Boiling greens

[sunsunsun]

@LucH I agree, steaming is S-tier

[Mossy]

Interesting. So pressure cooking may not be the best? That is how I do a lot of my cooking. I know microwaving has been in the cross-hairs for quite some time. I quit using my microwave for about 10 years because of all the negative talk about it, but have started again about 2 1/2 years ago. It's a definite time saver. I read somewhere that microwaving vegetables actually retained the most nutrients (could it have been Peat that said this?). I'm not asserting this as if I know it to be true, but kind of thought dumping in response to this subject. As time allows, maybe I can provide better information, source, quotes, etc.

It's really tough to get the final answer on anything, but I respect and am open to arguments against modern cooking. In general, the modern world does tend to contaminate much that it touches. But, in the name of objectivity, one thing we know, the microwave and the pressure cooker have been around long enough for us to know that some people were able to eat food from them and not only survive, but live long lives.

[Corngold]

@Mossy said:

It's really tough to get the final answer on anything, but I respect and am open to arguments against modern cooking. In general, the modern world does tend to contaminate much that it touches. But, in the name of objectivity, one thing we know, the microwave and the pressure cooker have been around long enough for us to know that some people were able to eat food from them and not only survive, but live long lives.

Have you heard of food irradiation? Supposedly the majority of food in stores including produce, meat, etc., is "irradiated" before it is packaged.

https://www.iaea.org/newscenter/news/what-is-food-irradiation-and-why-is-it-important

I don't know what the risks are. It seems if large agencies defend it then it might be pretty bad. On the other hand not many people know or talk about it, and I don't know if it's still being done.

As for modern cooking, you're right because we "contaminate" so much, down to "bioengineered" food products.

My opinion is that if you find traditional recipes for greens or other foods, then that is best. As for nutrients, isn't it that nutrients from greens leach into the broth? So a hearty soup / stew should have a good amount of nutrients in the broth.

Had to ask a i for help:

Water-soluble nutrients (leach heavily into broth)

Vitamin C : 50–70% lost into the water (and further degraded by heat)
B vitamins (folate, B6, thiamine): 30–60% can leach out
Potassium and other minerals: 30–50% may pass into the broth

Fat-soluble nutrients (mostly stay in the greens)

Vitamins A, K, E: largely retained in the leaves since they don't dissolve in water
Beta-carotene: mostly stays put, and heat can actually improve its bioavailability

What this means practically
The broth itself becomes genuinely nutritious — think of it like a light vegetable stock. If you discard the water, you're throwing away a meaningful share of the water-soluble vitamins and minerals. Drinking or using the broth in soups, rice, or sauces is a simple way to recover those nutrients.
Factors that affect how much leaches out

Chopping: more cut surfaces = more leaching
Boil time: longer cooking = more loss
Water volume: more water = more dilution and loss
Temperature: a gentle simmer loses slightly less than a hard boil

The bottom line: roughly 30–60% of water-soluble nutrients end up in the broth depending on conditions. Fat-soluble nutrients stay mostly in the greens. If you want maximum retention, steaming or sautéing is more efficient — but if you're boiling, save and use the broth.

I don't think it's anything to worry too much about unless you're vegan or vegetarian. Those diets usually create vitamin / mineral deficiencies because they avoid dairy, meat, and fish.

@Mossy

[LucH]

@mossy
Talk with AI (Claude)
Context 1 (nutrition and health forum)
LucH says:
I won't use microwave: Proteins are exploded. (...)
Context 2:
LucH thinks:
Pressure cooking may become a problem for human metabolism as long you usually use this way. So it’s a question of frequency and quantity.
And saying it’s quicker and that we all know people who do so for their grand-ma who lives like a well-fit centenarian (nearly a 100 year-old well-fit body-shaped person)...
We have all heard of a 100 year-old smoker who’s fine. Nobody won’t refute / disprove that cigarette is bad for lungs ...

