Food & Chemistry

Engine No.9

I couldn't think of a more appropriate forum for this question so, mods if it belongs somewhere else, please move.

That being said, when looking at the calorie content of a particular food, specifically uncooked or raw food, how does the act of cooking affect this. Whenever I make, say toasties for example, I'll throw a few lumps of cheese on the hot plate to make some cheddar crisps but I notice that the fat separates out and alot of it will be left on the hotplate. Obviously this has an effect on the fat content but does it kill the protein/fibre/carb content etc or does it boost it and what is the nett effect on the food?

duploelabs

Jesus, you could write books on this and people have. On food and cooking by Harold McGee would be the first stop

dipdip

Send a message to the boards user rubadub, he is all about this subject.

rubadub

dipdip wrote: »

Send a message to the boards user rubadub, he is all about this subject.

hehe, the title caught my eye

pajopearl wrote: »

specifically uncooked or raw food, how does the act of cooking affect this.

Cooking under normal circumstances just drives off moisture and fat can fall out too. So if you have raw chicken fillets the protein per 100g will be quoted lower than the protein per 100g when cooked, as you cook the water in it is driven off so it gets concentrated. Raw rice will be the opposite, lowering values per 100g when cooked as its just diluted down and water has no nutrition or calorie values.

Skimmed milk typically has higher natural sugar content per 100ml than full fat, since when the fat is removed all the other stuff increases slightly. If you got dried milk powder it would be even higher, which is more obvious.

pajopearl wrote: »

Obviously this has an effect on the fat content but does it kill the protein/fibre/carb content etc or does it boost it and what is the nett effect on the food?

The content is still there, unless you totally incinerate it and destroy it. The amount per 100g will just go up. If you were overly concerned or curious and had a good small scale then you could weigh a kitchen towel and wipe up the fat and weigh it, this would let you work out how much fat was left behind.

Cooking food can also effect how much energy you can get from it, calories are an inexact science for humans. If you at popcorn kernels you would not get as much energy from them compared to the same amount eaten after popping. Same with raw rice vs overcooked rice. The raw ones will just pass through barely digested.

Some study was done showing peanut butter supplied more energy than whole nuts, gram for gram, for similar reasons. Cooking can also change the bio-availability of foods, basically how much you absorb, the most common one you hear about is eggs, cooking them increases the bio availability of protein. This comes up in the fitness forum a lot where weightlifters are drinking raw eggs, often not knowing that it would be far better to have them cooked, both taste & protein wise.

Thud

duploelabs wrote: »

Jesus, you could write books on this and people have. On food and cooking by Harold McGee would be the first stop

Would recommend this book if you have any interest in the chemistry of food/cooking

Oblomov

have a look at

www.modernist-chef.com

some wonderful equipment.... Just rge price stopping me..LOL

Just a quick check The large Sonic prep is no lomger on display... Hmmm

Jawgap

If you are interested, I can recommend this online course (it's free)

Science & Cooking: From Haute Cuisine to Soft Matter Science

I'm not sure if they are going to run it again, but you can look back the lessons / lectures and do the 'homework.'

I did it last year and found it thoroughly enjoyable!

EDIT: Harold McGee is one of the tutors on it.

Oblomov

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ePElZwxnRlE

Thw sonic prep...

Have a browse thro the Eddie Sheppard bits and pieces... the Cteam whipper is almost a must for infusion..