Why are raw percentages often calculated by calories? I understand why macronutrient ratios are calculated by calories. But the benefits of raw and the detriments of cooking are not directly proportional to calories.

Consider high calorie fats. Some are damaged significantly by cooking while others are very tolerant to heat. Consider low calorie greens. Are they less healthy raw than potatoes because they have less calories?

The ideal way to measure raw percentages would be based on the actual benefits of raw versus the actual detriments of cooked on a per food basis. But calculating by weight seems a much better approximation than calculating by calories.

Thoughts?

Per calorie makes more sense because through the sheer act of adding wateryou can significantly influence numbers , for one. And secondly, nutrients per calorie is where it's at in terms of reaching nutritionalexcellency. Consider that broccoli has more protein per calorie than beef and that underdoing healthful nutrients whilst overdoing calories from bad fats is a major cause of diseases, I think it's a better way to go by rather than by weight. Fuhrman talks about this persuasively in Eat to Live and calls it: getting the biggest nutritional bang for your caloric buck

Edit: just realizing I am not answering your cooked/raw question. I do think greens are healthier than potatoes because they have more nutrients per calorie than potatoes. Since cooking in many cases destroys nutrients, the formula still applies.
I am also thinking about how satiety plays into this. Cooking concentrates foods whilst reducing the satiety causing effects of unprocessed fibers, so this adds into the equation as well.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 06/10/2009 04:00PM by cocoa_nibs.

do whatever you want.

No5, you got a point there.

There would be bigger burden on the body with deepfried potatoes than lightly steamed potatoes, and affect the "how %raw are you?"-thinking.

Example 1: if you eat 50% steamed potatoe and 50% raw fruit one day and if you (example 2 eat 50% deepfried chips and 50% raw fruit the other day. There MUST be a change in the "wellbeing of the body" between the two examples, right?

The same applies with what your body NEEDS for the moment. If you got diabetes, your body might crave blueberries and will make you feel better, than your friend that also eats the same amount blueberries, but he doesn't got diabetes so you he will not feel as energized as the person that got diabetes because that body craves some other fruit.

How raw do you "feel", depends on what condition you're in.

Logically I would go for the calorie for a starter and "thumb" the calculation of % raw. But I understand your thinking.