Learn What it means to "Eat Clean"

NavyKnightAh13

bumping

Hearts_2015

I have some great meal planners and recipes, happy to help!

:flowerforyou:

I'm glad you started this thread.. it's of interest to me... :drinker:
Congrats on your loss, was reading your profile... wonderful b/a's photos!:happy:

iechick

I can only speak from my own experience, but it's near impossible for me to overeat with my focus on a mostly whole foods, plant based diet. For instance, today I broke my fast at noon with 2 servings of brown rice with mushrooms, bell peppers, onion and carrots mixed in. I was full for hours and it was around 350 calories. For supper I had 2 servings of beans with more veggies, diced olives and a spoonful of full fat sour cream.. Another 400ish calories and I'm stuffed. So for today I've had under 800 calories, feel full/no hunger at all, and I have no desire to eat anything else tonight. But yet my maintenance calorie goal is somewhere around 1,800 calories. I also did a brisk two mile walk after supper, so there's extra calories I'm supposed to add in. If anything since switching to this way of eating I've continued to lose weight, even though I'm in maintenance.

I tend to stick to 'ingredients' instead of pre-made items and I either make things from them (like a batch of raw apple muffins or a bean dish), or I eat them as is (fresh veggies are eaten raw or steamed etc). For me this way of eating has allowed me to maintain effortlessly, with no tracking.

750 calories a day is unhealthy no matter what you eat.

I realize that, which is why I ate something else before bed last night to get my calories up. I was just responding to someone's post, that it's very hard to overeat if you're focusing on a whole foods diet.

Sabine_Stroehm

How can you tell someone is a "Clean Eater"?

Don't worry - they'll tell you.

As opposed to the donut patrol? who feels the need to launch into EVERY "clean eating" thread and go on and on about donuts and pizza (I eat pizza, btw)?

The "iifym" crowd is just as sanctimonious by and large as the "clean eaters".

In the end, it all comes to personal preference, and to what EACH OF US thinks will sustain us for life, as well as what is sustainable by us.

IIFYM may work great as a lifestyle approach for some. And so-called "clean eating" (I hate that term) may work for others. It works for me. I've been at maintenance for 12 years.

I have never seen any pro-iifym person say any of the following:
-you will get cancer
-wait until you're 70
-my way is the only way anyone can be healthy

However, "clean eating" discussions always devlove into those completely baseless assertions, which are always made from the same 'side.'

Funny, I have never heard any of those statements from this OP nor read them on any other 'clean eating' threads.

You obviously didn't read the threads where several posters were bashing jonnythan. Their belief (and what sadly sounded like hope) that he would be sick when he gets older was pathetic.

Jonnythan who declared my lifestyle "sad"? meh

Sabine_Stroehm

Clean eating is a subjective turn thrown around by different followers of whatever crazy fitness phenom is current. I just eat to meat my nutrient goals.

WOW. Talk about subjective.

I would try to explain my views on this again, but you likely wouldn't read them, or try to understand my perspective. So I won't bother. It's clear you've decided what YOU think it means.

BeachIron

Clean eating is a subjective turn thrown around by different followers of whatever crazy fitness phenom is current. I just eat to meat my nutrient goals.

WOW. Talk about subjective.

I would try to explain my views on this again, but you likely wouldn't read them, or try to understand my perspective. So I won't bother. It's clear you've decided what YOU think it means.

It does, quite literally, mean different things to different people. I have never seen two clean eaters agree: each of dairy, GMO, organic, legumes, and grains are or are not "clean" depending on the individual arguing the term. By any reasonable metric it is a useless term for that reason.

That said, I honestly don't care what others eat or do not eat. If someone wants to use pseudoscience to guide their life, that is certainly their right. It is also my right to point out the absurdity of doing that and to continue to shake my head. I'm entirely too old to believe that people who are so easily deluded by this type of thing are going to change their minds.

Best of luck!

Sabine_Stroehm

Clean eating is a subjective turn thrown around by different followers of whatever crazy fitness phenom is current. I just eat to meat my nutrient goals.

WOW. Talk about subjective.

