In short, based on questionable dataset, "low carb" wasn't really low carb (37-60% calories), "vegetable-based" diet was still ~30% animal source calories (vs 45% for "animal-based"), vegetable group generally ate more varied/whole food plants and had healthier behaviors, various other contradictory health outcomes within the deciles.
Most people should probably be eating more plants, but this study really doesn't demonstrate "low-carbohydrate diet based on animal sources was associated with higher all-cause mortality, whereas a vegetable-based low-carbohydrate diet was associated with lower all-cause and cardiovascular disease mortality rates" especially as most people would understand the terms "low-carb" / "based on animal sources" / "vegetable-based".
https://deniseminger.com/2010/09/08/brand-spankin-new-study-...
In short, based on questionable dataset, "low carb" wasn't really low carb (37-60% calories), "vegetable-based" diet was still ~30% animal source calories (vs 45% for "animal-based"), vegetable group generally ate more varied/whole food plants and had healthier behaviors, various other contradictory health outcomes within the deciles.
Most people should probably be eating more plants, but this study really doesn't demonstrate "low-carbohydrate diet based on animal sources was associated with higher all-cause mortality, whereas a vegetable-based low-carbohydrate diet was associated with lower all-cause and cardiovascular disease mortality rates" especially as most people would understand the terms "low-carb" / "based on animal sources" / "vegetable-based".