Forum
»
More General Categories
»
Misc.
» Adding fire to an animal makes the food more delicious and last longer in your body
- Results 1 to 19 of 19
04-24-2024, 01:26 PM
#1
Adding fire to an animal makes the food more delicious and last longer in your body
That is why mariomiami's raw food and eating philosophy is retarded
Agree or disagree?
Agree or disagree?
04-24-2024, 01:28 PM
#2
I do believe that cooking food destroys a lot of the nutrients.
- GaryRidgway
- 16oz King
- GaryRidgway
- 16oz King
- Join Date: Apr 2013
- Posts: 25,866
- Rep Power: 311,620
-
04-24-2024, 01:59 PM
#3
Originally Posted By GaryRidgway⏩
No sire, it does not destroy the nutrients.
I do believe that cooking food destroys a lot of the nutrients.
It breaks down the proteins.
Those 2 phrases have the same technical meaning but 2 different practical meanings.
To destroy means to lose or not be able to use
To break down is to make into smaller more usable prices.
When you eat foods the digestion process is specifically to break down the proteins into small usable parts.
Would be cool if there was a way to begin that process before we eat the food right? There is….you cook it
[My wife drank 9 Adios MFers in one night on a business trip with her boss]
04-24-2024, 02:43 PM
#4
(((cooking)))
neglect lifting acquire tendons
uses hook grip to jerk off crew
would cuck Rippetoe (respectfully)
04-24-2024, 02:53 PM
#5
Originally Posted By Condo41⏩
You're saying cooked food retains 100% of the nutrients. Fuk outta here.
No sire, it does not destroy the nutrients.
It breaks down the proteins.
Those 2 phrases have the same technical meaning but 2 different practical meanings.
To destroy means to lose or not be able to use
To break down is to make into smaller more usable prices.
When you eat foods the digestion process is specifically to break down the proteins into small usable parts.
Would be cool if there was a way to begin that process before we eat the food right? There is….you cook it
It breaks down the proteins.
Those 2 phrases have the same technical meaning but 2 different practical meanings.
To destroy means to lose or not be able to use
To break down is to make into smaller more usable prices.
When you eat foods the digestion process is specifically to break down the proteins into small usable parts.
Would be cool if there was a way to begin that process before we eat the food right? There is….you cook it
- GaryRidgway
- 16oz King
- GaryRidgway
- 16oz King
- Join Date: Apr 2013
- Posts: 25,866
- Rep Power: 311,620
-
04-24-2024, 02:53 PM
#6
If man never learned how to cook meat, we would still be swinging from the trees and flinging poo on each other.
*Simplicity is the key to life*
Thanks ZBlacktt for the mod rep!
Thanks ForumSentinel for the admin rep!
Thanks Gxp23 for the mod rep!
Thanks 400LB Gorilla for the mod rep!
Thanks CountryMike for admin rep!
Thanks Nics1246 for mod rep!
I got married on August 24, 2013!!
ლ(╹◡╹ლ)
04-24-2024, 02:57 PM
#7
Originally Posted By GaryRidgway⏩
You're saying cooked food retains 100% of the nutrients. Fuk outta here.
[My wife drank 9 Adios MFers in one night on a business trip with her boss]
04-24-2024, 03:06 PM
#8
Originally Posted By Condo41⏩
I'm not sure what this image is supposed to mean. Are any nutrients destroyed in the cooking process? Yes or no
- GaryRidgway
- 16oz King
- GaryRidgway
- 16oz King
- Join Date: Apr 2013
- Posts: 25,866
- Rep Power: 311,620
-
04-24-2024, 03:21 PM
#9
Originally Posted By GaryRidgway⏩
It's a semi-famous interview where Jordan peterson gave a simple response and the chick constantly, after everything he said, would go "so you're saying…" and then proceed to HEAVILY change what he had said to be more septic.
I'm not sure what this image is supposed to mean. Are any nutrients destroyed in the cooking process? Yes or no
Anyway…
"Does ANY nutrients get destroyed in the cooking process?"
Since we're going on a 100% or 0% spectrum with nothing in between and no room for nuance. Then you got me cornered. Yes, there are nutrients that get lost during the cooking process.
Now if you plan on stomping on the brakes at this moment and not go further into it and choose to run around saying that cooking food destroys the food's nutrients implying that the food should not be cooked, you'll be doing so in error.
