Raw food?

[velvetpage]

I was just linked to this by a person who started following me on twitter. I have a few misgivings about it.

First, the suggestion that eating cooked food raises your white blood cell count, indicating your body is fighting an infection. I've studied vaccines enough to know that an immune system that is never tested isn't going to work very well; that is, getting white blood cells to do something is far better than leaving them to do nothing. Which makes me wonder: is a raw diet actually worse for the immune system because it doesn't give it any exercise? (This is even assuming that that information is true - I'm not convinced yet.)

Second, the idea that all toxic bi-products of anything must immediately be bad. I'm not buying it. Our bodies have ways of getting rid of stuff that is toxic to us after it enters the body. I'll only be concerned about toxic bi-products when studies are done to show that they don't get broken down and turned into something else, or eliminated, by my body. Showing that I'm getting the toxins isn't enough; I need to know if I'm keeping them.

Third, genetic mutations are normal. They're not some rare occurrence to be avoided. They're part of what the body does, and the overwhelming majority do not lead to bad health outcomes like aggressive cancers. So when you tell me that eating cooked food causes genetic mutations, I'm likely to tell you that if your cells aren't mutating at all, there's something wrong with them.

Now, I can see the benefits of a vegetarian diet and I agree that it would be healthier. I can even see the benefits of a vegan diet for at least some people, though I haven't done the research to find out if it would be good for everyone, and I'm not particularly interested in it. But raw food? If it's toxic, then I'll continue to live with the toxins that the vast, vast majority of society has managed to do all right on for thousands of years. I'm not scared enough of the outcomes listed to consider that drastic a change to my lifestyle.

Comments

[doc-mystery.livejournal.com]

(Scratches head) A very short preamble; before I went into medicine, I studied molecular biology.

While genetic mutations are common, and sometimes advantageous to the population of a species when conditions change, they are not desirable in an individual organism.

Remember that DNA is both information, the recipe for making an organism) *and* the storage media for that recipe. Randomly missing instructions of that recipe, mis-reading of the needed ingredients, mixing up the orders of the steps, etc., bending or tearing the pages of the recipe and imperfectly taping it together again, etc., isn't very likely to improve the final intended results.

Genetic mutations are normally avidly sought for and corrected by cellular mechanisms at a variety of levels inside a cell's nucleus. For example, the double helix structure of DNA itself, along with the need for three codons to make mRNA transcripts helps DNA/gene fidelity. And when gene products (proteins) are misfolded or don't 'look right' they are tagged with another protein for later removal and recycling.

The gradual accumulation of genetic mutations can lead to not only abnormal gene products, but dysregulation of the expression of many other genes. Everything from cancer, many diseases (Alzheimer's, Parkinson's, etc.) and normal/accelerated aging are thought to be possible end results of the accumulation of genetic errors over an organism's lifetime.

::B::

[velvetpage.livejournal.com]

I stand corrected. :) However, I think the other stuff still stands, and I'm not convinced they have the research to back up the claim that cooked food (that was otherwise unprocessed) leads to more mutations.

[commanderteddog.livejournal.com]

HA! Yes, you know it's a dead serious scientific explanation when the interviewee claims "They are also more cheerful!" without any stats or backing. Ugh.

I've considered borrowing a book or two on raw food cooking NOT for the diet, but to see if I can repurpose some of the recipes in the summer months. Cheaper produce in the summer plus not heating up the apartment equals enough of an interest to at least try a recipe or two. I know there's raw food restaurant in the city that offers "spaghetti" made out of thick strings of zucchini, which strikes me as an interesting base for a salad.

[velvetpage.livejournal.com]

I'm all for stealing recipes from any and every source. :)

[commanderteddog.livejournal.com]

I shall post my findings, then!

[r-caton.livejournal.com]

It's a good job her teeth are so pearly white and string (no orthodontics of course) otherwise she wouldn't be able to handle raw food...I find it hard to chew even cooked meat sometimes and rending my sustenance limb from limb is beyond me now....
Raw food....
damn stuff must be crawling with germs....

[redeem147.livejournal.com]

Kinda makes me want to eat a big, well-done steak. ;)

[velvetpage.livejournal.com]

I had that craving too. :)

[hillarygayle.livejournal.com]

I usually try not to post when I'm in an actively cynical mood because it weirds people out. But this? This pretty much just looks to me like something for someone to feel all smug about. e_e Ooo, look how healthy I am with my entirely raw diet.

[kisekileia.livejournal.com]

This. It looks like quackery to me.

[velvetpage.livejournal.com]

Yep.

[pthalo]

*quacks*

I used to think the raw food thing just meant eating a lot of salads, which are good for you, but when I found out it included raw meat.. yuck. :)

[velvetpage.livejournal.com]

I'm trying to imagine eating raw quinoa. The image is not a nice one.

[dornbeast.livejournal.com]

Using Google to search for the phrase "Maillard molecules" produces a lot of articles written by or about people promoting a raw-food diet.

A bit of digging found the phrase "Maillard compounds." The article I found in that search offers a different opinion. (http://www.middlebury.edu/administration/middmag/archive/2005/summer/academic/)

[velvetpage.livejournal.com]

That was a good read. And it's pretty much as I expected: they over-simplified so dramatically that there's no possible comparison between the raw foods proponents, and actual science. Even the populations conceivably most at risk from toxic bi-products wouldn't really benefit from the raw diet because the reaction would continue to happen in their own bodies.