Is pastuerized juice inferior to raw juice?
Posted by:
Anonymous User
()
Date: November 29, 2008 07:28PM Besides the "feeling" of making fresh juice.
I always assumed it was but that was just an assumption. Does pasteurization really damage nutrients significantly? Curious for educated responses like from arugula or others who study nutrition. Cheers! Re: Is pastuerized juice inferior to raw juice?
Posted by:
suvine
()
Date: November 29, 2008 07:59PM Yes it kills the juice it is formula.
Can sit around for month Baby cows fed pasteurized milk die Re: Is pastuerized juice inferior to raw juice?
Posted by:
irena
()
Date: November 29, 2008 08:25PM Pasteurization is simply heating liquids (usually to below boiling temp)in order to control number of microorganisms and therefore prolong shelf live. So you are basically dealing with cooked food. Even flash pasteurized juices which the health food industry seems to market as a healthy alternative cooks the juice to at least 160F it is just done quickly so the color of the juice stays more vibrant. Again you are dealing with a cooked juice--enzymes have been destroyed, and overall nutritive value is much inferior to raw, freshly made juice. Re: Is pastuerized juice inferior to raw juice?
Posted by:
la_veronique
()
Date: November 29, 2008 09:42PM they say "FLASH" pasteurize as if killing it really fast is better than slow prolonged heating
what's the difference? Re: Is pastuerized juice inferior to raw juice?
Posted by:
swimmer
()
Date: November 29, 2008 09:45PM la_veronique Wrote:
------------------------------------------------------- > they say "FLASH" pasteurize as if killing it > really fast is better than slow prolonged heating > > what's the difference? It has a quick merciful death scene, instead of a long slow, agonizingly painful and dramatic demise. :-) Re: Is pastuerized juice inferior to raw juice?
Posted by:
arugula
()
Date: November 29, 2008 10:55PM raw vs. not raw (248 vs 249 g)
a: 496, 194 iu c: 124, 81.9 mg niacin: 1.0, 0.7 mg folate: 74.4, 44.8 mcg all other reported values are similar data sources: fresh squeezed [www.nutritiondata.com] chilled, including from concentrate [www.nutritiondata.com] Re: Is pastuerized juice inferior to raw juice?
Posted by:
Omega
()
Date: November 29, 2008 11:42PM If juice isn't perishable, it's dead. Re: Is pastuerized juice inferior to raw juice?
Posted by:
EZ rider
()
Date: November 29, 2008 11:58PM There's only one difference that matters to me between pasteurized dead food and raw live food and thats the way it makes me feel.
How's that for scientific ? Re: Is pastuerized juice inferior to raw juice?
Posted by:
Anonymous User
()
Date: November 30, 2008 01:49AM suvine Wrote:
------------------------------------------------------- > Yes it kills the juice it is formula. > Can sit around for month Define "kills"? > Baby cows fed pasteurized milk die A : are you sure? B : what's that have to do with juice? ------------------------- irena Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Pasteurization is simply heating liquids (usually > to below boiling temp)in order to control number > of microorganisms and therefore prolong shelf > live. So you are basically dealing with cooked > food. Even flash pasteurized juices which the > health food industry seems to market as a healthy > alternative cooks the juice to at least 160F it is > just done quickly so the color of the juice stays > more vibrant. Again you are dealing with a cooked > juice--enzymes have been destroyed, and overall > nutritive value is much inferior to raw, freshly > made juice. Do enzymes matter? ------------------------- la_veronique Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > they say "FLASH" pasteurize as if killing it > really fast is better than slow prolonged heating > > what's the difference? Dunno. Maybe someone will explain. I could google it but I'd rather hear a raw take. ------------------------- arugula Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > raw vs. not raw (248 vs 249 g) > a: 496, 194 iu > c: 124, 81.9 mg > niacin: 1.0, 0.7 mg > folate: 74.4, 44.8 mcg > > all other reported values are similar > > data sources: > > fresh squeezed > [www.nutritiondata.com] > t-juices/1971/2 > > chilled, including from concentrate > [www.nutritiondata.com] > t-juices/1973/2 Thank arugula! ------------------------- Omega Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > If juice isn't perishable, it's dead. All juice (no matter how it's treated) is perishable? Is raw honey "dead"? ------------------------- EZ rider Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > There's only one difference that matters to me > between pasteurized dead food and raw live food > and thats the way it makes me feel. > How's that for scientific ? It's not. Could be placebo effect, could be the enjoyable experience of juicing it yourself. Someone who "knows" vegetarianism is "bad" might just "feel" better eating meat. It's unobjective, especially in the short term. Not to invalidate your experience in the least. Just saying a short-term "feeling" is as much a result of your mind as it is of your tongue. BTW, thanks everyone for playing with me here as I play devil's advocate. I think it's important to wonder about your beliefs every once in awhile. Re: Is pastuerized juice inferior to raw juice?
Posted by:
Omega
()
Date: November 30, 2008 06:40AM communitybuilder Wrote:
------------------------------------------------------- > > Omega Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > If juice isn't perishable, it's dead. > > > All juice (no matter how it's treated) is > perishable? I should have written "highly perishable," as in 2 or 3 days maximum shelf life (perhaps longer for acidic raw juice such as orange/grapefruit). > Is raw honey "dead"? To quote you from your response to suvine above: "what's that have to do with juice?" Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/30/2008 06:40AM by Omega. Re: Is pastuerized juice inferior to raw juice?
Posted by:
anaken
()
Date: November 30, 2008 08:54AM generally anything on a shelf has to be rendered enzymatically inactive. one doesn't need to ascribe to any enzyme theory of raw to understand that anything living (i.e. wthout heating or added chemicals) will witness bacteria at work
fresh juice start losing its vitality almost immediately.its totally noticeable just as removing the skin of an apple. as far as pasteurized juice not only will it be rendered not vital, its likely that much like oils and nuts/seeds that the heating/ or simply long term exposure to oxygen/lack of and light will cause it to be rancid. I imagine honey in its raw state wouldn't have much of a shelf life either, but then again it is not a true liquid removed from its 'fiber' just because you buy something unprocessed like spirulinia or mechanically processed like a nut butter doesn't mean its going to be vital or free of mold and fungus. if anyone is looking for the convenience of a bottled raw juice there are some places that use a norwalk press and bottle juices in glass. These theoretically last 2 days or so and generally taste pretty solid to me. any other juice maker I wouldn't bother drinking after the first 10 minutes or so Re: Is pastuerized juice inferior to raw juice?
Posted by:
EZ rider
()
Date: November 30, 2008 10:09AM
Jay Kordich (the Juiceman) always says the juice drinker should put his/her mouth right under the juice machine to get the best and freshest juice because it goes downhill from there. Actually the food starts losing its potency as soon as its cut or pressed. Re: Is pastuerized juice inferior to raw juice?
Posted by:
Omega
()
Date: November 30, 2008 10:15AM anaken Wrote:
------------------------------------------------------- > I imagine honey in its raw state wouldn't have > much of a shelf life either, but then again it is > not a true liquid removed from its 'fiber' Raw honey does not spoil and it can last centuries, though it can ferment. It has a pH of 3 or 4. Re: Is pastuerized juice inferior to raw juice?
Posted by:
iLIVE
()
Date: November 30, 2008 12:09PM apparently the most important vitamin is taken down a few notches (vitamin C) in most fruits that are juiced
[www.ultimatecitrus.com] but the people that have done the studies say that the daily value is still over 100% daily value even if it is pasteurized i guess what the article is saying is that it also depends on what it's stored in, and for how long anyway, the big thing to ponder about would be how much the vitamin levels are effected ..but other then that I do not believe that killing the enzymes does anything to make someone feel good or bad; it probably just tastes better freshly squeezed ( i know i like it better ) - and has more nutritional value. Re: Is pastuerized juice inferior to raw juice?
Posted by:
arugula
()
Date: November 30, 2008 03:36PM anaken Wrote:
------------------------------------------------------- [I imagine honey in its raw state wouldn't have much of a shelf life either, but then again it is not a true liquid removed from its 'fiber' just because you buy something unprocessed like spirulinia or mechanically processed like a nut butter doesn't mean its going to be vital or free of mold and fungus.] For untreated foods, shelf life is roughly inversely proportional to water content. This is why concentrated sugars (like honey) and fats last a long time compared to watery foods. Re: Is pastuerized juice inferior to raw juice?
Posted by:
Anonymous User
()
Date: November 30, 2008 04:50PM Nothing, I guess. I should have used cider or fermented juice as an example, not honey. Re: Is pastuerized juice inferior to raw juice?
Posted by:
suvine
()
Date: November 30, 2008 05:23PM EZ rider I want to see someone doing that, drink from the juicer tip Re: Is pastuerized juice inferior to raw juice?
Posted by:
EZ rider
()
Date: November 30, 2008 05:36PM
I think the point that Jay was making is to drink the juices as fresh as possible. Once the juice is made its like turning an hourglass over and watching the sand (nutrients) slip away. Re: Is pastuerized juice inferior to raw juice?
Posted by:
Anonymous User
()
Date: November 30, 2008 06:35PM But is it worth the time & money to make fresh juice three or four times a day to save 33% of it's vitamin C?
I think the ideal ecologically would be to have a few huge factories pressing thousands & thousands of gallons of juice in some sort of vacuum sealed environment sealed away from light & oxygen (the destroyers) & then sold. It's a damn shame that the Naked juice company can't sell raw juice anymore cause some jerk got sick & blamed the juice. I projectile vomited after eating a sausage once (years ago) & yet they still sell those. Thousands of expensive, power hungry juicers going in thousands of kitchens just doesn't make sense. I remember an apple pressing I went to in Nor. Cal., it was so fun. Re: Is pastuerized juice inferior to raw juice?
Posted by:
suvine
()
Date: November 30, 2008 06:42PM I asked LALITA at Ann Wigmore about Orange juice and she said it was much better to eat the orange for fiber. Re: Is pastuerized juice inferior to raw juice?
Posted by:
Anonymous User
()
Date: November 30, 2008 11:24PM suvine Wrote:
------------------------------------------------------- > I asked LALITA at Ann Wigmore about Orange juice > and she said it was much better to eat the orange > for fiber. I like pulpy orange juice anyway. Might as well just blend the suckers. Re: Is pastuerized juice inferior to raw juice?
Posted by:
suvine
()
Date: December 01, 2008 01:13AM ahahah you guys are so funny. All of you. Love your comments. Thanks. Re: Is pastuerized juice inferior to raw juice?
Posted by:
debbietook
()
Date: December 02, 2008 06:07AM Community builder - I always have my juice raw but never have the juicer on 3-4 times a day.
I have it on once a day, each morning. The rest of the time I have my juice in the whole fruits and vegetables. Being 100% raw I rarely need additional liquid outside my food. Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
|
|