So, would you like to know more or are you gonna form your own conclusion converse to the truth based on a fraction of the information required to understand the subject
[My wife drank 9 Adios MFers in one night on a business trip with her boss]
04-24-2024, 03:28 PM
#10
Originally Posted By Condo41⏩
I'm not saying its 100% or 0% it depends how much you cook it. You could potentially lose all the nutrtients if you burn everything. I don't eat raw food mainly cause the quality of food in America is so sheeit and the animals are likely sick and fed a chit diet.
It's a semi-famous interview where Jordan peterson gave a simple response and the chick constantly, after everything he said, would go "so you're saying…" and then proceed to HEAVILY change what he had said to be more septic.
Anyway…
"Does ANY nutrients get destroyed in the cooking process?"
Since we're going on a 100% or 0% spectrum with nothing in between and no room for nuance. Then you got me cornered. Yes, there are nutrients that get lost during the cooking process.
Now if you plan on stomping on the brakes at this moment and not go further into it and choose to run around saying that cooking food destroys the food's nutrients implying that the food should not be cooked, you'll be doing so in error.
So, would you like to know more or are you gonna form your own conclusion converse to the truth based on a fraction of the information required to understand the subject
Anyway…
"Does ANY nutrients get destroyed in the cooking process?"
Since we're going on a 100% or 0% spectrum with nothing in between and no room for nuance. Then you got me cornered. Yes, there are nutrients that get lost during the cooking process.
Now if you plan on stomping on the brakes at this moment and not go further into it and choose to run around saying that cooking food destroys the food's nutrients implying that the food should not be cooked, you'll be doing so in error.
So, would you like to know more or are you gonna form your own conclusion converse to the truth based on a fraction of the information required to understand the subject
- GaryRidgway
- 16oz King
- GaryRidgway
- 16oz King
- Join Date: Apr 2013
- Posts: 25,866
- Rep Power: 311,620
-
04-24-2024, 03:29 PM
#11
Originally Posted By GaryRidgway⏩
I dont think when we evolved to Homo Sapiens that we were ever really supposed to eat raw animal meat.
I'm not saying its 100% or 0% it depends how much you cook it. You could potentially lose all the nutrtients if you burn everything. I don't eat raw food mainly cause the quality of food in America is so sheeit and the animals are likely sick and fed a chit diet.
USMC 0311
*Ice Hockey/Lacrosse Crew*
*fukkin zeezbrah when pickin up chicks but do one thing to fuk it up/cant sustain after that night crew*
*C7 GS Vette Crew*
04-24-2024, 03:39 PM
#12
Originally Posted By GaryRidgway⏩
Yeah see you did it again, you dont see it in yourself. The all or nothing fallacy you're addicted to it and you for sure will deny it even though it's right there for everyone to see.
I'm not saying its 100% or 0% it depends how much you cook it. You could potentially lose all the nutrtients if you burn everything. I don't eat raw food mainly cause the quality of food in America is so sheeit and the animals are likely sick and fed a chit diet.
You MUST be smart enough to realize no one is suggesting you burn it to the point there is no nutritional value.
Any reasonable adult understands the OP isbsuggesting normal cooking of food.
[My wife drank 9 Adios MFers in one night on a business trip with her boss]
04-24-2024, 03:41 PM
#13
Originally Posted By Condo41⏩
I said it depends how much you cook it. The less you cook it the less you lose from it. What would normal cooking of a steak be?
Yeah see you did it again, you dont see it in yourself. The all or nothing fallacy you're addicted to it and you for sure will deny it even though it's right there for everyone to see.
You MUST be smart enough to realize no one is suggesting you burn it to the point there is no nutritional value.
Any reasonable adult understands the OP isbsuggesting normal cooking of food.
You MUST be smart enough to realize no one is suggesting you burn it to the point there is no nutritional value.
Any reasonable adult understands the OP isbsuggesting normal cooking of food.
- GaryRidgway
- 16oz King
- GaryRidgway
- 16oz King
- Join Date: Apr 2013
- Posts: 25,866
- Rep Power: 311,620
-
04-24-2024, 03:47 PM
#14
Originally Posted By GaryRidgway⏩
Normal cooking of a steak is obviously medium rare to medium well. Any regular person would be able to know thi
I said it depends how much you cook it. The less you cook it the less you lose from it. What would normal cooking of a steak be?
