Spinach

[bidouille23]

Hello ,

who can explain to me why spinach would be richer in a little all that composes them when they are cooked rather than raw ???

where is the magic trick ???

source

http://www.passeportsante.net/fr/Nutrit ... epinard_nu

thank you in advance

[highfly-addict]

No magic, look at the quantities in the top row: there is a ratio of 3 (95/32) which you then find roughly throughout the table.

In short, according to this table, raw or cooked, it is also nourishing.

[bidouille23]

Slut,

I agree, but in the 95 gr there is water ...

but both are nourishing, not the problem ...

Simply:

for 32g for 95gr

protein 0.9 / 32 = 0.0281 2.8 / 95 = 0.0294

ditto for everything so there is much more of each element after cooking?

capturing, transforming part of the plant ???
it intrigues me I would like to understand, I will also look but if someone had had the answer seeing that I am a big lazy;) ... understands that it would have arranged me

[highfly-addict]

The small difference can probably be explained by the loss of water from the leaves during scalding.

Well yes, it evaporates around the leaves so probably a little "inside" too!
So at the exit, after draining, we are left with a slightly concentrated product compared to the raw version.

Well ... maybe there is another explanation!?!

[Janic]

There is a weight ratio 1 to 3 between the two cups and therefore the composition is the same. However generally the food is taken in quantitative reference (here volume in this case) which gives the impression of a difference. By cons and this is what makes the difference between cooked and raw is that cooked it is possible to consume a larger amount (here ratio of 1 to 3) which does not mean that these overdoses are useful or necessary in nutritional requirements, on the other hand this requires a prolonged digestive effort for less assimilation.

[bidouille23]

Slut,

thank you for this beginning of response but I must be a little stupid with some places, because it does not really speak to me, on the contrary ...

I agree the Weight ratio is 1 to 3 but not that of volume, that of volume is 1 for 1/2, so half the volume, for the weight I imagine that it is l water that makes the difference, and that for the volume once cooked the spinach is packed therefore less bulky, hence more weight for less volume because the density of spinach increased due to water that she absorbed ...

This does not help me ultimately understand or I do not understand ...
this said my error is perhaps in the fact that I imagine that the cup of raw which makes 250 ml is the same which makes 125ml when cooked ...

If it is not actually that, in this case I think I understand: it is that there is more spinach cooked in the end in the same volume (hence higher density) therefore more nutrients for the same volume ...

And can be a concentration effect too ...

I've just ?

[Janic]

in this case it is the weight that counts and not the volume. thus 1 kg of lead and 1 kg of feather make the same weight but not the same volume. Now in nutrition, it is the weight (and therefore its components independently of the water contained) which is the reference.

[Christophe]

I think as said above: it is a drop in humidity after cooking ... For the rest I think Bidouille that it is an error of approximation ...

We find the coef 95/32 ...

What is not normal is that we do not compare by the same masses ...
I don't quite understand the logic of the double table ...

[Obamot]

I also do not understand the logic of this table, because:

- it is made under "ideal conditions",

- conditions rarely met in everyday life except to cut vegetables directly in the garden (and only consume them when mature;

- conditions rarely met, since it is by far not always the case, since for convenience we tend to "last the season" to the end (when we are lucky enough to have a garden) so we leave the plants standing while waiting to eat them (when they are in pain since all the energy is then concentrated on the plant's own reproduction) wouldn't it be better to cut everything when ripe and freeze?

- the loss is there, where for those who do not have a garden, in the transport of vegetables to the markets, then to the consumer, and loss again in the fridges before being cooked, to finally reach the table;

- precisely, this is why - if not to consume fresh, and for spinach it is in the minutes following the cut so as not to lose the iron - it would be better to freeze or buy frozen products, since the cold chains move on the place of harvest where everything is "caught" by the cold in a few seconds in-situ ...

Finally the method of cooking: the only one I know is that of cooking with gentle steam (95 degrees C). In addition, cooking in such a pot with a dome-shaped cover allows all the toxins to fall (specific to vegetables or collected in the atmosphere during growth, even during watering with chemical fertilizers) to make them fall back into the water in the lower tank (without it falling on the food, as with a classic lid!)
http://www.nature-vitalite.com/fr/produ ... italiseurs

[hic]

Hello ,

who can explain to me why spinach would be richer in a little all that composes them when they are cooked rather than raw ???

where is the magic trick ???

source

http://www.passeportsante.net/fr/Nutrit ... epinard_nu

thank you in advance

There is flavor and dumpling!
Reverse 95 and 32