Modern wheat a "perfect, chronic poison," doctor says

[jeff47]

204. Here's how you're getting the science wrong

The problem is the author of that paper has declared "animal-based diets" based on studies from around 1985.

Those studies claimed things like carbon isotopes can prove meat-vs-plant diet. Because somehow the carbon atoms would know they were in a plant instead of a gazelle. And somehow 3 skeletons from about the same area are somehow a valid sample. And forgetting that bones decay much slower than dead plants. But I digress.

More modern studies have basically come to the conclusion "it's hard to say". Such as this one. However, we do have evidence in that until we developed decent hunting tools we could not live in the relatively plant-poor colder climates. Like Europe.

That pre-tool era would be closest to what we "evolved to eat", if you're going to make the claim we "evolved to eat" anything in particular.

Also:

there was a characteristic reduction in stature , an
increase in infant mortality , a reduction in lifespan , an increased
incidence of infectious diseases , an increase in iron deficiency anemia
, an increased incidence of osteomalacia, porotic hyperostosis and
other bone mineral disorders and an increase in the number of
dental caries and enamel defects

It's called a population explosion. It happens in pretty much all mammals when you provide them a massive abundance of food.

Lastly, there's a major chemistry flaw in your conclusions: Carbohydrates don't only come from cereals. Yes, cereal grains are high in carbohydrates, but what's the major source of calories for humans in vegetables? Or apples? Or potatoes? Carbohydrates. Plants have little in the way of protein and humans can't digest cellulose.