Discussion Board

Many “raw-foodist” think that cooking food at high temperatures destroys the health benefits of plant-foods. If this is true, why does green-tea have so many health benefits?

According to Dr. Gregor, some foods have enhanced nutrient values when cooked, such as carrots and celery.

You can look it up on his website at www.nutritionfacts.org

And tomatoes.

A lot of times foods have 1-3 nutrients that are 'enhanced' through cooking, however you are still destroying the other 98% of nutrients through cooking. So it may not be the healthiest trade-off. And it is hard to determine which nutrient is more important over another in any given plant food, since there are thousands if not millions of nutrients yet to be discovered.

Plus how do we know 'how much' of that enhanced nutrient we need? If the fruit or vegetable is meant to be eaten in a raw state, are we meant to ingest that amount of the nutrient or are we meant to cook it to eat more than is naturally occurring?

Green tea has anti-oxidants just like chocolate and poison oak. I don't know about the health benefits though. There are people who thrive without the use of green tea.

People say animal foods and saturated fats have health benefits too.

There are some raw foods you wouldn't want to touch with a ten foot pole. I've known people to eat sprouted black beans and get violently ill. Raw potatoes aren't good to eat. There are many plants out there that are inedible and toxic, of course.

And there are many plant foods that shouldn't be eaten cooked either.

So, I don't think it's really fair to knock the raw diet as a whole. I know of many who have cured and reversed a lot of health problems this way. While not everyone wants to be exclusively 100% raw, it has worked well for a lot of people.

Are you certain it is not the exact opposite?

Green tea is not cooked at high temps, it is steeped at just below boiling so it does not get heated beyond 210-212 degrees F. Heck, I was in a sauna yesterday for probably 1/2 hour that was 170 degrees.

I'm not certain of the exact percentages, just noticing that people tend to be concerned about 1 or 2 nutrients that are enhanced with cooking over the rest that aren't.

I believe green tea leaves are roasted at high temps during processing. White tea is usually sun dried though.

Maybe you could be in a sauna at 170 degrees for a small period of time, but you likely couldn't put your hand in 170 degree water for even a few seconds without it getting destroyed. Most people cannot even handle being in the heat very long when it's over 90 degrees.

It doesn't matter how hot the sauna was, it's about your body temperature. You would die if your body got much higher than 106.

Michael

I was just being snarky about the sauna. But I think green tea is just heated as needed to dry it out so it doesn't oxidize. Black tea gets roasted at up to 200 degrees.

As for nutrients in foods, under normal cooking minerals are not damaged at all (unless lost via being leached into cook water). Partial break down of some vits but also much more access due to break down of cellulose which you cannot digest nor chew enough to release everything in there. It is true that there are some things you get from raw and not from cooked but not much and on balance, much more from cooked. That's why when you check CRONoMeter etc cooked veg are usually considerably higher in calories, that fuel component is absorbed rather than being lost "out the back" while tied up in the cellulose matrix.

Science now shows us that raw foods are far less absorbed by the body compared to cooked. It's not about what you eat, but what you absorb.

Sure, cooking may result in the loss of 15% of some nutrients, but if you are absorbing twice the amount of nutrients vs.. raw, then what's the problem?

This likely explains why many raw foodists need to consume so much food... Their bodies simply are absorbing much!

A cooked, whole food, low fat, plant based diet, is the only diet which science is proving time and time again to be the most beneficial to human health.

Well it could be that they eat so much because fresh food is mostly water, and so low in calories. But there are a lot more raw foodists that eat a ton of fat so they don't eat quite as much as the ones on a low-fat fruit and vegetable based diet.

Raw vs cooked...The battle rages on. So how did Dr. McDougall arrive at the current diet that includes both forms? Originally he watched peoplr thrive on their original diets of primarily fruits and vegetables and rice. He watched their offspring get sick as they adopted the western diet. Their original diet was largely cooked but not 100%. He figured that id it could sustain and allow people to thrive it was fine. Now after decades of observation and research he believes the mix of cooking and raw is not really the primary issue except for some extreme cases of either. If you enjoy raw foods have at it. If all cooked is your preference, fine. It appears we do fine on both. I'd hate to limit one myself to only one side of the ledger.
f1jim