I believe cooking food destroys many of the nutrients in it

I offer up this as proof:
http://healthyeating.sfgate.com/nutritious-raw-kale-3399.html
I believe raw foods are very important / better.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 04/22/2013 09:28 PM, jon_banquer wrote:

Cooking = oxidizing. Scavengers eat oxidized food.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 04/22/2013 10:18 PM, George Plimpton wrote:

No such thing as "normal" humans. We're the only animal that can't figure out what its natural diet would be. Fruit? Raw blubber?

Yes, soybeans, for example - toxic. They're not a natural food for humans.

A few... not many. They're abundantly available from the right sources.

It's common sense. Simple.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 04/22/2013 11:43 PM, jon_banquer wrote:

Probably most of the chow Plimpton eats is manufactured. It's feed.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

You really don't know much about what you are saying. Humans are classified as omnivores, i.e. they can eat animal or vegetable food.

It is? Strange that the human race has been eating cooked food for quite a spell. How in the world did you ever come up with such a half baked idea?
--
Cheers,

John B.
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 04/23/2013 05:00 AM, J.B.Slocomb wrote:

Who mentioned anything about carnivores or omnivores? Eskimos like their blubbery flesh raw. A natural diet would not be cooked.

We've done lots of unnatural things for quite a spell. Sometimes we regret the consequences. Like when the wings fold up and the houses get bigger and we say "Aw shit, I'm not a bird." Other times the lessons are less dramatic.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

What was the average life expectancy, back when people ate their food raw?
--
Ed Huntress

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 04/23/2013 09:55 AM, Ed Huntress wrote:

Way back when people were eaten raw?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Nah, just like your examples. For instance, eating raw blubber.
--
Ed Huntress

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 04/23/2013 10:20 AM, Ed Huntress wrote:

If Eskimo life expectancy isn't good, or if it is, what do you think that is going to tell you?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

What it tells me is that you introduced a ridiculous example when promoting raw food, because, if you're eating blubber, how you cook it or not probably has little to do with how long you'll live.
d8-)
--
Ed Huntress

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 04/23/2013 11:58 AM, Ed Huntress wrote:

You (and Slocomb) are lost. I never held raw blubber up as a fine food, superior to Plimpton's cooked blubber. Never said anything about omnivore vs. vegetarian either.
And Eskimo life expectancy, by most accounts, is shit.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Since we both apparently read it the same way, that's what you appear to have communicated -- not that it's a fine food, but that it's an example of what's "natural," as in: "Eskimos like their blubbery flesh raw. A natural diet would not be cooked."
It's more "natural" to primitive peoples, it appears. For the most part, cooking food is intertwined with human evolution:
"The shift to cooking is reflected in modern human anatomy. For one, our jaws are considerably smallerand thus less able to bite into hard foodsthan those of our earliest ancestors.
"Also, our gut is not set up for processing raw items as effectively as cooked food."
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2009/02/090213-human-diet-cooking.html
That's not to say that eating raw food is necessarily bad, especially for those who have a weight problem. Eating and digesting raw food is much less efficient, which may not be bad for everyone:
"H. erectus had a large brain and body size, and many believe that the species' hunter-gatherer lifestyleassociated with more cooked meatfueled its growth." "...Yesterday Richard Wrangham, a biological anthropologist at Harvard University, served up new evidence for his hypothesis: Cooking decreases the energy cost of eating.
"For primates, including humans, "energy is absolutely critical, and [it's] what natural selection is constantly trying to maximize," Wrangham said during a preview of his work at the American Association for the Advancement of Science's annual meeting in Chicago."
(same link as above)
So the chemistry of it may be very controversial, but the point of cooking food appears not to be. If you have a defense for your position it's not what ancient man ate; it's what we need to avoid in our current, overfed culture.
Carry on with whatever works for you. Just don't promote your diet for everyone. There was a bunch on CompuServe who invaded a diabetes forum many years ago (I was a sysop there), and we had to threaten them with legal action before they killed some of our members.
Food fads are personal things. It's best to keep them that way.

Yes indeed.
--
Ed Huntress

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Tue, 23 Apr 2013 20:11:13 -0700 (PDT), jon_banquer

Jon, of all the topics in the world that I don't want to hear about, what you've learned about your own body falls somewhere between the art of sewage-plant maintenance and the sexual habits of the ring-tailed lemur.
Not that I wouldn't read about it if there was nothing else left to read at the barber shop. But, please, post it to yourself. You've been doing that a lot lately and it's simplified personal hygiene here on RCM. Please continue.
--
Ed Huntress

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Ah, you mean like rice, wheat, rye and oats. Just bite then off the stem and chew do you?

--
Cheers,

John B.
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 04/23/2013 06:09 PM, J.B.Slocomb wrote:

You aren't finding any traction.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

He finds a lot more than you do.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

A great rebuttal.... albeit not on the same topic, but thoughtful.
Now, rather than go frolicking off into never, never land will you tell us how a "raw eater" such as your good self propose to devour any of the cereal grains, often refereed to as "staples".
--
Cheers,

John B.
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 04/23/2013 10:20 AM, George Plimpton wrote:

LOL!
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 04/23/2013 11:35 AM, George Plimpton wrote:

Honey bees
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Polytechforum.com is a website by engineers for engineers. It is not affiliated with any of manufacturers or vendors discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.