Clean eating help
Options
Replies
-
itsthehumidity wrote: »itsthehumidity wrote: »Ah the daily clean eating debate thread.
I know it's hard to understand, but OP like many others is defining "clean food" not just as that which is unprocessed, but as any food that contributes meaningfully to a good diet; that is, foods that have a high nutrient density, and provide substantial amounts of micronutrients while keeping the diet compliant with its macronutrient constraints.
The question OP is asking, which many people ask and which falls on purposefully deaf ears, is really is it acceptable if 80% of the food I eat aligns with my dietary macro/micro goals, and 20% does not, so long as I stay within my calorie ceiling for the day?
The answer is: sure. You can go very far with this rule. Eventually you may need to reduce that 20% figure to 10 or 5 or 0 depending on your physique goals, but feel free to run with this for now.
Crap, now we are supposed to be able to read people's minds? Cause, ... , she didn't say that
No, we don't at all. It just takes the slightest amount of sense and reason sometimes to know what someone is really after. The term clean food is intended to describe food choices that align with a diet that brings you closer to your fitness and health goals. This concept unifies those who use this term, and it's the concept, which generated OP's specific question, that I'm bringing to the surface.
I bet if OP and I sat down, she would agree that what I'm saying is what she meant, or was getting that, even though it wasn't precisely what she said.
Your description of the term clean eating is not the one I'm familiar with.
0 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »itsthehumidity wrote: »itsthehumidity wrote: »Ah the daily clean eating debate thread.
I know it's hard to understand, but OP like many others is defining "clean food" not just as that which is unprocessed, but as any food that contributes meaningfully to a good diet; that is, foods that have a high nutrient density, and provide substantial amounts of micronutrients while keeping the diet compliant with its macronutrient constraints.
The question OP is asking, which many people ask and which falls on purposefully deaf ears, is really is it acceptable if 80% of the food I eat aligns with my dietary macro/micro goals, and 20% does not, so long as I stay within my calorie ceiling for the day?
The answer is: sure. You can go very far with this rule. Eventually you may need to reduce that 20% figure to 10 or 5 or 0 depending on your physique goals, but feel free to run with this for now.
Crap, now we are supposed to be able to read people's minds? Cause, ... , she didn't say that
No, we don't at all. It just takes the slightest amount of sense and reason sometimes to know what someone is really after. The term clean food is intended to describe food choices that align with a diet that brings you closer to your fitness and health goals. This concept unifies those who use this term, and it's the concept, which generated OP's specific question, that I'm bringing to the surface.
I bet if OP and I sat down, she would agree that what I'm saying is what she meant, or was getting that, even though it wasn't precisely what she said.
Your description of the term clean eating is not the one I'm familiar with.
Me neither. I have actually NEVER heard anyone explain clean eating as food choices that bring you closer to your health & fitness goals. While Dianne's list includes some of the craziest definitions you would ever hear someone use for "clean eating", the vaguest I've ever heard is unprocessed, whole foods.0 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »itsthehumidity wrote: »itsthehumidity wrote: »Ah the daily clean eating debate thread.
I know it's hard to understand, but OP like many others is defining "clean food" not just as that which is unprocessed, but as any food that contributes meaningfully to a good diet; that is, foods that have a high nutrient density, and provide substantial amounts of micronutrients while keeping the diet compliant with its macronutrient constraints.
The question OP is asking, which many people ask and which falls on purposefully deaf ears, is really is it acceptable if 80% of the food I eat aligns with my dietary macro/micro goals, and 20% does not, so long as I stay within my calorie ceiling for the day?
The answer is: sure. You can go very far with this rule. Eventually you may need to reduce that 20% figure to 10 or 5 or 0 depending on your physique goals, but feel free to run with this for now.
Crap, now we are supposed to be able to read people's minds? Cause, ... , she didn't say that
No, we don't at all. It just takes the slightest amount of sense and reason sometimes to know what someone is really after. The term clean food is intended to describe food choices that align with a diet that brings you closer to your fitness and health goals. This concept unifies those who use this term, and it's the concept, which generated OP's specific question, that I'm bringing to the surface.
