

The evolutionary role of cooking - colins_pride
http://www.economist.com/science/displayStory.cfm?story_id=13139619

======
ewiethoff
I learned from the article that cooking "denatures proteins." I happen to be
very allergic to all raw produce except grapes, apples, onions, lettuce, and
spinach. Everything else needs to be cooked. No crudités or fresh orange juice
for me. People look at me funny and ask why cooking would make a difference. I
say, "I dunno, but it must break down my allergy molecules so that I don't
react to them." Then they (idiots all!) say, "No, that doesn't make sense."
Now I can confidently snow people with "denatured proteins," whether or not
that's the true reason for cooking solving my produce allergy problem.
Confidently bowl people over with scientific jargon, and they believe you.

~~~
albertsun
So you're allergic to folded proteins? That seems unlikely since even those
few raw things you can eat have trace amounts of different proteins in them.

If I were very allergic to so many different foods, I'd want a real
explanation for my own sake at least, and not just try to snow people with
scientific jargon.

~~~
ewiethoff
I would love a real explanation. But believe you me, allergy science is just
getting started. (So is a heck of a lot of other medical knowledge.)
"Allergists" didn't even exist until a few decades ago. "Allergy and
immunology" is a pretty new specialty.

My pediatrician switched his practice to "allergy and asthma" in 1970. He told
my mom he did so because he wanted to try to help whatever the heck is wrong
with me. Well, I can't read his mind for motives, but that's what my mom
reported.

I astound and baffle allergists when their tests reveal the huge numbers of
foods--and varieties of foods--I'm allergic to. (Note to self: I am _not_
going into my other allergy foods here.) Their first reaction is to blurt out,
"What do you eat?! How do you live?! It's a wonder you're alive!" After that,
their reactions and attempts to help vary considerably. The closest I've
gotten to an explanation from a live doctor is hearing one mutter something
about "volatile oils" into his Dragon Naturally Speaking before walking off
and leaving his nurse distressed for my sake.

I do get strange satisfaction knowing that food allergies have gotten much
more prevalent in the past decade or so. This means more researchers take more
interest in it, the FDA changes its food labeling laws, the general populace
has a little more knowledge, etc. When I'm feeling grandiose, I tell myself
that my strange body (and that of a guy I spoke to on the phone who is a
guinea pig at the Mayo because he's allergic to _all_ foods) are the vanguard
or cassandras or whatever for something new and weird going on in the world.
But perhaps I read too many Greg Bear novels. ;-)

I subscribe to an allergy research newsletter from South Africa, which
contains a lot of fascinating, nerdly stuff I _never_ hear from live doctors.
And when I do try to mention research, I get, "That means you don't need me
except to prescribe Epipens." But I got away from reading it a few years ago.
I think I'll head back to doing so. Thank you for indirectly putting the bee
in my bonnet. <http://www.allallergy.net/abstracts/index.cfm>

Ah! A quick glance reveals an article called "The importance of nasal
provocation test in the diagnosis of natural rubber latex allergy." This just
might pertain to me even though I have a banana allergy, not a latex
allergy... But I think I'll leave it for a few days. This whole topic is
getting way too heavy today. Bye, folks. I'm logging out.

------
alecst
Stating cooking "underpins all other [human evolutionary changes]" sounds
interesting if _corroborated_. I perused the web for some more information on
Richard Wrangham's research. Wikipedia provided this:

<http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=cooking-up-bigger-brains>

[http://artsci.wustl.edu/~hpontzer/Courses/Wrangham&Conkl...](http://artsci.wustl.edu/~hpontzer/Courses/Wrangham&Conklin-
Britain2003CBP%20Cooking%20as%20a%20Biological%20Trait.pdf)

...and the evidence points against him. Fire doesn't appear to have been
controlled until far after Wangham assests. Not only, but:

 _The mainstream view among anthropologists is that the increase in human
brain-size was due to a shift away from the consumption of nuts and berries to
the consumption of meat._

makes more sense. The transition from primitive food sources (nuts, berries --
chimp food now) may have catalyzed the transition to a regular high-calorie
diet. Take this article with a juicy fliet mignon, topped with a generous
helping of salt.

~~~
ShardPhoenix
Both the linked article and the sci-am article show that this is hardly a
settled matter either way, and that Wrangham's thesis isn't unreasonable.

~~~
alecst
Right. I'm of the opinion that human evolution was influenced by a combination
of these two factors, in addition to many others. However, given the evidence,
I do _not_ think that cooking is the preeminent contributor to
cognitive/human/metabolic development.

~~~
nsrivast
This qualified opinion should have been your original comment.

------
wozer
>And the consumption of a cooked meal _in the evening_ , usually in the
company of family and friends, is normal in every known society.

In Germany peope have their cooked meal _at noon_ (or at least most still
have). Until recently (i.e. a few decades ago), this was also the case in
Scandinavia.

~~~
tspiteri
But when people are at work at noon, and their children are at school, it is
easier to have the family meal in the evening.

------
immad
"he thinks that cooking and other forms of preparing food are humanity’s
“killer app"

Am I the only one that thought killer app was only used in reference to
web/technology platforms :)

~~~
alecst
This is called an analogy.

~~~
immad
I know. I just found the analogy interesting, since I didn't think the killer
app term was mainstream.

