Cooking eliminates vitamins and minerals?

[William St]

I've seen this claim from various sources, so I decided to
check it out for myself. I went to
http://www.nal.usda.gov/fnic/foodcomp/index.html and looked up
the info on broccoli, since that's a commonly eaten veggie in
both raw and cooked form.

The results are that most vitamin and mineral contents are
somewhat reduced by cooking, ranging from around 4% for
magnesim to about 50% for vitamin A. No nutrients were
completely or mostly eliminated by cooking. So yes, cooking
does reduce some of the nutritional value, but it does NOT
destroy or "kill" any of the nutrients, as some claim.

Unfortunately the USDA method of cooking was boiling and
draining. I presume steaming it would save a significant
amount of this loss.

None of the caloric values changed, so the protein, carbo, and
fat are apparently not lost to cooking. I guess the upshot of
this is that you need to eat a little more of the cooked than
the raw to get the same nutritional benefits. No big deal,
IMO. (for me, the cooked version is far more palatable than
the raw, unless the raw is dipped in something I'm trying
to cut down on)

bill

[Rita]

On Wed, 15 Jan 2003 14:36:44 GMT, William Stacy
<wstacy@obase.net> wrote:

>I've seen this claim from various sources, so I decided to
>check it out for myself. I went to
>http://www.nal.usda.gov/fnic/foodcomp/index.html and looked
>up the info on broccoli, since that's a commonly eaten veggie
>in both raw and cooked form.
>
>The results are that most vitamin and mineral contents are
>somewhat reduced by cooking, ranging from around 4% for
>magnesim to about 50% for vitamin A. No nutrients were
>completely or mostly eliminated by cooking. So yes, cooking
>does reduce some of the nutritional value, but it does NOT
>destroy or "kill" any of the nutrients, as some claim.
>
>Unfortunately the USDA method of cooking was boiling and
>draining. I presume steaming it would save a significant
>amount of this loss.
>
>None of the caloric values changed, so the protein, carbo,
>and fat are apparently not lost to cooking. I guess the
>upshot of this is that you need to eat a little more of the
>cooked than the raw to get the same nutritional benefits. No
>big deal,
>IMO. (for me, the cooked version is far more palatable than
> the raw, unless the raw is dipped in something I'm
> trying to cut down on)
>
>bill

How much raw broccoli can a person chow down? I eat raw
cauliflower and carrots frequently. I expect the best way to
eat vegetables is in the manner that appeals to you so that
you DO eat them. An assortment of raw veggies with some low
fat dip makes a nice change from cooking them.

[Katra]

William Stacy wrote: <snipped>
>
> None of the caloric values changed, so the protein, carbo,
> and fat are apparently not lost to cooking. I guess the
> upshot of this is that you need to eat a little more of the
> cooked than the raw to get the same nutritional benefits. No
> big deal,
> IMO. (for me, the cooked version is far more palatable than
> the raw, unless the raw is dipped in something I'm
> trying to cut down on)
>
> bill

Try making a fat free ranch. Get the powdered ranch mixes, and
add them to fat free sour cream... Yum! ;-)

Best raw veggie dip there is. Good for raw cauliflower,
brocolli, carrots, celery, squash strips and cucumber.

K.

[Alf Christ]

On Wed, 15 Jan 2003 14:36:44 GMT, William Stacy
<wstacy@obase.net> wrote:

>for vitamin A. No nutrients were completely or mostly
>eliminated by cooking. So yes, cooking does reduce some of
>the nutritional value, but it does NOT destroy or "kill" any
>of the nutrients, as some claim.

Most water soluble vitamins and others do leak out into the
boiling water, so if you use the boiling water for other
dishes, eg. soup, sauce, boullion etc, then most of it is
recovered.

But, some do react with other chemicals in the food boiled,
like taurine with glucose to form an adduct which at least in
cats are broken down by bacteria. In wet cat food you need to
add 5 times more taurine to the food than in dry pellets to
compensate for the losses by boiling the food :-(

[Roman]

That's correct. Cooking doesn't destroy all nutrients. And for
plant based foods, benefits of cooking may outweigh reduced
amounts of nutrients in cooked foods. Plants (if not all, then
many) are known to contain various antinutrients, from mineral
binding phytic acid to enzyme inhibitors and goitrogens.
Soaking, fermentation, and cooking neutralize (at least, to
some extent) these antinutrients. According to Dr. Weston
Price's observations, many (most?) plants should be cooked.

