I posted this on another site, wanted lots of answers so I'll post here too.

This is kind of a spin-off of another thread on "why is raw better than cooked"...I just wanted some clarity (although, obviously, I believe the claim that raw is better--even FDA says raw veggies better nutritionally than cooked etc.)

for example....take a veggie like broccoli. It has calcium in it. If you cook it, does the calcium absorbption levels go down? does the actual amount of calcium go down? is it completely gone? Does cooking alter the fiber content? I support the claim that it's not AS good for you, but does it actually make it NOT good for you? Is there evidence to support that it is actually harming you to eat this food cooked? Wouldn't it be better to eat cooked broccoli rather than no broccoli at all? If I eat 100% raw and then eat cooked veggie's am I harming my system?

I guess I always believed that eating RAW is just optimal way of eating, but i feel like I'm reading that people think cooking of this food is actually TOXIC?

thanks for any clarity!
sarah

toxic

>If you cook it, does the calcium absorbption levels go down? does the actual amount of calcium go down? is it completely gone?

No. Generally the mineral content is not changed much. It's the vitamin content that suffers. But that is not the whole story.

> Does cooking alter the fiber content?

Cooking breaks down the fibrous matrix and releases more of what is there. At the same time, some vitamin and protective phytochemical content is destroyed. But there may be net increases compared to raw for some substances, which is why the "experts" are still saying to include both cooked and raw. Also it's very difficult to get a lot of kcals from raw vegetables because they are so bulky.

> I support the claim that it's not AS good for you, but does it actually make it NOT good for you?

Yes, with veggies that are not overcooked or grilled: still good, but not as.

>Is there evidence to support that it is actually harming you to eat this food cooked?

Yes, for some overcooked and/or overprocessed fats, proteins, and carbohydrates, grilling, frying, etc are very bad and can turn fats and proteins into overt toxins. But light steaming is usually not that bad.

>Wouldn't it be better to eat cooked broccoli rather than no broccoli at all?

Yes. I think so.

>If I eat 100% raw and then eat cooked veggie's am I harming my system?

I don't think so. I think something like 80% raw 20% lightly steamed veggies is probably close to ideal although to be truthful we really don't know what ideal is, just a ballpark. We haven't tested these diets on 10s of thousands of people locked up in metabolic wards for life. We can do limited studies on tortured lab animals, limited clinical trials tweaking one or two little parameters on sick or healthy people, and epidemiology studies that examine populations. They all have flaws. It's not easy to put the pieces together, especially because we all have our little or big biases and it's so difficult to shake them and be objective.

A lot of people can't handle 100% raw, it's too spartan, they are constantly feeling cravings and some may have difficulty maintaining weight and getting enough kcals and nutrients. Including some of the lightly cooked veggies can help in such a case. Or even a little bit of cooked legumes or whole grains.

I'd prety much agree with Arugula:

Steamed/boiled veggies and fuit - not as good for you as raw but not particularly bad for you.

Cooked fats, particularly fried and grilled foods - can be very toxic, even mainstream science agrees with this.

Rob

--
Rob Hull - Funky Raw
My blog: [www.rawrob.com]

Obviously it's not toxic or it would kill people but for many foods it causes some degradation.

Certain types of cooking create carcinogens (grilling mostly), you're not going to do much harm with steaming and for many vegetables you make them more digestable that way.

Of course even better is fermentation, after which the vegetables are still raw (with the nutrition more bioavialable).

Lots of good info above.

Cooking introduces toxins into the food. That being said, having a low fat cooked vegan diet (10% fat or less) of lots of fresh fruits, lots of raw salads, and steamed vegetables without salt, condiment, and spices is much healthier than the typical transitional gourmet high fat 100% raw diet.

The higher the temperature used in cooking, the more toxins are introduced. Fats become carcinogenic when subject to high (frying, baking) temperatures. Starches create acrylamides at high temperatures, a substance known to be highly carcinogenic. (In a recent article stated the federal limit for acrylamides in an 8 oz glass of water is 0.12 ug. Compare that to 1 oz of Cheerios that has 7 ug, 6 oz of french fries has 60 ug).

Cooking also destroys fiber, which is a necessary nutrient. It also removes water, which is also a necessary nutrient.

acording to Physiology any substance that is not inherent or natural, to the state of the internal environment is poison.

I mean we can all say its perfectly natural we are cooking our food.

but I think its bad.

good bacteria becomes bad bacteria just by what food is around it. i want to be good bacteria.

Did I just say that?





Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/09/2007 12:13PM by coconutcream.