# Straight Dope on potato skins **URL:** \ **Category:** Cecil's Columns/Staff Reports\ **Created:** [May 20, 2009, 6:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/straight-dope-on-potato-skins/497052 "2009-05-20T06:00:40Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 16\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Greg\_Charles](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/839c29/32.png) [@Greg\_Charles](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Greg_Charles)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2009, 6:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/straight-dope-on-potato-skins/497052/1 "2009-05-20T06:00:40Z")
In an old [column](http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/397/it-is-true-all-the-vitamins-in-potatoes-apples-etc-are-in-the-skin), Cecil states the skin of the potato “consists mostly of dead cells filled with a waxy, largely vitaminless substance whose chief function is to protect the potato’s insides.” Wikipedia, while confirming as urban legend that the potato skin contains _all_ the vitamins, says the skin does contain about 50% of the nutrients and fiber. Since there is less skin than potato, that means the skin is actually the more nutritious part. Both agree that peeling the skin before cooking the potato causes most of the nutrition to be lost. However, if you just want to know whether or not you should eat the skin of, say, a baked potato, there’s a pretty clear discrepancy. Who’s right? ---
**Author:** ![John\_W.Kennedy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_w.kennedy/32/1031_2.png) [@John\_W.Kennedy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_W.Kennedy)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2009, 5:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/straight-dope-on-potato-skins/497052/2 "2009-05-20T17:42:40Z")
I think we may have a bit of ambiguity concerning “potato skin” here. How thick is the “skin”? ---
**Author:** ![Greg\_Charles](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/839c29/32.png) [@Greg\_Charles](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Greg_Charles)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2009, 6:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/straight-dope-on-potato-skins/497052/3 "2009-05-21T06:07:44Z")
Well, I say it starts with where the air ends, and stops where the potato flesh begins. Seriously though, are you suggesting that part of the skin is Cecil’s dead, vitaminless cells, and part is the vitamin-rich potato skin of Wikipedia? Cecil does say there’s a layer of protein under the skin, but as far as vitamins … well it’s hard not to conclude that Cecil said there are none while Wikipedia (and several other places) claim that most of the vitamins are there. ---
**Author:** ![bibliophage](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bibliophage/32/7615_2.png) [@bibliophage](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bibliophage)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2009, 1:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/straight-dope-on-potato-skins/497052/4 "2009-05-21T13:26:35Z")
> [@Greg\_Charles](#): > > Wikipedia, while confirming as urban legend that the potato skin contains _all_ the vitamins, says the skin does contain about 50% of the nutrients and fiber. What the [Wikipedia article](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Potato#Nutrition) says is, “While the skin does contain approximately half of the total dietary fiber, more than 50% of the nutrients are found within the potato itself.” It doesn’t say how much more than 50%. Could be 51%, could be 99%. ---
**Author:** ![John\_W.Kennedy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_w.kennedy/32/1031_2.png) [@John\_W.Kennedy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_W.Kennedy)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2009, 4:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/straight-dope-on-potato-skins/497052/5 "2009-05-21T16:08:50Z")
> [@Greg\_Charles](#): > > Well, I say it starts with where the air ends, and stops where the potato flesh begins. [Yakko]Well, that was pointless![/Yakko] Go to a restaurant and order “potato skins”. Now ask a cook to peel a potato in front of you. Quite a difference. ---
**Author:** ![Greg\_Charles](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/839c29/32.png) [@Greg\_Charles](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Greg_Charles)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2009, 4:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/straight-dope-on-potato-skins/497052/6 "2009-05-21T16:38:45Z")
All right, fair enough. Skins can be cut thick or thin. The crux of my distress is I’ve believed that the potato skin was at best completely void of nutrition … and at worst poisonous … for the past decade based on Cecil’s column. It turns out that’s not true. I don’t believe Wikipedia means 99% when they say more than 50% and a cursory look through some nutrition web sites confirms that. The upshot is dumb things that my mom told me when I was a kid, but were later refuted by the Straight Dope, might actually be true. My whole world-view is crumbling! ---
**Author:** ![dracoi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/90db22/32.png) [@dracoi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dracoi)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2009, 11:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/straight-dope-on-potato-skins/497052/7 "2009-05-21T23:46:48Z")
> [@John\_W.Kennedy](#): > > I think we may have a bit of ambiguity concerning “potato skin” here. How thick is the “skin”? Just to add to the ambiguity, potato skins are not the same for all varieties. The red waxy potatoes have a much thinner skin than a Russet, and I suspect that the two types of skins are pretty different in composition. ---
**Author:** ![AskNott](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/asknott/32/5790_2.png) [@AskNott](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AskNott)\ **Post date:** [May 22, 2009, 9:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/straight-dope-on-potato-skins/497052/8 "2009-05-22T21:55:21Z")
> [@bibliophage](#): > > What the [Wikipedia article](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Potato#Nutrition) says is, “While the skin does contain approximately half of the total dietary fiber, more than 50% of the nutrients are found within the potato itself.” It doesn’t say how much more than 50%. Could be 51%, could be 99%. If the figure were “more than 90%” I think they would have said so. ---