Demand for AI
Don’t comment what precedes.
The forumer cooks the weekend for the week. The menus are +/ balanced for macronutrients LPG and most nutrients. Eat home-made food, not much from manufactured origin.
Be positive, moderate in advice. Need to register in 2 or 3 times, like most people when it’s a thorough change. The key demand: How to adapt to optimize when you don’t have time or energy to prepare a meal after a workday.
Don’t ask for detailed menus. Of course, he / she doesn’t suffer from thyroid, adrenal glands, low-grade inflammation, immune reaction …

Claude says:
Blabla (not pertinent).
=> I summarize after 2x re-redirection.
So we suppose a lack of time and energy during the week. We accept short-time and easy cooking with potatoes, pasta and rice.
We use “meat cuts” that are allowed or +/ beneficial when cooked by pressure.

Here are suggestions for 3 “models”, for 2 days in the week.
Section 1 (for 2 days)
These share connective tissue and collagen — exactly what pressure cooking handles best. The result is tender, the cooking time is cut by half or more, and they reheat well during the week without drying out.
These are also generally less expensive cuts — an added practical advantage for batch cooking.

Examples:
Tough / thick cuts for pressure cooking — examples
Poultry
• Chicken thighs and drumsticks — ideal, stay moist
• Chicken whole legs — same
• Turkey thighs — less common but excellent
• Chicken wings — good for a richer result
Duck
• Duck legs — perfect for pressure cooking, fat renders well
• Duck confit-style preparation — works very well under pressure
• Duck thighs — same logic as poultry above
Rabbit
• Whole pieces or legs — underused but very well suited
• Stays tender, mild flavour, pairs with anything
Pork belly
• Shoulder — excellent
• Spare ribs — very good
• Cheeks — outstanding result
Beef / veal
• Shin, cheek, shoulder, short ribs
• Osso buco cuts — veal shin particularly good

Comment (LucH)
Moderate pork.
Duck breast and pork belly are specific cases
Duck breast (magret)
• Naturally tender — pressure cooking is too aggressive
• Best cooked pan-seared on weekend, medium doneness
• Reheats gently during the week without drying if sliced cold and warmed briefly in a covered pan with a little water. (Fine with musterd, if you like it so).
• 650g covers 3 days easily if portioned right
Pork belly
• Fatty and layered — pressure cooking actually works here
• Fat renders, meat stays moist, reheats very well
• Good candidate for the pressure cooker batch

So the distinction within this category
Cut / Method
Duck breast / Pan weekend, gentle reheat weekdays
Pork belly / Pressure cooker viable
Duck legs / Pressure cooker ideal
Chicken thighs / Pressure cooker ideal
NB: Roasted before pressure is best.

Section II (for 2 other days)
Pragmatic choices. What works well under pressure cooking
Legumes — best case for pressure cooking. Not 2 days in a row (anti-protease).
• Lentils, chickpeas, white beans, black beans
• Texture and digestibility actually improve
• Portion and freeze — grab one portion per weekday
Comment (LucH)
These two categories are where pressure cooking makes the most sense nutritionally and practically — long cooking times reduced problems. Need still to alternate.
What goes with it that's fast, real, and doesn't require weekend pre-cooking.
Eggs, tins, cheese — things that live in your kitchen permanently, no planning needed, combined with freshly cooked starch in 10 minutes total.

Third part — spontaneous weekday meals, no planning needed
Eggs + salad or tomato + a soup
• 5 minutes maximum
• Always available, no weekend prep required
Beans + pasta
• Pasta cooking = passive wait
• Beans from weekend batch or a tin — straight on top
Lentils + rice
• Both cookable during the week, passive
• Or lentils from weekend batch — even faster
Frozen mixed vegetables + wok + bacon
• 10 minutes, high heat, done
• Bacon adds fat and flavour instantly
• Frozen vegetables are nutritionally fine — underrated

[Milk Destroyer]

@alfredoolivas Perhaps, but I'm not certain. I actually was eating a lot more kale recently (maybe 150g a day) for a week and I did notice I had lost some weight (like 5lbs), but I was also walking in nature more at the time.

I'll try incorporating it more consistently and get back to you.

[Mossy]

@Corngold said:

Have you heard of food irradiation? Supposedly the majority of food in stores including produce, meat, etc., is "irradiated" before it is packaged.

