I came across this article on raw foods from Scientific American. Why would I expect there to be studies with "scientific" proof? Silly me.

[www.scientificamerican.com]


My favorite raw vegan

Its a pretty fair article from the quick skim ive given it.

In fact i agree with many of the points they make. One of the main theories around the raw food diet is the enzyme content of food. But these are destroyed largely by stomach acid anyway and don't contribute beneficially to digestion. So pointless giving too much thought to these enzymes.

The potential for serious nutrient deficiencies and imbalances is also fair with following a strict raw diet. There's a mountain of scientific research on the wonderful health benefits of plant foods, just not much if any on these strict and often strangely constructed new raw food diets that have taken off big time in the past 5-10 years.

[www.natuhealth.co.uk]



Edited 5 time(s). Last edit at 01/18/2013 09:40AM by powerlifer.

yeah, "very" scientific. Most articles there suggest ideas. Like someone from a university had the idea that the large brains came from cook food, then wrote about the 'discovery' of the idea. There is no difference between now and before Galileo. It is how humans want to think. They think their ideas are true. But at least there is ideological freedom.

Actually shocked to read an article in Scientific American that falls prey to the lack of evidence=lack of correlation fallacy: "There is no evidence that . . . " Maybe they do this a lot and I just don't know

Thanks for posting, Trive.

Here are my opinions on the myths presented in the article.

Misconception #1: Cooking destroys nutrients
I disagree with the article here. Cooking does destroy nutrients, and the article even agrees in part with this so-called myth. But it then goes to say it makes other nutrients more available, which is true, but then again, you really don't need to those extra nutrients because you can get the ones you need from other raw foods.

Misconception #2: Cooking destroys enzymes
I agree with the articles point of view on this.

Misconception #3: Raw foods are detoxifying
I agree that raw foods are not detoxifying. Only the body can detoxify, the raw foods do not do this. On the other hand, raw foods are less toxic than cooked foods, and this helps your body to detoxify because you have lessened the toxic load of your diet. So the statement is incorrect, the correct statement is "Raw foods are less toxic"

Misconception #4: Raw veganism is healthful
I disagree with the article here, though for people with highly sick bodies and weak digestion and low life energy, perhaps all raw would be too extreme for their bodies to handle the shock. Also, one's belief system highly determines the outcome. If someone has a deep seated fear that raw foods are not nutritious, they will have a bad outcome on a raw diet.

Misconception #5: Raw-only foods are natural
Well, every animal species on earth save man thrives on a raw food diet, and humans shares over 98% of DNA with bonobos, so I have to think that what people currently eat is not our natural diet, but one that came out of necessity after humans left their natural habitat of the tropics and moved to colder temperate climates.

I am using Google Chrome right to post the previous message, and it had a spelling correction for bonobos —nanobots—

Prana Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Here are my opinions on the myths presented in the
> article.
>
> Misconception #1: Cooking destroys nutrients
> I disagree with the article here. Cooking does
> destroy nutrients, and the article even agrees in
> part with this so-called myth. But it then goes to
> say it makes other nutrients more available, which
> is true, but then again, you really don't need to
> those extra nutrients because you can get the ones
> you need from other raw foods.

Its not a case of extra nutrients but the absorbability which matters most, which for foods such as spinach in there raw form is very poor.

Good article showing just how much more bio-available most nutrients in spinach are cooked rather than raw. There is about over 3 times more bioavailability in cooked spinach than raw. Which means to get the same health benefits and nutrition i do from cooked spinach, you would need to eat over 3 times the amount i do cooked.

Doesn't make sense to me not only from a digestion point of view, but there is no guarantee you would even match the same level of nutrition because it is the cooking and the softening of the hard fibers which increases the digestibility of these nutrients.

[www.livestrong.com]

[www.natuhealth.co.uk]



Edited 9 time(s). Last edit at 01/19/2013 07:50PM by powerlifer.

Compare the nutrition facts of a 1/2 cup raw broccoli vs. 1/2 cup boiled broccoli. You need to adjust the serving sizes when you go to each page. Besides the mysterious and currently unquantifiable "life energy," cooked broccoli wins on all counts. Personally, I like a combination of raw and cooked with nearly all veg.

[nutritiondata.self.com]

[nutritiondata.self.com]

At work, we have a cafeteria where you can get soup every day. I have tried soup. Some of them are very tasteful. But, no matter what kind of soup I ate, it did not make me feel good in the long run. When I order salad, it does not affect my mood at all, or it improves it a little(the components of the salad are usual products, not organic and not very fresh). But, when I eat fresh fruit, I just feel great! I can tell the difference easily. There is no question about it. And yes, the feeling lasts long, if I don't eat other things.

