I think they make a lot of sense and have followed a lot of their teachings. However, I just found out they don't approve of pressure cooking/canning. And hence my question to you guys.
I usually put my chicken carcasses in the crockpot and let them simmer for a day and then I can the resulting chicken stock/bone broth. Pros: the long, slow simmer helps extract minerals. Cons: it takes a full day of running an electric appliance.
I know some people prefer to cook it in a pressure cooker. Pros: it's fast! and if I'm going to pressure can it anyhow, why not? But does it do as good a job at extracting the most minerals and collagen from the bones?
I'm looking mainly from a nutrition standpoint. Sally Fallon and the "Real Food" crowd claim that using a pressure cooker/canner is bad because of the higher temps. I don't understand this because my understanding is that the temp only goes up to ~ 260. And I bake or roast everything higher than that.
I've been canning my chicken stock. To do that I have to use a pressure canner. So if I'm going to pressure can it anyway, why not pressure cook it first instead of simmering it 24hrs? On the other hand, if pressure cooking/canning is going to render it somehow less nutritious I guess I could freeze it...
What's the deal? What am I missing? Any devoted followers here who could shed some light on this for me?
I usually put my chicken carcasses in the crockpot and let them simmer for a day and then I can the resulting chicken stock/bone broth. Pros: the long, slow simmer helps extract minerals. Cons: it takes a full day of running an electric appliance.
I know some people prefer to cook it in a pressure cooker. Pros: it's fast! and if I'm going to pressure can it anyhow, why not? But does it do as good a job at extracting the most minerals and collagen from the bones?
I'm looking mainly from a nutrition standpoint. Sally Fallon and the "Real Food" crowd claim that using a pressure cooker/canner is bad because of the higher temps. I don't understand this because my understanding is that the temp only goes up to ~ 260. And I bake or roast everything higher than that.
I've been canning my chicken stock. To do that I have to use a pressure canner. So if I'm going to pressure can it anyway, why not pressure cook it first instead of simmering it 24hrs? On the other hand, if pressure cooking/canning is going to render it somehow less nutritious I guess I could freeze it...
What's the deal? What am I missing? Any devoted followers here who could shed some light on this for me?
I follow a real food/traditional diet and have started pressure canning recently to have a new way to store things and a save freezer space as well... The conclusions I have currently reached (subject to possible change as I learn new things) are this- foods that require a long slow simmer to pull nutrients out of bones and meat (like stock) I will continue to simmer or crockpot. The pressure cooker may made fast stock, but there won't be the time for minerals to be pulled from bones. I am not as concerned about the heat of pressure canning the stock damaging the nutrients once they are in the stock. As for other cooking I think anything that needs to have cooking done slowly to extract nutrients or break down anti-nutrients I will still do slowly, but things that are just cooking to be cooked, pressure cooking will be fine! 
