Lustig claims there was a catastrophic shift from fats to sugars due to blaming fats for obesity. Supposedly fructose doesn't trigger the satiation signals that fats do however.
Fructose also has different glycemic profile - it doesn't trigger the same big spike is blood sugar that glucose does. It has to be metabolized by the liver first, which is the rate-limiting step. Although, too much can lead to a cirrhosis-like condition called non-alcoholic fatty liver disease [1]. Sugar is bad, even fructose.
With that in mind, there's no such thing as a minimum required daily intake of carbohydrates.
Yeah, fats definitely have issues, but, they come with rate limiters - satiation triggers. Heart of his argument is that fructose triggers nothing, so you keep chugging it, and with almost identical stress to liver as alcohol, which also has a limiter for most people (you pass out :) )
Satiation is more complicated then that. You can eat pure fat or pure sugar and neither option will make you feel full. Both will also cause malnutrition in you, no matter how much of them you consume.
With that in mind, there's no such thing as a minimum required daily intake of carbohydrates.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-alcoholic_fatty_liver_dise...