I would try to explain my views on this again, but you likely wouldn't read them, or try to understand my perspective. So I won't bother. It's clear you've decided what YOU think it means.

It does, quite literally, mean different things to different people. I have never seen two clean eaters agree: each of dairy, GMO, organic, legumes, and grains are or are not "clean" depending on the individual arguing the term. By any reasonable metric it is a useless term for that reason.

That said, I honestly don't care what others eat or do not eat. If someone wants to use pseudoscience to guide their life, that is certainly their right. It is also my right to point out the absurdity of doing that and to continue to shake my head. I'm entirely too old to believe that people who are so easily deluded by this type of thing are going to change their minds.

Best of luck!

As I've said: I agree the term is silly. His post was also silly. And arrogant.

I eat primarily vegetables, fruits (prepared minimally), lean meats, whole grains, no refined grains, no added sugar (when I can help it), no HFCS, and aim to limit my consumption of overly processed, packaged convenience foods. I bet most folks who use the phrase "clean eating" would say my diet is pretty "clean". Is my approach to eating a "crazy fitness" phenomenon? Do you, beachiron think that's odd, unsustainable or "sad"? Trendy? A fad? If I said my diet was built around "whole foods" would that phrase work? I'm figuring no.

How long has "IFFYM" been around as a buzz phrase in dieting?

BeachIron

Clean eating is a subjective turn thrown around by different followers of whatever crazy fitness phenom is current. I just eat to meat my nutrient goals.

WOW. Talk about subjective.

I would try to explain my views on this again, but you likely wouldn't read them, or try to understand my perspective. So I won't bother. It's clear you've decided what YOU think it means.

It does, quite literally, mean different things to different people. I have never seen two clean eaters agree: each of dairy, GMO, organic, legumes, and grains are or are not "clean" depending on the individual arguing the term. By any reasonable metric it is a useless term for that reason.

That said, I honestly don't care what others eat or do not eat. If someone wants to use pseudoscience to guide their life, that is certainly their right. It is also my right to point out the absurdity of doing that and to continue to shake my head. I'm entirely too old to believe that people who are so easily deluded by this type of thing are going to change their minds.

Best of luck!

As I've said: I agree the term is silly. His post was also silly.

I eat primarily vegetables, fruits (prepared minimally), lean meats, whole grains, no refined grains, no added sugar (when I can help it), no HFCS, and aim to limit my consumption of overly processed, packaged convenience foods. I bet most folks who use the phrase "clean eating" would say my diet is pretty "clean". Is my approach to eating a "crazy fitness" phenomenon? Do you, beachiron think that's odd, unsustainable or "sad"? Trendy? A fad? If I said my diet was built around "whole foods" would that phrase work? I'm figuring no.

How long has "IFFYM" been around as a buzz phrase in dieting?

I don't think IIFYM is really used as a "buzz phrase in dieting" so much as an approach that was developed during the course of participating in bodybuilding. It was actually a way of pulling back a bit from the craziness that is prevalent there in terms of "bro" or "clean" diet. No one is "selling" it so to speak, but you will see it mentioned here a bit and on places like bodybuilding.com, and there is a IIFYM.com, but again the idea is one of "pulling back" and bringing order into one's diet. Put another way, the idea is to better explain the minimum amount of dietary effort necessary to achieve the desired results. That said, if you want to use "buzz phrase in dieting," then I'm okay with that as I don't really find a semantic argument helpful in this context.

I don't think cutting out refined carbohydrates, added sugar, or "processed" foods is necessary, physiologically speaking, unless there is an individual medical need to do so. If someone desires to do so because they can't control themselves, then I would hope that they would work on that through teaching themselves moderation, rather than deciding to cut it out for the rest of their lives. And yes, I would personally find a life without ice cream or cake "sad." Just like I would find a life without sex, or beaches, or hiking, or any other of the joys I find in life would be "sad." That is not to personally attack your choices in life, but I certainly wouldn't be pushing dietary asceticism on others.

mmapags

Clean eating is a subjective turn thrown around by different followers of whatever crazy fitness phenom is current. I just eat to meat my nutrient goals.

