Quote: (11-29-2014 01:02 PM)JoyStick Wrote:
Is a pressure cooker a better investment than a slow cooker?
Will the two different method make a different in how the food or broth will taste?
And which one is better from a nutritional point of view?
They're completely different. One is slow and low, one is hard and fast.
From a strictly culinary perspective, I say that a pressure cooker is the more useful tool, seeing as how it cuts cooking time drastically down. It will also yield the better tasting broth/stock. But that's not to make light of slow cookers which are a valuable convenience for many people (and they can be rigged to use for sous vide preparations) I would personally rather cook something in 90 minutes than wait for it to cook all day long.
When discussing availability of nutrients, there is no one perfect answer. Some nutrients are more available raw, others are more available cooked. It's good to balance both raw and cooked vegetables in your diet. I don't bother worrying about which ones to eat raw vs which cooked. I like both raw and cooked greens. I like both raw and cooked root vegetables. You can slice raw Kohlrabi paper thin and make a nice slaw out of it, or you can braise it in chicken stock and butter for a delicious side dish.