Welcome to Debate Club! Please be aware that this is a space for respectful debate, and that your ideas will be challenged here. Please remember to critique the argument, not the author.
What is clean eating?
Options
Replies
-
-
lemurcat12 wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »I think seeing it as an ideal is partly inference on your part. Without a doubt there is some of that, but no more so than any other WOE IMO. IIFYM or flexible dieting is put forth as an ideal just as often. So is eating 5-6 meals a day, and not eating after X p.m., or LCHF. Most people on MFP put their WOE out as an ideal.
I disagree.
First of all, I don't put my way of eating (the term WOE irritates me more than clean, I think) ;-) out there as an ideal at all. I think eating a healthful, nutrient-rich diet is an ideal, but that there are millions of ways to get there and my way (which I don't always live up to) is no better than any other, except for me.
Second, the notion of "clean" as ideal is inherent both in the word and in the idea that not clean foods should not be eaten. Since everyone eats some "clean" foods and many of us here who aren't called and don't use the label "clean eaters" still eat mostly "clean" foods, what does "clean eating" mean if not trying to eat ONLY clean foods. And if you do that, why? Because you think they are better in some way and the others aren't good for you. And this is supported by endless people on MFP claiming that "processed" (or "not clean") foods are bad for us. If you eat not clean foods (and you acknowledge that you do and they can in many cases support a healthful diet, like your extra fiber pasta), how does it make sense to call yourself a clean eater? Because you eat lots of "clean" foods? I guess I think it's odd to want a special label for eating vegetables and just generally eating the kind of diet I think should be normal and standard (lots of nutrient-dense whole foods, some other things).
If you don't understand what 'clean eating' mean how do you know you eat clean foods?
But seriously it's clear we're never going to agree. You put connotations on the phrase that I don't.
Also, I don't call myself a clean eater. If asked, I'd say I eat fairly clean, but it's not a label I'd volunteer. I have a longstanding understanding of the term and it's what I assume when the term is used unless someone specifies differently. It is a loosy goosy definition but I don't need all terms to fit neatly in the box. I'm okay with messy.0 -
WinoGelato wrote: »Can you please point out where, in this thread or any other, that people advocate eating nothing but twinkies and bacon?
People advocate that there is no such thing as unhealthy food. That CICO trumps all. Now they can either prove it or not. I'm betting not will be the option of choice.
Sidenote: does MFP offer a calories burned for googling?
People advocate that pretty much any food can fit within the context of an overall healthy DIET. I made this statement yesterday almost to the letter in another thread and another person jumping to a strawman argument quoted me and asked how I can recommend someone eat nothing but pizza, pop and cookies and still be healthy.A lot of my food looks like yours; the vast majority in fact. But, I'll also be ok with a bowl of ice cream. Why? Because I don't actually live the crazy strawman lifestyle. Most of my foods are whole, fresh ingredients. But I don't deny myself some treats.
I'm not criticizing what people do or don't eat. It's the notion of this intentional obtuseness with regards to the concept of healthy or clean food.
To me it isn't a crazy strawman lifestyle. The only thing I'm missing out on is feeling like crap and weighing more. And I don't really miss that very much.
Your comments around intentional obtusity go both ways.
This is a discussion about what the definition of clean eating is and if it is a helpful term for people to use in order to build a diet around. It is my contention, and many here I think as well, that no, that is not a helpful term, because it is subjective to the individual and applies morality and judgement around a particular way of eating. You say that you aren't criticizing what people eat, but in your first statement, you challenged those people eating nothing but twinkies and bacon to show up in 6 months to compare a blood panel, if they are still alive.
How is that not a criticism of what people eat, other than the fact that I don't know anyone who eats that way so I guess you are criticizing that poor strawman?
I'm glad you have improved your health issues and that you are feeling better. I too have lost weight and feel great. However I still eat ice cream and bacon (not much of a twinkie person to be honest). I also eat hummus and popcorn. And vegetables. And greek yogurt. And lean protein. Whole grains. Dairy. Etc....
Oh and your pictures that you originally posted, that would be very unhealthy for me. I'm allergic to strawberries.
0 -
I'll post my last cholesterol profile right now, no need to wait 6 months.If all calories are truly created equal as I've seen on these forums and you truly believe that, then spend the next 6 months getting your calories from twinkies and bacon. If you survive we'll compare a blood panel.Component Standard Range Your Value Cholesterol <200 mg/dL 144 Triglycerides <150 mg/dL 60 HDL >40 mg/dL 63 LDL, Calculated <130 mg/dL 69 Chol/HDL Ratio <4.5 2.3
I can also state that in the last 8 months or so, the various times I've had my glucose read, the highest it ever reached was 98 - and that's not a fasting reading, even though 98 would be acceptable for fasting levels.0 -
I'll post my last cholesterol profile right now, no need to wait 6 months.If all calories are truly created equal as I've seen on these forums and you truly believe that, then spend the next 6 months getting your calories from twinkies and bacon. If you survive we'll compare a blood panel.Component Standard Range Your Value Cholesterol <200 mg/dL 144 Triglycerides <150 mg/dL 60 HDL >40 mg/dL 63 LDL, Calculated <130 mg/dL 69 Chol/HDL Ratio <4.5 2.3
I can also state that in the last 8 months or so, the various times I've had my glucose read, the highest it ever reached was 98 - and that's not a fasting reading, even though 98 would be acceptable for fasting levels.
Nice reading but have you been eating only twinkies and bacon for 6 months?0 -
0
-
WinoGelato wrote: »Can you please point out where, in this thread or any other, that people advocate eating nothing but twinkies and bacon?
People advocate that there is 1)no such thing as unhealthy food. That 2)CICO trumps all. Now they can either 3)prove it or not. I'm betting not will be the option of choice.
Sidenote: does MFP offer a calories burned for googling?
1) With proper context and dosage, there's not. Just unhealthy diets. I'm sure you would say that broccoli is healthy and oreos are not. However, a diet of nothing but broccoli is not healthy at all and a balanced diet which includes a few Oreos throughout the week is not unhealthy. Certainly, some foods have more benefits than others but that doesn't make one healthy and the other unhealthy.
2) This is only used in reference to weight loss. Energy balance is the defining factor for whether or not weight loss will occur. If you burn more energy than you consume you will burn fat to make up the difference. If you consume more energy than you burn you will store the extra as fat for later use.
This is strictly in terms of weight loss. No one advocates that CICO is the determining factor for a healthy diet. For a healthy diet, proper intake of all the macro and micronutrients must occur. If strict adherence to what you define as "clean eating" helps you achieve that, good for you but it's not necessary. It is perfectly fine and feasible to attain a healthy balanced diet which includes a moderate amount of foods not deemed "clean."
3) The first law of thermodynamics already did.0 -
I always thought clean eating was washing your hands before you eat. That's how it was when I grew up!0
-
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »
I'll post my last cholesterol profile right now, no need to wait 6 months.If all calories are truly created equal as I've seen on these forums and you truly believe that, then spend the next 6 months getting your calories from twinkies and bacon. If you survive we'll compare a blood panel.Component Standard Range Your Value Cholesterol <200 mg/dL 144 Triglycerides <150 mg/dL 60 HDL >40 mg/dL 63 LDL, Calculated <130 mg/dL 69 Chol/HDL Ratio <4.5 2.3
I can also state that in the last 8 months or so, the various times I've had my glucose read, the highest it ever reached was 98 - and that's not a fasting reading, even though 98 would be acceptable for fasting levels.
Nice reading but have you been eating only twinkies and bacon for 6 months?
I actually don't care for twinkies, but UG77 isn't offering to similarly restricting himself to only broccoli and kale for 6 months.0 -
Also, not just twinkies, and 10 weeks but
http://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/11/08/twinkie.diet.professor/index.html
Haub kind of already did UG77's challenge in a more reasonable way, even though less reasonable that I've ever seen any one of the board's cicophants like myself recommend for a diet. And his health improved.For a class project, Haub limited himself to less than 1,800 calories a day. A man of Haub's pre-dieting size usually consumes about 2,600 calories daily. So he followed a basic principle of weight loss: He consumed significantly fewer calories than he burned.
His body mass index went from 28.8, considered overweight, to 24.9, which is normal. He now weighs 174 pounds.
But you might expect other indicators of health would have suffered. Not so.
Haub's "bad" cholesterol, or LDL, dropped 20 percent and his "good" cholesterol, or HDL, increased by 20 percent. He reduced the level of triglycerides, which are a form of fat, by 39 percent.0 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »
I'll post my last cholesterol profile right now, no need to wait 6 months.If all calories are truly created equal as I've seen on these forums and you truly believe that, then spend the next 6 months getting your calories from twinkies and bacon. If you survive we'll compare a blood panel.Component Standard Range Your Value Cholesterol <200 mg/dL 144 Triglycerides <150 mg/dL 60 HDL >40 mg/dL 63 LDL, Calculated <130 mg/dL 69 Chol/HDL Ratio <4.5 2.3
I can also state that in the last 8 months or so, the various times I've had my glucose read, the highest it ever reached was 98 - and that's not a fasting reading, even though 98 would be acceptable for fasting levels.
Nice reading but have you been eating only twinkies and bacon for 6 months?
I actually don't care for twinkies, but UG77 isn't offering to similarly restricting himself to only broccoli and kale for 6 months.
No, but my understanding was that he wanted to compare his results with someone who did.
Twinkies are often what I think of as a perfect example of food that is not clean, not even close to clean. I mean seriously, what is that stuff?? They are so weird.0 -
WinoGelato wrote: »Can you please point out where, in this thread or any other, that people advocate eating nothing but twinkies and bacon?
People advocate that there is no such thing as unhealthy food. That CICO trumps all. Now they can either prove it or not. I'm betting not will be the option of choice.
Sidenote: does MFP offer a calories burned for googling?
I'll refer you back to my first post in this thread - the 4th post of the thread.In re: the actual topic, I think it's quite obviously a good idea to center one's diet around whole, nutrient (macro and micro) dense foods.
Where I (obviously to anyone who knows my posting history) disagree with most self-proclaimed "clean eaters" is that there's a big and unsubtle difference between "centering" one's diet around such foods, but allowing for variance vs requiring the diet to be exclusively those foods (thus creating "good/clean/allowable" foods and "bad/unclean/avoid at all costs" foods.)
To both somehow interpret that as promoting "a diet of nothing but bacon and twinkies" AND to accuse other posters of being intentionally obtuse and trolls is perhaps one of the biggest cases of hypocrisy I've ever witnessed on MFP.0 -
juggernaut1974 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »Can you please point out where, in this thread or any other, that people advocate eating nothing but twinkies and bacon?
People advocate that there is no such thing as unhealthy food. That CICO trumps all. Now they can either prove it or not. I'm betting not will be the option of choice.
Sidenote: does MFP offer a calories burned for googling?
I'll refer you back to my first post in this thread - the 4th post of the thread.In re: the actual topic, I think it's quite obviously a good idea to center one's diet around whole, nutrient (macro and micro) dense foods.
Where I (obviously to anyone who knows my posting history) disagree with most self-proclaimed "clean eaters" is that there's a big and unsubtle difference between "centering" one's diet around such foods, but allowing for variance vs requiring the diet to be exclusively those foods (thus creating "good/clean/allowable" foods and "bad/unclean/avoid at all costs" foods.)
To both somehow interpret that as promoting "a diet of nothing but bacon and twinkies" AND to accuse other posters of being intentionally obtuse and trolls is perhaps one of the biggest cases of hypocrisy I've ever witnessed on MFP.
Yup0 -
-
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »
I'll post my last cholesterol profile right now, no need to wait 6 months.If all calories are truly created equal as I've seen on these forums and you truly believe that, then spend the next 6 months getting your calories from twinkies and bacon. If you survive we'll compare a blood panel.Component Standard Range Your Value Cholesterol <200 mg/dL 144 Triglycerides <150 mg/dL 60 HDL >40 mg/dL 63 LDL, Calculated <130 mg/dL 69 Chol/HDL Ratio <4.5 2.3
I can also state that in the last 8 months or so, the various times I've had my glucose read, the highest it ever reached was 98 - and that's not a fasting reading, even though 98 would be acceptable for fasting levels.
Nice reading but have you been eating only twinkies and bacon for 6 months?
I actually don't care for twinkies, but UG77 isn't offering to similarly restricting himself to only broccoli and kale for 6 months.
No, but my understanding was that he wanted to compare his results with someone who did.
Twinkies are often what I think of as a perfect example of food that is not clean, not even close to clean. I mean seriously, what is that stuff?? They are so weird.
Twinkies are simply golden sponge cake with cream filling. I understand how some are frightened by Hostess or the phallic shape, but they're not much different than the yellow sponge cake with cream filling below.
0 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »
I'll post my last cholesterol profile right now, no need to wait 6 months.If all calories are truly created equal as I've seen on these forums and you truly believe that, then spend the next 6 months getting your calories from twinkies and bacon. If you survive we'll compare a blood panel.Component Standard Range Your Value Cholesterol <200 mg/dL 144 Triglycerides <150 mg/dL 60 HDL >40 mg/dL 63 LDL, Calculated <130 mg/dL 69 Chol/HDL Ratio <4.5 2.3
I can also state that in the last 8 months or so, the various times I've had my glucose read, the highest it ever reached was 98 - and that's not a fasting reading, even though 98 would be acceptable for fasting levels.
Nice reading but have you been eating only twinkies and bacon for 6 months?
I actually don't care for twinkies, but UG77 isn't offering to similarly restricting himself to only broccoli and kale for 6 months.
No, but my understanding was that he wanted to compare his results with someone who did.
Twinkies are often what I think of as a perfect example of food that is not clean, not even close to clean. I mean seriously, what is that stuff?? They are so weird.
Twinkies are simply golden sponge cake with cream filling. I understand how some are frightened by Hostess or the phallic shape, but they're not much different than the yellow sponge cake with cream filling below.
Without being able to touch or taste that I'll have to take your word for it. But if I was betting gal, I'd bet they are very different in make-up, taste and texture.0 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »
I'll post my last cholesterol profile right now, no need to wait 6 months.If all calories are truly created equal as I've seen on these forums and you truly believe that, then spend the next 6 months getting your calories from twinkies and bacon. If you survive we'll compare a blood panel.Component Standard Range Your Value Cholesterol <200 mg/dL 144 Triglycerides <150 mg/dL 60 HDL >40 mg/dL 63 LDL, Calculated <130 mg/dL 69 Chol/HDL Ratio <4.5 2.3
I can also state that in the last 8 months or so, the various times I've had my glucose read, the highest it ever reached was 98 - and that's not a fasting reading, even though 98 would be acceptable for fasting levels.
Nice reading but have you been eating only twinkies and bacon for 6 months?
I actually don't care for twinkies, but UG77 isn't offering to similarly restricting himself to only broccoli and kale for 6 months.
No, but my understanding was that he wanted to compare his results with someone who did.
Twinkies are often what I think of as a perfect example of food that is not clean, not even close to clean. I mean seriously, what is that stuff?? They are so weird.
Twinkies are simply golden sponge cake with cream filling. I understand how some are frightened by Hostess or the phallic shape, but they're not much different than the yellow sponge cake with cream filling below.
Without being able to touch or taste that I'll have to take your word for it. But if I was betting gal, I'd bet they are very different in make-up, taste and texture.
The only difference I found between a Twinkie and someone's cake was the taste of the cream filling. Some use Cool-Whip, others make actual whipped cream, some is sweeter, etc..
Hey @diannethegeek , please add "Doesn't taste "right"/has wrong "texture"" to the definition list.0 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »
I'll post my last cholesterol profile right now, no need to wait 6 months.If all calories are truly created equal as I've seen on these forums and you truly believe that, then spend the next 6 months getting your calories from twinkies and bacon. If you survive we'll compare a blood panel.Component Standard Range Your Value Cholesterol <200 mg/dL 144 Triglycerides <150 mg/dL 60 HDL >40 mg/dL 63 LDL, Calculated <130 mg/dL 69 Chol/HDL Ratio <4.5 2.3
I can also state that in the last 8 months or so, the various times I've had my glucose read, the highest it ever reached was 98 - and that's not a fasting reading, even though 98 would be acceptable for fasting levels.
Nice reading but have you been eating only twinkies and bacon for 6 months?
I actually don't care for twinkies, but UG77 isn't offering to similarly restricting himself to only broccoli and kale for 6 months.
No, but my understanding was that he wanted to compare his results with someone who did.
Twinkies are often what I think of as a perfect example of food that is not clean, not even close to clean. I mean seriously, what is that stuff?? They are so weird.
Twinkies are simply golden sponge cake with cream filling. I understand how some are frightened by Hostess or the phallic shape, but they're not much different than the yellow sponge cake with cream filling below.
Without being able to touch or taste that I'll have to take your word for it. But if I was betting gal, I'd bet they are very different in make-up, taste and texture.
The only difference I found between a Twinkie and someone's cake was the taste of the cream filling. Some use Cool-Whip, others make actual whipped cream, some is sweeter, etc..
Hey @diannethegeek , please add "Doesn't taste "right"/has wrong "texture"" to the definition list.
I absolutely will not. It's not being offered as a definition of clean eating here. It might be a partial definition, but as I explained above -as silly as the list may be- I do try to keep it to just definitions given by self-professed clean eaters. Not things said in the heat of battle.0 -
stevencloser wrote: »The chocolate and sodas are on the outside isle of the grocery store for me, so I'm totally down with that definition.
In one of the grocery stores I shop at, soap/bodywash, shampoo and conditioner, toothpaste, and deodorant are on the outside. Blech. Sadly, they all put the chocolate in the middle
I have only encountered the idea of "clean eating" on the internet, and most of that on MFP.
I think part of the problem with the term and why it creates such debate is that culturally (U.S.) we have a really strong aversion to the general concept of things and people being "unclean" or dirty. There is so much negative connotation associated with unclean, much more so than the concept of unhealthy in my opinion. So when a person defines clean eating, those of us who don't eat by that definition take it as an implied judgement that we live in an "unclean" way and lash out to defend ourselves.
As mentioned early in this post, there does also seem to be an anti-intellectualism component to many/most/all of the listed definitions. I'm particularly talking about the ones mentioning scientific terms and words that are unpronounceable. I think most clean eaters would agree that water is the best liquid to consume (not talking about Flint, Michigan or Navajo Nation). But if an ingredient list were to include dihydrogen monoxide rather than water, people would freak out. Most of us with a stronger background in and understanding of science find this offensive and obnoxious, but people who hate or fear science don't want to listen to our attacks on the BS they have bought into.
This also leads into the frequent discussion threads of people wanting to do cleanses to get rid of the "toxins" in their bodies. Yet, I have never seen any of those OPs actually define what those toxins are or why their body needs the assistance of a cleanse. I work in a place with many things I think most people would categorize as a toxin. If you consume one, you will have a very bad day (assuming you survive)! I don't recommend drinking the hydrofluoric acid or eating uranium, but if you do, a cleanse will not be your biggest concern.0 -
...If all calories are truly created equal as I've seen on these forums and you truly believe that, then spend the next 6 months getting your calories from twinkies and bacon. If you survive we'll compare a blood panel.
Ahhh, there it is. Thank you for trotting out the usual "clean eating" strawman and proving the point I made in a previous post. Anybody who doesn't "eat clean" is a junk-swilling, nearly dead slob. There can be no middle ground, ever. You're either eating fresh fruits and vegetables grown high on a mountain and harvested by virgin unicorns, or you're wallowing in filth while glomming down bacon-wrapped twinkies. Simply not possible in the mind of an orthorexic that there could be a reasonable, moderate middle ground which is still balanced and healthy.0
Apologies... forrinner... 
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 392.1K Introduce Yourself
- 43.6K Getting Started
- 259.9K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.7K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.4K Fitness and Exercise
- 403 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.8K Motivation and Support
- 7.9K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.4K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.4K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions