If you're like me then you feel annoyed when somebody asks you to prove that gluten is harmful to the body. People will say things like, "I feel fine and I've been eating bread and pasta and cereal my whole life."
Anything short of a celiac diagnosis and people will defend gluten, literally to the death. Proponents of wheat-based products think that unless a physician examines their gastrointestinal track and records an acute autoimmune response to the gluten protein molecule, then they're safe to eat gluten until their heart's content...or at least until someone proves gluten causes ill effects in non-celiacs. They quickly dismiss your advice against gluten as silly, misguided or even offensive.
Paleo types tend to adopt a defensive stance in trying to prove that gluten can be harmful for all people regardless of celiac status. We scramble for links and studies that might expose gluten. Often these searches turn up nothing compelling enough to overturn hidden biases cleverly implanted by bread-makers, propagandists and spinsters who are allowed to make unjust claims on food packages that make people believe whole wheat bread reduces cholesterol, cancer or heart disease.
Most endocrinologists recommend whole wheat bread to their diabetic patients!
Well, is anybody out there getting sick of caving and scrambling for evidence that exposes gluten?
Would it be easier to reach people and more effective if we extract the bias and simply find out why they think bread or cereal is nutritious? Then deal head-on with each specific misconception about each purported benefit?
Let's say you own a self-proclaimed health store with jars and crates of gluten on the shelves.
Give me one reason to buy your product.