But your brain is funky. You have redditor brain. You split hairs and go to full extremes to make points.
You use confusing terms like "nutrients" wtf are you talking about? Water is a nutrient under strict circumstances. Micro nutrients get lost when cooking. Macro nutrients CAN be lost if fat drips off of bacon. PROTEIN may be lost if it's burnt but overall it's broken down with heat and ADDS to the builavailability during absorption.
So. The nuances are too vast to adopt a blanket statement "nutrients are lost when cooking"
Ya…nutrients are lost on the drive home from the grocery store, wtf are you trying to say?
[My wife drank 9 Adios MFers in one night on a business trip with her boss]
04-24-2024, 03:53 PM
#15
Originally Posted By Condo41⏩
I'm saying I disagree. I think minimal or no cooking is better. Provided the animal is not sick.
Normal cooking of a steak is obviously medium rare to medium well. Any regular person would be able to know thi
But your brain is funky. You have redditor brain. You split hairs and go to full extremes to make points.
You use confusing terms like "nutrients" wtf are you talking about? Water is a nutrient under strict circumstances. Micro nutrients get lost when cooking. Macro nutrients CAN be lost if fat drips off of bacon. PROTEIN may be lost if it's burnt but overall it's broken down with heat and ADDS to the builavailability during absorption.
So. The nuances are too vast to adopt a blanket statement "nutrients are lost when cooking"
Ya…nutrients are lost on the drive home from the grocery store, wtf are you trying to say?
But your brain is funky. You have redditor brain. You split hairs and go to full extremes to make points.
You use confusing terms like "nutrients" wtf are you talking about? Water is a nutrient under strict circumstances. Micro nutrients get lost when cooking. Macro nutrients CAN be lost if fat drips off of bacon. PROTEIN may be lost if it's burnt but overall it's broken down with heat and ADDS to the builavailability during absorption.
So. The nuances are too vast to adopt a blanket statement "nutrients are lost when cooking"
Ya…nutrients are lost on the drive home from the grocery store, wtf are you trying to say?
- GaryRidgway
- 16oz King
- GaryRidgway
- 16oz King
- Join Date: Apr 2013
- Posts: 25,866
- Rep Power: 311,620
-
04-24-2024, 04:08 PM
#16
Originally Posted By GaryRidgway⏩
And I'm saying there is no disagreement or agreement available to be had. It is a measured science with numbers attached to it.
I'm saying I disagree. I think minimal or no cooking is better. Provided the animal is not sick.
You can't agree that 2+2=4, it is no matter what.
Cooking will remove certain vitamins. It will allow certain minerals to become more available. It will denatured protein chains so they are available - and if overdone it will destroy the proteins (burnt) - it will make fat more available except for the parts that liquify and drip off.
In the end, cooking makes nutrients more available and the losses from cooking are an acceptable tradeoff.
[My wife drank 9 Adios MFers in one night on a business trip with her boss]
04-25-2024, 07:57 AM
#17
Originally Posted By GaryRidgway⏩
Sure, it’s to remind you of ***gotry and it’s evils.
I'm not sure what this image is supposed to mean. Are any nutrients destroyed in the cooking process? Yes or no
5'10
- swordplay76
- Registered User
- swordplay76
- Registered User
- Join Date: Sep 2023
- Age: 54
- Posts: 2,737
- Rep Power: 18,237
-
04-25-2024, 07:58 AM
#18
It helps the food breakdown faster. So it can be digested faster. Are you are wrong in saying "it stays longer in your body".
When it comes your time to die, be not like those whose hearts are filled with the fear of death, so that when their time comes they weep and pray for a little more time to live their lives over again in a different way. Sing your death song and die like a hero going home.
04-25-2024, 11:36 AM
#19
Originally Posted By monster0ultra⏩
Imagine being on a technology cycle for 3 months and only seeing 10% gains on your lifts and having your resting heart rate double.
Godfrd is the fattest active miscer so he is the authority on maxxing how many calories and nutrients make it into the body.
When it comes your time to die, be not like those whose hearts are filled with the fear of death, so that when their time comes they weep and pray for a little more time to live their lives over again in a different way. Sing your death song and die like a hero going home.
Bookmarks
- Digg
- del.icio.us
- StumbleUpon
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts