Paleo vs Eatting clean?
Replies
-
tennisdude2004 wrote: »Why not stick to the OP's question. Oh that's right you haven't tried either of the diets so you are not really commenting from a position of experience (and I doubt good knowledge of them either).
Why do you assume we haven't tried either way of eating?
For example, the usual complaint about "clean" eating is that it means nothing and in fact people who preen about eating "clean" usually eat like the rest of us in these discussions (including many of the same "processed" foods they just pretend are somehow not processed). You yourself jumped to a strawman about someone who eats McD's and then packaged pot pies and a hot dog with Twinkies every day (or some such, I forget the details) as if not eating "clean" meant not eating every meal from a box or a fast food restaurant. By that standard, I imagine all of us are "clean" eaters, yay us!
Therefore, my guess is that I've tried "clean" eating as much as anyone here.
As for paleo, I did try it, because I figured it might be an easy way to cut calories before I decided I enjoyed tracking and because it basically fits with my preferred way to eat (or so I thought) and my plan to cut calories that I ate mindlessly or without adequate enjoyment (in other words, adding rice to some meat and veggies or putting them in a sandwich almost never improves them to my specific taste). What I learned was that I missed dairy way more than I expected (and I've been eating lots of it since that experiment and feeling great), and that I found it pointless and annoying to go out of my way to avoid foods when I didn't have any particularly good reason for doing it, like an allergy or negative symptom from the foods (when I was doing it I couldn't find a soup at Pret without either grains or beans, but many of the soup options were otherwise good and would have been helpful to my goals to be able to eat, for example).
Also, I realized that since the foods in question were ones I didn't care that much about most of the time (I'd bet good money that overeating beans will never be a weight management issue for me), eliminating them served no point. So I shifted to a calorie focused approach (although I could stop tracking and keep to it, I think), although to a certain extent I do cut calories by not eating grains as much as I might and being more sparing re starchy carbs in general (although no way would I give up potatoes--that's why I never did a Whole30).
0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »Why not stick to the OP's question. Oh that's right you haven't tried either of the diets so you are not really commenting from a position of experience (and I doubt good knowledge of them either).
Why do you assume we haven't tried either way of eating?
For example, the usual complaint about "clean" eating is that it means nothing and in fact people who preen about eating "clean" usually eat like the rest of us in these discussions (including many of the same "processed" foods they just pretend are somehow not processed). You yourself jumped to a strawman about someone who eats McD's and then packaged pot pies and a hot dog with Twinkies every day (or some such, I forget the details) as if not eating "clean" meant not eating every meal from a box or a fast food restaurant. By that standard, I imagine all of us are "clean" eaters, yay us!
Therefore, my guess is that I've tried "clean" eating as much as anyone here.
As for paleo, I did try it, because I figured it might be an easy way to cut calories before I decided I enjoyed tracking and because it basically fits with my preferred way to eat (or so I thought) and my plan to cut calories that I ate mindlessly or without adequate enjoyment (in other words, adding rice to some meat and veggies or putting them in a sandwich almost never improves them to my specific taste). What I learned was that I missed dairy way more than I expected (and I've been eating lots of it since that experiment and feeling great), and that I found it pointless and annoying to go out of my way to avoid foods when I didn't have any particularly good reason for doing it, like an allergy or negative symptom from the foods (when I was doing it I couldn't find a soup at Pret without either grains or beans, but many of the soup options were otherwise good and would have been helpful to my goals to be able to eat, for example).
Also, I realized that since the foods in question were ones I didn't care that much about most of the time (I'd bet good money that overeating beans will never be a weight management issue for me), eliminating them served no point. So I shifted to a calorie focused approach (although I could stop tracking and keep to it, I think), although to a certain extent I do cut calories by not eating grains as much as I might and being more sparing re starchy carbs in general (although no way would I give up potatoes--that's why I never did a Whole30).
My response wasn't to you, it was clearly to ndj1979 - and I know from previous conversations he is not talking from a position of experience.
In regards to the example of a days food I gave, I pretty much ate like that last year - so I was drawing on my own experience and I do not think I am untypical.
Also there were no twinkies (they're not that big over here).
I'm not claiming to be a clean eater by the way - I'm just not overly sensitive about other people that do.
Maybe I am untypical because when I hear someone wanting to eat a healthier diet I don't instantly feel as though they have just walked across the room and slapped me in the face) because I choose to eat a less than optimal diet (that's not to say Clean diets are by the way ) but IMO a clean diet (and by clean I mean a better way than the standard western diet).-1 -
tennisdude2004 wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »yopeeps025 wrote: »diannethegeek wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »herrspoons wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »herrspoons wrote: »Unless you have a defined medical condition, like Crohn's or epilepsy or IBS (to a degree) or a very few other conditions, eating clean is meaningless and has no discernable fat loss or health benefits over a wider diet where foods are consumed in moderation.
Really?
I'm pretty sure its healthier to eat home prepared meals each day than mass produced microwavable ready meals!
I'm pretty sure If you did eat mass produced ready meals each day, your levels of inflammation and oxidation would be higher than if you ate home prepared food.
My reasoning behind this is you would definitely be eating increased amounts of Man made transfats, Interesterified Fats and polyunsaturated fats.
So prove it. 'Pretty sure' doesn't cut it.
Also note the phrase 'in moderation'. I wouldn't recommend living on ready meals exclusively, but one or so a day isn't going to harm you.
No, but how untypical a day would it be to say have:
MacDonalds breakfast
Cereal bar
Microwavable lunch of description
Bag of crisps
For dinner Chicken and a pre-made jar of sauce. Maybe some coated (seasoned) frozen potatoes.
I think that's not an untypical kind of day for a lot of people - Most of those things are mass produced.
Although I sure the companies producing them use only the finest ingredients and to hell with the profit margins!
Can you honestly say you do not 'personally' know anyone that barely eats a bit of fruit or veg! I know loads.
This was the original statement in the quote string that started all of this:Unless you have a defined medical condition, like Crohn's or epilepsy or IBS (to a degree) or a very few other conditions, eating clean is meaningless and has no discernable fat loss or health benefits over a wider diet where foods are consumed in moderation.
You've gone from a discussion of clean eating vs. a wide diet with all foods in moderation to a discussion comparing clean eating vs. only packaged/fast food and almost no veggies. You're shifting the goal posts wildly.
Straw man argument.
How is my post straw man? I was answering the post about eating a wide diet in moderation was unhealtier than eating a 'clean diet'.
If a lot of the items on your wider diet (like SAD) are mass produced (multi-ingredient) and you eat each of them in moderation, a majority of your food is still mass produced!
why did you put mass produced next to multi-ingredient?????
mass produced and one ingredient
the incredible edible egg
http://www.uspoultry.org/economic_data/
I put multi ingredient next to mass produced so people didn't say stuff like - Yeah but what about eggs and apples - their healthy and mass produced.
Although I doubt anyone would be that obvious.
Maybe I've been around these forums too long. Although it is good to tussle with the trolls, from time to time! lol
*yawn* troll comment again.
Funny how everyone else is a troll, but I assume that you do not think you are.
I would recommend looking up the definition of troll.
Well I'm not the one hijacking a thread!
Who is and how are they doing so?
Seriously, have you seen the first page. There was only about legitimate (non hijacking) posts on the whole page!!!!
hijacks thread and then complains about the hijacking of same thread..lolz...
Sorry, you mean I hijacked your hijacking!
In case you didn't read the original OP:
I was just reading up on the Paleo diet haven't committed to anything yet still weighing my options. But reading it, it seems similar to eating clean, is it just a fancy name for the same thing? Has anyone had success using this diet
From the very first reply this thread was hijacked.
And subsequent posts after did not stay on track.
Very few (and certainly not for the FB) posts have addressed whether the diets are similar and non have addressed whether the diets are healthy, and only a minority in the number of post responses are from people who have tried either and are giving their feedback on them.
All that seems to have happened is its been hijacked by people sensitive to the fact both diets are named wrong (although that's just good marketing - someone has got very rich, high five to them) and that people eating clean are some how belittling every other fragile soul, who eats a ready meal or store bought bagel!
Why not stick to the OP's question. Oh that's right you haven't tried either of the diets so you are not really commenting from a position of experience (and I doubt good knowledge of them either).
I answered the OPs question ..she asked about paleo and clean eating, I said do neither and eat the foods that she likes and just maintain a deficit.
I am not the one that went off on a tangent about "bad' fats, what is "pretty much good", and what you think the majority of peoples diets are < all of which were not questions posed by the OP ..
trollers gonna troll..
I'm not saying didn't hijack your hijack!
I was addressing the question from a previous post asking why a clean diet was deemed healthier than a wider moderate diet - and those where my thoughts on it.
Also your answer to the OP doesn't make sense - they didn't ask which one should they choose!!!!!
Hijack much?
I did answer the question. I said neither is required for weight loss, thus, OP does not need to bother with either.
I am not the one spewing off in every direction and then when confronted about said nonsensical statements, provide no response and then complain about "hijacking"….0 -
yopeeps025 wrote: »diannethegeek wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »herrspoons wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »herrspoons wrote: »Unless you have a defined medical condition, like Crohn's or epilepsy or IBS (to a degree) or a very few other conditions, eating clean is meaningless and has no discernable fat loss or health benefits over a wider diet where foods are consumed in moderation.
Really?
I'm pretty sure its healthier to eat home prepared meals each day than mass produced microwavable ready meals!
I'm pretty sure If you did eat mass produced ready meals each day, your levels of inflammation and oxidation would be higher than if you ate home prepared food.
My reasoning behind this is you would definitely be eating increased amounts of Man made transfats, Interesterified Fats and polyunsaturated fats.
So prove it. 'Pretty sure' doesn't cut it.
Also note the phrase 'in moderation'. I wouldn't recommend living on ready meals exclusively, but one or so a day isn't going to harm you.
No, but how untypical a day would it be to say have:
MacDonalds breakfast
Cereal bar
Microwavable lunch of description
Bag of crisps
For dinner Chicken and a pre-made jar of sauce. Maybe some coated (seasoned) frozen potatoes.
I think that's not an untypical kind of day for a lot of people - Most of those things are mass produced.
Although I sure the companies producing them use only the finest ingredients and to hell with the profit margins!
Can you honestly say you do not 'personally' know anyone that barely eats a bit of fruit or veg! I know loads.
This was the original statement in the quote string that started all of this:Unless you have a defined medical condition, like Crohn's or epilepsy or IBS (to a degree) or a very few other conditions, eating clean is meaningless and has no discernable fat loss or health benefits over a wider diet where foods are consumed in moderation.
You've gone from a discussion of clean eating vs. a wide diet with all foods in moderation to a discussion comparing clean eating vs. only packaged/fast food and almost no veggies. You're shifting the goal posts wildly.
Straw man argument.
