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
1235746

Replies

  • hectorh82
    hectorh82 Posts: 110 Member
    Options
    clean eating is a term used by certain people on pay roll lol.. example, after i became certified (long ago) in nutrition we where given a list of supplements to push and using certain words like "healthier" "substitute" "better"
    clean eating (the phrase) is just a marketing ploy to get you to buy more of certain foods!! and we health lovers eat it up due to fear and give in. in "real life" clean foods are common sense!! loaded baked potatoe or just a baked potatoe? bag of cheetoes or bowl of grapenuts and milk.. thats all it really is.. this is my opinion of course and we all have one lol.
  • AnvilHead
    AnvilHead Posts: 18,344 Member
    Options
    It's about the silliest word ever for food. We all know what healthy is. Just do it.

    "Healthy" is no less a vague, subjective term. There are people who believe that "healthy" means eating nothing but plant-based foods. There are others who believe that "healthy" is coffee with a huge dollop of butter in it for breakfast and a diet consisting of 80-90% fat. Some seem to believe that if you even go near anything with HFCS, GMO or sugar, you'll immediately bloat up with huge tumors. There's just as much woo and derp about "healthy" as there is about "clean". The thing they have in common is that context and dosage are usually not taken into consideration.
  • zyxst
    zyxst Posts: 9,134 Member
    Options
    sullus wrote: »
    Another one that really gets me is the honey vs high fructose corn syrup debate ... one is awesome and clean and great for you, and the other is the processed scourge of the earth, killing us all.

    But they're nearly the same thing. Their Glucose to Fructose ratios are quite similar and they act the same way in the body.

    They're both made pretty much the same way too. Both start with sugar water from plants, add enzymes to convert about 45% of the sugar to fructose, evaporate until sticky.

    Considering how honey is produced by bees, it's definitely not "clean" (unless eating bee puke is on the Okay to Eat list).
  • Ketzalitzli2
    Ketzalitzli2 Posts: 38 Member
    Options
    All I know is, I started eating better and cutting out processed foods and loading down on carbs about 2 weeks ago and started doing my workouts and then today I ate an asiago bagel with cream cheese and I feel like I'm about to die right now! So eating clean or not, no more bagels for me! haha

    That sounds awful. But it also sounds like it may be an allergy or intolerance of some kind to one of the ingredients in the bagel. Which seems like it would be a different subject than clean eating.

    I used to have them all the time but I think because I've been watching more of what I eat and cutting out things not so good for me, my stomach was just not ready for the onslaught! hehe.. But I do get what u mean.
  • Need2Exerc1se
    Need2Exerc1se Posts: 13,576 Member
    Options
    zyxst wrote: »
    sullus wrote: »
    Another one that really gets me is the honey vs high fructose corn syrup debate ... one is awesome and clean and great for you, and the other is the processed scourge of the earth, killing us all.

    But they're nearly the same thing. Their Glucose to Fructose ratios are quite similar and they act the same way in the body.

    They're both made pretty much the same way too. Both start with sugar water from plants, add enzymes to convert about 45% of the sugar to fructose, evaporate until sticky.

    Considering how honey is produced by bees, it's definitely not "clean" (unless eating bee puke is on the Okay to Eat list).

    Raw honey is natural, HFCS is not. So one is clean and the other is not.
  • sullus
    sullus Posts: 2,839 Member
    Options
    hectorh82 wrote: »
    clean eating is a term used by certain people on pay roll lol.. example, after i became certified (long ago) in nutrition we where given a list of supplements to push and using certain words like "healthier" "substitute" "better"
    clean eating (the phrase) is just a marketing ploy to get you to buy more of certain foods!! and we health lovers eat it up due to fear and give in. in "real life" clean foods are common sense!! loaded baked potatoe or just a baked potatoe? bag of cheetoes or bowl of grapenuts and milk.. thats all it really is.. this is my opinion of course and we all have one lol.

    Bag of cheetos EVERY TIME. As someone who suffers from hereditary hemochromatosis, the 122% of your daily iron that the grape nuts contains is potentially toxic to me. The cheetos are healthier.

    And on the baked potato example - I know people who are WAY into the glycemic index thing, and adding the "loaded" to the potato significantly slows down the carb absorption and is therefore "healthier". In ISOLATION, the plain potato may sound "better" for .. reasons. But if I'm looking at my macros for the day, and I have a whole bunch of fat and carbs available, the loaded baked potato can be a heck of a healthy choice.

    The simple fact of the matter is that humans can eat an enormous variety of things and remain healthy. To me, the "healthiest" diet has always been the one with the most variety, regardless of if an individual item can claim some arbitrary definition of its worthiness.

    All answers are correct. Everyone gets a trophy.
  • sullus
    sullus Posts: 2,839 Member
    Options
    zyxst wrote: »
    sullus wrote: »
    Another one that really gets me is the honey vs high fructose corn syrup debate ... one is awesome and clean and great for you, and the other is the processed scourge of the earth, killing us all.

    But they're nearly the same thing. Their Glucose to Fructose ratios are quite similar and they act the same way in the body.

    They're both made pretty much the same way too. Both start with sugar water from plants, add enzymes to convert about 45% of the sugar to fructose, evaporate until sticky.

    Considering how honey is produced by bees, it's definitely not "clean" (unless eating bee puke is on the Okay to Eat list).

    Raw honey is natural, HFCS is not. So one is clean and the other is not.

    They're made the same way.
  • Need2Exerc1se
    Need2Exerc1se Posts: 13,576 Member
    Options
    sullus wrote: »
    zyxst wrote: »
    sullus wrote: »
    Another one that really gets me is the honey vs high fructose corn syrup debate ... one is awesome and clean and great for you, and the other is the processed scourge of the earth, killing us all.

    But they're nearly the same thing. Their Glucose to Fructose ratios are quite similar and they act the same way in the body.

    They're both made pretty much the same way too. Both start with sugar water from plants, add enzymes to convert about 45% of the sugar to fructose, evaporate until sticky.

    Considering how honey is produced by bees, it's definitely not "clean" (unless eating bee puke is on the Okay to Eat list).

    Raw honey is natural, HFCS is not. So one is clean and the other is not.

    They're made the same way.

    Um, no I don't think so. What kind of bees make HFCS?
  • erialcelyob
    erialcelyob Posts: 341 Member
    Options
    I use it as a personal term to gauge whether I believe I'm eating well, for me it is when I have healthy whole, home cooked foods, minimal out wrappers and not junk
  • sullus
    sullus Posts: 2,839 Member
    Options
    sullus wrote: »
    zyxst wrote: »
    sullus wrote: »
    Another one that really gets me is the honey vs high fructose corn syrup debate ... one is awesome and clean and great for you, and the other is the processed scourge of the earth, killing us all.

    But they're nearly the same thing. Their Glucose to Fructose ratios are quite similar and they act the same way in the body.

    They're both made pretty much the same way too. Both start with sugar water from plants, add enzymes to convert about 45% of the sugar to fructose, evaporate until sticky.

    Considering how honey is produced by bees, it's definitely not "clean" (unless eating bee puke is on the Okay to Eat list).

    Raw honey is natural, HFCS is not. So one is clean and the other is not.

    They're made the same way.

    Um, no I don't think so. What kind of bees make HFCS?

    oh. You care whether humans or bees made it.

    Either way, it's sugar water + enzymes + time.
  • AnvilHead
    AnvilHead Posts: 18,344 Member
    Options
    hectorh82 wrote: »
    clean eating is a term used by certain people on pay roll lol.. example, after i became certified (long ago) in nutrition we where given a list of supplements to push and using certain words like "healthier" "substitute" "better"
    clean eating (the phrase) is just a marketing ploy to get you to buy more of certain foods!! and we health lovers eat it up due to fear and give in. in "real life" clean foods are common sense!! loaded baked potatoe or just a baked potatoe? bag of cheetoes or bowl of grapenuts and milk.. thats all it really is.. this is my opinion of course and we all have one lol.

    I'd think that somebody who's "certified in nutrition" (whatever that means) would have a grasp of context within the overall diet rather than demonizing individual foods/meals. Subsisting entirely on ice cream, pop tarts, cheetos and cookies would be a bad thing, but there's absolutely nothing detrimental about eating them in moderation on an occasional basis if one is staying within their calorie goals and meeting their macro/micronutrient requirements.
  • Need2Exerc1se
    Need2Exerc1se Posts: 13,576 Member
    Options
    sullus wrote: »
    sullus wrote: »
    zyxst wrote: »
    sullus wrote: »
    Another one that really gets me is the honey vs high fructose corn syrup debate ... one is awesome and clean and great for you, and the other is the processed scourge of the earth, killing us all.

    But they're nearly the same thing. Their Glucose to Fructose ratios are quite similar and they act the same way in the body.

    They're both made pretty much the same way too. Both start with sugar water from plants, add enzymes to convert about 45% of the sugar to fructose, evaporate until sticky.

    Considering how honey is produced by bees, it's definitely not "clean" (unless eating bee puke is on the Okay to Eat list).

    Raw honey is natural, HFCS is not. So one is clean and the other is not.

    They're made the same way.

    Um, no I don't think so. What kind of bees make HFCS?

    oh. You care whether humans or bees made it.

    Either way, it's sugar water + enzymes + time.

    For the label of clean, yes. But in what universe does what a food contains = "made the same way"?
  • hectorh82
    hectorh82 Posts: 110 Member
    Options
    sullus wrote: »
    hectorh82 wrote: »
    clean eating is a term used by certain people on pay roll lol.. example, after i became certified (long ago) in nutrition we where given a list of supplements to push and using certain words like "healthier" "substitute" "better"
    clean eating (the phrase) is just a marketing ploy to get you to buy more of certain foods!! and we health lovers eat it up due to fear and give in. in "real life" clean foods are common sense!! loaded baked potatoe or just a baked potatoe? bag of cheetoes or bowl of grapenuts and milk.. thats all it really is.. this is my opinion of course and we all have one lol.

    Bag of cheetos EVERY TIME. As someone who suffers from hereditary hemochromatosis, the 122% of your daily iron that the grape nuts contains is potentially toxic to me. The cheetos are healthier.

    And on the baked potato example - I know people who are WAY into the glycemic index thing, and adding the "loaded" to the potato significantly slows down the carb absorption and is therefore "healthier". In ISOLATION, the plain potato may sound "better" for .. reasons. But if I'm looking at my macros for the day, and I have a whole bunch of fat and carbs available, the loaded baked potato can be a heck of a healthy choice.

    The simple fact of the matter is that humans can eat an enormous variety of things and remain healthy. To me, the "healthiest" diet has always been the one with the most variety, regardless of if an individual item can claim some arbitrary definition of its worthiness.

    All answers are correct. Everyone gets a trophy.

    U would be correct, variation of people and the variation of foods is vast.. know your body and base your decisions on those facts lol..
  • auddii
    auddii Posts: 15,357 Member
    Options
    sullus wrote: »
    hectorh82 wrote: »
    clean eating is a term used by certain people on pay roll lol.. example, after i became certified (long ago) in nutrition we where given a list of supplements to push and using certain words like "healthier" "substitute" "better"
    clean eating (the phrase) is just a marketing ploy to get you to buy more of certain foods!! and we health lovers eat it up due to fear and give in. in "real life" clean foods are common sense!! loaded baked potatoe or just a baked potatoe? bag of cheetoes or bowl of grapenuts and milk.. thats all it really is.. this is my opinion of course and we all have one lol.

    Bag of cheetos EVERY TIME. As someone who suffers from hereditary hemochromatosis, the 122% of your daily iron that the grape nuts contains is potentially toxic to me. The cheetos are healthier.

    And on the baked potato example - I know people who are WAY into the glycemic index thing, and adding the "loaded" to the potato significantly slows down the carb absorption and is therefore "healthier". In ISOLATION, the plain potato may sound "better" for .. reasons. But if I'm looking at my macros for the day, and I have a whole bunch of fat and carbs available, the loaded baked potato can be a heck of a healthy choice.

    The simple fact of the matter is that humans can eat an enormous variety of things and remain healthy. To me, the "healthiest" diet has always been the one with the most variety, regardless of if an individual item can claim some arbitrary definition of its worthiness.

    All answers are correct. Everyone gets a trophy.

    Participation awards are for losers. It's actually our trivia team name.
  • janejellyroll
    janejellyroll Posts: 25,763 Member
    Options
    sullus wrote: »
    sullus wrote: »
    zyxst wrote: »
    sullus wrote: »
    Another one that really gets me is the honey vs high fructose corn syrup debate ... one is awesome and clean and great for you, and the other is the processed scourge of the earth, killing us all.

    But they're nearly the same thing. Their Glucose to Fructose ratios are quite similar and they act the same way in the body.

    They're both made pretty much the same way too. Both start with sugar water from plants, add enzymes to convert about 45% of the sugar to fructose, evaporate until sticky.

    Considering how honey is produced by bees, it's definitely not "clean" (unless eating bee puke is on the Okay to Eat list).

    Raw honey is natural, HFCS is not. So one is clean and the other is not.

    They're made the same way.

    Um, no I don't think so. What kind of bees make HFCS?

    oh. You care whether humans or bees made it.

    Either way, it's sugar water + enzymes + time.

    Why is something natural when a bee makes it and unnatural when a human makes it?

    I guess we can add "If it is made by an insect or animal, it's clean and if it is made by a human, it isn't" to the list of clean/not clean attributes.
  • sullus
    sullus Posts: 2,839 Member
    Options
    sullus wrote: »
    sullus wrote: »
    zyxst wrote: »
    sullus wrote: »
    Another one that really gets me is the honey vs high fructose corn syrup debate ... one is awesome and clean and great for you, and the other is the processed scourge of the earth, killing us all.