WOW. Talk about subjective.

I would try to explain my views on this again, but you likely wouldn't read them, or try to understand my perspective. So I won't bother. It's clear you've decided what YOU think it means.

It does, quite literally, mean different things to different people. I have never seen two clean eaters agree: each of dairy, GMO, organic, legumes, and grains are or are not "clean" depending on the individual arguing the term. By any reasonable metric it is a useless term for that reason.

That said, I honestly don't care what others eat or do not eat. If someone wants to use pseudoscience to guide their life, that is certainly their right. It is also my right to point out the absurdity of doing that and to continue to shake my head. I'm entirely too old to believe that people who are so easily deluded by this type of thing are going to change their minds.

Best of luck!

As I've said: I agree the term is silly. His post was also silly.

I eat primarily vegetables, fruits (prepared minimally), lean meats, whole grains, no refined grains, no added sugar (when I can help it), no HFCS, and aim to limit my consumption of overly processed, packaged convenience foods. I bet most folks who use the phrase "clean eating" would say my diet is pretty "clean". Is my approach to eating a "crazy fitness" phenomenon? Do you, beachiron think that's odd, unsustainable or "sad"? Trendy? A fad? If I said my diet was built around "whole foods" would that phrase work? I'm figuring no.

How long has "IFFYM" been around as a buzz phrase in dieting?

I don't think IIFYM is really used as a "buzz phrase in dieting" so much as an approach that was developed during the course of participating in bodybuilding. It was actually a way of pulling back a bit from the craziness that is prevalent there in terms of "bro" or "clean" diet. No one is "selling" it so to speak, but you will see it mentioned here a bit and on places like bodybuilding.com, and there is a IIFYM.com, but again the idea is one of "pulling back" and bringing order into one's diet. Put another way, the idea is to better explain the minimum amount of dietary effort necessary to achieve the desired results. That said, if you want to use "buzz phrase in dieting," then I'm okay with that as I don't really find a semantic argument helpful in this context.

I don't think cutting out refined carbohydrates, added sugar, or "processed" foods is necessary, physiologically speaking, unless there is an individual medical need to do so. If someone desires to do so because they can't control themselves, then I would hope that they would work on that through teaching themselves moderation, rather than deciding to cut it out for the rest of their lives. And yes, I would personally find a life without ice cream or cake "sad." Just like I would find a life without sex, or beaches, or hiking, or any other of the joys I find in life would be "sad." That is not to personally attack your choices in life, but I certainly wouldn't be pushing dietary asceticism on others.

Excellent representation. I pretty much feel this exact way and take this exact approach.

Maybe I'm a little tone deaf on this but I really don't see the reason for all the negative reaction to IIFYM. Yes, there are some that flaunt the treats aspect of what they eat. But as someone said earlier, why focus on the 20% instead of the 80% of solid, nutritional eating. Possibly, those who talk about the fast food and treats are skewing the perception. But as someone else said, go look at their diaries and that will tell the tale usually.

Sabine_Stroeh, it sounds like your eating method and mine are pretty much the same other that the measuring aspect. I will also allow myself, pizza, ice cream and the occasional baked good. It is the minor part of my diet. You may or may not do that same, I can't tell. Other than that, It's hitting my calorie targets and my macro targets with the priority being protein, then fats, then carbs with mostly whole foods (probably 90%). It's pretty simple really and pretty much straight forward and easy to follow.

I think the negative reaction to the "clean eating" threads is the "rules" based, holier than thou approach that is not supported b any data and the lack of any universal definition. It's pretty much common sense that most of the food we eat should be nutrient dense.

delicious_cocktail

Jonnythan who declared my lifestyle "sad"? meh

He tends to be inflammatory in his rhetoric.

Your lifestyle is only sad if you are pining for things you feel that you cannot have, but truly can, without impact.

It sounds like you very much enjoy your lifestyle, so I would suggest you toss him into the bucket of "people who say things to get a reaction" and for pete's sake please don't elect him a representative of the rational-diet-society.

StrictlyPro

I'm so late in this thread that my reply probably won't even be seen, but my definition of eating clean is avoiding trans fats and toxic metals.

Sabine_Stroehm

Clean eating is a subjective turn thrown around by different followers of whatever crazy fitness phenom is current. I just eat to meat my nutrient goals.

WOW. Talk about subjective.

I would try to explain my views on this again, but you likely wouldn't read them, or try to understand my perspective. So I won't bother. It's clear you've decided what YOU think it means.

It does, quite literally, mean different things to different people. I have never seen two clean eaters agree: each of dairy, GMO, organic, legumes, and grains are or are not "clean" depending on the individual arguing the term. By any reasonable metric it is a useless term for that reason.

That said, I honestly don't care what others eat or do not eat. If someone wants to use pseudoscience to guide their life, that is certainly their right. It is also my right to point out the absurdity of doing that and to continue to shake my head. I'm entirely too old to believe that people who are so easily deluded by this type of thing are going to change their minds.

Best of luck!

As I've said: I agree the term is silly. His post was also silly.

I eat primarily vegetables, fruits (prepared minimally), lean meats, whole grains, no refined grains, no added sugar (when I can help it), no HFCS, and aim to limit my consumption of overly processed, packaged convenience foods. I bet most folks who use the phrase "clean eating" would say my diet is pretty "clean". Is my approach to eating a "crazy fitness" phenomenon? Do you, beachiron think that's odd, unsustainable or "sad"? Trendy? A fad? If I said my diet was built around "whole foods" would that phrase work? I'm figuring no.

How long has "IFFYM" been around as a buzz phrase in dieting?

I don't think IIFYM is really used as a "buzz phrase in dieting" so much as an approach that was developed during the course of participating in bodybuilding. It was actually a way of pulling back a bit from the craziness that is prevalent there in terms of "bro" or "clean" diet. No one is "selling" it so to speak, but you will see it mentioned here a bit and on places like bodybuilding.com, and there is a IIFYM.com, but again the idea is one of "pulling back" and bringing order into one's diet. Put another way, the idea is to better explain the minimum amount of dietary effort necessary to achieve the desired results. That said, if you want to use "buzz phrase in dieting," then I'm okay with that as I don't really find a semantic argument helpful in this context.

I don't think cutting out refined carbohydrates, added sugar, or "processed" foods is necessary, physiologically speaking, unless there is an individual medical need to do so. If someone desires to do so because they can't control themselves, then I would hope that they would work on that through teaching themselves moderation, rather than deciding to cut it out for the rest of their lives. And yes, I would personally find a life without ice cream or cake "sad." Just like I would find a life without sex, or beaches, or hiking, or any other of the joys I find in life would be "sad." That is not to personally attack your choices in life, but I certainly wouldn't be pushing dietary asceticism on others.

dietary asceticism. Interesting.
I think I've said what I wanted to say, and you have done the same. Your final clause there sums up your perspective, and with that. I'm done discussing it with ya. cheers.

Sabine_Stroehm

Jonnythan who declared my lifestyle "sad"? meh

He tends to be inflammatory in his rhetoric.

Your lifestyle is only sad if you are pining for things you feel that you cannot have, but truly can, without impact.

It sounds like you very much enjoy your lifestyle, so I would suggest you toss him into the bucket of "people who say things to get a reaction" and for pete's sake please don't elect him a representative of the rational-diet-society.

He is rather inflammatory. And seems to enjoy it. So that he got a little back I don't really mind.

Sabine_Stroehm

Sabine_Stroeh, it sounds like your eating method and mine are pretty much the same other that the measuring aspect. I will also allow myself, pizza, ice cream and the occasional baked good. It is the minor part of my diet. You may or may not do that same, I can't tell. Other than that, It's hitting my calorie targets and my macro targets with the priority being protein, then fats, then carbs with mostly whole foods (probably 90%). It's pretty simple really and pretty much straight forward and easy to follow.

I think the negative reaction to the "clean eating" threads is the "rules" based, holier than thou approach that is not supported b any data and the lack of any universal definition. It's pretty much common sense that most of the food we eat should be nutrient dense.

I do eat pizza and ice cream. I may be a little more particular in my selection (because I choose not to eat HFCS), but sure. I never enjoyed baked goods, so that isn't anything for me to consider.
Pizza isn't something I allow, per se it's just something I eat. It's one of my favorite foods, in fact. There's a nice little wood oven pizza place near by that we love and that fits quite nicely with my approach to eating. And Hubs makes a helluva good pizza.

delicious_cocktail

He is rather inflammatory. And seems to enjoy it. So that he got a little back I don't really mind.

If IIFYM and "Clean Eating"/"Whole Foods" could be considered groups, neither of us have a shortage of poor representatives.

It's a shame.

Sabine_Stroehm

He is rather inflammatory. And seems to enjoy it. So that he got a little back I don't really mind.

If IIFYM and "Clean Eating"/"Whole Foods" could be considered groups, neither of us have a shortage of poor representatives.

It's a shame.

LOL You got that right.

delicious_cocktail

Should arrange some sort of snack mixer where we all exchange luna bars and protein bars as a sign of good will :-D

BeachIron

Clean eating is a subjective turn thrown around by different followers of whatever crazy fitness phenom is current. I just eat to meat my nutrient goals.

WOW. Talk about subjective.

I would try to explain my views on this again, but you likely wouldn't read them, or try to understand my perspective. So I won't bother. It's clear you've decided what YOU think it means.

It does, quite literally, mean different things to different people. I have never seen two clean eaters agree: each of dairy, GMO, organic, legumes, and grains are or are not "clean" depending on the individual arguing the term. By any reasonable metric it is a useless term for that reason.

That said, I honestly don't care what others eat or do not eat. If someone wants to use pseudoscience to guide their life, that is certainly their right. It is also my right to point out the absurdity of doing that and to continue to shake my head. I'm entirely too old to believe that people who are so easily deluded by this type of thing are going to change their minds.

Best of luck!

As I've said: I agree the term is silly. His post was also silly.

I eat primarily vegetables, fruits (prepared minimally), lean meats, whole grains, no refined grains, no added sugar (when I can help it), no HFCS, and aim to limit my consumption of overly processed, packaged convenience foods. I bet most folks who use the phrase "clean eating" would say my diet is pretty "clean". Is my approach to eating a "crazy fitness" phenomenon? Do you, beachiron think that's odd, unsustainable or "sad"? Trendy? A fad? If I said my diet was built around "whole foods" would that phrase work? I'm figuring no.

How long has "IFFYM" been around as a buzz phrase in dieting?

I don't think IIFYM is really used as a "buzz phrase in dieting" so much as an approach that was developed during the course of participating in bodybuilding. It was actually a way of pulling back a bit from the craziness that is prevalent there in terms of "bro" or "clean" diet. No one is "selling" it so to speak, but you will see it mentioned here a bit and on places like bodybuilding.com, and there is a IIFYM.com, but again the idea is one of "pulling back" and bringing order into one's diet. Put another way, the idea is to better explain the minimum amount of dietary effort necessary to achieve the desired results. That said, if you want to use "buzz phrase in dieting," then I'm okay with that as I don't really find a semantic argument helpful in this context.

I don't think cutting out refined carbohydrates, added sugar, or "processed" foods is necessary, physiologically speaking, unless there is an individual medical need to do so. If someone desires to do so because they can't control themselves, then I would hope that they would work on that through teaching themselves moderation, rather than deciding to cut it out for the rest of their lives. And yes, I would personally find a life without ice cream or cake "sad." Just like I would find a life without sex, or beaches, or hiking, or any other of the joys I find in life would be "sad." That is not to personally attack your choices in life, but I certainly wouldn't be pushing dietary asceticism on others.

dietary asceticism. Interesting.
I think I've said what I wanted to say, and you have done the same. Your final clause there sums up your perspective, and with that. I'm done discussing it with ya. cheers.

Don't go away mad . . .

delicious_cocktail

BeachIron! We're organizing a mixer!

BeachIron

BeachIron! We're organizing a mixer!

I'm in!