I have participated in lab studies of the raw food concept. Although not yet to publishable stages, the preliminary findings are interesting. To put it simply, raw food proponents seem to realize only half the story to nutrition. Here's what I mean:
The claim is that cooking removes nutrients from food, and this is true. It also breaks down fiber and converts many toxins into harmless byproducts. The process of cooking, in most cases, seems to allow more nutrients to actually be gained from the food.
Look at it this way. With the aspects of food that make it difficult to digest (fiber, etc.), and the toxins that leach nutrients from the system, you will get maybe half of that initial amount of nutrients from uncooked food (this is an arbitrary estimate, there are to many examples). If you cook your food, you may lose 30% of the nutirents, but you absorb virtually all of what is left. So cooking produces an actual (roughly) 20% gain.
2006-07-16
03:15:23
·
9 answers
·
asked by
neil s
7