    But they're nearly the same thing. Their Glucose to Fructose ratios are quite similar and they act the same way in the body.

    They're both made pretty much the same way too. Both start with sugar water from plants, add enzymes to convert about 45% of the sugar to fructose, evaporate until sticky.

    Considering how honey is produced by bees, it's definitely not "clean" (unless eating bee puke is on the Okay to Eat list).

    Raw honey is natural, HFCS is not. So one is clean and the other is not.

    They're made the same way.

    Um, no I don't think so. What kind of bees make HFCS?

    oh. You care whether humans or bees made it.

    Either way, it's sugar water + enzymes + time.

    For the label of clean, yes. But in what universe does what a food contains = "made the same way"?

    OK.

    They both contain about 20% water and 80% sugar

    The sugar in both consists of about 40% Fructose 55% glucose, and 5% other sugars

    Honey has some pollen in it. Maybe a leg or 2. And some wax.

    So, as I said - they both are made via similar processes, and have similar contents.
  • DaddieCat
    DaddieCat Posts: 3,646 Member
    edited February 2016
    Options
    sullus wrote: »
    sullus wrote: »
    zyxst wrote: »
    sullus wrote: »
    Another one that really gets me is the honey vs high fructose corn syrup debate ... one is awesome and clean and great for you, and the other is the processed scourge of the earth, killing us all.

    But they're nearly the same thing. Their Glucose to Fructose ratios are quite similar and they act the same way in the body.

    They're both made pretty much the same way too. Both start with sugar water from plants, add enzymes to convert about 45% of the sugar to fructose, evaporate until sticky.

    Considering how honey is produced by bees, it's definitely not "clean" (unless eating bee puke is on the Okay to Eat list).

    Raw honey is natural, HFCS is not. So one is clean and the other is not.

    They're made the same way.

    Um, no I don't think so. What kind of bees make HFCS?

    oh. You care whether humans or bees made it.

    Either way, it's sugar water + enzymes + time.

    Why is something natural when a bee makes it and unnatural when a human makes it?

    I guess we can add "If it is made by an insect or animal, it's clean and if it is made by a human, it isn't" to the list of clean/not clean attributes.

    There are quite a few things made by animals that I wouldn't eat... think fecal matter, owl pellets, etc. But I guess that's "clean"? I'm so confused now.

    *ETA maybe I'll just be a Breatharian... but is that clean with air pollutants? I think I might die... nothing left to eat. :'(
  • WinoGelato
    WinoGelato Posts: 13,454 Member
    Options
    Well, I might as well do something with this list and the new debate forums seems as good a place as any for it.

    Once upon a time, I was under the belief that clean eating had a simple definition. It was cooking from scratch using as simple ingredients as possible.

    MFP has disillusioned me of that idea.

    Here on MFP I've seen clean eating defined in a few different ways. These are all answers given by users when asked what clean eating is. Some of them have been formatted to fit the list better, but many of them are copy/pasted directly from their original posts. Be sure to read to the end, where things really start to diverge.
    • Nothing but minimally processed foods.
    • Absolutely no processed foods.
    • Shop only the outside of the grocery store.
    • Nothing out of a box, jar, or can.
    • Only food that's not in a box or hermetically sealed bag, or from e.g. McDonald's.
    • No take-out or junk food at all.
    • Nothing at all with a barcode.
    • Nothing with more than 5 ingredients.
    • Nothing with more than 4 ingredients.
    • Nothing with more than 3 ingredients.
    • Nothing with more than 1 ingredient.
    • No added preservatives.
    • No added chemicals.
    • No chemicals, preservatives, etc. at all.
    • No ingredients that you can't pronounce.
    • No ingredients that sound like they came out of a chemistry book.
    • Nothing that is processed and comes in a package or wrapper, or has any ingredient that sounds scientific.
    • Don't eat products that have a TV commercial.
    • Don't eat foods that have a mascot.
    • If it grows or had a mother, it is ok to eat it.
    • Don't eat products that have a longer shelf life than you do.
    • Eat "food" and not "food-like substances."
    • No added sugar.
    • No added refined sugar.
    • Swap white sugar for brown.
    • No "white" foods.
    • Nothing but lean meats, fruits, and vegetables.
    • Nothing but lean meats, fruits, vegetables, and beans.
    • A plant-based whole food diet.
    • Eat foods as close to their natural state as POSSIBLE, and little to no processed food.
    • Only meat from grass-fed animals and free-range chickens.
    • Only pesticide-free foods.
    • Nothing that causes your body bloat or inflammation.
    • No trigger foods, nothing from fast food chains, nothing in the junk food aisles, and no high gmo foods.
    • No red meat, no sweets, no pasta, no alcohol, no bread, no soda, nothing but fresh fruits and vegetables, complex carbohydrates and lean proteins.
    • Eat a plant based diet consisting of whole plant foods.
    • No bad carbs and processed foods.
    • Anything that makes a better choice.
    • Not cheating on whatever diet you are on.
    • Any food that doesn't make it difficult to hit your macro/micro targets.
    • Clean eating means eating optimally.

    I like to note that under some of those definitions, Fritos are a clean food (only 3 ingredients). Under some of them, eggs and pistachios are not.

    So what is clean eating? And is it a useful descriptor at all?




    Since there's been some confusion on other threads, I want to note that this is on the Nutrition Debate board. So it's going to be, you know, a debate. Bring your opinions. Bring your dictionaries. Bring your studies. But if you don't want people to respond to your posts with questions or rebuttals, this might not be the board for you.

    I feel terrible about the poor, dirty, 2 ingredient foods based on this list. They must feel so left out knowing that foods with 1, 3, 4 and 5 ingredients are all considered clean but they are not. I guess that means Nice Cream with bananas and PB2 aren't clean after all. DARN IT!
  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    Options
    sullus wrote: »
    sullus wrote: »
    Now here's a question. I like fries.
    I buy frozen, noname brand, packaged fries in a bag with barcode and everything. -> Definitely processed food, no doubt about it.
    They only have 2 ingredients though: potatoes and sunflower oil. -> Nothing you can't pronounce and not exceeding the magical 4 ingredients.

    Clean or not?
    I'd bet you a tenner if we asked 100 clean eaters without each knowing what the others said, the answers would be split almost 50/50.

    I go with a similar example on Cape Cod potato chips and Fritos. Each is as close to nature as possible (washed, sliced/ground and cooked), has only 3 ingredients which can be pronounced (chips: Potatoes, sunflower oil, salt; Fritos: Corn, corn oil, salt)

    They both meet nearly every definition proposed above (can't meet them all because some are contradictory)

    Sure they both have an added chemical preservative (salt). But it seems like the clean eating people are cool with that one chemical preservative.

    Fritos are pretty far from the natural state of corn.

    Because they're ground?

    Does that mean that corn tortillas aren't "clean"? What about polenta?

    Or is it something else?

    Yes, because they are ground. Technically, shucked, decobbed (or whatever you call removing the kernels from the cob) and ground. I don't see how tortillas any different, polenta maybe a little cleaner as a single food.

    Would all ground foods be unclean or is this specific to corn?

    Whelp .. that knocks coffee and tea off the list of clean foods.

    It would also remove nut butters, which I think are generally considered okay for clean eaters (but I'm not sure). Also ground meats and everyone I know personally who eats clean will eat ground meats.

    And flour, but I suppose that's no surprise.
  • Need2Exerc1se
    Need2Exerc1se Posts: 13,576 Member
    Options
    sullus wrote: »
    sullus wrote: »
    sullus wrote: »
    zyxst wrote: »
    sullus wrote: »
    Another one that really gets me is the honey vs high fructose corn syrup debate ... one is awesome and clean and great for you, and the other is the processed scourge of the earth, killing us all.

    But they're nearly the same thing. Their Glucose to Fructose ratios are quite similar and they act the same way in the body.

    They're both made pretty much the same way too. Both start with sugar water from plants, add enzymes to convert about 45% of the sugar to fructose, evaporate until sticky.

    Considering how honey is produced by bees, it's definitely not "clean" (unless eating bee puke is on the Okay to Eat list).

    Raw honey is natural, HFCS is not. So one is clean and the other is not.

    They're made the same way.

    Um, no I don't think so. What kind of bees make HFCS?

    oh. You care whether humans or bees made it.

    Either way, it's sugar water + enzymes + time.

    For the label of clean, yes. But in what universe does what a food contains = "made the same way"?

    OK.

    They both contain about 20% water and 80% sugar

    The sugar in both consists of about 40% Fructose 55% glucose, and 5% other sugars

    Honey has some pollen in it. Maybe a leg or 2. And some wax.

    So, as I said - they both are made via similar processes, and have similar contents.

    Nothing in your statement or in reality backs up the bolded part. The rest may be true. I don't know really but it's irrelevant. Clean = natural. Honey = natural. HFCS = not natural. So, honey = clean and HFCS =/= clean.