Why we fell for clean eating

Bry_Fitness70

I found this article to miss the point entirely.

https://theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2017/aug/11/why-we-fell-for-clean-eating

She was a “gluten-free, sugar-free, oil-free, grain-free, legume-free, plant-based raw vegan”. What? This is supposed to be a typical clean eater?

I think most people consider "clean eating" to comprise eating a diet with higher purity standards, i.e., fewer industrial food laboratory additives. For example, you choose to eat a cookie with 5-6 ingredients instead of 25 ingredients, or a steak from a cow that was not injected with steroids, hormones, or antibiotics. But you are still eating cookies and steak; clean eating doesn't necessarily speak to the type of food you are eating. I think this article mischaracterizes the philosophy.

tiptoethruthetulips

Bry_Lander wrote: »

I found this article to miss the point entirely.

https://theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2017/aug/11/why-we-fell-for-clean-eating

She was a “gluten-free, sugar-free, oil-free, grain-free, legume-free, plant-based raw vegan”. What? This is supposed to be a typical clean eater?

I think most people consider "clean eating" to comprise eating a diet with higher purity standards, i.e., fewer industrial food laboratory additives. For example, you choose to eat a cookie with 5-6 ingredients instead of 25 ingredients, or a steak from a cow that was not injected with steroids, hormones, or antibiotics. But you are still eating cookies and steak; clean eating doesn't necessarily speak to the type of food you are eating. I think this article mischaracterizes the philosophy.

I started to read the article but it was way too long and I lost interest.

When I first read about clean eating I liked the concept of cooking and eating wholesome foods with minimal processing prior to purchase.

There are many variations of clean eating and if we had 30 people in a room I doubt they would agree on a definition, but the example provided in the article introduction goes beyond even extreme clean eating.

VintageFeline

I do think there was a period of peak clean eating madness for a while there where this level of extreme was seen as the most virtuous. Kind of a dick waving contest as happens with a lot of things.

But it seems to be coming back to a more sensible level now. Still a bit overly fervent in some quarters but largely just a healthful way of eating dressed up as "clean" because people like labels.

lemurcat12

There is no consistent "clean eating" philosophy, but when I ask what people mean by "eating clean" I get told they don't eat ANY processed foods. Usually that's not true, of course, but that seems to be what they think it is and what they aspire to (and certainly cookies would not be permitted!).

I eat a generally whole foods, nutrition-conscious, vegetable-focused diet and get my meat and eggs and some dairy (and during the season, my vegetables and some fruit) from a local farm, don't buy packaged things with lots of ingredients different from what I'd use if making it at home (just how I prefer to eat, not because I think it matters health or weight-wise), and yet I'm reasonably certain I'm NOT a clean eater, since I think some processed foods (yogurt, smoked salmon, canned tomatoes, dried pasta, canned beans) can be helpful, occasionally have some protein powder, and enjoy chocolate and ice cream (including ice cream I make at home).

More to the point, I DON'T demonize food processing or sugar or any other foods, even the ones I do not eat, and make food choices based on what I think makes sense based on nutrition and my own lifestyle, not purity (or the idea that some foods are "clean" and some are not).

Maybe if the term got used more sensibly I wouldn't agree so much with the article, but it seems to track what I see in the "clean eating" movement and the kinds of weird ideas and obsessions I was moving toward when I was briefly obsessed with eating "only natural" (when I really did try to avoid anything processed and just make it myself, to a point of making things harder and my diet pointlessly difficult to sustain, and even flirted with the idea of locavorism, which is dumb if one lives where I do).

If someone wants to make a big thing of giving up ultra processed foods, fine, but I don't think that's really "clean eating" or what it claims to be, and it's just basically how I've always eaten and not some kind of special way that needs a self-important name. Do some use clean for that? I imagine, as people use clean for every which way they eat, it seems (see, e.g., Panera).

We currently have a poster running around claiming that anything that has been frozen is bad and another criticizing homecooked (potentially) meats with sauces on them as not clean meats -- I think the terminology absolutely tends to promote restrictive approaches and those not grounded in actual reasons (like nutrition) but kind of a superstitious approach toward foods (non clean foods will have some power over you, make you fat with just a few bites, etc.).