Now that you mention it, I do remember reading about that concept a while back. I don't know much about it, but you've motivated me to look into it.

Modernity has strangely meant a degradation of quality for the masses, The most affluent and prosperous era on earth (from my limited knowledge) should equate to the highest quality being more prevalent. That is not the case. Companies tout how something is "real" on packing, because in many cases the standard is synthetic, artificial, bio-engineered, etc.

There is something hearty and seemingly more nutritious about soups and broths. Coincidentally, soups and homemade broth are a staple of my cooking. And it's pressure cooking that allows for this extraction, or so it seems, over a shorter period than traditionally required. Based on your AI response, arguably the high heat of pressure cooking is the biggest factor to consider. It seems any leeching would simply go from the vegetable to the finished broth. But, if the heat killed off the nutrients before that could happen, that would be a bad thing, to say the least.

[LucH]

@Mossy said:

if the heat killed off the nutrients before that could happen, that would be a bad thing, to say the least.

Only ionizing some "food" to avoid fungus and kill insects. So. No inpact on enzyms and protein integrity.

[Mossy]

@LucH said:

We have all heard of a 100 year-old smoker who’s fine. Nobody won’t refute / disprove that cigarette is bad for lungs ...

Indeed. And I was going to offer up this very anecdote with my original comment. There are always exceptions to things we know in general are bad.

I appreciate your thorough response, and will comb through it. Thank you.

[Milk Destroyer]

@LucH I've always wondered if substances going through airport xrays would have some effect on their structure, what do you think?

[LucH]

@Milk-Destroyer said:

I've always wondered if substances going through airport xrays would have some effect on their structure, what do you think?

It is entirely a matter of intensity, duration, and repetition
Summary:
1. The Sun (The Borderline Case)
Time exposure makes the difference
While visible light is completely safe, the Sun emits Ultraviolet (UV) rays. UV light sits exactly on the border of the ionizing spectrum. It has short enough wavelengths to pack a punch. It physically damages skin cells and causes sunburns, which is why it can lead to structural DNA changes (skin cancer) over time.
However Infra-Red light is fine when you adapt the wavelength and the duration.
Picture 8.

2. Cell Phone in a Pocket (Trouser or Breast Pocket)

• Ionization Capability: Absolutely zero.
• Warmth has a incidence (thermal effect).
  NB: Everybody won’t agree here. I don’t put mine in a trouser pocket since it has an influence on my hand when I use it for a long time on internet.

3. Public Electric Streetlight
Zero impact if you’re not electrical sensitive (50Hz to 60Hz).
NB: It's different if it's a high-voltage pylon. Cows whose water trough is under this type of pylon produce significantly less milk.

4. Airport Scanners
Too short to have an impact. + low level on the scale.

5. Dental xRays:
Yes.
I’ve asked Google to develop some points. Has to be confirmed by another source since we can’t trust AI, as you already know. AI flatters you and sometimes invents / often extrapolates to avoid contradicting itself.

The Physics of Exposure
• Intensity: Both airport scanners and dental X-rays use extremely low-intensity beams. They are engineered to look only at surface levels or thin jaw bones, requiring a fraction of the power used for deep-tissue medical scans like CT scans. [1, 2]
• Duration: The exposure time is measured in milliseconds. The beam clicks on and off almost instantly, minimizing the window of interaction with your cells.
• Repetition: For the average person, these events happen once or twice a year. The human body has highly efficient, constant cellular repair mechanisms that easily fix the minor, isolated cellular stress caused by such infrequent, low-dose exposures. [1]

The Exception: Developing Life
Your concern about pregnant women is scientifically spot-on.
• Rapid Cell Division: A fetus is in a state of rapid development. Cells are dividing constantly to form organs and body structures.
• Higher Sensitivity: Cells undergoing mitosis (division) are significantly more vulnerable to DNA alterations from ionizing radiation.
• Precautions: This is why dental offices use extra precautions, like lead aprons that cover the abdomen, or delay non-urgent routine X-rays until after delivery, purely as a protective measure for that sensitive stage of life. [1, 2]
For an adult, a few routine exposures do not accumulate enough energy to alter your body's structure.