Unless it has a very particular kind of toxin that is destroyed or altered and rendered less harmful by cooking (usually made in a lab and put there on purpose to discourage raw eating)... If it's not ok to eat raw, then cooking it will only mask the symptoms, but maximize the damage.
For example, AV did experiments with raw and cooked swordfish fed to cats and dogs. Swordfish is high in mercury.
The cats and dogs were mixed and separated into two groups at random. Mercury levels were measured in the fish by weight content, and then all feces and urine for each animal were collected, and had their mercury levels measured.
By calculating how much mercury each animal ingested and how much it excreted, one can roughly calculate how much mercury was absorbed and accumulated as toxicity in the body of the animal.
In the group fed raw, 88-92% of mercury was eliminated within the 7 days the study lasted (last two days were water fasting days). In the group fed cooked, only 8-12% was excreted.
Furthermore, by analyzing in detail the excretions of each group, it was noticed that cholesterol bubbles encapsulated the mercury in the raw group, but not in the cooked group. What likely happened is that this natural bond was broken by the cooking process, leading to all that toxicity being absorbed and stored rather than discarded or eliminated.
