His book “a walk in the woods” is one my favorites. Will have to check this out

I have a client (I work in treatment of obesity) who has been citing one small study to me for YEARS (as a way to justify why he has never tried a low carb diet and instead endlessly gets on starvation plans he creates himself then binges and gives up....).:this study found equal weight loss in subjects given 1000 calories per day of straight carbs vs protein vs fat.
This drives me crazy as while I believe some people can be successful long term on low fat plans, there still should be a plan of some kind. Does not have to be low carb, although I feel low carb has many advantages in terms is sustainability, reduction of appetite, other health benefits.... but at end of day, I just need person to stick to a plan and most adults do better when given autonomy over these kinds of decisions.
A 1000 calorie plan obviously isn’t sustainable for anyone, and no eats just one macronutrient! So who cares what study found? Also body will behave differently when being starved vs in a calorie deficit.

He argues (he is a doctor) that there just isn’t enough double blind evidence to argue against gluten (in particular). I always say that I agree, as nutritional research is fraught with erroneous conclusions due to the difficulty of doing double blind research.
But at end of day, does it matter if it is the gluten per say or some other component in wheat that causes so many digestive issues, inflammation, are addictive and promote overeating and obesity? If we can agree removing improves these things (he agrees there is enough evidence there), we need to just take leap of faith, it is SOMETHING in grains be it gluten or another possible factor.