So, a specialist with ketones published a study related to ketones; which they stand to benefit monetarily from.*
That doesn't necessarily mean the research is suspect in itself - but there is a reason we need disclosures like this.
"Competing interests: The intellectual property covering the manufacture and use of the ketone ester is owned by the University of Oxford and the NIH and is licensed to TdeltaS Global Inc. K.C., as an inventor, receives a share of the royalties under the terms prescribed by each institution. K.C. is a director of TdeltaS Ltd., a company spun out of the University of Oxford to develop products based on the science of ketone bodies in human nutrition."
On the other hand, in the counterfactual case the reverse critique would also be possible: if he's so sure about his science claims, why doesn't he put his money where his mouth is?