Hot food vs cold food
This may seem like kind of an odd topic but in my life I've noticed that eating foods when they are hot (temperature wise) has always made me feel worse than when eating it cold. For example, eating 3 slices of hot pizza vs 3 slices of cold pizza. I'm using pizza as an example cause a good number of people have eaten it hot and cold. When I eat it hot I feel like total crap but when I eat it cold I don't feel as weighed down and sluggish. This goes for almost any food.
I realize cooking has been around for a long time but it's still somewhat an invention so wouldn't heating up food be unnatural? Is it possible eating food that is heated is not as healthy as non-heated food? I felt the same way when I used to eat fried chicken.
I doubt it. Many nutrients are more bioavailable when they are cooked (in food form).
I wanna say that both foods hot and cold are good. Some vitamins and nutrients are directly got from without cooking like seafood and meat. And some foods are needed for cook because without cooking this kind of foods not be an tasty and its going to waste..
I often eat cooked foods after they have been refrigerated for many hours and are still cold. Best of both worlds? :-)
i don't know, i feel the same whether the food is hot or cold, the difference for me is the starch/carb count. lotsa starchy carbs and i feel really weighed down
some foods i have to eat hot, some i have to eat cold tho. mouthfeel, yo
I was wondering, recently, if there might be some benefit to eating cold, cooked foods just so your body has to expand a tiny bit more energy to warm the food up. Or potentially you just miss out on some nutrients.
Interesting to think about, but either way I doubt it makes a [I]significant[/I] difference.
cold gelatin from italian roast beef is mighty tasty tho
when my stomach feels better i should make a pot full. and eat it cold. to test it out.
[QUOTE=mindo;622571]This may seem like kind of an odd topic but in my life I've noticed that eating foods when they are hot (temperature wise) has always made me feel worse than when eating it cold. ...
I realize cooking has been around for a long time ...[/QUOTE]
You changed the question part-way through.
Is this about hot/cold or cooked/raw? Two different things.
Yes, cooking been around for awhile:
[url=http://www.amazon.com/Catching-Fire-Cooking-Made-Human/dp/0465020410/]Amazon.com: Catching Fire: How Cooking Made Us Human (9780465020416): Richard Wrangham: Books[/url]
It can make some nutrients more available (although some are heat-labile). It can also make the sheer energy-content of the food more available.
Doesn't mean you should eat the food while it's still very hot and burn yourself. My father told me of how he'd once seen the intestines of pigs shown as a comparison. One set had been fed on hot mash, one on cold-mash. (Presumably, both sets of mash had been cooked.) IIRC, those of the former appeared somewhat shrunken. Pigs will, I'm told, eat food scalding hot, squeal in pain, but go on eating.
I think you've raised an interesting topic that I don't think has ever been aired on these boards before.
Yeah, cooked food is fine (although many primitive peoples eat [I]some[/I] of their food raw -- perhaps certain cuts like liver). But letting it cool a bit is probably a good idea.
My homemade Indian curry is the best after you let it cool down, but not cold, just warm, slightly above room temperature.
And remember, be sure to add spices. Lots of spices.
Cooking has been around for half a million years or more. It is thoroughly paleo, if you're worried about that sort of thing.
But if you feel better eating your food cold, then eat it cold. It's not going to change the nutrition of the food (I don't mean uncooked, but chilled after cooking--cooking definitely does change the nutrition available in food, usually for the better!).