Blog

4

That is the question.

flag
great question, I am confused with this one too. – Louisa Mar 9 2010 at 19:23

7 Answers

1

I would not eat any unpeeled potatoes unless they're organic. Even then, I'm not so sure since some are sprayed with "organic" pesticides and herbicides. See my post regarding the degree to which non-organic potatoes are sprayed to avoid sprouting.

Ever wonder how potatoes do not seem to spoil? I've eaten some potatoes that I kept in my fridge for longer than 6 months; apparently, this long shelf life is due to pesticides and herbicides.

I now eat all my yams and sweet potatoes peeled. I don't eat potatoes anymore since they're nightshades. But even if I were to bring them back, it would only be organic potatoes.

link|flag
1 
 The white potatoes I buy here in the UK sprout easily - if I leave them in my veg cupboard and forget them, they have long tentacle things which come out to meet me when I open the cupboard door. – andrew Dec 26 2011 at 10:37
Most of the pesticides are in the skin according to studies and every single conventional batch of potatoes I've ever gotten has gone bad pretty fast(turned green/sprouted). Conventional potatoes do have a funky taste when compared to organic though in my experience. – cliff Dec 26 2011 at 14:05
1

Any potato I eat (yam, white, purple, whatever) gets extra crunchy skin, I love it. Slap some extra Kerrygold and sea salt in there, roll it up and eat it with yer fingers. Yum.

link|flag
1

If I like it and my body responds well to it, I eat it.

link|flag
5

I don't see anything wrong with eating the skin. I also don't subscribe to the theory that phytic acid is bad. I think it is healthy to have it, providing you occasionally eat some high mineral meals without it. See http://jn.nutrition.org/cgi/content/full/133/11/3778S

I eat skinless steamed potatoes most of the time, but eat the skin occasionally, especially when roasting the potatoe. I always eat the skin of purple potatoes cause that's where most of the anthocyanins are.

link|flag
4

According to this article, potatoes are not part of the paleo diet at all:

The essentials of the Paleolithic Diet are:

Eat none of the following:

· Grains- including bread, pasta, noodles

· Beans- including string beans, kidney beans, lentils, peanuts, snow-peas and peas

· Potatoes

· Dairy products

· Sugar

· Salt

link|flag
A fair number of people in the paleo universe eat potatoes (and/or rice) occasionally. There's some evidence showing paleolithic consumption of starchy tubers. Some eat dairy as well -- I suspect most of us at least eat butter. As for giving up salt... I don't know too many folks who make that choice, though it's worth noting that by giving up processed foods, you give up a LOT of salt. – John R Mar 9 2010 at 21:51
In Cordain's newest book, he mentions WHITE potatoes are no good, but other tubers/ground vegetables are fine. Such as sweet potatoes or yams. – sean Dec 20 2011 at 17:08
1 
 I don't know whose Paleo he owes his allegiance to, but many people do eat potatoes, dairy, and evenn some legumes. As for salt, the argument could be made in favor of Celtic salt and sea salt, which are minimally processed, as opposed to processed, iodized salt. – Namby Pamby Dec 26 2011 at 5:00
2

The skin is likely the best place for the potato to put up a fight. All those carbs that the plant stored up so that it could grow the following season need to be protected. It makes sense for the skin to be full of harmful substances.

Pretty odd that we have always been told to eat the skin. Funny how conventional wisdom is often not just wrong, but harmful.

link|flag
I've always thought that there are the most nutrients just under the skin. – henny Mar 9 2010 at 3:25
As I recall, we were mostly advised to eat the skin as a good source of fiber. But I agree that it borders on comical how much lousy guidance we've been given, under the label of healthy advice. For my part, I always enjoyed the skins -- the flavor and the texture. Have pretty much stopped eating white potatoes on all but rare occasions -- but I do regularly eat sweet potatoes, skin and all. Seems I recall reading somewhere (Daily Apple maybe? can't remember) that sweet potato skins were contained much lower levels of anti-nutrients. Would be great if someone could confirm! – Albert Jul 8 2011 at 20:54
6

http://donmatesz.blogspot.com/2009/09/primal-potatoes-part-2.html "The skin of Potatoes would not be eaten by paleolithic ancestors as it would be burnt when cooking in the ashes."

It's also where almost all the antinutrients are. Get your nutrients from meat and use the potatoes to soak up the fat. Don't worry about the nutrients in the skin because there are antinutrients there too and they are less bioavailable than those in the meat anyway.

link|flag
1 
 I'm guessing this is true of sweet potatoes as well, then? – JJ Mar 9 2010 at 1:07
3 
 By anti-nutrient, I suppose you mean phytic acid? Turns out phytic acid may have tremendous anti-cancer properties. See jn.nutrition.org/cgi/content/full/133/11/3778S – Jay Mar 9 2010 at 22:53
1 
 All kinds of things are "anti cancer" in vitro...but haven't been proved in humans. I will stick with things that don't affect the absorption of nutrients in my meals like afternoon green tea or a couple of nuts as a snack. – Bread-Eating Beelzebub Mar 9 2010 at 23:35
2 
 Funny you say that because tea does affect the absorption of minerals. Also, phytic acid has shown anti-cancer properties in animal studies and human case-studies. – Jay Mar 10 2010 at 16:16
1 
 Melissa, polyphenols in tea will reduce the absorption of some minerals including iron. – HealthRediscovery Mar 16 2010 at 23:52
show 3 more comments

Your Answer

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.