Let’s consider the raw food diet.
Recent studies have suggested that raw food should make up the majority of a
balanced diet. Many foods, when cooked, lose much of the nutrients that they
inherently possessed. Thus, by cooking these foods, we are removing any
potential benefits that we have received from consuming the food. Eating these
foods raw allows us to get the full benefit of the enzymes natural to the
foods. This is particularly true with many fruits and vegetables.
However, cooked food advocates
would argue that other foodstuffs are only so beneficial to us because of the
cooking process, and they would be right. Certain fruits, like tomatoes,
release certain antioxidants when heated. These antioxidants are extremely
helpful in reducing the risk of cancerous cells growing in our body. Similarly,
some vegetables like asparagus also release more nutrients when boiled or
steamed than in their raw form. This would lend further weight to the argument
that cooked foods are better for your long term health.
So, again we ask, which is true?
As with many dietary this or that questions, the answer is
somewhere in the middle. There are some foods that are better eaten raw. On the
other side, there are some foods that are better cooked. What does this tell
us? Well, we should probably eat some raw foods and some cooked foods. Yes, it
really is that simple. There is no right or wrong absolute approach, merely
common sense. If cooking a food is better for you, then you should cook it. If
eating it raw is more beneficial, then eat it raw. As any health guru should
tell you, the key to healthy eating is all about balance. That balance includes
a balance between cooked and raw.