**Author:** ![bibliophage](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bibliophage/32/7615_2.png) [@bibliophage](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bibliophage)\ **Post date:** [May 22, 2009, 10:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/straight-dope-on-potato-skins/497052/9 "2009-05-22T22:43:48Z")
Ordinarily I’d agree that’s likely, but this is Wikipedia we’re talking about. As far as I can tell, the factoid was added by somebody named Kaldinger on 27 November 2006. The wording was slightly different back then, but there was never any cite. > [@](#): > > While the skin does contain approximately half of the total dietary fiber, the majority (\> 50%) of the nutrients are found within the potato itself > > [Potato - Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Potato&oldid=90462383#Food_value) ---
**Author:** ![BigT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bigt/32/12044_2.png) [@BigT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BigT)\ **Post date:** [May 31, 2009, 5:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/straight-dope-on-potato-skins/497052/10 "2009-05-31T05:19:34Z")
And it’s now been updated with a cite which indicates that the nutrition density of each is about equal. It’s actually a bit of original research, though, (and, thus may be deleted) so I’ll link to the current revision. > **[Potato | Nutrition](https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Potato&oldid=293202909#Nutrition)** > > Boiled potato pulp with skin is 77% water, 20% carbohydrates, 2% protein, and contains negligible fat (table). In a reference amount of 100 grams (3.5 oz), boiled potato supplies 87 calories of food energy, and is a rich source of vitamin B6 (23% of the Daily Value, DV), with moderate contents (10–16% DV) of some B vitamins and vitamin C (table). Other micronutrients are below 10% of the DV. > The potato is rarely eaten raw because raw potato starch is poorly digested by humans. > Potatoes are ofte... ---
**Author:** ![janeslogin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/df788c/32.png) [@janeslogin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/janeslogin)\ **Post date:** [May 31, 2009, 3:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/straight-dope-on-potato-skins/497052/11 "2009-05-31T15:15:31Z")
The story they taught us in horticultural classes a half century ago was that the micro-nutrients clung to the inside of the skin. Fiber was part of the skin. Starch was the white stuff. A more interesting, at least a more difficult, question, I think, is who started peeling the potato in the first place? And why? Or who started peeling apples or peaches or oranges (Many of us eat orange peel in marmalade all the time. I know a woman who eats the whole orange.) for that matter? ---
**Author:** ![Irishman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/b487fb/32.png) [@Irishman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Irishman)\ **Post date:** [June 1, 2009, 3:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/straight-dope-on-potato-skins/497052/12 "2009-06-01T15:00:25Z")
Heck, who started peeling bananas? Apes don’t. Peels tend to be bitter and get stuck in the teeth. Why waste time on that, when the tasty flesh is just underneath waiting to be savored? ---
**Author:** ![mj\_2](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/6a8cbe/32.png) [@mj\_2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mj_2)\ **Post date:** [June 2, 2009, 5:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/straight-dope-on-potato-skins/497052/13 "2009-06-02T17:56:45Z")
> [@Irishman](#): > > Peels tend to be bitter and get stuck in the teeth. Why waste time on that, when the tasty flesh is just underneath waiting to be savored? Cool - Food porn! That’s why I’m here.🆒 ---
**Author:** ![Tim\_T-Bonham.net](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/46a35a/32.png) [@Tim\_T-Bonham.net](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tim_T-Bonham.net)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2009, 7:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/straight-dope-on-potato-skins/497052/14 "2009-06-10T19:26:54Z")
> [@janeslogin](#): > > TA more interesting, at least a more difficult, question, I think, is who started peeling the potato in the first place? And why? Or who started peeling apples or peaches or oranges The ‘peel’ is primarily a protective coating on any fruit or vegetable, and thus less tasty and harder to chew (& digest) than the inside. And some have evolved a bitter or unpleasant taste, to try to discourage eating. Peeling probably started way back pre-history, when people had enough spare food to be able to ‘waste’ the peel part in order to make the food taste better. Not something you would do until then. Even in the 1800’s, the English had fancy peeled potato dishes, while the famine-stricken Irish had their potatoes ‘boiled in their jackets’. ---
**Author:** ![gustp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/fbc32d/32.png) [@gustp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gustp)\ **Post date:** [June 13, 2009, 6:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/straight-dope-on-potato-skins/497052/15 "2009-06-13T18:49:18Z")
> [@Irishman](#): > > Heck, who started peeling bananas? Apes don’t. > > Peels tend to be bitter and get stuck in the teeth. Why waste time on that, when the tasty flesh is just underneath waiting to be savored? Have you ever seen an ape eat a banana? I have and they peel them every time. ---
**Author:** ![Irishman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/b487fb/32.png) [@Irishman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Irishman)\ **Post date:** [June 14, 2009, 3:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/straight-dope-on-potato-skins/497052/16 "2009-06-14T03:40:58Z")
Some years ago I saw apes at a zoo eating fruit. They didn’t peel their fruit. Can’t recall now which type of ape it was. I’m thinking gorilla, but not certain I remember correctly.