I don't want to be unnecessarily cynical, but I do notice that this research about corn was funded by a company, Tate & Lyle, which provides corn-based ingredients:
You can find less biased research that examines structurally similar resistant starches, such as bean or cocoa oligosaccharides. In theory resistant corn starch should have similar properties, with the added benefit that you can use it as a flour replacement at around 10-15% of total dry weight without significantly affecting taste or texture of the finished product.
When it comes down to it, journalists should never write articles about single health studies. In essence, none of them are valuable sources of information for the general public. Without replication and meta-analyses, they really should only get attention from the scientific community.
That's pretty funny, I was just this morning looking up Quest bars on Amazon, and the comments were all furious that they had switched the fiber source in them to soluble corn fiber
Soluble corn fiber still needs more study, but then again their previous fiber source (isomalto-oligosaccharides) seems like it was worse given what evidence does exist.
There was a "what about the men" comment that appears to have disappeared before I could respond to it, but here's some useful info about calcium https://ods.od.nih.gov/factsheets/Calcium-Consumer/ in particular check out those RDAs.
Like most RDAs, they are almost comically low. Three cups of milk (one large glass...) would exceed the recommended amount , before eating anything else that might possibly contain calcium.
http://www.tateandlyle.com/ingredientsandservices/pages/rawm...
Too bad that the researchers couldn't have found more neutral funders.