Simply bashing established diet guidelines of the Heart Foundation and Diabetes Australia by assertions unsupported by well researched evidence, is just not good enough.

I am not in any LCHF camp. I think it would very difficult for most people to meet nutrient needs adequately by such means (adequate micronutrients, as well as the carbohydrates themselves). I have read a good many anecdotes of people who seemed to get benefit from low carb diets in the short term (eg 3-18 mths), but got worsened health in the longer term (often including reduced metabolism, as predicted by Dr Atkins). I suspect that there are many studies showing short term apparently beneficial changes in some particular risk markers, and in some symptoms. I doubt that there are rigorous long term studies showing LCHF to be beneficial over moderate or high carb diets that meet other nutritional needs for protein, minerals and vitamins. None-the-less, I can imagine that there might be individual exceptions where long term lowish carb may be useful, if their carbohydrate metabolism is already irrevocably deranged.

But I am not convinced that the evidence supports (poly- or mono-) unsaturated fats over saturated fats.
In fact, one of the many difficulties I see in a LCHF diet is that it is difficult to avoid excessive unsaturated fats on a high fat diet, even if you mostly eat relatively saturated fat.

http://nutritionfacts.org/video/the-saturated-fat-studies-buttering-up-the-public/