I bet if OP and I sat down, she would agree that what I'm saying is what she meant, or was getting that, even though it wasn't precisely what she said.
Your description of the term clean eating is not the one I'm familiar with.
Me neither. I have actually NEVER heard anyone explain clean eating as food choices that bring you closer to your health & fitness goals. While Dianne's list includes some of the craziest definitions you would ever hear someone use for "clean eating", the vaguest I've ever heard is unprocessed, whole foods.
That is similar to what I've always known it to mean. The definition I learned growing up was "The close the food is to it's natural state, the cleaner it is."0 -
itsthehumidity wrote: »itsthehumidity wrote: »Ah the daily clean eating debate thread.
I know it's hard to understand, but OP like many others is defining "clean food" not just as that which is unprocessed, but as any food that contributes meaningfully to a good diet; that is, foods that have a high nutrient density, and provide substantial amounts of micronutrients while keeping the diet compliant with its macronutrient constraints.
The question OP is asking, which many people ask and which falls on purposefully deaf ears, is really is it acceptable if 80% of the food I eat aligns with my dietary macro/micro goals, and 20% does not, so long as I stay within my calorie ceiling for the day?
The answer is: sure. You can go very far with this rule. Eventually you may need to reduce that 20% figure to 10 or 5 or 0 depending on your physique goals, but feel free to run with this for now.
Crap, now we are supposed to be able to read people's minds? Cause, ... , she didn't say that
No, we don't at all. It just takes the slightest amount of sense and reason sometimes to know what someone is really after. The term clean food is intended to describe food choices that align with a diet that brings you closer to your fitness and health goals. This concept unifies those who use this term, and it's the concept, which generated OP's specific question, that I'm bringing to the surface.
I bet if OP and I sat down, she would agree that what I'm saying is what she meant, or was getting that, even though it wasn't precisely what she said.
I think it's important to eat healthfully and try to, but I wouldn't call my own diet clean, so expect that those who use the term mean something beyond eating healthfully (as OP indicated by her answer).
That said, she's getting advice, so why turn this into a debate by complaining that not everyone is as certain they know precisely what OP meant as you claim to be.0 -
clean eating=terms of endearment0
-
I'm glad I could add fuel to the fire!0
-
itsthehumidity wrote: »I'm glad I could add fuel to the fire!
you rascal you0 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »itsthehumidity wrote: »itsthehumidity wrote: »Ah the daily clean eating debate thread.
I know it's hard to understand, but OP like many others is defining "clean food" not just as that which is unprocessed, but as any food that contributes meaningfully to a good diet; that is, foods that have a high nutrient density, and provide substantial amounts of micronutrients while keeping the diet compliant with its macronutrient constraints.
The question OP is asking, which many people ask and which falls on purposefully deaf ears, is really is it acceptable if 80% of the food I eat aligns with my dietary macro/micro goals, and 20% does not, so long as I stay within my calorie ceiling for the day?
The answer is: sure. You can go very far with this rule. Eventually you may need to reduce that 20% figure to 10 or 5 or 0 depending on your physique goals, but feel free to run with this for now.
Crap, now we are supposed to be able to read people's minds? Cause, ... , she didn't say that
No, we don't at all. It just takes the slightest amount of sense and reason sometimes to know what someone is really after. The term clean food is intended to describe food choices that align with a diet that brings you closer to your fitness and health goals. This concept unifies those who use this term, and it's the concept, which generated OP's specific question, that I'm bringing to the surface.
I bet if OP and I sat down, she would agree that what I'm saying is what she meant, or was getting that, even though it wasn't precisely what she said.
Your description of the term clean eating is not the one I'm familiar with.
Me neither. I have actually NEVER heard anyone explain clean eating as food choices that bring you closer to your health & fitness goals. While Dianne's list includes some of the craziest definitions you would ever hear someone use for "clean eating", the vaguest I've ever heard is unprocessed, whole foods.
That is similar to what I've always known it to mean. The definition I learned growing up was "The close the food is to it's natural state, the cleaner it is."
Like a mushroom?0 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »itsthehumidity wrote: »itsthehumidity wrote: »Ah the daily clean eating debate thread.
I know it's hard to understand, but OP like many others is defining "clean food" not just as that which is unprocessed, but as any food that contributes meaningfully to a good diet; that is, foods that have a high nutrient density, and provide substantial amounts of micronutrients while keeping the diet compliant with its macronutrient constraints.
The question OP is asking, which many people ask and which falls on purposefully deaf ears, is really is it acceptable if 80% of the food I eat aligns with my dietary macro/micro goals, and 20% does not, so long as I stay within my calorie ceiling for the day?
The answer is: sure. You can go very far with this rule. Eventually you may need to reduce that 20% figure to 10 or 5 or 0 depending on your physique goals, but feel free to run with this for now.
Crap, now we are supposed to be able to read people's minds? Cause, ... , she didn't say that
No, we don't at all. It just takes the slightest amount of sense and reason sometimes to know what someone is really after. The term clean food is intended to describe food choices that align with a diet that brings you closer to your fitness and health goals. This concept unifies those who use this term, and it's the concept, which generated OP's specific question, that I'm bringing to the surface.
I bet if OP and I sat down, she would agree that what I'm saying is what she meant, or was getting that, even though it wasn't precisely what she said.
Your description of the term clean eating is not the one I'm familiar with.
Me neither. I have actually NEVER heard anyone explain clean eating as food choices that bring you closer to your health & fitness goals. While Dianne's list includes some of the craziest definitions you would ever hear someone use for "clean eating", the vaguest I've ever heard is unprocessed, whole foods.
That is similar to what I've always known it to mean. The definition I learned growing up was "The close the food is to it's natural state, the cleaner it is."
Like a mushroom?
Sure, if it's food.0 -
Lean Cuisine frozen dinners (which I eat often) align with a diet that brings me closer to my fitness and health goals.itsthehumidity wrote: »The term clean food is intended to describe food choices that align with a diet that brings you closer to your fitness and health goals.
Few would count Lean Cuisine as clean food.0 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »itsthehumidity wrote: »itsthehumidity wrote: »Ah the daily clean eating debate thread.
I know it's hard to understand, but OP like many others is defining "clean food" not just as that which is unprocessed, but as any food that contributes meaningfully to a good diet; that is, foods that have a high nutrient density, and provide substantial amounts of micronutrients while keeping the diet compliant with its macronutrient constraints.
The question OP is asking, which many people ask and which falls on purposefully deaf ears, is really is it acceptable if 80% of the food I eat aligns with my dietary macro/micro goals, and 20% does not, so long as I stay within my calorie ceiling for the day?
The answer is: sure. You can go very far with this rule. Eventually you may need to reduce that 20% figure to 10 or 5 or 0 depending on your physique goals, but feel free to run with this for now.
Crap, now we are supposed to be able to read people's minds? Cause, ... , she didn't say that
No, we don't at all. It just takes the slightest amount of sense and reason sometimes to know what someone is really after. The term clean food is intended to describe food choices that align with a diet that brings you closer to your fitness and health goals. This concept unifies those who use this term, and it's the concept, which generated OP's specific question, that I'm bringing to the surface.
I bet if OP and I sat down, she would agree that what I'm saying is what she meant, or was getting that, even though it wasn't precisely what she said.
Your description of the term clean eating is not the one I'm familiar with.
Me neither. I have actually NEVER heard anyone explain clean eating as food choices that bring you closer to your health & fitness goals. While Dianne's list includes some of the craziest definitions you would ever hear someone use for "clean eating", the vaguest I've ever heard is unprocessed, whole foods.