Bry_Fitness70

All good points. I felt like this article chose the ultimate strawman version of the clean eater, the person with an excessively restrictive eating regimen. I don't think most people accept this variation as representing clean eating.

MelissaPhippsFeagins

Bry_Lander wrote: »

All good points. I felt like this article chose the ultimate strawman version of the clean eater, the person with an excessively restrictive eating regimen. I don't think most people accept this variation as representing clean eating.

I read the whole thing and the point seemed to be that there is not a single definition and that it is easy to take it to extremes like the unfortunate first example did. For the life of me, I could not think where she was getting enough protein without eating legumes and grain.

Anyway, I am not a clean eater. I do try to eat mostly things my parents' parents would recognize. The grandparents were born between 1890 & 1911. Food was processed, but not packed with preservatives that I can't pronounce.

Peanut butter cookies made with pb, egg and brown sugar like Granny made them, for instance. Fresh veggies when possible. Home canned or frozen if not. If I could get raw milk without driving 90 minutes to get it I would. I can't, so I buy whole milk at my local grocery. My lunch today will be Pinto beans with chow chow and onions, spiced apples, and cornbread. There will be Shepherds pie for dinner.

The people who make me crazy are the ones who say, "I don't eat processed food," while drinking vanilla soy milk. Ummm, you're drinking a vanilla flavored liquefied bean. You do you, but don't say that's not a processed food.

Bry_Fitness70

MelissaPhippsFeagins wrote: »

Bry_Lander wrote: »

All good points. I felt like this article chose the ultimate strawman version of the clean eater, the person with an excessively restrictive eating regimen. I don't think most people accept this variation as representing clean eating.

I read the whole thing and the point seemed to be that there is not a single definition and that it is easy to take it to extremes like the unfortunate first example did. For the life of me, I could not think where she was getting enough protein without eating legumes and grain.

Anyway, I am not a clean eater. I do try to eat mostly things my parents' parents would recognize. The grandparents were born between 1890 & 1911. Food was processed, but not packed with preservatives that I can't pronounce.

Peanut butter cookies made with pb, egg and brown sugar like Granny made them, for instance. Fresh veggies when possible. Home canned or frozen if not. If I could get raw milk without driving 90 minutes to get it I would. I can't, so I buy whole milk at my local grocery. My lunch today will be Pinto beans with chow chow and onions, spiced apples, and cornbread. There will be Shepherds pie for dinner.

The people who make me crazy are the ones who say, "I don't eat processed food," while drinking vanilla soy milk. Ummm, you're drinking a vanilla flavored liquefied bean. You do you, but don't say that's not a processed food.

1) I agree that there isn't a single definition of "clean eating" and it means something different to everyone. However, the version that the woman in this article practiced is extreme, and the rejection of this version doesn't equate to a rejection of some variation of "clean eating" or that it was something that we "fell for".

2) Your version is sensible, striving for more simplicity and less laboratory derived ingredients. I aspire to this, but in reality, practicality dictates that I eat a lot of foods I would prefer not to because I'm just too busy.

stevencloser

MelissaPhippsFeagins wrote: »

Bry_Lander wrote: »

All good points. I felt like this article chose the ultimate strawman version of the clean eater, the person with an excessively restrictive eating regimen. I don't think most people accept this variation as representing clean eating.

I read the whole thing and the point seemed to be that there is not a single definition and that it is easy to take it to extremes like the unfortunate first example did. For the life of me, I could not think where she was getting enough protein without eating legumes and grain.

Anyway, I am not a clean eater. I do try to eat mostly things my parents' parents would recognize. The grandparents were born between 1890 & 1911. Food was processed, but not packed with preservatives that I can't pronounce.

Peanut butter cookies made with pb, egg and brown sugar like Granny made them, for instance. Fresh veggies when possible. Home canned or frozen if not. If I could get raw milk without driving 90 minutes to get it I would. I can't, so I buy whole milk at my local grocery. My lunch today will be Pinto beans with chow chow and onions, spiced apples, and cornbread. There will be Shepherds pie for dinner.

The people who make me crazy are the ones who say, "I don't eat processed food," while drinking vanilla soy milk. Ummm, you're drinking a vanilla flavored liquefied bean. You do you, but don't say that's not a processed food.

What people need to realize is that in that time there was still preservatives and being able to pronounce it or not is no seal of quality. At the time your grandparents were born, cocaine was used as medicine for just about everything, I think it a bit silly to base one's definition of healthy living on that time.

Also raw milk has a way higher risk of getting you sick than pasteurized, and for what benefit? It tastes a bit better maybe?

GottaBurnEmAll

I think a lot of people who weren't raised on scratch/home cooking the way I was got a bit carried away with themselves and with being virtuous about food purity, taking it too far as a proxy for being "healthy".

There's a middle ground to be had here, not even talking about what's being discussed in this thread as the author's extreme, but rather the whole view of eating and processed foods as being a proxy for healthiness and virtue. One can just simply say they prefer to cook meals from scratch, using few convenience products and leave it at that.

You know, like they used to, before food became a moral issue all you kids started banging on about while you were on my lawn.

Bry_Fitness70

stevencloser wrote: »

MelissaPhippsFeagins wrote: »

Bry_Lander wrote: »

All good points. I felt like this article chose the ultimate strawman version of the clean eater, the person with an excessively restrictive eating regimen. I don't think most people accept this variation as representing clean eating.

I read the whole thing and the point seemed to be that there is not a single definition and that it is easy to take it to extremes like the unfortunate first example did. For the life of me, I could not think where she was getting enough protein without eating legumes and grain.

Anyway, I am not a clean eater. I do try to eat mostly things my parents' parents would recognize. The grandparents were born between 1890 & 1911. Food was processed, but not packed with preservatives that I can't pronounce.

Peanut butter cookies made with pb, egg and brown sugar like Granny made them, for instance. Fresh veggies when possible. Home canned or frozen if not. If I could get raw milk without driving 90 minutes to get it I would. I can't, so I buy whole milk at my local grocery. My lunch today will be Pinto beans with chow chow and onions, spiced apples, and cornbread. There will be Shepherds pie for dinner.

The people who make me crazy are the ones who say, "I don't eat processed food," while drinking vanilla soy milk. Ummm, you're drinking a vanilla flavored liquefied bean. You do you, but don't say that's not a processed food.

What people need to realize is that in that time there was still preservatives and being able to pronounce it or not is no seal of quality. At the time your grandparents were born, cocaine was used as medicine for just about everything, I think it a bit silly to base one's definition of healthy living on that time.

Also raw milk has a way higher risk of getting you sick than pasteurized, and for what benefit? It tastes a bit better maybe?

Is this the point where someone posts the chemical composition of an apple, with all of those multisyllabic contents like Niacin, Pantothenic acid, Selenium, etc. ?

I think that we can pick and choose what eating habits make sense from the past and incorporate them into our lives while rejecting the snake oil stuff. I don't see how additives like sodium nitrate, partially hydrogenated oils, high fructose corn syrup, BHA, BHT, Red or Yellow # whatever food dyes, etc., have benefited our food supply from a consumer standpoint since the "old days".

ninerbuff

The fitness industry perpetuated a lot of "clean eating" which is kind of ironic too because they kept speaking of the "health" aspect of eating "clean" foods, yet promoted supplementation which HAS NO RIGOROUS ASSESSMENT of purity of supplements out there. The majority of supplements are contaminated with something other than what's on the label many times, especially since most supplements are just bought from a 3rd party manufacturer that makes it for several hundred distributors.
And many are fooled by "clean eating" because of all these fitness people telling them to eat that way, but not disclosing they are on some PED or drug regimen to enhance their physiques. There are really no "true" naturals out there that compete. Even the naturals are using some sort of supplement or concoction to try to one up the competition.


A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

stevencloser

Red # or yellow # or Exxx number things are often just international names for stuff you get out of natural stuff. Carotene out of carrots is a food dye. It's fine in carrots but not fine if you stick it into something you want to be orange?

VeronicaA76

I find "eating clean" a relative term that varies from person to person. While a few things tend to run the gambut of not clean (deep fried, most prepackaged sweets like Oreo's and Twinkies), a lot of argument for what is "clean" and what isn't persists. It is becoming a catch all term with very little meaning outside of advertising. I'll just stick to trying to have a nutritious diet that has a good balance of various foods, nutrients and vitamins.