I think Kevin Hall's observation that the TEE's measured in the supposedly weight stable phase of this diet, that varied from an average of 140 to >500 cal/day more than the average intake pretty much negates drawing any sort of meaningful conclusions from the Ebbeling et.al. study. It really is a waste of time and mental energy to discuss a highly suspect 300 cal/day difference in TEE measured by state of the art methods, but highly susceptible to error as it was not measured directly.
But what can we learn from this study? Well, as with the Biggest Loser study we learn that:
