"Discover Cooking, Discuss Life."

Go Back   Discuss Cooking - Cooking Forums > General Cooking Information > General Cooking
Click Here to Login
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 03-29-2006, 11:51 PM   #11
Assistant Cook
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 41
Originally Posted by Haggis
Unless it overcooks and blackens, then its carcinogenic supposedly (this is not limited to just bread).
Could be. In the article they mentioned that overcooking reduces the amount of antioxidants in the crust. It would be kind of ironic if the antioxidants turned carcinogenic after further heating.

So burning your food not only tastes bad but it's a possible health hazard?


Phantom of the Kitchen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-30-2006, 12:44 PM   #12
Chef Extraordinaire
kitchenelf's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 19,725
Send a message via MSN to kitchenelf
Originally Posted by Phantom of the Kitchen
So burning your food not only tastes bad but it's a possible health hazard?

Burned bread/toast definitely has some carcinogenic properties.

I've always heard the crust is better for you too - I have 2 friends that religiously eat only the crust, I don't - they're thin - I'm not


"Count yourself...you ain't so many" - quote from Buck's Daddy
kitchenelf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-30-2006, 01:00 PM   #13
Certified Pretend Chef
Andy M.'s Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 43,611
Originally Posted by breadman
Was having the debate the other day if the crust was in fact healthier for you than just the bread. We did some research and found this webpage which says that the crust is actually healthier for you. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...1105080817.htm
Is this a valid claim?
Suppose the crust is more healthful than the interior of the bread. Will that change your eating habits?

I think I'll start working on a loaf that's all crust just in case...
"If you want to make an apple pie from scratch, you must first create the universe." -Carl Sagan
Andy M. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-30-2006, 03:16 PM   #14
Sous Chef
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 751
So burning your food not only tastes bad but it's a possible health hazard?
Apparently it is. Though buggered if I'm going to stop using my cast-iron grill pan to put scorch marks on my meat (or some vegetable for that matter).
Haggis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-30-2006, 03:46 PM   #15
Senior Cook
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: USA,NewJersey
Posts: 403
You might want to take a look at the source for that article. The American Chemical Society is a Washington Lobbyist. Scientific information from a lobby group, regardless of which group/their credentials, should always be taken with a BIG grain of salt. Unless you want to believe things like smoking isn't bad for your health.

Everything that I've read on the subject, most recently the new Harold McGee, says that browning creates unhealthy compounds. Not as unhealthy as burning, but unhealthy none the less.
scott123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-04-2006, 12:21 AM   #16
Assistant Cook
jasonhoggan's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Heber, UT
Posts: 5
I dont see how the crust could be any healthier. It has all the same ingredients. Unless for some stange reason the oven bakes the carbs out of the crust.
jasonhoggan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2006, 06:12 AM   #17
Master Chef
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Galena, IL
Posts: 7,970
Gram used to say that burned toast makes you sing. I think that moms and grandmothers would tell you that the crust was good for you just to make you eat the crust and not waste it. The only thing I can think of is that it may have more roughage and be good for your digestive system compared to the softer parts.
Claire is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-19-2013, 04:08 AM   #18
Chef Extraordinaire
buckytom's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: My mountain
Posts: 20,488
lurker surfing.

interesting non-info just left for dead.

so what's the deal?

i vwonder if this is an ole wives'-ey thing in an effort to get difficult to feed children to eat what was offered them without waste. drawing on the fact that vegetable and fruit skins actually have additional nutritional value (if for nothing else than fibre).

my wife has started to cut the crusts off of my boy's sandwiches, but it seems to me as though it might be due to his reluctance to eat the offering.

damned kids push limits just as a natural reaction. that's how they become their own people.

but what if they aren't offered an option?

ok, so getting back, is there really a benefit to a crust beyond texture and taste?
"Thunderbolt and lightening,
very, very frightening me!" Galileo
buckytom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-19-2013, 11:50 AM   #19
Chef Extraordinaire
GotGarlic's Avatar
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Southeastern Virginia
Posts: 20,596
I'm going with the theory that it's a ploy to get kids to eat it. The experiment described in the article was in a test tube, not on animals or humans, so the results might not hold up. Claire's suggestion about fiber isn't correct, either. Bread isn't roughage. I don't think the fiber in bread cleans out the intestines the same way as fiber in veggies does.

The trouble with eating Italian food is that five or six days later you're hungry again. ~ George Miller
GotGarlic is online now   Reply With Quote

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off

» Discuss Cooking on Facebook

Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:17 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.