Cooked food is poison?

[racheljj]

I'd like to look at scientific evidence that "cooked food is poisonous to our bodies." Does anyone know of any web sites for this? I'm very interested in studying the science behind that statement.

Thanks,

Rachel Johnson

[Gosia]

there exists scientific evidence that supports the argument that cooked food is poison. For example:

J Nutr 1992 Apr;122(4):924-30
Shifting from a conventional diet to an uncooked vegan diet reversibly alters fecal hydrolytic activities in humans.
Ling WH, Hanninen O. Department of Physiology, University of Kuopio, Finland.
We studied the effect on fecal hydrolytic activities of adopting an uncooked extreme vegan diet and readopting a conventional diet. Eighteen subjects were randomly divided into test and control groups. In the test group subjects adopted the uncooked extreme vegan diet for 1 mo and then resumed a conventional diet for a second month. Controls consumed a conventional diet throughout the study. Phenol and p-cresol concentrations in serum and daily output in urine and fecal enzyme activities were measured. The activity of fecal urease significantly decreased (by 66%) as did cholylglycine hydrolase (55%), beta-glucuronidase (33%) and beta-glucosidase (40%) within 1 wk of beginning the vegan diet. The new level remained throughout the period of consuming this diet. Phenol and p-cresol concentrations in serum and daily outputs in urine significantly declined. The fecal enzyme activities returned to normal values within 2 wk of resuming the conventional diet. Concentrations of phenol and p-cresol in serum and daily output in urine had returned to normal after 1 mo of consuming the conventional diet. No changes were observed in the control group during the study. Results suggest that this uncooked extreme vegan diet causes a decrease in bacterial enzymes and certain toxic products that have been implicated in colon cancer risk.

[vegbaby]

I wanted to add, though not scientific evidence and purely anecdotal, that whenever I eat cooked food, my lymph nodes in my neck swell up like I'm sick!

[VeganWannaBe]

OM Goodness ... I now have a new found motivation to keep pressing onward to 100% raw. Thank You!

[racheljj]

I'm glad to read that study, Gosia. Thanks for posting it. I wonder, though, if there's a study that also includes a healthier version of a cooked foods diet rather than just comparing raw foods to conventional cooked foods diet.

Interesting.

Rachel

[Curtis]

Hi Rachel nice to have you here.:)
I myself still struggle with calling cooked food poison. It is true that cooked food has less nutrients in it. To me eating food lower in nutrients than one needs would cause the body to be more open for diseases, etc. I guess the reason I have trouble calling it poison is I haven't seen any long term scientific studies linking eating cooked food to say like cancer,etc. Don't take me wrong I firmly believe eating whole, natural food is the best way to live but I am not sure of the bad effects of say a vegan that steams vegetables.:)



I'd like to look at scientific evidence that "cooked food is poisonous to our bodies." Does anyone know of any web sites for this? I'm very interested in studying the science behind that statement.
Rachel Johnson

[tglasco4]

Hi Rachel,

As far as I can tell, I have seen none. I know it is the opinion of many raw foodists (including storm and jinjee talifero) but I know of no scientific evidence. That being said, I do believe the statement to be true based on my on experience.

Peace.

Todd


I'd like to look at scientific evidence that "cooked food is poisonous to our bodies." Does anyone know of any web sites for this? I'm very interested in studying the science behind that statement.

Thanks,

Rachel Johnson

[tglasco4]

Wow Gosia! That is definitely scientific proof! What do the letters at the top of the post stand for? "J Nutr 1992 Apr;122(4):924-30"
I would like to look it up and save it myself and give it as reference to anyone who asks. Thanks in advance!

Todd

[rawnora]

We need to understand that the word "poison" doesn't necessarily mean something that makes us drop over dead immediately. Poison can work slowly or quickly. Some poisons are so harmful that they can do irreparable damage to organs and tissues quickly, before the body is able to eliminate them. In other poisons, the damage is slow and cumulative. Such is the case with cooked food. It has been repeatedly shown that eating cooked food elicits the same response in the body (leukocytosis) that ingesting acknowledged poisons do. Leukocytes, or white blood cells, are the body's clean up crew. They are there to protect us, but they can only do so much and it is quite easy to overwhelm them. This is only one of the problems with eating cooked food. After you've been raw for awhile and then go back to eating cooked food you will recognize immediately that it IS poison, abeit a slow one. It should be noted as well that not all cooked foods are equally harmful.

Nora
<http://www.RawSchool.com>

[Rawkinlocs]

Off topic real quick: HI NORA!!!! *waving :D


Okay, back to our regularly scheduled program... :p

[loveraw]

Thanks Gosia for the input, very helpful, I loved your website, I think you guys are doing amazing.

Nora, thanks for posting here, that is really good to know.

[Helen Of Tennessee]

I was watching Dr. Loraine Day on TV and she said that there were scientific studies done that proved that eating S.A.D. does cause diseases, but it can't be published in the medical journals because the pharmecutical companies would pull their ads.

Maybe you can contact Dr. Day for the reports: http://www.drday.com

<>< Helen of Tennessee

[racheljj]

Thanks to all of you for your responses.

Re comparing SAD to raw foods...that's not what I want to do. My family doesn't eat SAD anymore. We eat healthier versions of cooked foods so I'm wanting studies that compare healthy cooked foods with raw foods diet long term. I agree that all raw food is healthy short term for cleansing.

Nora wrote: "It has been repeatedly shown that eating cooked food elicits the same response in the body (leukocytosis) that ingesting acknowledged poisons do. Leukocytes, or white blood cells, are the body's clean up crew. They are there to protect us, but they can only do so much and it is quite easy to overwhelm them."

I ask: Can you show me adequate studies that prove this? Are there studies that compare junk food, healthy cooked foods and raw foods rather than just raw foods vs. SAD?

Todd, I agree that our personal experience counts big time! Yes, personal experience is part of the discovery process, but so is research. It's important to listen to our bodies and minds to see when have the most energy, when our mind is clear, when our skin glows, etc. If something's not right physically, then we need to tweak something, whether that's adding more raw foods, adding some vitamin or another or adding eggs or meat. :)

Finally, thanks, Curtis. So far, I'm not really seeing any concrete scientific evidence PROVING that ALL cooked foods are poisonous for ALL humans. I'm wanting to either get proof for my theory or else find proof for the statement about cooked foods. My theory is that high raw is excellent but that different people have different needs and that cooked foods and animal proteins are needs for many people. Basically, I don't want to blindly follow anything anymore. I want to question, discover and learn.

I appreciate everyone's response.

Rachel Johnson

[tglasco4]

Rachel,

I find it refreshing that you are seeking to find out things for yourself. So few people do that these days. In the bible it gives an example of that in the book of Acts 17:11 where it says..
" These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so."

Take no persons word but prove all things until you are satisfied. You can't go wrong that way. I am convinced that 100% raw diet is the best for the human system, but I am also convinced that not everyone gets there at the same speed. I believe if a person is at least 75-85% raw for a period of time, that the body will crave 100% eventually and it will be a natural transition. That period of time can be days, weeks, months or years. But that is me and I don't believe in pushing my convictions on anyone. So, Rachel I am glad you are here and I know you will find what balance you seek, because you are seeking.

Also, Nora, glad you are here! I hope you post often!

Peace.

Todd

[Olive]

I would hesitate from using such a definitive statement as "cooked food is poison." For one, whether or not that statement is true, it feels a bit extremist to me. I know it's not an exact match, but as a vegan I won't go around calling meateaters murderers. I may feel the act of eating an animal when it is not needed to sustain life murder, but I will only alienate the person. Personally, I believe living foods is best for health--I've already seen results myself! But I think cooked foods being literal poison is inaccurate. I'm also coming to the conclusion that there isn't a lot of research out there comparing a raw foods diet with a healthy vegan diet or a SAD diet. There probably isn't the funding. I've come across studies that point to the consumption of whole foods as being health giving, but nothing "big picture."

Todd-- "J Nutr 1992 Apr;122(4):924-30" means "Journal of Nutrition, April of 1992, volume 122 (the four signifies the issue number or month--April) and 924-30 are the page numbers. You can go to http://www.pubmed.com to look it up!

[SwishTN]

As a person who is constantly wanting to better herself, and gain true wisdom and knowledge, I must say that this board is so refreshing....
Thank you Rachel for asking questions, and being consistent with following through on what you want to discover, vs letting things just kind of be....
Everyone has such incredible input, and the fact that people can have differences of opinion and be so wonderful about it is encouraging....
That's it : ).
Lauri

[Sharon in Colorado]

I heard that the book Nature's First Law states 'cooked food is poison' at the end of every chapter (I realize the book was largely plagerized)....but I wonder if asking for scientific evidence on the NFL site might get someone to produce their findings.

Also there is the question of denatured food in general, if there is a difference in reaction in the body between a Twinkie and a piece of whole wheat bread. I wouldn't think there is a big difference between those two, but I wouldn't see steamed broccoli getting quite the same reaction. I personally haven't felt as bad having a steamed veggie as I have a piece of bread after I've been raw for an extended period of time. For one, I believe grains cause far more mucous production than cooked fruits, vegetables and meats. Dairy and egg causes the second most mucous production. This is of course based on personal experience and reading about mucous in foods over the years.

I wonder if Arnold Ehret conducted studies like these for his mucousless diet system.

[tglasco4]

Thanks alot Olive.:)

[rawnora]

Hi Rachel,
Research is not the right place to seek answers to questions about health. Time does not permit me to list all of its problems, but at the top of the list is the fact that unless you investigate the methodology used in each study and know whom it was conducted by and for what reasons ($), you cannot trust the published outcomes. On top of that, medical research is not true science. It relies heavily on animal studies, which are fatally flawed. Even when the studies are done on humans, the researchers are biased going in. The germ theory and the notion that humans are omnivores are two examples of unproven ideas that researchers commonly labor under, and many times base their conclusions on. You must be aware of the mountain of contradictory and conflicting information that has come from medical science. The entire field is a vast morass of confusion. In the end, we all know that research is driven by money and nobody makes any money by proving that raw food is optimal.

I know it sounds like sacrilege, but we don't need studies. What we need to know, we can easily know without them. If this weren't the case, our ancestors would not have survived through the millenia. The truth is always obvious and self-evident, not hidden away in medical journals. If what you want is proof, eat all raw for 6 months. Then have a cooked meal, even one that you regard as "healthy" now. This will convince you better than any study could. If you're trying to convince someone other than yourself, you'll never be able to do it with medical research because a study that "proves" the opposite of what your study "proves" can always be found.

I applaud anyone for seeking truth and for wanting to avoid following theories and hypotheses. However, there are ways to do this that don't involve relying on what passes for science in the medical world. I'm not opposed to real science, because real science is logical, it always works (in practical application), and its outcomes are consistently reproduce-able. Medical or nutritional research does not fit any of these criteria, so it does not qualify as real science. It is intensely liberating to realize that we can each know certainly and definitively what needs to be done to maintain health, without help from people in white coats. If you have questions about how I can be certain of the things I'm certain of, feel free to ask and I'll attempt to explain (as time allows).

Thanks for your inquiry.

Nora
www.RawSchool.com

[VeggieGirl]

I just ran across this at www.rawschool.com - I think it offers a balanced insight into your question.

Cheers-
VeggieGirl

"Cooked food is obviously not a poison that will immediately cause us to fall over dead. Rather what it does is gradually and cumulatively overtax the various organs and processes in our bodies with a backlog of waste. Eating cooked food is like piling so much trash in your driveway that the trash collectors can't keep up. Eventually, the trash is going to overtake the entire driveway and you're going to have a problem. A lifetime of eating cooked food causes the body to become saturated in its waste. Tissues that are in constant contact with toxins and other waste become irritated, inflamed, ulcerated and indurated (hardened). Cells die at an accelerated rate, tissues degenerate and organs lose functionability. This is why people in their 30s, 40s and 50s who eat a cooked food diet typically have one chronic illness or another. The fact that people manage to live for decades eating a diet of cooked food doesn't mean that it isn't harmful, but rather attests to the human body's capacity for tolerating abuse and demonstrates that our lifespans would be a great deal longer if we lived in accordance with our biological mandates."

[Curtis]

Thank you VeggieGirl this is what I believe and had a hard time putting into words. :)
And ty Nora for writing it!

[VeganWannaBe]

Fantastic Nora!
BTW ... feel free to move into my home anytime ... I could really use your help in my transistion. It would save me so much time if you were actually here so that I wouldn't have to reference your site so many times a day :) Thanks for blessing me w/ your shared knowledge ... amazing!

[nobletroll]

--I found this on more than one sight if you do a serch for Acrylamide you should be able to check it out. It is a toxin formed in starch-rich foods when you heat it---

AO cautious on findings of acrylamide in some fried and baked foods

ROME, 26 April 2002 -- It is too early to reach any firm conclusions on the unexpected finding of the toxic chemical acrylamide in fried and baked food by Sweden's National Food Administration, the UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) said today. It added that it welcomed the suggestion by Swedish authorities to study the findings in co-operation with international organisations and has already requested access to the data.

FAO's comments came in the wake of an NFA announcement this week that a scientific group at the University of Stockholm found that acrylamide "probable human carcinogen" is formed during heating of starch-rich foods to high temperatures. The NFA also announced that it has developed a new, rapid method for the analysis of acrylamide in foods. It said the risks associated with acrylamide in foods are not new, but added that emerging knowledge may make it possible to reduce the risks that we have so far accepted without discussion.

