AHBD":54n8j1o2 said:
And according to the USDA , kale is very low in oxalates and can be fed as a staple. It's spinach + swiss chard that should be avoided but not kale.
https://www.healwithfood.org/articles/oxalates-kale-spinach.php
I'd just note that the claim on the above link is immediately preceded by the disclaimer:
Before delving into the exact values, it is important to note that the oxalic acid content of a specific vegetable can vary significantly depending on several factors. For example, the type of soil in which the vegetable was grown as well as the age of the vegetable when it was harvested can have a great impact on the oxalate content of that food. Furthermore, oxalate concentrations of vegetables such as kale and spinach have been shown to vary significantly depending on the season.
I don't know about everyone else, but I have no way of knowing/determining about the kale at my local grocery (whose sources vary depending on many factors inherent in the grocery/produce business), what type of soil it was grown in, how old it was when harvested, seasonality, or the other factors that affect levels of oxalates. It makes me wonder what the USDA
actually said, and how they couched it.
A lot of articles cite:
According to nutrient data provided by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), 100-gram serving of kale (Brassica oleracea L. var. acephala) contains only 20 milligrams of oxalates.
Yet none of them I've read/seen provide a link to the USDA where this alleged data can be reviewed or evaluated.
Does anyone have one? I spent the better part of an hour searching the USDA site and couldn't find
anything relating to the amount(s) of oxalates in kale. It
might (or might not) clear up some confusion to be able to read/see this source material.
Does the figure apply to fresh raw kale, chopped, steamed, otherwise cooked/prepared? Because all of those variables
also affect the amount of oxalates. These things might be determined if a direct link were provided, and as with the link cited above, there may also be disclaimers/qualifiers wherever the USDA published the data.
USDA also has a long history of errors, gaffs, politics, and other foibles (e.g. the food pyramid--don't get me
started!). I'd be the first to admit it'd be nice if they were an unimpeachable source/reference, but unfortunately, that's not their track record.
With all the variables surrounding some vegetables and oxalates (kale is not the only one) I'd still rather play safe than sorry. As I originally stated, sources still differ; as a part of a BD's diet, fine, but I won't--and wouldn't--take the chance of using it as a staple.
YMMV. There are so many safe(r) options.