Animal based foods, on the other hand, are better eaten raw.
And many people who eat them raw feel great improvements to
their health: improved digestion and elimination, elimination
of allergies, etc. They feel that raw animal food is easier to
digest than cooked. I would also like to add that some of
these people, having experimented, have come to conclusion
that some part of these foods should be cooked. And healthy
indigenous native observed by Dr. Price have eaten both cooked
and raw animal foods.

If you decide to check this "scientifically", you will
probably not find studies comparing benefits of raw animal
foods to cooked ones. But dog owners who put their dogs on
diets similar to BARF (Bones And Raw Foods) find similar
improvements in their pets.

Roman

"William Stacy" <wstacy@obase.net> wrote in message
news:3E2570DB.48EEC3C6@obase.net...
> I've seen this claim from various sources, so I decided to
> check it out for myself. I went to
> http://www.nal.usda.gov/fnic/foodcomp/index.html and looked
> up the info on broccoli, since that's a commonly eaten
> veggie in both raw and cooked form.
>
> The results are that most vitamin and mineral contents are
> somewhat reduced by cooking, ranging from around 4% for
> magnesim to about 50% for vitamin A. No nutrients were
> completely or mostly eliminated by cooking. So yes, cooking
> does reduce some of the nutritional value, but it does NOT
> destroy or "kill" any of the nutrients, as some claim.
>
> Unfortunately the USDA method of cooking was boiling and
> draining. I presume steaming it would save a significant
> amount of this loss.
>
> None of the caloric values changed, so the protein, carbo,
> and fat are apparently not lost to cooking. I guess the
> upshot of this is that you need to eat a little more of the
> cooked than the raw to get the same nutritional benefits. No
> big deal,
> IMO. (for me, the cooked version is far more palatable than
> the raw, unless the raw is dipped in something I'm
> trying to cut down on)
>
> bill

[William St]

Comparing raw beef with broiled, there appears to be no
reduction in any nutrients from the broiling process. So the
problem with nutrient loss seems to be simple leaching or
disolving out of some in the boiling process rather than heat
itself. Another myth destroyed, at least partially.

bill

[William St]

Katra wrote:

> Try making a fat free ranch. Get the powdered ranch mixes,
> and add them to fat free sour cream... Yum! ;-)

I'm on low carb, so I avoid ALL fat free products, which are
loaded with highly refined or even manufactured carbs (except
for the naturally almost fat free veggies). But thanks anyway;
I'll continue using my bleu cheese salad dressing, salsa, or
my personal favorite, mixing half of each.

bill

[Spiro J]

"Rita" <spamcatcher@nyc.rr.com> wrote in message
news:2p4b2vo4fds9g69uipq5d5al67bitir13e@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 15 Jan 2003 14:36:44 GMT, William Stacy > How much
> raw broccoli
can a person chow down? I
> eat raw cauliflower and carrots frequently. I expect the
> best way to eat vegetables is in the manner that appeals to
> you so that you DO eat them. An assortment of raw veggies
> with some low fat dip makes a nice change from cooking them.

Chowing down raw broccoli isn't a very good idea considering
it is a goitergen (causese thyriod hormonal issues).

[Roman]

"Rita" <spamcatcher@nyc.rr.com> wrote in message
news:2p4b2vo4fds9g69uipq5d5al67bitir13e@4ax.com...
>An assortment of raw veggies with some low fat dip makes a
>nice change from cooking them.

Fat helps utilization of minerals and vitamins, so your low
fat dip is good only for taste. Not saying it's necessarily
bad. Just depends on one's goals.

Roman

[Roman]

"Katra" <Katra@centurytel.net> wrote in message
news:3E25AF48.6E29026C@centurytel.net...

> Try making a fat free ranch. Get the powdered ranch mixes,
> and add them to fat free sour cream... Yum! ;-)

Fat free sour cream is an oxymoron. Cream is supposed to have
fat. What you get when you buy a "fat free sour cream" is a
concoction of starch, various gums, and dry milk solids -- all
designed to fool a deluded average element of the mass who's
been manipulated to believe that fat = disease/death.

Roman

[William St]

Spiro J wrote:

> "Rita" <spamcatcher@nyc.rr.com> wrote in message
> news:2p4b2vo4fds9g69uipq5d5al67bitir13e@4ax.com...
> > On Wed, 15 Jan 2003 14:36:44 GMT, William Stacy > How much
> > raw broccoli
> can a person chow down? I
> > eat raw cauliflower and carrots frequently. I expect the
> > best way to eat vegetables is in the manner that appeals
> > to you so that you DO eat them. An assortment of raw
> > veggies with some low fat dip makes a nice change from
> > cooking them.
>
> Chowing down raw broccoli isn't a very good idea considering
> it is a goitergen (causese thyriod hormonal issues).

Really? Which substance in there does that?

[Roman]

"William Stacy" <wstacy@obase.net> wrote in message
news:3E25C210.DBE276EE@obase.net...
> Spiro J wrote:
>
> > Chowing down raw broccoli isn't a very good idea
> > considering it is a goitergen (causese thyriod hormonal
> > issues).
>
> Really? Which substance in there does that?

Read
http://www.ansci.cornell.edu/plants/toxicagents/glucosin.html
to learn about thyroid suppressing substances in plants.

Roman

[William St]

Roman wrote:
>
> "William Stacy" <wstacy@obase.net> wrote in message
> news:3E25C210.DBE276EE@obase.net...
> > Spiro J wrote:
> >
> > > Chowing down raw broccoli isn't a very good idea
> > > considering it is a goitergen (causese thyriod hormonal
> > > issues).
> >
> > Really? Which substance in there does that?
>
> Read http://www.ansci.cornell.edu/plants/toxicagents/glu-
> cosin.html to learn about thyroid suppressing substances
> in plants.
>
> Roman

Ok I read that and it's very interesting. Goiter is a rare
thing in humans in the US so I think the anti-cancer effects
they mentioned there might be worth the risk. In fact since
hyperthyroidism is fairly common, raw broccoli might be a
good, natural prevention for Grave's disease, no?

bill

[Alf Christ]

On Wed, 15 Jan 2003 16:06:30 -0600, "Roman"
<r_rom@yahoo.com> wrote:

>That's correct. Cooking doesn't destroy all nutrients. And
>for plant based foods, benefits of cooking may outweigh
>reduced amounts of nutrients in cooked foods. Plants (if not
>all, then many) are known to contain various antinutrients,
>from mineral binding phytic acid to enzyme inhibitors and
>goitrogens. Soaking, fermentation, and cooking neutralize (at
>least, to some

Even cyanide-containing stuff is found in some foodstuff which
may poison you if you use them daily, like at Cuba and among
poor people in India.

[Alf Christ]

On Wed, 15 Jan 2003 13:15:00 -0700, "Spiro J"
<nope@nope.org> wrote:

>Chowing down raw broccoli isn't a very good idea considering
>it is a goitergen (causese thyriod hormonal issues).

You should do that rather often to see the effect. As used by
most people, it doesb't constitute a problem. However, if you
use it as a staple food several times a day, it should perhaps
concern :-) (Boiled, no problem)

[N-H-P]

Once upon a time, our fellow Alf Christophersen rambled on
about "Re: Cooking eliminates vitamins and minerals?." Our
champion De-Medicalizing in sci.med.nutrition retorts,
thusly ...

>On Wed, 15 Jan 2003 13:15:00 -0700, "Spiro J"
><nope@nope.org> wrote:

>>Chowing down raw broccoli isn't a very good idea considering
>>it is a goitergen (causese thyriod hormonal issues).

>You should do that rather often to see the effect. As used by
>most people, it doesb't constitute a problem. However, if you
>use it as a staple food several times a day, it should
>perhaps concern :-) (Boiled, no problem)

Kelp / Iodine supplements are an antidote to high goitrogen
foods. Cooking also helps.

There is plenty of published research that shows additional
Iodine protects against a high goitrogen diet, too.

What is not so well known is that in the States none of the
processed foods in our diets contains added iodine. That is
correct! In America, unless you personally add salt to your
foods you are getting ZERO iodine from salt in processed
foods. I reported on a news story documenting this fact in my
private health newsgroup, of course.

Hark! My private health newsgroup beckons!
--
John Gohde, Achieving good Nutrition is an Art, NOT a Science!

The nutrition of eating a healthy diet is the foundation of
the biomedical model of natural health. Weighing in at 17
webpages, Nutrition (www.Food.NaturalHealthPerspective.com/)
is now with more documentation and sharper terminology than
ever before.

[Roman]

"William Stacy" <wstacy@obase.net> wrote in message
news:3E263510.F5B35BAE@obase.net...
> >
> > Read http://www.ansci.cornell.edu/plants/toxicagents/gluc-
> > osin.html to
learn
> > about thyroid suppressing substances in plants.
> >
> > Roman
>
> Ok I read that and it's very interesting. Goiter is a rare
> thing in humans in the US so I think the anti-cancer effects
> they mentioned there might be worth the risk. In fact since
> hyperthyroidism is fairly common, raw broccoli might be a
> good, natural prevention for Grave's disease, no?

I don't know if hyperthyroidism is more prevalent than
hypothyroidism. All people I know personally with thyroid
malfunction have hypofunction. But regardless statistics, one
should be aware of this effect some plants can have on us and
make sure not to overdo them (in any way they choose to do
that). Especially, if one is hypothyroid.

There are other substances that have other antinutrient
effects, e.g. phytic acid. To be safe, I try to prepare my
food in traditional ways.

Roman

[Dr. S. Gee]

DATE: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 14:58:14 -0600 TO: Roman FROM: Dr. S.
Geek, Ph.D. SUBJECT: "Re: Cooking eliminates vitamins and
minerals?." NG: sci.med.nutrition
==========

>There are other substances that have other antinutrient
>effects, e.g. phytic acid. To be safe, I try to prepare my
>food in traditional ways.

Ha, ... Hah, Ha!

You are not entitled to an opinion unless you have a PhD
behind your name, ... Geek!
--
Another we know next to nothing about nutrition moment brought
to you by Dr. S. Geek, Ph.D.

Science is all about knowing less and less about more and
more.

[Dolores]

William Stacy <wstacy@obase.net> wrote in message
news:<3E2570DB.48EEC3C6@obase.net>...
> I've seen this claim from various sources, so I decided to
> check it out for myself. I went to
> http://www.nal.usda.gov/fnic/foodcomp/index.html and looked
> up the info on broccoli, since that's a commonly eaten
> veggie in both raw and cooked form.
>
> The results are that most vitamin and mineral contents are
> somewhat reduced by cooking, ranging from around 4% for
> magnesim to about 50% for vitamin A. No nutrients were
> completely or mostly eliminated by cooking. So yes, cooking
> does reduce some of the nutritional value, but it does NOT
> destroy or "kill" any of the nutrients, as some claim.
>
> Unfortunately the USDA method of cooking was boiling and
> draining. I presume steaming it would save a significant
> amount of this loss.
>
> None of the caloric values changed, so the protein, carbo,
> and fat are apparently not lost to cooking. I guess the
> upshot of this is that you need to eat a little more of the
> cooked than the raw to get the same nutritional benefits. No
> big deal,
> IMO. (for me, the cooked version is far more palatable than
> the raw, unless the raw is dipped in something I'm
> trying to cut down on)
>
> bill

Are there any vitamins or minerals left after the water spray
in the vegetable aisle of the super market soaks them for
hours. When they first started the spray on vegetables several
years ago, the spray was very very fine and infrequent and
only on the leafy green stuff. Now everything is sopping wet
and even the root vegetables are sprayed. The water adds to
the weight too so that you are paying for water as well.

I always go to the produce room in the back of the store and
ask the produce guy to get me vegetables that haven't been
cleaned yet.

Dolores

[William St]

dolores wrote:

> Are there any vitamins or minerals left after the water
> spray in the vegetable aisle of the super market soaks them
> for hours.

Spraying water on veggies does not leach out their vitamins
or their minerals to any significant degree. You have to
cook them submerged in water to lower the amount
significantly, and even boiling them in water only reduces
these things by a fraction.

bill