Acrylamide is used in the manufacturing of plastics and is strictly controlled by environmental regulations. The new data claim that acrylamide is formed spontaneously in foods while frying potatoes, for example, or baking bread or cookies. However, Swedish authorities offered no explanation about how and why this occurs.

According to FAO, the toxicological effects of acrylamide are well known. It causes DNA damage and at high doses neurological and reproductive effects have been observed. Prolonged exposure has induced tumours in rats, but cancer in man has not been convincingly shown. The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) has classified acrylamide as a "probably carcinogenic to humans."

Dr. Manfred Luetzow, FAO's food chemicals expert in the Organization's Food and Nutrition Division, said: "We understand from the report that this is not a new risk. This contaminant has probably been present in such foods since mankind started to bake and fry. Unfortunately, the information available does not allow us to draw conclusions or to make recommendations for consumers or food manufacturers."

Dr. Luetzow said that the current FAO/WHO recommendation to consume a well-balanced and diversified diet prepared in ways that preserve nutrient contents is consistent with the new findings and does not need to be changed.

[racheljj]

Thanks to all of you. I love the variety of responses I've gotten here.

And, thanks, especially to Todd for the encouragement.

Rachel

[loveraw]

Rachel,
This is something that I have found on someone elses site. It is similar to what Nora says and it specificaly states that it's the change in temperature that causes this, not what type of food you eat. Also I looked up leukocytosis and it's basicaly like having an infection after you eat cooked food. If that is true then we would be living in a constant state of infection all our life? So an aspirin a day is now starting to make sence?

Here is the article,
In 1930, research was conducted at the Institute of Clinical Chemistry in Lausanne, Switzerland, under the direction of Dr. Paul Kouchakoff. The effect of food (cooked/processed vs. raw/natural) on the immune system was tested and documented. Dr. Kouchakoff's discovery concerned the leukocytes, the white blood cells. Apparently, a well-known phenomena occurred immediately after a person ate.


It was found that after a person eats cooked food, his/her blood responds immediately by increasing the number of white blood cells. This is a well-known phenomena called "digestive leukocytosis", which means that there is a rise in the number of leukocytes, or white blood cells, after eating. Since digestive leukocytosis was always observed after eating, it was considered to be a normal physiological response to eating. No one knew why the number of white cells would rise after eating, since this appeared to be a stress response, as if the body was reacting to something harmful, such as infection, trauma, or exposure to toxic chemicals.


Back in 1930, Swiss researchers of the institute of Chemical Chemistry studied the influence of food on human blood and made a remarkable discovery. They found that eating unaltered, raw food or food heated at low temperatures did not cause a reaction in the blood. In addition, if a food had been heated beyond a certain temperature (unique to each food), or if the food was processed (refined, added chemicals, etc.), this always caused a rise in the number of white cells in the blood. The researchers renamed this reaction "pathological leukocytosis", since the body was reacting to highly altered food. They tested many different kinds of foods and found that if the foods were not overheated or refined, they caused no reaction. The body saw them as "friendly foods". However, these same foods, if heated at too high a temperature caused a negative reaction in the blood, a reaction that is found only when the body is invaded by a dangerous pathogen or trauma.

[Curtis]

Nicely put loveraw :)
Along these same lines I want to share Jinjee and Storms latest newsletter they sent me.

Raw Inspiration - 11/13/04 - Chemistry 101

********************************************

What keeps me raw? I just believe it is the right way to eat. It seems so
simple. It seems like common sense. When you apply heat to something you
change it. That's just a first high school chemistry lesson. Our food and
our bodies are made up of the same basic elements. Heating these elements is
destructive to them. You wouldn't want to heat your hand at cooking
temperatures. You would basically kill your hand. By applying heat to food
we change it. Eat any raw fruit or vegetable. Cook it and eat it cooked. In
100 out of 100 cases, the raw version will taste better than the cooked.
We're talking about crunchy, juicy, tasty and succulent versus soft, limp,
bland and mushy!

********************************************
In Health,

Jinjee and Storm

I love how simple these folks are. I think sometimes we make this to complicated. :)

[Gosia]

J Nutr 1992 Apr;122(4):924-930 is the source of the mentioned article. I quoted the abstract only, but if you would like to read the full article, then you can access it in any library that holds the mentioned journal. J Nutr is Journal of Nutrition, 122(4) is the number of the volume, and 924-930 are the pages of the article.
:)

[chilove]

my lymph nodes also get swollen when i eat cooked food. it happens every time. that is enough proof for me.