PALEOFOOD Archives

Paleolithic Eating Support List

PALEOFOOD@LISTSERV.ICORS.ORG

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Todd Moody <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Paleolithic Eating Support List <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Mon, 10 May 2004 12:19:23 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (50 lines)
Jim Swayze wrote:

>>What published research is there that shows that cooking doesn't make
>>inedible foods edible?
>>
>>Todd Moody
>>[log in to unmask]
>>
>>
>>
>
>True that cooking makes inedible food edible.  No one disagrees with that.
>
>

Except William, so far.

>I don't know if this is where William is going, Todd, but I do disagree that it's necessarily the case that reason we find cooked food tasty is because it makes inedible food edible.  (Unless by inedible foods you're referring to spoiled meat rather than, say, beans or potatoes).
>
>

I wasn't going for that conclusion, although there may be *something* to
it.  William's original statement was that it's a "mystery" why the
practice of cooking got started in the first place.  My reply was that
it's no mystery.  Cooking makes inedible foods edible, thus giving those
who cook many more food options, in comparison to those who don't cook.
This is a great advantage.

In uncooked plants, there is a ratio of  "secondary compounds" (i.e.,
antinutrients and toxins) to "primary compounds" (i.e., macro- and
micro- nutrients).  If that ratio is high enough, the food is inedible
(to members of a particular species).  Cooking, in some cases, lewers
that ratio to levels comparable to edible uncooked foods.  Those are
precisely the cases in which cooking makes the inedible edible.

I suppose in some cases, cooking improves the flavor of foods *because*
it renders them edible, for example by bursting cellulose chambers in
which starches are sealed.  Then when we eat the cooked vegetable it
tastes sweeter because more starch reaches the tongue, where the
salivary enzymes quickly begin the conversion to glucose.  Indeed, a
case could be made that the reason why the starch-digesting enzyme is
present in the saliva at all is to make starches taste good (since 99.9%
of the conversion occurs later, after the food is swallowed).  And I
suppose some secondary compounds do impart an "off" flavor, so that
cooking would remove that flavor.  But I don't think I'm in a position
to generalize this to all cooked foods.

Todd Moody
[log in to unmask]

ATOM RSS1 RSS2