Let me try to address some of these points first with some evolutionary perspective. Imagine yourself our early ancestors with limited tools of stone and wood. You have a choice for food, you can walk up to a plant and start eating it, or you can spend time and energy making a weapon, tracking prey, hopefully catching that prey without injuring yourself, skinning it, gutting it, hopefully cooking it properly, and still possibly risking parasites and poisonous bacteria, especially if fire is unavailable. Just from a time and energy use perspective I'd take the easy route and eat the plant material, even plant material that required cooking would be easier.
Pollan's advice is pretty decent, but you don't need the vegetables. If you like them, fine, but for some they cause health issues.
This is a poor argument because pretty much anything causes health issues in someone. Epigenetic alterations from drugs and pollutants in the environment have likely altered the natural responses of many people to some degree.
Sounds weird, right? Not really, plants evolved defence-mechanisms against being eaten, so many of them contain a lot of toxins, small amounts, it's true, but they do make some people sick.
Again, same problem as above, some people might react negatively to something. Plus many plants in fact evolved to be eaten, at least parts of them, as a way to distribute their seeds. Fruits are the prime example, the plants evolved sweet tasty covering for their seeds. If they had damaging compounds animals and people wouldn't eat them, seeds would not get distributed within a conducive growing medium, (waste), and the plants would likely go extinct.
Fat is what human evolved to eat. Fat is the single most important macro-nutrient and it's essential for life. If you don't eat fats you will die - it's called "rabbit starvation".
Fats are of course part of a balanced diet. "Rabbit starvation" is quite rare. Related to my previous point above, if fats are "the single most important macro-nutrient" why does almost no one desire to eat pure fat on it's own, (which most people think is tasteless and rather gross), and why do most people crave sweets and sugar, which fat and meat have almost none, but fruit is loaded with? Why would we have taste receptors for sweetness if it weren't a signal for us to eat foods containing it?
Of course there's huge establishment FUD against this, because they want to keep you all sick so they can keep selling their drugs.
I have a big problem with this line of reasoning, it's sort of a conspiracy theory tactic which people use to argue the moon landing never happened and the earth is really flat. The fact is many independent researchers and doctors have done a lot of work trying to find the truth with no other agenda. Dr Greger for example reads through hundreds of studies and gives away his interpretations for free on youtube, not even monetizing his videos. Yes he has a book but since he gives away all his findings for free and updates them constantly I can't imagine any reason to buy the book. He's a Dr. who has experienced first hand improvements in his patients through switching to a more plant based diet, and provides a number of studies backing up his claims. Clinical trials, in vitro experiments, and population studies, all combining to reach a similar conclusion. The "establishment trying to keep you sick" argument doesn't hold water when part of the "establishment" is a well funded meat industry pushing their agenda as well.
A final word on phytates and oxalates as "anti nutrients". Yes they can limit some absorption of some compounds but most plants have an abundance of those compounds compared to meat and thus a slight reduction in absorption doesn't have an overall negative effect. Plus other plant foods can counteract their effects, spinach is high in oxlates but vitamin C can negate that. Eat your spinach with a bell pepper. The idea that anti nutrients are a protective measure used by plants to avoid being eaten doesn't hold up since any negative effects might not show up for months or not at all, it's a pretty weak defense.