Good god in bacon, this thread makes me want to strangle someone.
Because the best way to have a discussion is to lead your opponent down a path of "what about THIS? what about THAT?" and then when they try to helpfully oblige, accuse them of strawmanning and avoiding the original point.
<facedesk>0 -
rprussell2004 wrote: »yopeeps025 wrote: »diannethegeek wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »herrspoons wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »herrspoons wrote: »Unless you have a defined medical condition, like Crohn's or epilepsy or IBS (to a degree) or a very few other conditions, eating clean is meaningless and has no discernable fat loss or health benefits over a wider diet where foods are consumed in moderation.
Really?
I'm pretty sure its healthier to eat home prepared meals each day than mass produced microwavable ready meals!
I'm pretty sure If you did eat mass produced ready meals each day, your levels of inflammation and oxidation would be higher than if you ate home prepared food.
My reasoning behind this is you would definitely be eating increased amounts of Man made transfats, Interesterified Fats and polyunsaturated fats.
So prove it. 'Pretty sure' doesn't cut it.
Also note the phrase 'in moderation'. I wouldn't recommend living on ready meals exclusively, but one or so a day isn't going to harm you.
No, but how untypical a day would it be to say have:
MacDonalds breakfast
Cereal bar
Microwavable lunch of description
Bag of crisps
For dinner Chicken and a pre-made jar of sauce. Maybe some coated (seasoned) frozen potatoes.
I think that's not an untypical kind of day for a lot of people - Most of those things are mass produced.
Although I sure the companies producing them use only the finest ingredients and to hell with the profit margins!
Can you honestly say you do not 'personally' know anyone that barely eats a bit of fruit or veg! I know loads.
This was the original statement in the quote string that started all of this:Unless you have a defined medical condition, like Crohn's or epilepsy or IBS (to a degree) or a very few other conditions, eating clean is meaningless and has no discernable fat loss or health benefits over a wider diet where foods are consumed in moderation.
You've gone from a discussion of clean eating vs. a wide diet with all foods in moderation to a discussion comparing clean eating vs. only packaged/fast food and almost no veggies. You're shifting the goal posts wildly.
Straw man argument.
Good god in bacon, this thread makes me want to strangle someone.
Because the best way to have a discussion is to lead your opponent down a path of "what about THIS? what about THAT?" and then when they try to helpfully oblige, accuse them of strawmanning and avoiding the original point.
<facedesk>
Lol
-1 -
tennisdude2004 wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »yopeeps025 wrote: »diannethegeek wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »herrspoons wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »herrspoons wrote: »Unless you have a defined medical condition, like Crohn's or epilepsy or IBS (to a degree) or a very few other conditions, eating clean is meaningless and has no discernable fat loss or health benefits over a wider diet where foods are consumed in moderation.
Really?
I'm pretty sure its healthier to eat home prepared meals each day than mass produced microwavable ready meals!
I'm pretty sure If you did eat mass produced ready meals each day, your levels of inflammation and oxidation would be higher than if you ate home prepared food.
My reasoning behind this is you would definitely be eating increased amounts of Man made transfats, Interesterified Fats and polyunsaturated fats.
So prove it. 'Pretty sure' doesn't cut it.
Also note the phrase 'in moderation'. I wouldn't recommend living on ready meals exclusively, but one or so a day isn't going to harm you.
No, but how untypical a day would it be to say have:
MacDonalds breakfast
Cereal bar
Microwavable lunch of description
Bag of crisps
For dinner Chicken and a pre-made jar of sauce. Maybe some coated (seasoned) frozen potatoes.
I think that's not an untypical kind of day for a lot of people - Most of those things are mass produced.
Although I sure the companies producing them use only the finest ingredients and to hell with the profit margins!
Can you honestly say you do not 'personally' know anyone that barely eats a bit of fruit or veg! I know loads.
This was the original statement in the quote string that started all of this:Unless you have a defined medical condition, like Crohn's or epilepsy or IBS (to a degree) or a very few other conditions, eating clean is meaningless and has no discernable fat loss or health benefits over a wider diet where foods are consumed in moderation.
You've gone from a discussion of clean eating vs. a wide diet with all foods in moderation to a discussion comparing clean eating vs. only packaged/fast food and almost no veggies. You're shifting the goal posts wildly.
Straw man argument.
How is my post straw man? I was answering the post about eating a wide diet in moderation was unhealtier than eating a 'clean diet'.
If a lot of the items on your wider diet (like SAD) are mass produced (multi-ingredient) and you eat each of them in moderation, a majority of your food is still mass produced!
why did you put mass produced next to multi-ingredient?????
mass produced and one ingredient
the incredible edible egg
http://www.uspoultry.org/economic_data/
I put multi ingredient next to mass produced so people didn't say stuff like - Yeah but what about eggs and apples - their healthy and mass produced.
Although I doubt anyone would be that obvious.
Maybe I've been around these forums too long. Although it is good to tussle with the trolls, from time to time! lol
*yawn* troll comment again.
Funny how everyone else is a troll, but I assume that you do not think you are.
I would recommend looking up the definition of troll.
Well I'm not the one hijacking a thread!
Who is and how are they doing so?
Seriously, have you seen the first page. There was only about legitimate (non hijacking) posts on the whole page!!!!
hijacks thread and then complains about the hijacking of same thread..lolz...
Sorry, you mean I hijacked your hijacking!