That is similar to what I've always known it to mean. The definition I learned growing up was "The close the food is to it's natural state, the cleaner it is."
Like a mushroom?
Sure, if it's food.
Last I heard a mushroom was indeed a food
But of course in its natural state it's in a bed of compost so best cleaned before eating
0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »There's no rule, it's basically what you define it as. Personally I consider 80/20 a moderation style of eating and assume "clean" means someone is trying to cut certain things out entirely (which I don't do).
Someone asked about getting started in clean eating yesterday and this is what I wrote (and a link to the thread, as you might find it helpful):
I don't use the term "clean eating," but I mainly cook from whole foods, and have done this for a long time.
IME, weight loss does not naturally come from this -- I gained lots of weight doing it and have also lost weight doing it. What matters is paying attention to what/how much you eat. To the extent you are snacking a lot on foods that you would no longer eat, I suppose it can help, as it requires that you bake cookies rather than buy them or the like (I tend not to like packaged cookies anyway, and am partial to homemade baked goods, but I also do include some ice cream and high-quality chocolate in my diet).
I'd recommend reading about nutrition, which is more about what you do include in your diet than not eating specific foods. Here's an excellent start: http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/nutritionsource/what-should-you-eat/ and I also like this: http://bigthink.com/videos/david-katz-on-what-we-know-about-diet
What helps me is to try to include some protein and vegetables (I eat a lot) in all meats, and then treat everything else as extras based on what I'm in the mood for. I tend to have a standard breakfast, which makes it easy (mine is 2 egg vegetable omelet with some additional protein or fruit depending on the day). While I wouldn't say that's a better breakfast than any others, having a standard plan for breakfast makes it easy. Lunches I try to make ahead for the week or bring dinner leftovers (I buy lunch too often, though, although I pick options consistent with my overall goals). For dinner I tend to have lots of vegetables and some other sides (like potatoes, sweet potatoes, pasta, rice) on hand and will decide in advance what my protein will be and take it out to defrost if necessary. I will whip up dinner based on that, the vegetables I have on hand, and the starch I'm in the mood for (maybe turn everything into a pasta dish or stir fry, maybe just have some potatoes on the side too).
As you get used to this it becomes easy. You might want to work up to it by focusing on one thing at a time, instead of trying to switch over to home cooking all at once.
What really made it easy for me is when I stopped menu planning and thinking I had to have a recipe and buy things for that recipe. Now I just focus on what I have at home (I learned to do this from cooking from a CSA box of vegetables and figuring out how to use them up, no matter what they were) and it makes it so much easier. I sometimes read cookbooks for ideas but never actually cook from a recipe.
http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10348748/clean-eating-guide-how-did-you-start
All of this is really good advice.0 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »itsthehumidity wrote: »itsthehumidity wrote: »Ah the daily clean eating debate thread.
I know it's hard to understand, but OP like many others is defining "clean food" not just as that which is unprocessed, but as any food that contributes meaningfully to a good diet; that is, foods that have a high nutrient density, and provide substantial amounts of micronutrients while keeping the diet compliant with its macronutrient constraints.
The question OP is asking, which many people ask and which falls on purposefully deaf ears, is really is it acceptable if 80% of the food I eat aligns with my dietary macro/micro goals, and 20% does not, so long as I stay within my calorie ceiling for the day?
The answer is: sure. You can go very far with this rule. Eventually you may need to reduce that 20% figure to 10 or 5 or 0 depending on your physique goals, but feel free to run with this for now.
Crap, now we are supposed to be able to read people's minds? Cause, ... , she didn't say that
No, we don't at all. It just takes the slightest amount of sense and reason sometimes to know what someone is really after. The term clean food is intended to describe food choices that align with a diet that brings you closer to your fitness and health goals. This concept unifies those who use this term, and it's the concept, which generated OP's specific question, that I'm bringing to the surface.
I bet if OP and I sat down, she would agree that what I'm saying is what she meant, or was getting that, even though it wasn't precisely what she said.
