Slow cookers and nutrients ?

helen-in-hants

They say methods such as steaming are best to retain the highest quality of nutrients in veg, so the quicker they are cooked the better. I have a SC and just wondered if anyone knows whether cooking veg for so many hours destroys the nutrition of the veg? I love making veggie & meat casseroles for my sons, but wonder if they are getting much from it, other than taste, after being cooked for so long?
I have looked through the SC index, but see no reference to this.


Another quickie: if you add a tin of baked beans to a SC recipe do they stay soft, or does cooking for so long turn them into little bullets?


thanks

black-saturn

My presumption is that they lose all the vitamins as the longer you cook something the less vitamins there are in it.

BrokeBrokeBroke

I'm no nutricianist (sp?) but when you cook casseroles / stews etc in the slowcooker, you eat everything in there (eg the juices etc from the food) so the nutrients should still be in the liquid. Again, I have just made this up! so it may not be true. I know when you boil and boil veg all the goodness is drained away with the water, but assumed that some / most would stay in the liquid in the slowcooker.

comping_cat

BrokeBrokeBroke wrote:

I'm no nutricianist (sp?) but when you cook casseroles / stews etc in the slowcooker, you eat everything in there (eg the juices etc from the food) so the nutrients should still be in the liquid. Again, I have just made this up! so it may not be true. I know when you boil and boil veg all the goodness is drained away with the water, but assumed that some / most would stay in the liquid in the slowcooker.

This is what ive heard as well, veg loses its nutrients into the water its being boiled in, and as you normally throw the water away, the nutrients go with it, when steamed they stay in the veg longer, although some is still lost into the water at the bottom of the steamer. This would mean any nutrients being lost in the slow cooker, would be in the liquid around it, so as long as you are consuming everything (as in a stew or casserole) you would still be getting the goodness.

comping_cat

Also, i would think baked beans would stay soft, maybe even break up more, as they are originally hard beans and need to be soaked and cooked before they can be eaten!!!!
Catherine x

Skintmama

Just used a tin of baked beans in a chilli variation today. Cooked 4 hours on high they were just soft and tasty. Curious coincidence, it is the first time I have put bb in to SC!

Pink.

I've never had any prolems wtih baked beans in the slow cooker, in my experience they stay soft no matter how long they've been cooked.

I understand where you're coming from ie some nutrients can be destroyed by cooking at high temperatures but I'm inclined to agree with other users who have said that when cooking in a slow cooker most nutrients will be absorbed into the liquid that will be served with the dish.

Pink