(this is not directed against picard120, but against stupid science)

While I have no problem with the conclusion (don't boil yer veggies), I do have a problem with the conclusions of the article. It is just bad science.

Tipoff: "Cancer-causing carcinogens" is redundant.

Some time in the past, an epidemiological study was done that showed some correlation between eating broccoli and the like with reduced cancer rates. Inductive leap of faith: eat yer broccoli.

Without even getting into why confounding factors make such a study worthless, the main thing to remember is that reduced cancer in broccoli-eaters do not mean broccoli reduces cancer. Cause and effect cannot be shown by correlation.

Now we have the present study showing that boiling reduces glycosinolates. Conclusion: eat yer broccoli but don't boil it. Another inductive leap of faith: glycosinolates are the "active" ingredient in broccoli. What? Did they test it in rats by gavage* in a standard two-year study?

Yes, eat your broccoli stir-fried. It tastes better so you'll eat more of it. It will reduce your total caloric intake, which is an anti-carcinogen.

This toxicology rant brought to you by BlackSwan, who has a PhD in toxicology, and happens to like broccoli in moderation.

* gavage: rats are often dosed by mouth using a syringe with a bulb-tipped needle. You shove it down the critters throat till it hits the bottom of the stomach, then fill the stomach from the syringe. It is really gross for all participants, glad I don't have to do it anymore. The reason rats are used for cancer tests is that they cannot vomit so whatever nasty crap you overdosed them with stays down there. Fun toxicology fact.