I don't need studies. I would LOVE to be able to eat anything cooked and healthy. There is no such thing. Unfortunately, everything treated with heat is bad for you. Not 'not as healthy', but BAD. I wish this was not true, it would simplify my life.

Maybe your response to the soup is psychomatic. There's no way a healthy body or mind should react negatively to a bowl of vegetable soup unless it's been told that it should react negatively. I try to balance between the cooked and the raw with vegetables. With some like broccoli for example, you get a much more comprehensive serving of cancer fighting properties if you do it that way.

rab Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> At work, we have a cafeteria where you can get
> soup every day. I have tried soup. Some of them
> are very tasteful. But, no matter what kind of
> soup I ate, it did not make me feel good in the
> long run. When I order salad, it does not affect
> my mood at all, or it improves it a little(the
> components of the salad are usual products, not
> organic and not very fresh). But, when I eat fresh
> fruit, I just feel great! I can tell the
> difference easily. There is no question about it.
> And yes, the feeling lasts long, if I don't eat
> other things.
>
> I don't need studies. I would LOVE to be able to
> eat anything cooked and healthy. There is no such
> thing. Unfortunately, everything treated with heat
> is bad for you. Not 'not as healthy', but BAD. I
> wish this was not true, it would simplify my life.

HH Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Maybe your response to the soup is psychomatic.
> There's no way a healthy body or mind should react
> negatively to a bowl of vegetable soup unless it's
> been told that it should react negatively.

---
I don't think that's true at all. Steamed plain veggies is one thing; soup with salt added is another.

I like cooked and raw broccoli. I eat salads twice a day and when I eat cooked foods, most of the time I feel not as energized but I can see the benefits to both sides.

Eating soup doesn't automatically imply that it contains salt. Veggies will boil in a salt-free pot of water. Some unrefined non-table salt has plenty of benefits. Like anything else, you don't want to overdo it. Pink Himalayan salt contains over 80 essential minerals. The notion that all salts in any quantity are bad was debunked ages ago. I once went a year without salt. One day I started feeling lethargic and decided to throw a little salt on some grapefruit. I almost immediately perked up.

Utopian Life Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> HH Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Maybe your response to the soup is psychomatic.
> > There's no way a healthy body or mind should
> react
> > negatively to a bowl of vegetable soup unless
> it's
> > been told that it should react negatively.
>
> ---
> I don't think that's true at all. Steamed plain
> veggies is one thing; soup with salt added is
> another.

Its really worrying to see people classifying vegetable soup and lightly steamed dark green vegetables as not only not healthy but bad for our health.

[www.natuhealth.co.uk]

Its really worrying to see people classifying X (bacon) as not healthy. It doesn't matter. What raw food is about is not eating BAD things. You can repeat all you want the same sentence and believe it. But if it makes me sleepy (brocolly) , then it is your problem, not mine. You can make a golf ball soft and edible. Was it supposed to be like that? People thik they are onmivores. WRONG. They are cooked-onmivores. That is, they have to artificially process the food. repeat that

The criteria you have missed here Panchito is that cooked broccoli is bad for YOU.

Claiming natural wholefoods such as nuts or steamed broccoli as unhealthy and bad for you is orthorexia. Do you really believe lightly steamed dark green vegetables is bad for health ?. That i do find worrying and a really unhealthy outlook on food, sorry.

You can make wild irrational analogies such as comparing bacon, no one is talking about bacon or golf balls. We are talking about plant foods here, vegetable soup and dark greens for crying out loud. You don't get much healthier a food than dark leafy greens. Its funny how you guys completely ignored the point that you get about 10 times more nutrition and the healthful components of these foods COOKED.

I really cannot believe that we are having a discussion about whether steamed broccoli is bad for our health or not.

[www.natuhealth.co.uk]



Edited 5 time(s). Last edit at 01/20/2013 03:48PM by powerlifer.

oh yeah, I am now orthorexic. Guess who is talking. I eat unlimited amounts of food like crazy and I am orthorexic. I carry 'pallets' of food and I am orthorexic. If I don't eat brocolly because it sedates me I am orthorexic. Nice game of labelling.

I am not against people eating brocolly. In fact the world population cannot support itself if not by cooking foods and making them soft and digestible. I defend cook food even for raw fooders when there is a need for it and even as occasional. But it is a personal view of things. People are free and should make their own opinions.

I wasn't suggesting you were orthorexic, what i said was anyone claiming natural wholefoods such as nuts or steamed broccoli is bad for our health then that is orthorexic behavior im afraid.

I have had a mild orthorexic past myself before it was even known by that name, so i find it easy to spot others who display orthorexic behavior such as with an irrational and often un-justified fear of cooked foods, even healthy foods cooked.

Even when we show some evidence above that these foods are much healthier and more digestible cooked might i add. These points go ignored. Why would you eat these foods raw in any large amount knowing you get far more nutrients in cooked form?

