I wholeheartedly support eating a whole foods, plant based diet for many reasons. I admire many of the things "raw foodists" say about their diet and the benefits they seem to have received from it. However, something nags at me whenever I read a post here about raw foods or when I read a book like 12 Steps to Raw Foods by Victoria Boutenko. Here is the logic of "raw foodism" as I perceive it:
(1) I used to eat cooked foods and was sick all the time/had less energy/fog of brain/etc.
(2) Now, I eat raw foods, am in great health/have more energy/mental capacity/feel great/lost fat/etc.
(3) Therefore, cooked foods are unhealthy.
Am I the only one who thinks that's illogical?
The "cooked" and "raw" labels can be reduced quite a bit. For example, we can bake, broil, braise, fry, grill etc. We can use a range of ingredients from animal to plant to synthetic food like substances. I will agree that eating french fries is unhealthy for a number of reasons. I will agree that "dry cooking" a number of foods appears to produce cancer causing acrylimides. But what about steaming kale or boiling soup, for example? Do we have evidence that this is an unhealthy way to consume vegetables? I haven't seen any empirical evidence to support the theory that ALL types of cooking ALL types of food is unhealthy - that the mere act of cooking food is unhealthy!
I think including some cooked vegetables by steaming and boiling them into soups can help make the transition to healthier eating much easier (it's helped me). Plus it helps get more greens in one's diet and adds to variety. Until I read facts stating why this form of cooking vegetables is unhealthy, I will remained unconvinced about raw foodism. ("Facts" other than the standard "cooking destroys enzymes" etc. I think cooking definitely destroys some of the nutrients/enzymes/etc. in vegetables, but what's left appears to be much more available to the body.)
|