They quote research on some raw foodists showing they have lower than average plasma levels of lycopene.  Hey, lycopene’s good for you... every bottle of ketchup says it has lots of it!  Apparently cooking tomatoes helps make it more available, and of course more concentrated.  But do we need it?  It’s an anti-oxidant, and anti-oxidants are lovely... but are the raw foodists getting more of other things that compensate for lower lycopene levels?  Is the average level of lycopene found in the general population actually the most healthful level to have?

Finally, I just don’t understand the evolutionary pressure that would have made cooked tomatoes the preferred way to eat.  But the take away message people are going to get from a quick skim of this article is that raw foodists are lacking in some nutrients and that cooking your food has advantages.  It may be true, but I’d need to see a lot more proof!  I’m eating cooked food still, but I’m eating it for other reasons - convenience, familiarity, comfort - not because I believe it to be more healthful.