I liked them best in stir-fries
There are a number of references online to them being poisonous and the need to boil them and keep changing the water.
Hi Digeroo
The web has become like the Bible - it's possible to find a hundred quotes to support any or all of the sides in an argument.
For example - from Geetha's kitchen:
"As far as I know only the pods and dried beans are eaten in India. The young pods (avarakai) are cooked like green beans; the seeds/beans (Mochai or Val) are soaked and skinned before incorporating into recipes. I have eaten them steamed, stir-fried, or boiled in various recipes."
I prefer folk wisdom to the axe-grinders of wikipedia any day!
The mature seeds are clearly a potential problem (and skinning them as above may be part of the solution), but it all comes down to dosage. The poison in question is the same one in manioc/cassava.
It's one that can creep up on you if you eat too much too regularly.
The social aspect of risk management is an interesting subject. It's turned into a political tabloid issue in the UK (creeping americanism - probably on the back of their obsession with litigation).
The result is that like all political issues we go from one extreme straight to the other - no chance of any happy medium.
Children have gone from extreme hardship - 2 mile walks fighting blizzards of sleet to get to school; to extreme coddling via the modern equivalent of their own flunkies with a sedan chair.
Only idiots ignore real risks, but there's something terribly bourgeois about thinking that all risk can and should be eliminated - because we are so wonderful, so precious, 'in apprehension, how like a God?'.
B@!!@<£s.
The best approach is the 'peanut throwing' one... It was invented by a very brilliant and exasperated US risk expert.
It must be very difficult to be a risk expert in the US without being exasperated - it's bad enough here.
Anyway, the idea is that a surprising number of US citizens die from throwing peanuts up and catching them in their mouths (or rather, they botch it).
On the other hand, we've all seen it done and/or done it ourselves with no ill effects.
He decided this was the threshold - anything causing more deaths was worth considering, anything causing less was worth ignoring.
It's a good strategy for life.
You'd be amazed how many scare stories fail this test (journalists do need their daily champagne and taxis). Just about any scare story you didn't already know was dangerous - isn't.
On the other hand people buy tasteless spreads and are shocked if you 'still' use butter while they are smoking 40 a day...
Ho Hum.