View Single Post
  #8 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
zxcvbob zxcvbob is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,555
Default uncooked broccili better than cooked? as with toms?

Pennyaline wrote:
> zxcvbob wrote:
>>
>> Pennyaline wrote:
>>> Raw broccoli is practically nutritionally useless as most nutrients
>>> are intracellular and it takes at least parcooking to weaken cell
>>> walls, something the human digestive system is incapable of doing.
>>>

>>
>>
>> Do you have a reference for this? I eat lots of raw broccoli in
>> salads and assumed it was good for more than just fiber. Thanks.

>
> Uh, yeah. Science is all behind this. The human body is incapable of
> digesting the complex starch cellulose. The cell walls of plants is
> cellulose. Plant nutrients are contained in the cells where the water
> is, as the walls and intracellular spaces are largely tough fiber and
> cementious matter. Herbivorous animals, especially ruminants can digest
> cellulose mechanically by chewing and chewing and chewing, and in the
> gut chemically.
>
> Cell walls weaken when cooked, and humans are more successful at
> breaking through and extracting the cellular contents with thorough
> chewing once vegetables are cooked. You get very little except
> indigestible fiber from raw veggies.
>



I'm not buying it. *Chewing* breaks down the cell walls. The cellulose
is still indigestible, but it is indigestible after cooking too.

Cooking reduces certain nutrient levels (vitamin C, for example), but
may make the remaining nutrients more available.

Bob