Your description of the term clean eating is not the one I'm familiar with.
Me neither. I have actually NEVER heard anyone explain clean eating as food choices that bring you closer to your health & fitness goals. While Dianne's list includes some of the craziest definitions you would ever hear someone use for "clean eating", the vaguest I've ever heard is unprocessed, whole foods.
That is similar to what I've always known it to mean. The definition I learned growing up was "The close the food is to it's natural state, the cleaner it is."
Like a mushroom?
Sure, if it's food.
Not these mushrooms!
0 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »itsthehumidity wrote: »itsthehumidity wrote: »Ah the daily clean eating debate thread.
I know it's hard to understand, but OP like many others is defining "clean food" not just as that which is unprocessed, but as any food that contributes meaningfully to a good diet; that is, foods that have a high nutrient density, and provide substantial amounts of micronutrients while keeping the diet compliant with its macronutrient constraints.
The question OP is asking, which many people ask and which falls on purposefully deaf ears, is really is it acceptable if 80% of the food I eat aligns with my dietary macro/micro goals, and 20% does not, so long as I stay within my calorie ceiling for the day?
The answer is: sure. You can go very far with this rule. Eventually you may need to reduce that 20% figure to 10 or 5 or 0 depending on your physique goals, but feel free to run with this for now.
Crap, now we are supposed to be able to read people's minds? Cause, ... , she didn't say that
No, we don't at all. It just takes the slightest amount of sense and reason sometimes to know what someone is really after. The term clean food is intended to describe food choices that align with a diet that brings you closer to your fitness and health goals. This concept unifies those who use this term, and it's the concept, which generated OP's specific question, that I'm bringing to the surface.
I bet if OP and I sat down, she would agree that what I'm saying is what she meant, or was getting that, even though it wasn't precisely what she said.
Your description of the term clean eating is not the one I'm familiar with.
Me neither. I have actually NEVER heard anyone explain clean eating as food choices that bring you closer to your health & fitness goals. While Dianne's list includes some of the craziest definitions you would ever hear someone use for "clean eating", the vaguest I've ever heard is unprocessed, whole foods.
That is similar to what I've always known it to mean. The definition I learned growing up was "The close the food is to it's natural state, the cleaner it is."
Like a mushroom?
Sure, if it's food.
Last I heard a mushroom was indeed a food
But of course in its natural state it's in a bed of compost so best cleaned before eating
Well we are talking about clean eating, so sure! Wiping dirt from food doesn't change the natural state of the food.
Not all mushrooms are food because some are poisonous.0 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »itsthehumidity wrote: »itsthehumidity wrote: »Ah the daily clean eating debate thread.
I know it's hard to understand, but OP like many others is defining "clean food" not just as that which is unprocessed, but as any food that contributes meaningfully to a good diet; that is, foods that have a high nutrient density, and provide substantial amounts of micronutrients while keeping the diet compliant with its macronutrient constraints.
The question OP is asking, which many people ask and which falls on purposefully deaf ears, is really is it acceptable if 80% of the food I eat aligns with my dietary macro/micro goals, and 20% does not, so long as I stay within my calorie ceiling for the day?
The answer is: sure. You can go very far with this rule. Eventually you may need to reduce that 20% figure to 10 or 5 or 0 depending on your physique goals, but feel free to run with this for now.
Crap, now we are supposed to be able to read people's minds? Cause, ... , she didn't say that
No, we don't at all. It just takes the slightest amount of sense and reason sometimes to know what someone is really after. The term clean food is intended to describe food choices that align with a diet that brings you closer to your fitness and health goals. This concept unifies those who use this term, and it's the concept, which generated OP's specific question, that I'm bringing to the surface.
I bet if OP and I sat down, she would agree that what I'm saying is what she meant, or was getting that, even though it wasn't precisely what she said.
Your description of the term clean eating is not the one I'm familiar with.
