Surely he's either right or he's wrong. Either the ingestion of fructose leads to 3x the number of calories that must be phosphorylated or it doesn't (versus glucose). The need for this extra phosphor either leads to more uric acid, or it doesn't. So on and so forth.
It's like watching 1 politician argue "This budget will save $X billion over 5 years", while the opposition argues that "No, it will COST $X Billion over 5 years".
Isn't this shit basic chemistry for these professional?