Please please keep in mind that I am not in anyway "knocking" dr graham or 80/10/10 in anyway...Im am honestly just confused by the lack of obvious validity I am seeing in his arguments in chapter one.
If you guys could help straighten me out I would greatly appreciate it, Im really confused.
1 - Could you do it without the use of a tool
I noted that Dr Graham seemed to base quite a few arguments on the "Could you eat it in its natural state without the use of a tool,container,heat etc etc.
- Maybe I am misinterpreting it...and I hope I am...but ...if we aren't supposed to eat anything that doesn't require a tool of one type or another...then.. we shouldn't be eating nuts with shells on them, or pineapples, or cantaloupe, or watermelon....etc etc....because we can't get into these things without a "tool".....
How did you guys interpret this??
2 - Nuts and seeds - Grains? .....
My question is this...Dr Graham defines grains as..seed...grass seed to be exact....why is it that we should eat...flax seed..or chia seed...but we shouldn't eat "grass seed".....and no I am not advocating eating "Grass seed"(grains)..that sounds kinda nasty
But his statements "for" seeds and nuts...was that..they are hard to digest...but we should still eat them??
I was thoroughly confused about that.... It would make much more sense to me if he said we shouldn't be eating seeds at all..of any kind(nut,fruit seed,grain/grass seed etc). But how can he say that we "should" eat seeds and nuts...(but I couldn't find any apparent reason why we should do this)....but we shouldnt eat..."grass seed"
3. - Using a childs "instincts"
Most of you have read the book and saw the analogy of the child in a room with a goat and a banana...which will he eat and which will he play with....
...If you stick a child in the yard with...grass...dirt...rocks...bugs....and a banana
Which one would you parents bet he would eat? (My money is on the rock ;))
Frankly...the argument against grains was weak at best.....Again..did I misinterpret it?
Im not knocking what he is saying....but it bothers me that he can take a valid argument..and back it up with an in-valid example...
P.S. On the plus side...I loved the introduction :) ...and alot of chapter one made alot of sense and just clarified some important things for me :) Im looking forward to reading the rest of the book...I just feel like I need to solidify these things before I continue reading .....Note..I may just be misinterpreting these arguments :)