The only thing we can learn from it. Is how this one person, personally, react to various diets while on a surplus caloric intake.

Agreed, case studies are curiosities that should be a catalyst for more formal research.

If you KNEW, it was only done on one singular individual, why the hell are you now calling it “the only serious comparison of dietary composition I’ve seen”.

A case study wouldn't get published if it covered a area already well published. The fact it exists means its in a novel area. I invite you to provide a better reference of a serious comparison of dietary composition. This case is novel in that its not epidemiology, its a intervention, it uses reasonable washouts, its the same individual on each course, and we know exactly what they were eating. Yes N=1, but you have to start somewhere.

You’re contradicting yourself because you’re unable to keep up. Trying to link this and market it as something of value is incompetence at best and purposefully disingenuous at worst.

You are making assumptions about my motivations which are not correct. The fact you haven't actually talked about the content of the study and are hyper focused on that it is a case study tells me your not actually interested in discussing the literature.

The methodology is extremely flawed, and you cannot use the data from this one person, to draw any conclusions on the general population.

Yes, I agree, because its a case study.

I don't even know what your position is on the literature, you have only established you don't find value in case studies.

You haven't even the grace to apologize for your demonstrably false accusations - At this point I think your just a argumentative misanthrope.