Do I have to eat 100% clean to lose weight?
Replies
-
Soo... If I am to believe everybody in this thread, I should be able to eat 1500 calories of butter every day and still fit into my sexy pants. Why has nobody told me this sooner?!?! Thank you folks of MFP for this genius insight!!!
Always someone that cant grasp the concept of moderation and has to take it to the extreme limits to disprove it. Yes you could still lose weight eating nothing but butter but obviously that would be ridiculous.
No, I actually CAN grasp moderation and it's what I've practiced to get to where I am now. My problem with this thread is those that are saying calorie deficit is all that matters. If your goal is to lose weight, yeah, calorie deficit is all that matters. If your goal is to be healthy, then clean eating is better than junk food every day.
With a straight face, can you tell me that 1,800 calories of junk food is going to have the same effect on your body as 1,800 calories of clean (even mostly clean) food?
And to be quite honest, you guys can do whatever you want to do. I don't care.
No one said x amount of junk has the same effect of x amount of whatever else outside of pure weight loss. No one told you to eat all your calories in junk (in fact the general response seems to be 'nuu, don't do that.')
All junk isn't moderation anymore than 100% clean food is.0 -
Nope you do not have to eat 100% clean. I'd say that i've had a pretty average diet the last couple months with bits of cheat days here and there and i've lost 60lbs still. SO it's more quantity over quality. Although healthier foods make you feel better and don't make you crave more unhealthy foods.0
-
If your goal is to lose weight, yeah, calorie deficit is all that matters.
Read the thread title.
Now read this line.
Read the thread title again.
We're done here!If your goal is to be healthy, then clean eating is better than junk food every day.
Oh and you were doing so well.
Yup, dopey post is dopey. As if the only 2 choices are "clean" eating, what ever that is, or all junk food every day.0 -
It may not be the food that has you stalled. Try revamping your exercise routine. If your only form of exercise is running, then your body expects that and then doesn't have to work as hard anymore. Try adding some strength training to your routine. Or adding some HIIT to your running routine to switch things up a little.
Keeping your body out of an exercise routine will keep it guessing and always result in a great calorie burn!
^^^this was my thought as well. Also calorie counting isn't exact when you are just going by smal med lg size fry etc. and not weighing food.0 -
It may not be the food that has you stalled. Try revamping your exercise routine. If your only form of exercise is running, then your body expects that and then doesn't have to work as hard anymore. Try adding some strength training to your routine. Or adding some HIIT to your running routine to switch things up a little.
Keeping your body out of an exercise routine will keep it guessing and always result in a great calorie burn!
^^^this was my thought as well. Also calorie counting isn't exact when you are just going by smal med lg size fry etc. and not weighing food.
Funny that you mention fries. The handful of times I've weighed fries, it's been almost dead on. But you are right.0 -
Having a calorific deficit is a good place to start.
Unfortunately for people who are slaicylate sensitive they will also need take into consideration the amount of salicylate in the foods they are eating. Animal protein is generally free except for veined, coloured or flavoured chesses, some veg and fruit is low most are higher, herbs and spices can have most but are only used sparingly.............0 -
-
Soo... If I am to believe everybody in this thread, I should be able to eat 1500 calories of butter every day and still fit into my sexy pants. Why has nobody told me this sooner?!?! Thank you folks of MFP for this genius insight!!!
Always someone that cant grasp the concept of moderation and has to take it to the extreme limits to disprove it. Yes you could still lose weight eating nothing but butter but obviously that would be ridiculous.
No, I actually CAN grasp moderation and it's what I've practiced to get to where I am now. My problem with this thread is those that are saying calorie deficit is all that matters. If your goal is to lose weight, yeah, calorie deficit is all that matters. If your goal is to be healthy, then clean eating is better than junk food every day.
With a straight face, can you tell me that 1,800 calories of junk food is going to have the same effect on your body as 1,800 calories of clean (even mostly clean) food?
