Talk:Raw foodism/Archive1

This is an archive page, last updated 15 April 2018. Please do not make edits to this page.

Archives for this talk page:  , (new)(back)

Chew

Chew on these rhubarb leaves. Susan Jayne Garlick^talk 13:07, 31 August 2007 (CDT)

Isn't it true in some cases? i.e. Heat destroys some beneficial things - I aint a biowatsit or anything but they've got me convinced. (I remember school canteen meals - overcooked cabbage etc.) Susan Jayne Garlick^talk 16:35, 1 September 2007 (CDT)

Certain nutrients are removed from certain foods by cooking. Certain toxins are inactivated by cooking. It's pretty much a wash. Certain types of cooking are less healthy, such as grilling over a fire. I'll get to it, but the basic premise is that enzymes in food are a good thing that musn't be cooked away...that part is rubbish. I'll 'splain.--PalMD^{-Ars longa, vita brevis} 16:45, 1 September 2007 (CDT)

I'm resisting the temptation to put in a mention of Steak Tartare... Totnesmartin 21:08, 30 July 2008 (EDT)

Why? Folks that have never tasted raw steak have never tasted steak. It became clear to me that the rarer the steak, the better it tastes. So ... the logical conclusion was to try steak tartare, and when properly seasoned, there is NO meat more delicious.

Sure, it tastes best when you season it with all the goodies in the article that your link pointed to, but it tastes great when just peppered and lightly salted, and topped with thin slices of tomato and tiny bits of onion, served on toast points. (Vidalia onions work best.)

The neat thing about it is: many steaks that go on sale, such as sirloin and london broil, might be tough when cooked the normal way, but grinding them up makes them tender. Don't let the butcher trim the fat tho -- that's where the flavor is.

Rem^Beau 22:47, 30 July 2008 (EDT)

Sadly I couldn't find the plain old recipe - raw steak, raw egg, pepper. I'm sure it's on the innertubes...somewhere. Totnesmartin 05:30, 31 July 2008 (EDT)

Sounds yummy - it's still raw if chopped, right? But hasn't toast been cooked twice? ħuman 22:02, 31 July 2008 (EDT)

So are twice-fried plantains ... you wouldn't turn your nose up on those, would you?

Rem^Beau 22:18, 31 July 2008 (EDT)

Depends. What do they smell like? ħuman 22:21, 31 July 2008 (EDT)

As pet food

I don't know how much research there's been into this field, but in my own experience, a raw chicken diet made a huge difference in my dog's health. When we got her, she had severe arthritis in her rear legs (at only 2 years old); her vet recommended glucosamine tablets. Those are expensive, so we tried this diet on the advice of a friend. We feed her free-range chicken necks from a local farm, and once a week she gets a meal of baked potatoes with other vegetables added. Cooked chicken bones are of course dangerous for dogs, but raw bones are an excellent source of glucosamine, and are easy for (big) dogs to eat. The diet improved her health rapidly, and she's been well since. JS Leitch 02:45, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

I own the good old TFE (?) publication "live foods". Many exotic pets (fishies, etc.) only eat live food, and thus the hobbyist must learn to provide it. Anyway, "raw" food is often special not because it's "raw", but because it is a "whole" diet. And, of course, you realize that anecdotal evidence proves nothing, right? ;) When you got your dog, she all mucked up. You took good care of her and now she is better. The diet may have nothing to do with it. ħuman 04:02, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

That's a good point; we *did* sort of rescue her from some scummy dope dealers with a bunch of evil-tempered children. JS Leitch 13:44, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

And of course, this is in animals rather than humans, I don't think we digest raw white-meat very well. It's an interesting observation, a great example of the confounding variables that make watching diets in a proper controlled test quite difficult. ^postate

I've been reading about the differences between the dietary needs of dogs and wolves recently. Wolves need whole animals (or parts thereof) flesh, skin, bones, fat and they are true carnivores. But we've converted dogs into some sort of omnivore which can survive on a much "poorer" diet. There is, in fact, some controversy over whether dogs should be fed raw meat with some people maintaining it should be cooked. I'm not personally convinced. From the way my dog will do anything for a nice bit of raw, red meat, she's not convinced either.--Bob^{Not Jim} 14:40, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

I think cooked meat is fine, but cooked bones can splinter and cause major internal problems. Raw bones crunch into powder. JS Leitch 14:48, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

Ability of human body to break down raw foods.

I was under the impression that cooking food, specifically vegetables, made them easier for the body process. As in, since humans aren't strictly herbivorous, our digestive system isn't designed to break down raw plant matter. I mean, real herbivores spend the vast majority of their waking lives just consuming food. I'm not an expert, so I don't understand this. Majintahu (talk) 08:19, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Potential benefit to the human microbiome via horizontal gene transfer from consumption of bacteria living on raw seaweed

This article discusses some research that suggests the consumption of raw nori (seaweed) provides (or historically provided) a benefit to the microbiome of Japanese populations. Cooking the nori as is done today destroys most of the bacteria. It appears that the benefit happened at some point in the past and is now being inherited. While I realize this isn't an argument put forth by the raw foodists (that I've encountered) it does seem to be one potential advantage in general: food sources can be more optimally utilized thanks to HGT from wild to domestic bacteria (allowing for harmful HGT at the same time, of course).

Gut bacteria in Japanese people borrowed sushi-digesting genes from ocean bacteria

Ikewinski (talk) 03:32, 25 January 2014 (UTC)