In case you didn't read the original OP:
I was just reading up on the Paleo diet haven't committed to anything yet still weighing my options. But reading it, it seems similar to eating clean, is it just a fancy name for the same thing? Has anyone had success using this diet
From the very first reply this thread was hijacked.
And subsequent posts after did not stay on track.
Very few (and certainly not for the FB) posts have addressed whether the diets are similar and non have addressed whether the diets are healthy, and only a minority in the number of post responses are from people who have tried either and are giving their feedback on them.
All that seems to have happened is its been hijacked by people sensitive to the fact both diets are named wrong (although that's just good marketing - someone has got very rich, high five to them) and that people eating clean are some how belittling every other fragile soul, who eats a ready meal or store bought bagel!
Why not stick to the OP's question. Oh that's right you haven't tried either of the diets so you are not really commenting from a position of experience (and I doubt good knowledge of them either).
I answered the OPs question ..she asked about paleo and clean eating, I said do neither and eat the foods that she likes and just maintain a deficit.
I am not the one that went off on a tangent about "bad' fats, what is "pretty much good", and what you think the majority of peoples diets are < all of which were not questions posed by the OP ..
trollers gonna troll..
I'm not saying didn't hijack your hijack!
I was addressing the question from a previous post asking why a clean diet was deemed healthier than a wider moderate diet - and those where my thoughts on it.
Also your answer to the OP doesn't make sense - they didn't ask which one should they choose!!!!!
Hijack much?
I did answer the question. I said neither is required for weight loss, thus, OP does not need to bother with either.
I am not the one spewing off in every direction and then when confronted about said nonsensical statements, provide no response and then complain about "hijacking"….
Again - no you didn't answer the question! You offered an unsolicited opinion - which as this is an open forum is your right!
What was the question regarding my nonsensical statement - I may have missed the question - ask again and I'll try an answer it! or offer an unsolicited statement - either seems to work with you dude!
-1 -
rprussell2004 wrote: »yopeeps025 wrote: »diannethegeek wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »herrspoons wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »herrspoons wrote: »Unless you have a defined medical condition, like Crohn's or epilepsy or IBS (to a degree) or a very few other conditions, eating clean is meaningless and has no discernable fat loss or health benefits over a wider diet where foods are consumed in moderation.
Really?
I'm pretty sure its healthier to eat home prepared meals each day than mass produced microwavable ready meals!
I'm pretty sure If you did eat mass produced ready meals each day, your levels of inflammation and oxidation would be higher than if you ate home prepared food.
My reasoning behind this is you would definitely be eating increased amounts of Man made transfats, Interesterified Fats and polyunsaturated fats.
So prove it. 'Pretty sure' doesn't cut it.
Also note the phrase 'in moderation'. I wouldn't recommend living on ready meals exclusively, but one or so a day isn't going to harm you.
No, but how untypical a day would it be to say have:
MacDonalds breakfast
Cereal bar
Microwavable lunch of description
Bag of crisps
For dinner Chicken and a pre-made jar of sauce. Maybe some coated (seasoned) frozen potatoes.
I think that's not an untypical kind of day for a lot of people - Most of those things are mass produced.
Although I sure the companies producing them use only the finest ingredients and to hell with the profit margins!
Can you honestly say you do not 'personally' know anyone that barely eats a bit of fruit or veg! I know loads.
This was the original statement in the quote string that started all of this:Unless you have a defined medical condition, like Crohn's or epilepsy or IBS (to a degree) or a very few other conditions, eating clean is meaningless and has no discernable fat loss or health benefits over a wider diet where foods are consumed in moderation.
You've gone from a discussion of clean eating vs. a wide diet with all foods in moderation to a discussion comparing clean eating vs. only packaged/fast food and almost no veggies. You're shifting the goal posts wildly.
Straw man argument.
Good god in bacon, this thread makes me want to strangle someone.
Because the best way to have a discussion is to lead your opponent down a path of "what about THIS? what about THAT?" and then when they try to helpfully oblige, accuse them of strawmanning and avoiding the original point.
<facedesk>
Strawman argument.
Thread still hijacked. lollerskates.0 -
Pumpkin Pie Label for :"home made pumpkin pie"
INGREDIENTS: Skim Milk, Cream, Sugar, Pumpkin, Pie Crust {Enriched Flour, Shortening (Partially Hydrogenated Soybean and Cottonseed Oils), Sugar, Water, corn Startch, Salt Coconut Oil, Pasteurized Eggs, Corn syrup, Brown Sugar, Annatto [ Natural Color, Stabilizer [Celluolse Gum, Carob Bean Gum, Carrageenan, Guar Gum, Dextrose, Salt], Lemon Juice Concentrate, Cellulose Gum, Natural Flavors, Spices.
To me, that seems like a highly processed food item. "Not Clean"
When we make pumpkin pie at home the can we start with say this:
INGREDIENTS: Pumpkin0 -
tennisdude2004 wrote: »Maybe I am untypical because when I hear someone wanting to eat a healthier diet I don't instantly feel as though they have just walked across the room and slapped me in the face) because I choose to eat a less than optimal diet (that's not to say Clean diets are by the way ) but IMO a clean diet (and by clean I mean a better way than the standard western diet).
I don't think people here react negatively to someone wanting to eat a healthier diet. I am always encouraging of that. I think people react negatively to the term "clean" specifically, and also often disagree with the idea that a focus on eliminating foods is the best way to eat healthy or somehow healthier than how people who don't eliminate foods (but who know about and care about nutrition) eat.0 -
EatsNotTreats wrote: »rprussell2004 wrote: »yopeeps025 wrote: »diannethegeek wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »herrspoons wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »herrspoons wrote: »Unless you have a defined medical condition, like Crohn's or epilepsy or IBS (to a degree) or a very few other conditions, eating clean is meaningless and has no discernable fat loss or health benefits over a wider diet where foods are consumed in moderation.
Really?
I'm pretty sure its healthier to eat home prepared meals each day than mass produced microwavable ready meals!
I'm pretty sure If you did eat mass produced ready meals each day, your levels of inflammation and oxidation would be higher than if you ate home prepared food.
My reasoning behind this is you would definitely be eating increased amounts of Man made transfats, Interesterified Fats and polyunsaturated fats.
So prove it. 'Pretty sure' doesn't cut it.
Also note the phrase 'in moderation'. I wouldn't recommend living on ready meals exclusively, but one or so a day isn't going to harm you.
No, but how untypical a day would it be to say have:
MacDonalds breakfast
Cereal bar
Microwavable lunch of description
Bag of crisps
For dinner Chicken and a pre-made jar of sauce. Maybe some coated (seasoned) frozen potatoes.
I think that's not an untypical kind of day for a lot of people - Most of those things are mass produced.
Although I sure the companies producing them use only the finest ingredients and to hell with the profit margins!
Can you honestly say you do not 'personally' know anyone that barely eats a bit of fruit or veg! I know loads.
This was the original statement in the quote string that started all of this:Unless you have a defined medical condition, like Crohn's or epilepsy or IBS (to a degree) or a very few other conditions, eating clean is meaningless and has no discernable fat loss or health benefits over a wider diet where foods are consumed in moderation.
You've gone from a discussion of clean eating vs. a wide diet with all foods in moderation to a discussion comparing clean eating vs. only packaged/fast food and almost no veggies. You're shifting the goal posts wildly.
Straw man argument.
Good god in bacon, this thread makes me want to strangle someone.
Because the best way to have a discussion is to lead your opponent down a path of "what about THIS? what about THAT?" and then when they try to helpfully oblige, accuse them of strawmanning and avoiding the original point.
<facedesk>
Regardless of where you stand on the eating issue, I think your post is absolute gold.
Thanks! And FWIW, I am heavily pro-eating.
(Although LESS heavily over the past 12 mos...)0 -
BlackTimber wrote: »Pumpkin Pie Label for :"home made pumpkin pie"
INGREDIENTS: Skim Milk, Cream, Sugar, Pumpkin, Pie Crust {Enriched Flour, Shortening (Partially Hydrogenated Soybean and Cottonseed Oils), Sugar, Water, corn Startch, Salt Coconut Oil, Pasteurized Eggs, Corn syrup, Brown Sugar, Annatto [ Natural Color, Stabilizer [Celluolse Gum, Carob Bean Gum, Carrageenan, Guar Gum, Dextrose, Salt], Lemon Juice Concentrate, Cellulose Gum, Natural Flavors, Spices.
To me, that seems like a highly processed food item. "Not Clean"
When we make pumpkin pie at home the can we start with say this:
INGREDIENTS: Pumpkin
lulz.
The stabilizers and gums are just for processing, and equivalent to basically nothing. Besides, I've seen most of those gums for sale at hippy shops, because they're "healthful supplements", same with the dextrose.
So what's your boggle, citizen? Are you just seeing gums and a -trose and having a little freak out for the fun?0 -
BlackTimber wrote: »Pumpkin Pie Label for :"home made pumpkin pie"
What is this "homemade pumpkin pie"?
I've made pumpkin pie at home lots of times--I even sometimes start with the pumpkin only, not the can, although I recently learned the canned stuff mostly comes from my budget-deficit-plagued state, so please buy it!
Uh, anyway, my own homemade pumpkin pie has no label, but I'm pretty sure it's not paleo. No good pie is paleo. Whether it is "clean" or not depends on your particular definition of "clean." For example, it typically includes "added sugar"--which some people say is not clean by definition--but it also contains nothing from a fast food restaurant or boxed meals, which seems to be a lower standard that we are now discussing.
0 -
Also:Carrageenan
common ingredient in almond milk, which people who go on about "eating clean" seem to adore and not count as processed.
0 -
LolBroScience wrote: »FatFreeFrolicking wrote: »
Never met one of those people
I'm one of "those people" so you have now.
And I'm almost 100% sure you've met someone with an autoimmune disease like Crohn's or Celiac which must be managed through a specific diet. Even cancer patients are advised to eliminate foods that come in a box and stick to lean meats, veggies, fruits, nuts, seeds, etc.0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »Maybe I am untypical because when I hear someone wanting to eat a healthier diet I don't instantly feel as though they have just walked across the room and slapped me in the face) because I choose to eat a less than optimal diet (that's not to say Clean diets are by the way ) but IMO a clean diet (and by clean I mean a better way than the standard western diet).
I don't think people here react negatively to someone wanting to eat a healthier diet. I am always encouraging of that. I think people react negatively to the term "clean" specifically, and also often disagree with the idea that a focus on eliminating foods is the best way to eat healthy or somehow healthier than how people who don't eliminate foods (but who know about and care about nutrition) eat.
There's nothing wring with disagreeing with eliminating food, just as there's nothing wrong
disagreeing with restricting calories and having to force yourself to stop eating when you are still hungry.
The only difference is I would never go onto an IIFYM thread and tell people that they didn't need to stop eating when they are still hungry and that they should eat LCHF - that would be me hijacking a thread! And would make me a bigger ..... than I already am!
I personally don't like the term IIFYM - I think its incorrect and doesn't address micro nutrients - but again I wouldn't have the A & I to go onto an IIFYM thread and say that, especially if the OP has not requested an alternative view point on the subject.
Hey call me a non-jerk but that's just me!
-1 -
tennisdude2004 wrote: »There's nothing wring with disagreeing with eliminating food, just as there's nothing wrong
disagreeing with restricting calories and having to force yourself to stop eating when you are still hungry.
I don't disagree with either. As I said before, I disagree with the claim that it is somehow inherently healthier to eliminate foods, that a diet that does that (though no one agrees on the foods) is somehow more nutritious than one that does not. That is a screwed up focus.
Obviously there can be good reasons to eliminate foods--either because they cause a bad reaction in you or are trigger foods (although I think people should work on the underlying issues) or because you find it an easier way to cut calories, for just a few reasons.
None of that means that there is such a thing as a "clean" diet or that "eating clean" is healthier than not "eating clean." And that is the topic under discussion.
Well, that and the difference between "eating clean" (which means nothing and therefore is simply an insult of others who presumably eat "unclean") and "paleo," which I'm practically the only one here to discuss at all.
0 -
FatFreeFrolicking wrote: »
OK no problem. Their life was not "saved" by a "clean" diet becasue "clean" doesnt mean Jack $%#$. They lost weight because they had a calorie deficit. They life may have been "saved" by losing weight but not because they ate some mythically "clean food".
Food is food. Get over it. No food is superior to other food is food for #*$& sake.
Also since everyone defines "clean" differently it is really a useless term
Excuse me?
In January, I was rushed to the hospital for severe vomiting and diarrhea caused by my Crohn's disease. I was in supraventricular tachycardia and had a resting heart rate of 225 BPM. I was THIS close to going into cardiac arrest. I was severely dehydrated and consequently, my electrolytes were extremely low. My potassium and magnesium levels were also dangerously low. In case you are unaware, magnesium is needed for proper heart function.
Prior to this, I didn't follow a strict diet like I should have. After my stay in the ICU, I changed my diet significantly. I eliminated gluten, dairy, and most foods that come in a box. I added more veggies, fruit, lean meats, nuts, seeds, olive oil, etc.
My Crohn's is now in remission. So how DARE you say "their life was not saved by a clean diet and clean doesn't mean jack *kitten*."0 -
FatFreeFrolicking wrote: »LolBroScience wrote: »FatFreeFrolicking wrote: »
Never met one of those people
I'm one of "those people" so you have now.
And I'm almost 100% sure you've met someone with an autoimmune disease like Crohn's or Celiac which must be managed through a specific diet. Even cancer patients are advised to eliminate foods that come in a box and stick to lean meats, veggies, fruits, nuts, seeds, etc.
It's already been stated... but there is a difference between choosing to eat or avoid foods due to particular diseases rather than eating a "clean" diet for weight loss. I'm assuming OP falls into the bucket of wanting to lose weight, improve body composition and also does not mention any medical conditions that would indicate a need to do so.0 -
LolBroScience wrote: »FatFreeFrolicking wrote: »LolBroScience wrote: »FatFreeFrolicking wrote: »
Never met one of those people
I'm one of "those people" so you have now.
And I'm almost 100% sure you've met someone with an autoimmune disease like Crohn's or Celiac which must be managed through a specific diet. Even cancer patients are advised to eliminate foods that come in a box and stick to lean meats, veggies, fruits, nuts, seeds, etc.
It's already been stated but a big difference between choosing to eat or avoid foods that due to particular diseases rather than eating a "clean" diet for weight loss. I'm assuming OP falls into the bucket of wanting to lose weight, improve body composition etc.
Yes, I'm very much aware. I was simply stating that for some, it is a life or death situation and MANY are ignorant to that.0 -
tennisdude2004 wrote: »The only difference is I would never go onto an IIFYM thread and tell people that they didn't need to stop eating when they are still hungry and that they should eat LCHF - that would be me hijacking a thread!
Well, to be honest, I do both of those - it's just that my macros are 75/25/as-close-to-zero-as-I-can-get. And I feel like I eat tremendously "cleanly," except for maybe the diet soda.
Um, and the lowrey's microwave pork rinds. God, those are good.
And I really don't see anything wrong with a stick of pepperoni from time to time...
But other than THAT? TOTALLY clean. So there.0 -
FatFreeFrolicking wrote: »LolBroScience wrote: »FatFreeFrolicking wrote: »LolBroScience wrote: »FatFreeFrolicking wrote: »
Never met one of those people
I'm one of "those people" so you have now.
And I'm almost 100% sure you've met someone with an autoimmune disease like Crohn's or Celiac which must be managed through a specific diet. Even cancer patients are advised to eliminate foods that come in a box and stick to lean meats, veggies, fruits, nuts, seeds, etc.
It's already been stated but a big difference between choosing to eat or avoid foods that due to particular diseases rather than eating a "clean" diet for weight loss. I'm assuming OP falls into the bucket of wanting to lose weight, improve body composition etc.
Yes, I'm very much aware. I was simply stating that for some, it is a life or death situation and MANY are ignorant to that.
Then you should be aware that those individuals making those statements are more than likely under the same frame of mind and that they are excluding those with medical conditions.0 -
rprussell2004 wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »The only difference is I would never go onto an IIFYM thread and tell people that they didn't need to stop eating when they are still hungry and that they should eat LCHF - that would be me hijacking a thread!
Well, to be honest, I do both of those - it's just that my macros are 75/25/as-close-to-zero-as-I-can-get. And I feel like I eat tremendously "cleanly," except for maybe the diet soda.
Um, and the lowrey's microwave pork rinds. God, those are good.
And I really don't see anything wrong with a stick of pepperoni from time to time...
But other than THAT? TOTALLY clean. So there.
I love pork rinds - Microwave pork rind???? we don't have them
0 -
LolBroScience wrote: »FatFreeFrolicking wrote: »LolBroScience wrote: »FatFreeFrolicking wrote: »LolBroScience wrote: »FatFreeFrolicking wrote: »
Never met one of those people
I'm one of "those people" so you have now.
And I'm almost 100% sure you've met someone with an autoimmune disease like Crohn's or Celiac which must be managed through a specific diet. Even cancer patients are advised to eliminate foods that come in a box and stick to lean meats, veggies, fruits, nuts, seeds, etc.
It's already been stated but a big difference between choosing to eat or avoid foods that due to particular diseases rather than eating a "clean" diet for weight loss. I'm assuming OP falls into the bucket of wanting to lose weight, improve body composition etc.
Yes, I'm very much aware. I was simply stating that for some, it is a life or death situation and MANY are ignorant to that.
Then you should be aware that those individuals making those statements are more than likely under the same frame of mind that they are excluding those with medical conditions.
Beyond that, I don't think of eliminating specific foods for medical reasons as "eating clean." What you eliminate depends on the medical issues. For example, I don't use penicillin since last time I did I ended up in the hospital due to a reaction to it. But I don't say I use "clean medicine" vs. others who use the filthy stuff. I simply avoid medicines that have a bad effect on me.
The issue with "clean" IMO is the assertion that certain foods are, by their very nature, "unclean." Even if that could be defended--and I don't see how, what's wrong with gluten if you have no sensitivity to it, after all?--we don't even have a clear list of foods to start the discussion with.
So my debate with you, if any, would not be that eating in a particular way can't be helpful, it's with your definition of "eating clean" as related to "eliminating foods that one has medical problems with."0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »LolBroScience wrote: »FatFreeFrolicking wrote: »LolBroScience wrote: »FatFreeFrolicking wrote: »LolBroScience wrote: »FatFreeFrolicking wrote: »
Never met one of those people
I'm one of "those people" so you have now.
And I'm almost 100% sure you've met someone with an autoimmune disease like Crohn's or Celiac which must be managed through a specific diet. Even cancer patients are advised to eliminate foods that come in a box and stick to lean meats, veggies, fruits, nuts, seeds, etc.
It's already been stated but a big difference between choosing to eat or avoid foods that due to particular diseases rather than eating a "clean" diet for weight loss. I'm assuming OP falls into the bucket of wanting to lose weight, improve body composition etc.
Yes, I'm very much aware. I was simply stating that for some, it is a life or death situation and MANY are ignorant to that.
Then you should be aware that those individuals making those statements are more than likely under the same frame of mind that they are excluding those with medical conditions.
Beyond that, I don't think of eliminating specific foods for medical reasons as "eating clean." What you eliminate depends on the medical issues. For example, I don't use penicillin since last time I did I ended up in the hospital due to a reaction to it. But I don't say I use "clean medicine" vs. others who use the filthy stuff. I simply avoid medicines that have a bad effect on me.
The issue with "clean" IMO is the assertion that certain foods are, by their very nature, "unclean." Even if that could be defended--and I don't see how, what's wrong with gluten if you have no sensitivity to it, after all?--we don't even have a clear list of foods to start the discussion with.
So my debate with you, if any, would not be that eating in a particular way can't be helpful, it's with your definition of "eating clean" as related to "eliminating foods that one has medical problems with."
I have no definition of clean eating, there is nothing to debate.0 -
tennisdude2004 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »Why not stick to the OP's question. Oh that's right you haven't tried either of the diets so you are not really commenting from a position of experience (and I doubt good knowledge of them either).
Why do you assume we haven't tried either way of eating?
For example, the usual complaint about "clean" eating is that it means nothing and in fact people who preen about eating "clean" usually eat like the rest of us in these discussions (including many of the same "processed" foods they just pretend are somehow not processed). You yourself jumped to a strawman about someone who eats McD's and then packaged pot pies and a hot dog with Twinkies every day (or some such, I forget the details) as if not eating "clean" meant not eating every meal from a box or a fast food restaurant. By that standard, I imagine all of us are "clean" eaters, yay us!
Therefore, my guess is that I've tried "clean" eating as much as anyone here.
As for paleo, I did try it, because I figured it might be an easy way to cut calories before I decided I enjoyed tracking and because it basically fits with my preferred way to eat (or so I thought) and my plan to cut calories that I ate mindlessly or without adequate enjoyment (in other words, adding rice to some meat and veggies or putting them in a sandwich almost never improves them to my specific taste). What I learned was that I missed dairy way more than I expected (and I've been eating lots of it since that experiment and feeling great), and that I found it pointless and annoying to go out of my way to avoid foods when I didn't have any particularly good reason for doing it, like an allergy or negative symptom from the foods (when I was doing it I couldn't find a soup at Pret without either grains or beans, but many of the soup options were otherwise good and would have been helpful to my goals to be able to eat, for example).
Also, I realized that since the foods in question were ones I didn't care that much about most of the time (I'd bet good money that overeating beans will never be a weight management issue for me), eliminating them served no point. So I shifted to a calorie focused approach (although I could stop tracking and keep to it, I think), although to a certain extent I do cut calories by not eating grains as much as I might and being more sparing re starchy carbs in general (although no way would I give up potatoes--that's why I never did a Whole30).
My response wasn't to you, it was clearly to ndj1979 - and I know from previous conversations he is not talking from a position of experience.
In regards to the example of a days food I gave, I pretty much ate like that last year - so I was drawing on my own experience and I do not think I am untypical.
Also there were no twinkies (they're not that big over here).
I'm not claiming to be a clean eater by the way - I'm just not overly sensitive about other people that do.
Maybe I am untypical because when I hear someone wanting to eat a healthier diet I don't instantly feel as though they have just walked across the room and slapped me in the face) because I choose to eat a less than optimal diet (that's not to say Clean diets are by the way ) but IMO a clean diet (and by clean I mean a better way than the standard western diet).
But couldn't you say that you eat a more nutritious diet (is that the term for more nutrient dense foods, less calorie laden ones?) than the standard western diet?
I am on a diabetic diet. It's new and I am still adapting. It doesn't seem as restrictive as some of these other diets, though, which surprises me.0 -
LolBroScience wrote: »I have no definition of clean eating, there is nothing to debate.
Unclear on my part. That was to FatFreeFrolic.
0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »LolBroScience wrote: »I have no definition of clean eating, there is nothing to debate.
Unclear on my part. That was to FatFreeFrolic.
Touche, my bad!0 -
It is not "clean eating" that "saved" you. It is the elimination of gluten, dairy and most processed foods that "saved" you.FatFreeFrolicking wrote: »FatFreeFrolicking wrote: »
OK no problem. Their life was not "saved" by a "clean" diet becasue "clean" doesnt mean Jack $%#$. They lost weight because they had a calorie deficit. They life may have been "saved" by losing weight but not because they ate some mythically "clean food".
Food is food. Get over it. No food is superior to other food is food for #*$& sake.
Also since everyone defines "clean" differently it is really a useless term
Excuse me?
In January, I was rushed to the hospital for severe vomiting and diarrhea caused by my Crohn's disease. I was in supraventricular tachycardia and had a resting heart rate of 225 BPM. I was THIS close to going into cardiac arrest. I was severely dehydrated and consequently, my electrolytes were extremely low. My potassium and magnesium levels were also dangerously low. In case you are unaware, magnesium is needed for proper heart function.
Prior to this, I didn't follow a strict diet like I should have. After my stay in the ICU, I changed my diet significantly. I eliminated gluten, dairy, and most foods that come in a box. I added more veggies, fruit, lean meats, nuts, seeds, olive oil, etc.
My Crohn's is now in remission. So how DARE you say "their life was not saved by a clean diet and clean doesn't mean jack *kitten*."
I know someone who has Crohn's disease. He too eliminated foods, but does not mean the rest of his diet is "clean." In this case he as well as you chose to eat more nutritious whole foods0 -
BlackTimber wrote: »Pumpkin Pie Label for :"home made pumpkin pie"
INGREDIENTS: Skim Milk, Cream, Sugar, Pumpkin, Pie Crust {Enriched Flour, Shortening (Partially Hydrogenated Soybean and Cottonseed Oils), Sugar, Water, corn Startch, Salt Coconut Oil, Pasteurized Eggs, Corn syrup, Brown Sugar, Annatto [ Natural Color, Stabilizer [Celluolse Gum, Carob Bean Gum, Carrageenan, Guar Gum, Dextrose, Salt], Lemon Juice Concentrate, Cellulose Gum, Natural Flavors, Spices.
To me, that seems like a highly processed food item. "Not Clean"
When we make pumpkin pie at home the can we start with say this:
INGREDIENTS: Pumpkin
When you make pumpkin pie at home, you are not federally required to list your ingredients in order of the amount present in the food (which is why pumpkin is the fourth item on the list), and you're comparing a can of pumpkin to an entire pie. Once you add in all the other ingredients to make the pie, the list for your pumpkin pie would be similar to that of a store-bought pie, not only in type but quantity.
0 -
FatFreeFrolicking wrote: »FatFreeFrolicking wrote: »
OK no problem. Their life was not "saved" by a "clean" diet becasue "clean" doesnt mean Jack $%#$. They lost weight because they had a calorie deficit. They life may have been "saved" by losing weight but not because they ate some mythically "clean food".
Food is food. Get over it. No food is superior to other food is food for #*$& sake.
Also since everyone defines "clean" differently it is really a useless term
Excuse me?
In January, I was rushed to the hospital for severe vomiting and diarrhea caused by my Crohn's disease. I was in supraventricular tachycardia and had a resting heart rate of 225 BPM. I was THIS close to going into cardiac arrest. I was severely dehydrated and consequently, my electrolytes were extremely low. My potassium and magnesium levels were also dangerously low. In case you are unaware, magnesium is needed for proper heart function.
Prior to this, I didn't follow a strict diet like I should have. After my stay in the ICU, I changed my diet significantly. I eliminated gluten, dairy, and most foods that come in a box. I added more veggies, fruit, lean meats, nuts, seeds, olive oil, etc.
My Crohn's is now in remission. So how DARE you say "their life was not saved by a clean diet and clean doesn't mean jack *kitten*."
clean eating doesn't do that.
removing foods you have a medical reaction to =/= clean eating.
I'm not sure how you managed to put that together.... but regardless congrats on figuring out how to eat well- lose weight and not be sick.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 176K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions