With so many  testimonials and "peer reviewed papers" and multitudes of 
claims and counterclaims in books magazines and the web etc., I  adopted 
an attitude that I will give the idea or research the 'benefit of the 
doubt' if it comes from a recognized authority such as a PhD in that 
particular field. However I also realize that 'Authorities' can be 
persuaded to publish garbage if the price is right, so I try to make 
sense or rationalize the argument to my best ability and then review the 
argument as presented by the authority. One of the underlying themes in 
the Paleo diet is that most seeds evolved defense mechanisms  such as 
toxic lectin type compounds as in grains,or neat strategies to pass 
through digestive tracts and be deposited in rich fertilizer such as the 
case for apple and citrus fruit seeds etc..  Coconuts and it derivatives 
are being touted as a mainstay of Polynesian paleolithic peoples. I am 
having difficulty rationalizing the how and why coconuts are not toxic. 
Its pro ported to be the closest thing to 'mothers milk' for many 
important compounds such as Lauric acid etc.. I see no advantage for 
that particular palm species to allow us eat  and destroy its seed? I 
sure hope that what I am reading about coconut is true because I really 
like eating and cooking with coconut. "Cordain" states that because 
coconut is 100 % saturated and has an extremely poor O6 to O3 ratio it 
should be avoided at all cost? Would anyone care to comment on this?
Don