So I will admit I am a bit biased as I lost an absolute ton of weight before I found Paleo by simply eating a small quantity of quick oats ($1.79 for a generic cardboard tube) with a little bit of real maple syrup or real peanut butter for breakfast, the same for lunch, and then a simple dinner of probably Paleo-friendly stew or fish with some veggies.
To be honest at about a 1/3 cup dry for breakfast and another for lunch I was probably entering ketosis from low calories even though I was eating 'carbs'. Oatmeal is fairly low on the Glylcemic index, but with such a small quantity I probably was 'almost fasting' for 24 hours at a time. I understand the logic behind (and currently do) the fasting with Paleo, but felt like I was keeping the fire burning while burning off excess fat around the clock.
PaNu's approach to weight loss is here: LINK There are some similarities, but also significant differences.
So, why not oatmeal? I am interested in Paleo from the 'this is what our bodies do and how they respond to foods' aspect, not the particulars of what humans ate in that particular epoch. It doesn't matter to me that humans in Paleo times didn't cook with this method or that... I am only interested in the why and how of real health and digestion.
PaNu seems to be anti grains in general, and I understand that gluten grains can cause leaky gut, and that we all are probably somewhat intolerant to wheat; but what is the science behind avoiding oatmeal?
Since starting a Lacto-Paleo style approach I cut out oatmeal and started eating more fats and fasting. This seems to work too, but I am curious why the former approach I stumbled upon might be considered 'wrong' from a Paleo standpoint.
In short, why is oatmeal 'bad' for me?