philh comments on Stupid Questions April 2015 - Less Wrong

7 Post author: Gondolinian 02 April 2015 09:29PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (145)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: philh 07 April 2015 08:58:01PM 0 points [-]

Does that mean I get more vitamins (e.g. because the vitamins were biologically unavailable in the rice, but available in the water) or fewer (e.g. because the reverse, or if a significant amount of water boils off)?

Comment author: kalium 12 April 2015 08:12:17PM 1 point [-]

Water loss through boiling shouldn't make a difference, as the vitamins are not volatile and will not boil off with it.

Comment author: polymathwannabe 07 April 2015 09:30:44PM 1 point [-]

I'm not sure. The rice is supposed to absorb (most of) the water you cook it in, which complicates giving an answer.

to get something just as filling but less calorific?

I hear shirataki was invented specifically for that purpose.