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?
Replies
-
SingRunTing wrote: »
What if bees grind it?
My bees aren't that well trained yet, but I'm working on it! ;-)1 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »
What if you grind the beef yourself?
The concept that something is "clean" if I prepare it myself but "not clean" if I pay someone else to prepare it for me is bizarre. But I'm going to guess that there are at least some people who might adopt that standard.1 -
So maybe if one was to grow and grind their own corn at home and make Fritos out of it, Fritos would be "clean". But not if another human or <gasp, heaven forbid> humans who work at a company made them!
Seems legit.
I'm going to guess that for some people if the company is "Frito Lay" then it isn't clean, but if it is a small, local company, then it is clean. Yet another layer of distinction I've seen in the forums -- that local foods are somehow cleaner than non-local foods and that foods made by smaller companies are cleaner than foods made by larger ones.1 -
It's one of the principles (and the biggest pseudoscientific fallacy) of Paleo/ancestral diets.
But in the more general "clean eating" context it usually means our grandparents or great-grandparents or some such.
Which is then clarified to mean them in their youth.
And then often, weirdly, used to say that flour and sugar should be banned.0 -
diannethegeek wrote: »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 don't know why people argue about this so much on this board. Everywhere else I post agrees that clean eating is only eating foods you could grow/prepare yourself. ypu don't have to do it yourself, you can buy them,but they can't require a laboratory or ingredients you can't buy in a grocery store. So butter is clean (because you could get milk and churn it yourself if you had the time) but margarine isn't because you couldn't make it in your kitchen. Likewise peanut butter made from peanuts and salt is clean. Protein powder isn't. It's pretty obvious really0 -
Heartisalonelyhunter wrote: »
I don't know why people argue about this so much on this board. Everywhere else I post agrees that clean eating is only eating foods you could grow/prepare yourself. ypu don't have to do it yourself, you can buy them,but they can't require a laboratory or ingredients you can't buy in a grocery store. So butter is clean (because you could get milk and churn it yourself if you had the time) but margarine isn't because you couldn't make it in your kitchen. Likewise peanut butter made from peanuts and salt is clean. Protein powder isn't. It's pretty obvious really
What if you are a chemist?
But seriously, under this definition chips and ice cream and french fries and bread and pasta and ground beef would all be clean, and many people on these boards have asserted that they are not.1 -
janejellyroll wrote: »
I'm going to guess that for some people if the company is "Frito Lay" then it isn't clean, but if it is a small, local company, then it is clean. Yet another layer of distinction I've seen in the forums -- that local foods are somehow cleaner than non-local foods and that foods made by smaller companies are cleaner than foods made by larger ones.
But, I'm from Plano, where Frito Lay is headquartered. I'm now confused. When I go home to visit my parents, is it clean, but when I'm home in Houston it's unclean?1 -
Heartisalonelyhunter wrote: »
I don't know why people argue about this so much on this board. Everywhere else I post agrees that clean eating is only eating foods you could grow/prepare yourself. ypu don't have to do it yourself, you can buy them,but they can't require a laboratory or ingredients you can't buy in a grocery store. So butter is clean (because you could get milk and churn it yourself if you had the time) but margarine isn't because you couldn't make it in your kitchen. Likewise peanut butter made from peanuts and salt is clean. Protein powder isn't. It's pretty obvious really
Everyone in this *thread* doesn't agree with your definition. We've got people arguing that ground foods (like polenta and peanut butter and ground beef) aren't clean. And I've seen people argue that dairy isn't clean.
Your definitions may be obvious to you, but they aren't universal. Plenty of those who think they are eating clean disagree with you.1 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »
What if you are a chemist?
But seriously, under this definition chips and ice cream and french fries and bread and pasta and ground beef would all be clean, and many people on these boards have asserted that they are not.
I know they have asserted it but meh. Those things are all clean to me in certain circumstances (French fries would have to be fried in lard, for instance)0 -
janejellyroll wrote: »
Everyone in this *thread* doesn't agree with your definition. We've got people arguing that ground foods (like polenta and peanut butter and ground beef) aren't clean. And I've seen people argue that dairy isn't clean.
Your definitions may be obvious to you, but they aren't universal. Plenty of those who think they are eating clean disagree with you.
Vegans don't consider butter "clean".
Paleo dieters don't consider peanuts "clean".
Whelp. There goes another arbitrary definition of "clean eating" out the window.1 -
That's part of the debate we're playing with here. Too many people look at clean/unclean as a binary decision. I agree with you that it's not; it is a continuum. Take Strawberries:
Wild strawberry picked and eaten in a field
Farm-raised strawberry picked and eaten in a field.
Farm-raised strawberry picked by machine, washed, and boxed for sale.
Farm-raised strawberry picked by machine, washed, sliced, frozen, and boxed for sale.
Farm-raised strawberry picked by machine, washed, sliced, mixed with a little sugar, frozen, and boxed for sale.
Farm raised strawberry processed into strawberry preserves ...
etc. (I got tired of typing)
Oh, I get it. The ones eaten in a field are dirty because they haven't been washed yet!
Or...oh...that's not what you meant?
So then at what point did they start getting unclean? When they were sliced or when they were smooshed up for preserves?
Or maybe this is all just a silly construct and none of the strawberries you describe are any cleaner than the other.0 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »
Raw honey is natural, HFCS is not. So one is clean and the other is not.
So if a bug makes it then it's clean but if a person makes it then it's unclean?
Brilliant.0 -
Heartisalonelyhunter wrote: »
I know they have asserted it but meh. Those things are all clean to me in certain circumstances (French fries would have to be fried in lard, for instance)
That's kind of the point of this thread.
If people can't agree on the basics, is it a useful label or a useful piece of advice?0 -
Heartisalonelyhunter wrote: »
I know they have asserted it but meh. Those things are all clean to me in certain circumstances (French fries would have to be fried in lard, for instance)
So you would reject the majority of the definitions on the list posted in favor of your definition (only eating foods you can grow and prepare yourself). But surely you realize that different people use different definitions, right?
Someone who defines "clean" as organic food may reject your lard-fried french fries because the pork wasn't organic. Someone who defines "clean" as plant-based may reject your lard-friend french fries because they have lard. Someone who defines "clean" as optimal eating (as someone did, in this very thread) may reject them because the macros aren't in their definition of optimal. Someone who doesn't eat products that have a TV commercial would reject them due to the ad campaigns for pork and Idaho potatoes. And it goes on and on.
You can -- with your definition of clean -- figure out a way to eat fries. But it's far from obvious that your definition is the only one.0 -
But, I'm from Plano, where Frito Lay is headquartered. I'm now confused. When I go home to visit my parents, is it clean, but when I'm home in Houston it's unclean?
Y. . . yes?
Yes. We'll go with yes.3 -
Vegans don't consider butter "clean".
Paleo dieters don't consider peanuts "clean".
Whelp. There goes another arbitrary definition of "clean eating" out the window.
No vegans don't consider butter vegan. And paleo eaters don't consider peanuts paleo. That's an additional dietary restriction.
OP I see your point but as I said the pointless arguments about clean only seem to happen on this board because people seem to take it personally that some people don't want to eat artificial ingredients. Everywhere else I post that is the standard.0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »
Unless the human is you and you make it at home, maybe? Or you watch someone else make it?
You read my mind. I bought some beef today, and I started to wonder if it would be clean, because I got the butcher to cut it into pieces for me. But I realized that has to be OK, because I watched him closely as he did it.2 -
Heartisalonelyhunter wrote: »
I know they have asserted it but meh. Those things are all clean to me in certain circumstances (French fries would have to be fried in lard, for instance)
Wait, lard is acceptable, but oil is not. Does pressing things make them unclean?
NOW WE'RE LOSING WINE TOO?! You people are monsters.1 -
JoshuaMcAllister wrote: »
And the prize for the most useful comment of the day..
Oh wait did I say useful I meant useless.
Giving yourself trophies?0 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »
I could see that. It rides a fine line with my familiarity with the term clean. I'd say it's not totally clean but it's cleaner than most packaged fries.
Based on what criteria?0 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »
I'm not overly comfortable with the term 'unclean' when it comes to food. I'm old school and never heard it described as anything other clean in varying degrees (clean, sort of clean, not clean, stuff like that). And there is plenty of room for argument even amongst those that share my definition as it's not a black and white type definition. Lots of gray.
But to me, no. Ground foods would not be clean. Those ground with the bran and germ included would cleaner than those with it removed. Those with it removed that are then bleached (e.g. white flour) are not clean.
Can you explain the difference between "not clean" and "unclean" please?0 -
Heartisalonelyhunter wrote: »
No vegans don't consider butter vegan. And paleo eaters don't consider peanuts paleo. That's an additional dietary restriction.
OP I see your point but as I said the pointless arguments about clean only seem to happen on this board because people seem to take it personally that some people don't want to eat artificial ingredients. Everywhere else I post that is the standard.
And I think that attributing it to "taking it personally" or personal offense ignores the broader point. If two clean eaters in this very thread can't agree, I don't think that you can say that the argument is solely caused by those who aren't clean eaters or that it's pointless. I've laid out my point and my reasoning for this thread several times upthread.
Although, I do tend to take it personally when clean eaters tell me, for instance, that I'll get cancer for eating the way I do (though they hardly ever know the details of my diet or health history). But that's not on topic for this thread.1 -
Wait, lard is acceptable, but oil is not. Does pressing things make them unclean?
NOW WE'RE LOSING WINE TOO?! You people are monsters.
Wine can happen by accident in nature. But if the process is guided by a person, it's suddenly unnatural.
RE oils: Some are pressed, but some are extracted with hexane which is then (mostly) burned off. Proponents of "clean eating" will use the pressed, but avoid the solvent-extracted oils.0 -
diannethegeek wrote: »
And I think that attributing it to "taking it personally" or personal offense ignores the broader point. If two clean eaters in this very thread can't agree, I don't think that you can say that the argument is solely caused by those who aren't clean eaters or that it's pointless. I've laid out my point and my reasoning for this thread several times upthread.
Although, I do tend to take it personally when clean eaters tell me, for instance, that I'll get cancer for eating the way I do (though they hardly ever know the details of my diet or health history). But that's not on topic for this thread.
But it's just semantics. It's the same if you asked two people to define a 'healthy' diet. Or 'beautiful'. There are always going to be different definitions of any word. But the OP asked what is clean and I told her the standards definition across the other boards I frequent.
Also to whoever asked about wine, you can make wine yourself with enough grapes and time. But you could never make canola oil in your kitchen.0 -
Heartisalonelyhunter wrote: »
But it's just semantics. It's the same if you asked two people to define a 'healthy' diet. Or 'beautiful'. There are always going to be different definitions of a word. But the OP asked what is clean and I told her the standards definition across the other boards I frequent.
Also to whoever asked about wine, you can make wine yourself with enough grapes and time. But you could never make canola oil in your kitchen.
I am the OP. I did ask what clean eating is. I also asked if it was a useful descriptor at the end of the post. And I added a disclaimer that this would be a post where replies would likely have some amount of banter and rebuttal.0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »
So beef is clean (let's say grass-fed, from a local farm, processing passes muster), but if you have a grinder at home and grind it it becomes not clean? I really don't get that.
This is why the term drives me batty. It's applying a label that sounds extremely judgmental to foods that are no worse in any way.
*shrug* Grinding is a process that changes the food from it's natural form. The further the food is from it's natural form the less clean it is. Ground beef is cleaner than cured beef, but it's still not 100% clean. I can't think how grass fed makes beef cleaner.
Seems simple to me but then I don't think of the label as a judgment anymore than I'd think of 'sweet' as a judgment. It either is or is not, or it may be just a little.0 -
Carlos_421 wrote: »
So if a bug makes it then it's clean but if a person makes it then it's unclean?
Brilliant.
It's just the meaning of the word natural. Nothing man-made is natural.0 -
diannethegeek wrote: »
That's kind of the point of this thread.
If people can't agree on the basics, is it a useful label or a useful piece of advice?
If only advice that is universally agreed upon is useful, what would qualify?0 -
Banter and rebuttal is fine. But I wonder what you were looking for, in the end? Obviously it's useful to the people who use it. As I said, is 'healthy' no longer a useful word because different people have different idea on what 'healthy eating' means? Shall we all decide to ban certain words from the English language because their meaning is fluid?diannethegeek wrote: »
I am the OP. I did ask what clean eating is. I also asked if it was a useful descriptor at the end of the post. And I added a disclaimer that this would be a post where replies would likely have some amount of banter and rebuttal.
0 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »
*shrug* Grinding is a process that changes the food from it's natural form. The further the food is from it's natural form the less clean it is. Ground beef is cleaner than cured beef, but it's still not 100% clean. I can't think how grass fed makes beef cleaner.
Seems simple to me but then I don't think of the label as a judgment anymore than I'd think of 'sweet' as a judgment. It either is or is not, or it may be just a little.
If I'm not misunderstanding you, cooking and butchering makes a food not clean.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 396K Introduce Yourself
- 44.1K Getting Started
- 260.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 176.3K Food and Nutrition
- 47.6K Recipes
- 232.8K Fitness and Exercise
- 448 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153.3K Motivation and Support
- 8.2K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 4.4K MyFitnessPal Information
- 16 News and Announcements
- 18 MyFitnessPal Academy
- 1.4K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions