 |
 | |
|
The "news and views" discussed here are those of the participating users, and do not necessarily represent or have the endorsement of the San Francisco Vegetarian Society.
|
| |  |
|
|
|
> SFVS on Facebook <
be kind to animals, don't eat them
|
Wednesday, August 19, 2009
|
|
|
|
|
I received this article regarding broccoli and it seems that eating broccoli raw is better than cooked.
We all know to eat our veggies — but what does cooking do in the nutrients?
Broccoli frequently earns a top spot on "superfoods" lists. This is partly because it delivers a healthy dose of sulforaphane, a compound thought to thwart cancer by helping to stimulate the body's detoxifying enzymes.
According to recent research in the Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, raw broccoli provides significantly more of this beneficial nutrient than cooked. (Cooking locks sulforaphane in, making it unavailable to your body.) In the small study, men were given about 1 cup of broccoli, raw or cooked. Those who ate the raw broccoli absorbed sulforaphane faster and in higher amounts compared to those who ate it cooked. The findings add to growing evidence that links diets rich in cruciferous vegetables, such as broccoli, kale and cauliflower, to lower rates of cancer.
Bottom line: If you like broccoli, eat it raw: it's more nutritious. Or, if you prefer it cooked, Martijn Vermeulen, Ph.D., the study's lead researcher, suggests steaming it until it's cooked but still crunchy. Some research suggests this method may keep sulforaphane available.Labels: health |
posted by JC on:
8/19/2009 12:49:00 PM
|
 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The latest postings on our Facebook page
Cooked. Lightly steamed to make it a bit easier to digest. However I do tend to munch on it raw during the chopping process.