I was first introduced to raw food through the Weston Price Foundation, although they ironically do not push raw foods (besides dairy) much because they do not wish to alienate the American people from their theory of high fat, animal foods being key for vibrant health.
Upon reading a lot of WP's research over the past year or two, I've found that Bone Broths are really only necessary when you eat cooked food. Pottenger showed in some studies that the hydrophilic nature of gelatin in broths attacts digestive enzymes to cooked food, which are normally hydrophobic. Pottenger pointed out if you eat raw foods, you do not need bone broth or gelatin because the enzyme content is so high and the foods are already hydrophilic on their own. Case in point, the Inuit were one of the only cultures WP studied that ate all raw, and despite being in the arctic regions of Canada (where a warm broth would think broth would be welcomed), they forwent it entirely -- because they simply didn't need it nutritionally.
I personally enjoy bone broth and still eat cooked foods for social situations so for now I'm going to mix as many of my cooked foods as I can with a reduced broth stock (read about reduction sauces here:
http://www.westonaprice.org/food-features/broth-is-beautiful ) to obtain the benefits of gelatin. I also always start a cooked meal with a raw fermented vegetable to prepare my digestive system.
Despite being cooked, Bone Broth feels nourishing, don't you think? Nothing beats a good soup in the winter.
Zym.
Topic: Raw Food and Bone Broth (Read 30456 times)