You say people are free to make there opinions, then let me be free in making mine.

[www.natuhealth.co.uk]



Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 01/20/2013 04:01PM by powerlifer.

I don't go around convincing people, just speak my mind. However, I think you do the opposite. You acuse people of what you do. Therefore, maybe you should ask yourself the questions.

Panchito Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I don't go around convincing people, just speak my
> mind. However, I think you do the opposite. You
> acuse people of what you do. Therefore, maybe you
> should ask yourself the questions.

You have become a very petty individual in the past few weeks Panchito. You state that people are allowed there opinion, except im obviously not allowed mine because it currently goes against your fanatical belief system.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/20/2013 04:05PM by powerlifer.

you are the one judging others. you throw the stones and then expect praise?

Panchito Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> you are the one judging others. you throw the
> stones and then expect praise?

You have been aggressive to me on a number of occasions recently, all because i hold a different opinion on diet than you do.

I think this says more about you, than it does about me Panchito.

I don't even intrude threads of yours like the fruitarian ones and most other 80/10/10 out of respect that you can air your opinions on diet without constant rebuttal like i get, i do more defending my posts than actual posting these days absolute waste of time and life.

But if someone asks me in a thread what my opinions are, im going to say them whether that ruffles you're newly aquired overly sensitive feelings or not. If you can't handle your diet being critiqued then look why, maybe you are scared?. Despite a few aggressive posts from you recently ive remained respectful through them all.

This is my last post on this issue.

[www.natuhealth.co.uk]



Edited 7 time(s). Last edit at 01/20/2013 04:14PM by powerlifer.

I don't call you names. However, I think you do bu using judging labels. I am the agressive one? I value your input and people like you. But please realize that This is a RAW FOOD FORUM

Peace



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/20/2013 04:15PM by Panchito.

Panchito Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I don't call you names. However, you do. I am the
> agressive one? I vcalue your imput and people like
> you. But plese realize that This is a RAW FOOD
> FORUM

Please quote where i have ever called you anything. I have only been anything but respectful to you during my time on this forum.

Actually its a living and raw foods discussion forum. I keep within those guidelines and like i said again if you aren't mature enough to realize people on the internet have different opinions then maybe this isn't the place for you Panchito.

If my posts make you angry then look deep inside yourself why they do.



Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 01/20/2013 04:19PM by powerlifer.

well, if you edit the post 10 times, it is difficult to quote what it is not there anymore. But you were labeling people who don't eat brocolly as 'orthorexic'

Panchito Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> well, if you edit the post 10 times, it is
> difficult to quote what it is not there anymore.
> But you were labeling people who don't eat
> brocolly as 'orthorexic'


Are you for real?

Did you read my post above ?. I think we should just agree to disagree because im not going to sit and post back and forth to this petty crap all day. You never post back to any of my points, just strawman garbage.

Debate my points, ignore them or grow up, im sorry but it has to be said.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 01/20/2013 04:24PM by powerlifer.

It is not debating. you are just driving people into specific areas. you never post your diet but you Judge others. Grow up.

Panchito Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> It is not debating. you are just driving people
> into specific areas. you never post your diet but
> you Judge others. Grow up.

Why should my diet be relevant to whatever we are discussing. Would it make you feel better so you could critique something in my diet lol, are you really that petty all of a sudden Panchito. I eat crap food now and again if it makes you feel better though. It is completely irrelevant to any post however. Also i never judge, but i offer my own thoughts which is why half my points start with in my opinion unlike yours, if that annoys you then sorry but grow up.

There should be no competitive element implied in diet, which is what many of you guys don't understand. This isn't a competition.

Again if you can't handle me nutritionally critiquing you're diet then ask yourself why that is. I think you will find some very important answers.



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 01/20/2013 04:31PM by powerlifer.

powerlifer Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Why should my diet be relevant to whatever we are
> discussing.

When you attack the raw food diet in a raw food forum, the people of the forum cannot attack yours because you keep it hidden. Yes, it is that simple. Is that irrelevant? I think not. It is not fair. In order to judge the diets of other people, it is fair to post yours so that maybe we find whats wrong with your too and return the Favour.

Panchito Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> When you attack the raw food diet in a raw food
> forum, the people of the forum cannot attack yours
> because you keep it hidden. Yes, it is that
> simple. Is that irrelevant? I think not. It is not
> fair. In order to judge the diets of other people,
> it is fair to post yours so that maybe we find
> whats wrong with your too and return the Favour.

Then you confirm to me just how petty a person you really are Panchito, if you feel the need to judge my diet because i critique yours.

I also do not attack the diet, i offer my opinion often when people ask for it. If you cannot handle discussing the points i make in my posts, then that is you're problem not mine. I have just as much right as you do to contribute here, whether you like my opinion or not.



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 01/20/2013 04:57PM by powerlifer.