I don't see anywhere in that study where it shows superiority of low carb in comparison to low calorie.
I never said ketosis was bad nor that keto diets themselves weren't effective - I was simply saying at the end of the day calorie balance is what matters and that article/whatever doesn't show any proof beyond that.
Anytime a keto diet works, it's because they eat less calories than they normally would - that simple. Most people can't eat the same amount of protein and fat calories as they could carbohydrate calories.
The ketosis thing was just part of that. You don't even have to be in ketosis for it to work. I don't think you looked at it carefully.
Your last paragraph is demonstrably false. It goes over that in the link I posted. People are capable of eating more with high carb, but that is irrelevant, as you try to eat less when you lose weight. People can indeed eat the same amount of calories or more and lose weight with low carb. The effect is more pronounced in people with metabolic problems.
The easiest way to understand why this is, and how it works, is to learn a little about biochemistry. Let me just give a quick example. Insulin is responsible for fat storage and feeding your body. So without it, you waste away and starve to death no matter how much you eat. If you stimulate insulin release with carbs, you increase fat storage and inhibit the mobilization of fat cells.
Then there is digestibility, carbs are more easily and quickly digested and stored. It's a more efficient fuel. There isn't as much thermogenic waste either.
another factor is that your body can regulate metabolism based on many factors. So attempting to eat less may just cause you to become more hungry, tired, and able to do less exercise. Manipulating your hormones can usually change this.
So hopefully those are easy to understand examples.
So when do calories matter? They matter AFTER all that stuff I talked about is done. This is on the cellular level. However those calories are determined by the other 90% of the equation.
So when do calories on the box label matter? When you are already doing very low carb, you can reduce calories to speed weight loss. However metabolic down regulation may become a factor at some point. This technique is particularly important for pre-contest cutting.
If you don't agree and still say it's all calories, then why don't you post some evidence.
First and foremost, fat stores efficiently even without insulin. Insulin is NOT required for fat storage.
Secondly, even if insulin did cause fat storage - it would be temporary, as when insulin levels drop you would continue using fat for fuel. What matters, then? The amount of total energy(calories) you consumed.
You will be hard pressed to find any reputable source that says calories are not the determining factor in weight/fat loss.
You're taking entirely too extremist of a view on insulin/carbs and demonizing them without realizing that calories are what matters.
Weightology.net has a good series on insulin and why it isn't the demon low-carb advocates make it out to be.
As for me misunderstanding what you had linked - it didn't show any proof that caloric deficit wasn't required for fat loss - which is what I'm arguing.
You can not eat 1000 calories of fat/protein over your maintenance and not gain weight, it goes against the laws of thermodynamics.