And to be quite honest, you guys can do whatever you want to do. I don't care.
I might be able to if you could define "clean" and "junk" for me.0 -
You do not.
but it's healthier over all if you do
and sometimes foods affect you differently then it affects most people. So always pay attention to your body and adjust accordingly.0 -
It may not be the food that has you stalled. Try revamping your exercise routine. If your only form of exercise is running, then your body expects that and then doesn't have to work as hard anymore. Try adding some strength training to your routine. Or adding some HIIT to your running routine to switch things up a little.
Keeping your body out of an exercise routine will keep it guessing and always result in a great calorie burn!
^^^this was my thought as well. Also calorie counting isn't exact when you are just going by smal med lg size fry etc. and not weighing food.
Funny that you mention fries. The handful of times I've weighed fries, it's been almost dead on. But you are right.
The big chains measure their portions pretty well. They've got their expenses calculated down to a nat's as_ and you have to be consistent to do that.
5-Guys, on the other hand, likes to overfill to the point that you've basically got a second serving in the brown bag. I should weigh theirs once, for the heck of it.0 -
Soo... If I am to believe everybody in this thread, I should be able to eat 1500 calories of butter every day and still fit into my sexy pants. Why has nobody told me this sooner?!?! Thank you folks of MFP for this genius insight!!!
Always someone that cant grasp the concept of moderation and has to take it to the extreme limits to disprove it. Yes you could still lose weight eating nothing but butter but obviously that would be ridiculous.
No, I actually CAN grasp moderation and it's what I've practiced to get to where I am now. My problem with this thread is those that are saying calorie deficit is all that matters. If your goal is to lose weight, yeah, calorie deficit is all that matters. If your goal is to be healthy, then clean eating is better than junk food every day.
With a straight face, can you tell me that 1,800 calories of junk food is going to have the same effect on your body as 1,800 calories of clean (even mostly clean) food?
And to be quite honest, you guys can do whatever you want to do. I don't care.
I might be able to if you could define "clean" and "junk" for me.
0 -
Soo... If I am to believe everybody in this thread, I should be able to eat 1500 calories of butter every day and still fit into my sexy pants. Why has nobody told me this sooner?!?! Thank you folks of MFP for this genius insight!!!
Always someone that cant grasp the concept of moderation and has to take it to the extreme limits to disprove it. Yes you could still lose weight eating nothing but butter but obviously that would be ridiculous.
No, I actually CAN grasp moderation and it's what I've practiced to get to where I am now. My problem with this thread is those that are saying calorie deficit is all that matters. If your goal is to lose weight, yeah, calorie deficit is all that matters. If your goal is to be healthy, then clean eating is better than junk food every day.
With a straight face, can you tell me that 1,800 calories of junk food is going to have the same effect on your body as 1,800 calories of clean (even mostly clean) food?
And to be quite honest, you guys can do whatever you want to do. I don't care.
I might be able to if you could define "clean" and "junk" for me.
That's exactly what I was going to say. I hate the argument of 'clean' vs. 'junk' because everyone has their own ideas of what those are irregardless of how or who originally designed them. And frankly, I don't want to eat 100% clean by any definition. What would be the fun in that??? Like everyone else has said, it's all about moderation and going to either extreme seems to backfire like Chris Farley after a can of refried beans.0 -
I dont get it, all I see is a turkeyNo. See ticker below.0 -
Soo... If I am to believe everybody in this thread, I should be able to eat 1500 calories of butter every day and still fit into my sexy pants. Why has nobody told me this sooner?!?! Thank you folks of MFP for this genius insight!!!
Always someone that cant grasp the concept of moderation and has to take it to the extreme limits to disprove it. Yes you could still lose weight eating nothing but butter but obviously that would be ridiculous.
No, I actually CAN grasp moderation and it's what I've practiced to get to where I am now. My problem with this thread is those that are saying calorie deficit is all that matters. If your goal is to lose weight, yeah, calorie deficit is all that matters. If your goal is to be healthy, then clean eating is better than junk food every day.
With a straight face, can you tell me that 1,800 calories of junk food is going to have the same effect on your body as 1,800 calories of clean (even mostly clean) food?
And to be quite honest, you guys can do whatever you want to do. I don't care.
I might be able to if you could define "clean" and "junk" for me.
0 -
Has anyone linked to the Twinkie diet yet?
This feels like a good thread for such a link.
http://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/11/08/twinkie.diet.professor/index.html0 -
I might be able to if you could define "clean" and "junk" for me.
I find it amusing that those that claim not to think food is junk or know what 'junk food' is, are often those that immediately start defending fast food, baked goods and sweets when someone mentions junk food.0 -
I might be able to if you could define "clean" and "junk" for me.
I find it amusing that those that claim not to think food is junk or know what 'junk food' is, are often those that immediately start defending fast food, baked goods and sweets when someone mentions junk food.
It's because the labels like "clean" or "junk" have no real meaning.
It's the labels we attack.
Nutrients matter. Labels do not.0 -
I keep wondering if these arguments are simply a matter of viewpoint. If some are arguing in support of how they eat 80% of the time while others are arguing defending what they eat 20% of the time and if in reality, most folks eat pretty similarly, big picture.0
-
I keep wondering if these arguments are simply a matter of viewpoint. If some are arguing in support of how they eat 80% of the time while others are arguing defending what they eat 20% of the time and if in reality, most folks eat pretty similarly, big picture.
It doesn't matter how you eat 80% of the time or 20% of the time.
What matters is what it all adds up to at the end of the day.
Count up the nutrients you've taken in at the end of the day, and if they add up to the right stuff then you're good. If they don't add up to the right stuff you're not good.
It doesn't matter if you eat 80% clean or 80% "junk" or 80% whatever if your overall total nutrient intake is inappropriate.0 -
I keep wondering if these arguments are simply a matter of viewpoint. If some are arguing in support of how they eat 80% of the time while others are arguing defending what they eat 20% of the time and if in reality, most folks eat pretty similarly, big picture.
Pretty much.
Some people use "clean" as shorthand for stuff without so many calories that I can enjoy it and make it fit in to my numbers. Others have made it a religion.0 -
I think you rather missed my point, but whatever.I keep wondering if these arguments are simply a matter of viewpoint. If some are arguing in support of how they eat 80% of the time while others are arguing defending what they eat 20% of the time and if in reality, most folks eat pretty similarly, big picture.
It doesn't matter how you eat 80% of the time or 20% of the time.
What matters is what it all adds up to at the end of the day.
Count up the nutrients you've taken in at the end of the day, and if they add up to the right stuff then you're good. If they don't add up to the right stuff you're not good.
It doesn't matter if you eat 80% clean or 80% "junk" or 80% whatever if your overall total nutrient intake is inappropriate.0 -
I think you rather missed my point, but whatever.I keep wondering if these arguments are simply a matter of viewpoint. If some are arguing in support of how they eat 80% of the time while others are arguing defending what they eat 20% of the time and if in reality, most folks eat pretty similarly, big picture.
It doesn't matter how you eat 80% of the time or 20% of the time.
What matters is what it all adds up to at the end of the day.
Count up the nutrients you've taken in at the end of the day, and if they add up to the right stuff then you're good. If they don't add up to the right stuff you're not good.
It doesn't matter if you eat 80% clean or 80% "junk" or 80% whatever if your overall total nutrient intake is inappropriate.
I'm quite certain I did not.
You and others are so intensely focused on food labels that you miss the overall picture and fail to understand what actually matters.0 -
I might be able to if you could define "clean" and "junk" for me.
I find it amusing that those that claim not to think food is junk or know what 'junk food' is, are often those that immediately start defending fast food, baked goods and sweets when someone mentions junk food.
I find it amusing people label foods as "junk" but then cannot define what it is about it that makes it that way. I am perfectly aware of what they consider to be junk though.0 -
And here comes the broscience.You do not have to eat 100% clean however just creating a calorie deficit will not help your goal. The timing of when you eat bad food can be helpful to your cause. Look into carb backloading. It is a fun way to lose get lean and eat what you want
A.C.E. Certified Personal/Group FitnessTrainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition0 -
Nope. But again, whatever.
I think you rather missed my point, but whatever.I keep wondering if these arguments are simply a matter of viewpoint. If some are arguing in support of how they eat 80% of the time while others are arguing defending what they eat 20% of the time and if in reality, most folks eat pretty similarly, big picture.
It doesn't matter how you eat 80% of the time or 20% of the time.
What matters is what it all adds up to at the end of the day.
Count up the nutrients you've taken in at the end of the day, and if they add up to the right stuff then you're good. If they don't add up to the right stuff you're not good.
It doesn't matter if you eat 80% clean or 80% "junk" or 80% whatever if your overall total nutrient intake is inappropriate.
I'm quite certain I did not.
You and others are so intensely focused on food labels that you miss the overall picture and fail to understand what actually matters.0 -
I might be able to if you could define "clean" and "junk" for me.
I find it amusing that those that claim not to think food is junk or know what 'junk food' is, are often those that immediately start defending fast food, baked goods and sweets when someone mentions junk food.
I find it amusing people label foods as "junk" but then cannot define what it is about it that makes it that way. I am perfectly aware of what they consider to be junk though.
It's the label on the wrapper.0 -
Disagree. Loss of body fat comes down to calorie deficit regardless whether one eats clean or not.Calorie deficits work for weight loss, but if you really want to tone then eating clean is mandatory.
WUT? Broscience on a roll here.However you don't have to eat clean 100% of time, it will just take longer to tone if you don't eat clean all the time.
Actually unless someone has a digestive issue or health issue, we process foods the same way from human to human.Also everyone processes food in different ways so you need to find that middle ground of eating clean and eating anything else.
More broscience. The amount of meals don't matter. Total calories at that end of the day do regardless of how it's achieved.But the main thing is that weight loss will happen with just having a calorie deficit and eating more meals over the course of a day rather than 3 large meals.
A.C.E. Certified Personal/Group FitnessTrainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition0 -
Nope. But again, whatever.
I think you rather missed my point, but whatever.I keep wondering if these arguments are simply a matter of viewpoint. If some are arguing in support of how they eat 80% of the time while others are arguing defending what they eat 20% of the time and if in reality, most folks eat pretty similarly, big picture.
It doesn't matter how you eat 80% of the time or 20% of the time.
What matters is what it all adds up to at the end of the day.
Count up the nutrients you've taken in at the end of the day, and if they add up to the right stuff then you're good. If they don't add up to the right stuff you're not good.
It doesn't matter if you eat 80% clean or 80% "junk" or 80% whatever if your overall total nutrient intake is inappropriate.
I'm quite certain I did not.
You and others are so intensely focused on food labels that you miss the overall picture and fail to understand what actually matters.
This might be the worst comeback argument I have ever seen on MFP.0 -
Yep. You'll probably lose lean muscle and feel like crap because of lack of macros and micros, but the deficit will cause you to be smaller. Not sexy, but smaller.Soo... If I am to believe everybody in this thread, I should be able to eat 1500 calories of butter every day and still fit into my sexy pants. Why has nobody told me this sooner?!?! Thank you folks of MFP for this genius insight!!!
A.C.E. Certified Personal/Group FitnessTrainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition0 -
I might be able to if you could define "clean" and "junk" for me.
I find it amusing that those that claim not to think food is junk or know what 'junk food' is, are often those that immediately start defending fast food, baked goods and sweets when someone mentions junk food.
It's because the labels like "clean" or "junk" have no real meaning.
It's the labels we attack.
Nutrients matter. Labels do not.
Labels have no meaning, yet we all know what they mean. Got it.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 426 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions