This is the order I think most of my colleagues read something in their field:
Abstract, results, methods, conclusions.
Experts can glean a lot about the methods from the results, and what not can be obtained from the methods. The conclusions are usually debatable, and mostly in the abstract.
The significance statements are worthless wastes of time.
The saturated/polyunsaturated issue to me points to the complexity of the science, not necessarily to anything nefarious.
Consider the response of both to heat. There's a good explanation for why polyunsaturated fats are more healthy when raw, but also good reasons to think that they're less healthy when heated to cooking temperature. But studies, and people, tend to ignore the distinction as if there's no chemical changes in response to 400F heat.
Add to this the fact that, for example, "sunflower oil" can vary wildly in it's actual lipid structure because of genetic variation, things get even more complicated.
Sure, there's manipulation in nutrition science, but it's not that different from other biomedical sciences. A lot of the confusion is that, but a lot of it is just random sampling variation, and problems people have with interpreting meta-analyses rather than individual studies; but some of it too is the actual inherent complexity of the topic.
That chain you're outlining is part of the problem with health care in the US.
It's not just pharmacists or PAs, it's psychologists, optometrists, dentists... The problem is we have this over regulated system that doesn't recognize the actual capabilities of many in the system that could be doing a lot more than they are, we're it not for professional lobbying around turf.
There are huge unrecognized bottlenecks to care that have everything to do with inaccurate regulatory assumptions about who can do what, starting with the consumer themselves.
I get a little upset about the idea of triaging down a chain, because the triage chain itself is a flawed idea. I dream of a much more competitive system where people get drug advice from professionals based on those professionals' training and expertise, regardless of specific training pathway or background.
Abstract, results, methods, conclusions.
Experts can glean a lot about the methods from the results, and what not can be obtained from the methods. The conclusions are usually debatable, and mostly in the abstract.
The significance statements are worthless wastes of time.