Well that's an opinion. One fact is that the GI of white rice is almost 50% higher than that of brown rice. That is metabolically significant. The best argument against brown rice is not that it's nutritionally barely superior to white rice but that brown rice contains higher levels of arsenic compared to white rice.
I eat a few bananas every week but I eat more avos than bananas. Plantains on occasion with Puerto Rican food or casado when I'm in Costa Rica.
I actually love to cook plantains.
Avocado toast with egg and Vegemite! I want that now but I'm fresh out of avocados.
TJ's and Fred Meyer are fully stocked and they are not beat to death.
The topic the nutritionist was speaking on was nutrient density and bio availability as it related to athletic performance. Which is more in line with the conversation of the thread. Glycemic index is typically used for people who are diabetic or closely watching their carbohydrate intake. In either case I think a sugary smoothie would not be recommended. It is unfair to take this one comment totally out of context.
Dr Sten makes zero distinction, rice is rice. I mean sometimes he will say something like brown rice is very slightly better. But yes neither is good if going grain carb free.
If your metabolism is in fine order and if you are eating a balanced diet it certainly won't matter if you eat a serving of white rice versus a serving of brown rice. But one third of the population has metabolic syndrome while over 10% have outright diabetes. Snce the article is in regard to athletes' performance the context of when and under what circumstances eating rice is advantageous should not be neglected and it hardly carries over to advice for most people.
Obviously, you should not eat rice if you are on a very low-carb diet. But what if you live in a country where the main food is rice and you only get small amounts of veg and even less quantities of meat and dairy? Beriberi, remember?