On Sun, 2 Oct 2005 22:32:28 -0400, "Nancy Young" <
[email protected]>
connected the dots and wrote:
~
~"zxcvbob" <
[email protected]> wrote
~
~> MrKrinkle wrote:
~>> Someone told me that spinach has some chemicals in it that prevent
it's
~>> nutrients from being absorbed into the body, and not only that,
but it
~>> also prvents the nutrients from the rest of the salad you ate it
with.
~>> But if you cook it first then you get the nutrients. Is that
true?
~
~> No. But there probably is a bit of truth to it. I believe spinach
~> contains oxalates, which inhibit (not not totally prevent) the
absorption
~> of calcium and... iron? OTOH, cooking will destroy some (but not
all) of
~> the vitamins.
~>
~> Overall, I think it would be more nutritious raw -- it certainly
makes a
~> better salad raw!
~
~I did a quick little search and right away found two sites that
backed up
~what he said, that it's better to be eaten cooked. I don't know
about
~it's affect on other foods.
~
~nancy
~
Citations, please? For every opinion on the internet, I can find a
dozen to contradict it in twenty ways. Not trying to be smarmy, just
would like to see the sources.
Thanks
maxine in ri