Me neither. I have actually NEVER heard anyone explain clean eating as food choices that bring you closer to your health & fitness goals. While Dianne's list includes some of the craziest definitions you would ever hear someone use for "clean eating", the vaguest I've ever heard is unprocessed, whole foods.
That is similar to what I've always known it to mean. The definition I learned growing up was "The close the food is to it's natural state, the cleaner it is."
Like a mushroom?
Sure, if it's food.
Last I heard a mushroom was indeed a food
But of course in its natural state it's in a bed of compost so best cleaned before eating
Well we are talking about clean eating, so sure! Wiping dirt from food doesn't change the natural state of the food.
Not all mushrooms are food because some are poisonous.
But someone uneducated in mycology could mistake them for food.0 -
Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »itsthehumidity wrote: »itsthehumidity wrote: »Ah the daily clean eating debate thread.
I know it's hard to understand, but OP like many others is defining "clean food" not just as that which is unprocessed, but as any food that contributes meaningfully to a good diet; that is, foods that have a high nutrient density, and provide substantial amounts of micronutrients while keeping the diet compliant with its macronutrient constraints.
The question OP is asking, which many people ask and which falls on purposefully deaf ears, is really is it acceptable if 80% of the food I eat aligns with my dietary macro/micro goals, and 20% does not, so long as I stay within my calorie ceiling for the day?
The answer is: sure. You can go very far with this rule. Eventually you may need to reduce that 20% figure to 10 or 5 or 0 depending on your physique goals, but feel free to run with this for now.
Crap, now we are supposed to be able to read people's minds? Cause, ... , she didn't say that
No, we don't at all. It just takes the slightest amount of sense and reason sometimes to know what someone is really after. The term clean food is intended to describe food choices that align with a diet that brings you closer to your fitness and health goals. This concept unifies those who use this term, and it's the concept, which generated OP's specific question, that I'm bringing to the surface.
I bet if OP and I sat down, she would agree that what I'm saying is what she meant, or was getting that, even though it wasn't precisely what she said.
Your description of the term clean eating is not the one I'm familiar with.
Me neither. I have actually NEVER heard anyone explain clean eating as food choices that bring you closer to your health & fitness goals. While Dianne's list includes some of the craziest definitions you would ever hear someone use for "clean eating", the vaguest I've ever heard is unprocessed, whole foods.
That is similar to what I've always known it to mean. The definition I learned growing up was "The close the food is to it's natural state, the cleaner it is."
Like a mushroom?
Sure, if it's food.
Last I heard a mushroom was indeed a food
But of course in its natural state it's in a bed of compost so best cleaned before eating
Well we are talking about clean eating, so sure! Wiping dirt from food doesn't change the natural state of the food.
Not all mushrooms are food because some are poisonous.
But someone uneducated in mycology could mistake them for food.
I suppose many things could be mistaken for food, but how does that make them food or relate to the OP?0 -
Edible plávka jahodovočervená:
Interesting psychotropic effects Amanita muscaria:
0 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »itsthehumidity wrote: »itsthehumidity wrote: »Ah the daily clean eating debate thread.
I know it's hard to understand, but OP like many others is defining "clean food" not just as that which is unprocessed, but as any food that contributes meaningfully to a good diet; that is, foods that have a high nutrient density, and provide substantial amounts of micronutrients while keeping the diet compliant with its macronutrient constraints.
The question OP is asking, which many people ask and which falls on purposefully deaf ears, is really is it acceptable if 80% of the food I eat aligns with my dietary macro/micro goals, and 20% does not, so long as I stay within my calorie ceiling for the day?
The answer is: sure. You can go very far with this rule. Eventually you may need to reduce that 20% figure to 10 or 5 or 0 depending on your physique goals, but feel free to run with this for now.
Crap, now we are supposed to be able to read people's minds? Cause, ... , she didn't say that
No, we don't at all. It just takes the slightest amount of sense and reason sometimes to know what someone is really after. The term clean food is intended to describe food choices that align with a diet that brings you closer to your fitness and health goals. This concept unifies those who use this term, and it's the concept, which generated OP's specific question, that I'm bringing to the surface.
I bet if OP and I sat down, she would agree that what I'm saying is what she meant, or was getting that, even though it wasn't precisely what she said.
Your description of the term clean eating is not the one I'm familiar with.
Me neither. I have actually NEVER heard anyone explain clean eating as food choices that bring you closer to your health & fitness goals. While Dianne's list includes some of the craziest definitions you would ever hear someone use for "clean eating", the vaguest I've ever heard is unprocessed, whole foods.
That is similar to what I've always known it to mean. The definition I learned growing up was "The close the food is to it's natural state, the cleaner it is."
Like a mushroom?
Sure, if it's food.
Last I heard a mushroom was indeed a food
But of course in its natural state it's in a bed of compost so best cleaned before eating
Well we are talking about clean eating, so sure! Wiping dirt from food doesn't change the natural state of the food.
Not all mushrooms are food because some are poisonous.
But someone uneducated in mycology could mistake them for food.
I suppose many things could be mistaken for food, but how does that make them food or relate to the OP?
You're the one who brought up mushrooms and "natural states."
I was just saying that you can't walk into the woods and pick any mushroom from it's natural state and eat it and be healthy. The mushrooms in my picture above are "clean" by many definitions and "natural." But they will freaking kill you.0 -
Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »itsthehumidity wrote: »itsthehumidity wrote: »Ah the daily clean eating debate thread.
I know it's hard to understand, but OP like many others is defining "clean food" not just as that which is unprocessed, but as any food that contributes meaningfully to a good diet; that is, foods that have a high nutrient density, and provide substantial amounts of micronutrients while keeping the diet compliant with its macronutrient constraints.
The question OP is asking, which many people ask and which falls on purposefully deaf ears, is really is it acceptable if 80% of the food I eat aligns with my dietary macro/micro goals, and 20% does not, so long as I stay within my calorie ceiling for the day?
The answer is: sure. You can go very far with this rule. Eventually you may need to reduce that 20% figure to 10 or 5 or 0 depending on your physique goals, but feel free to run with this for now.
Crap, now we are supposed to be able to read people's minds? Cause, ... , she didn't say that
No, we don't at all. It just takes the slightest amount of sense and reason sometimes to know what someone is really after. The term clean food is intended to describe food choices that align with a diet that brings you closer to your fitness and health goals. This concept unifies those who use this term, and it's the concept, which generated OP's specific question, that I'm bringing to the surface.
I bet if OP and I sat down, she would agree that what I'm saying is what she meant, or was getting that, even though it wasn't precisely what she said.
Your description of the term clean eating is not the one I'm familiar with.
Me neither. I have actually NEVER heard anyone explain clean eating as food choices that bring you closer to your health & fitness goals. While Dianne's list includes some of the craziest definitions you would ever hear someone use for "clean eating", the vaguest I've ever heard is unprocessed, whole foods.
That is similar to what I've always known it to mean. The definition I learned growing up was "The close the food is to it's natural state, the cleaner it is."
Like a mushroom?
Sure, if it's food.
Last I heard a mushroom was indeed a food
But of course in its natural state it's in a bed of compost so best cleaned before eating
Well we are talking about clean eating, so sure! Wiping dirt from food doesn't change the natural state of the food.
Not all mushrooms are food because some are poisonous.
But someone uneducated in mycology could mistake them for food.
I suppose many things could be mistaken for food, but how does that make them food or relate to the OP?
You're the one who brought up mushrooms and "natural states."
I was just saying that you can't walk into the woods and pick any mushroom from it's natural state and eat it and be healthy. The mushrooms in my picture above are "clean" by many definitions and "natural." But they will freaking kill you.
No, I did not bring up mushrooms. I said "food close to it's natural state"0
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
- 983 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.4K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions