Clean Eating Bashing?
Replies
-
I get how you see it, yes. I get what you *think* I say....
Great post. I tried saying something similar, but you said it more eloquently. I have often wondered if some of us post with great fervor about what we eat about 20% of the time, while others post with gusto about what they eat 80% (or whatever percentage) of the time.I haven't got 6K posts and years on this board, but I will say a couple of things:
Flaunting a McDonalds habit and love of poptarts flies in the face of everything most newbie (and old) dieters, as well as others, have learned or in the process of learning about diet,health, and nutrition. And that is exactly why it is done. But it is a knee jerk - in your face response that provokes. I get why. I get I the " I lost a million pounds eating Mickey D's, candy bars, and drinking pepsi" and it worked for me. But just as valid are those of us who eating snickers makes us feel like crap. Who believe that eating whole foods is better for our health - because we feel better eating that way. And I don't think either perspective is wrong. And, in fact, I think most folks on this board, talk a big twinkie and poptart, but in reality, don't do much of them either. They choose not to. Not because they are "bad" but because they don't fit their "macros." Choices. And my guess is that 99% of us do not stick to anything 100% of the time.
Healthy? Happy? Losing weight? Or gaining muscle? Feel good? Then it is all good. Who cares what anyone else thinks.
I too find that building my diet around whole foods makes me feel better. I eat snacks and the occasional meal that aren't nutritious as well, but don't consider those snacks the basis of my diet.
The way I see it, none of this has anything to do with how often anyone eats anything.
This entire argument is about whether certain foods are automatically bad. You warn of dangerous health consequences for people who eat "unclean" food, and I think those crazy scare tactics are not only wrong but horrendously counterproductive.0 -
So I can better understand, you believe there is no nutritional difference between the beef in a McDonalds Big Mac and a rib eye from a grass fed cow.
Why would you try to compare ground beef to ribeye? Make a fair comparison.
Ok, McDonald's ground beef to ground beef from a grass fed cow...0 -
So I can better understand, you believe there is no nutritional difference between the beef in a McDonalds Big Mac and a rib eye from a grass fed cow.
Why would you try to compare ground beef to ribeye? Make a fair comparison.
I agree with jonny on this one..nothing beats a nice big juicy ribeye...regardless of how it's fed.
But you take ground beef and make a burger at home the same size as the one at Micky D's and yes there is no nutrional difference...but the Micky D's one tastes better cause someone else made it.
I have to disagree. McD's is pretty boring. ("Where's the Beef?") I'm not a burger fan, per se, but I will eat a burger from Wendy's or Dairy Queen. Those two are the only ones that I can say, "That tasted good."0 -
0 -
haha.
it's an opinion.. people ask a question.. I believe X you believe Y. Both based off what we've read, and what we've experienced. I've never attacked an "unclean" eater.. other then to say grease laden food is unhealthy (which it is) and pop tarts are not health food (which they are not). There mere mention of "eat clean" elicits the sort of response you see in this thread.
It's like choosing a political party only in the nutrition world. Instead of Dem or Rep.. we have Clean and Unclean. And the truth is *most people* fall into a category somewhere in the middle, but will defend their position vehemently. lol.
I'm going to back to my popcorn now.. lol0 -
So I can better understand, you believe there is no nutritional difference between the beef in a McDonalds Big Mac and a rib eye from a grass fed cow.
Why would you try to compare ground beef to ribeye? Make a fair comparison.
Ok, McDonald's ground beef to ground beef from a grass fed cow...
Pretty much (if the fat content is the same and the ground beef from the grass fed cow has been frozen) unless you can show me a peer reviewed study that says different.0 -
haha.
it's an opinion.. people ask a question.. I believe X you believe Y. Both based off what we've read, and what we've experienced. I've never attacked an "unclean" eater.. other then to say grease laden food is unhealthy (which it is) and pop tarts are not health food (which they are not). There mere mention of "eat clean" elicits the sort of response you see in this thread.
It's like choosing a political party only in the nutrition world. Instead of Dem or Rep.. we have Clean and Unclean. And the truth is *most people* fall into a category somewhere in the middle, but will defend their position vehemently. lol.
I'm going to back to my popcorn now.. lol
Which is "unclean:" the Democrats or the Republicans?0 -
So I can better understand, you believe there is no nutritional difference between the beef in a McDonalds Big Mac and a rib eye from a grass fed cow.
Why would you try to compare ground beef to ribeye? Make a fair comparison.
Ok, McDonald's ground beef to ground beef from a grass fed cow...
There would be no significant nutritional differences. There are some minor differences in the fat profile, but they're extremely minor and not worth worrying about.0 -
So I can better understand, you believe there is no nutritional difference between the beef in a McDonalds Big Mac and a rib eye from a grass fed cow.
Why would you try to compare ground beef to ribeye? Make a fair comparison.
Ok, McDonald's ground beef to ground beef from a grass fed cow...
Pretty much (if the fat content is the same and the ground beef from the grass fed cow has been frozen) unless you can show me a peer reviewed study that says different.
http://www.nutritionj.com/content/9/1/100 -
haha.
it's an opinion.. people ask a question.. I believe X you believe Y. Both based off what we've read, and what we've experienced. I've never attacked an "unclean" eater.. other then to say grease laden food is unhealthy (which it is) and pop tarts are not health food (which they are not). There mere mention of "eat clean" elicits the sort of response you see in this thread.
It's like choosing a political party only in the nutrition world. Instead of Dem or Rep.. we have Clean and Unclean. And the truth is *most people* fall into a category somewhere in the middle, but will defend their position vehemently. lol.
I'm going to back to my popcorn now.. lol
Which is "unclean:" the Democrats or the Republicans?
Definitely both! :laugh:0 -
So I can better understand, you believe there is no nutritional difference between the beef in a McDonalds Big Mac and a rib eye from a grass fed cow.
Why would you try to compare ground beef to ribeye? Make a fair comparison.
Ok, McDonald's ground beef to ground beef from a grass fed cow...
Pretty much (if the fat content is the same and the ground beef from the grass fed cow has been frozen) unless you can show me a peer reviewed study that says different.
http://www.nutritionj.com/content/9/1/10
Interesting... so if I am reading this right, on it's own it is "better" but in the context of the diet as a whole not significantly. Much like carbs and GI charts... in the context of a meal the whole GI deal goes out the window.0 -
So I can better understand, you believe there is no nutritional difference between the beef in a McDonalds Big Mac and a rib eye from a grass fed cow.
Why would you try to compare ground beef to ribeye? Make a fair comparison.
Ok, McDonald's ground beef to ground beef from a grass fed cow...
Pretty much (if the fat content is the same and the ground beef from the grass fed cow has been frozen) unless you can show me a peer reviewed study that says different.
http://www.nutritionj.com/content/9/1/10
Exactly. The differences are negligible. The biggest thign people harp on ist he omega-3 to omega-6 ratio. The problem is that beef has virtually no omega-3 in it to begin with.
For example, Leheska et al. showed grass-fed cows had an n6/n3 ratio of 2.78 while grain-fed had an n6/n3 ratio of 13.6. Holy crap what a huge difference, right? However, when you look at the numbers a quarter-pound patty of grass-fed 90/10 ground beef would have 0.09 grams of omega-3 fatty acids while the grain-fed would have 0.02 grams. The grain-fed beef has like 80% less omega-3 but it's essentially 80% less than nothing.
That's the difference between statistically significant and clinically significant results. The differences are enough to statistically establish that there is a difference in the results, but no human being will experience any kind of health benefits from this difference.0 -
If people say “I want to be strong”, “I want to be fit”, “I want to be attractive” on MFP, what does that mean? It has to be bullsh*t, right, because no one can clearly, scientifically, objectively define what being strong, fit, and attractive is? And yet these types of comments are posted all the time and don’t cause a sh*tstorm - no one calls these people smug and arrogant.
So why is “clean eating” found to be offensive while these other subjective goals are fine? Whenever a thread mentions it, the “anti-clean eaters” relentlessly dissect the definition until they find something that they can take offense to, and then go after the person.
If I say “I want to be fit”, the response could be, “what does that mean, brah?” Maybe fit means being able to run a marathon to me. “How arrogant, not everyone can run a marathon or wants to, do you think that only runners are fit, they are scientifically harmful, blah blah blah.” You can be offended by damn near everything.0 -
well said, I agreeI find "non-clean" eaters to act superior a lot of the time compared to clean. I see a lot of clean eaters trying to get other to hop on board because, yeah, less chimicals and fats and sugars is obviously going to be better for you in the long run.
But I see a hell of a lot more people who feel personally attacked by the simple suggestion of "eating clean" or a vegan diet, and the idea that it is, shockingly, more healthy for you than the standard western diet of processed foods.
I'd had a lot of people get on my *kitten* about trying to eat cleaner, or eliminate certain foods from my diet. Never have I once had a vegan or clean-eater look down on me for chowing down on a double cheeseburger.
nicely said :flowerforyou:I haven't got 6K posts and years on this board, but I will say a couple of things:
Flaunting a McDonalds habit and love of poptarts flies in the face of everything most newbie (and old) dieters, as well as others, have learned or in the process of learning about diet,health, and nutrition. And that is exactly why it is done. But it is a knee jerk - in your face response that provokes. I get why. I get I the " I lost a million pounds eating Mickey D's, candy bars, and drinking pepsi" and it worked for me. But just as valid are those of us who eating snickers makes us feel like crap. Who believe that eating whole foods is better for our health - because we feel better eating that way. And I don't think either perspective is wrong. And, in fact, I think most folks on this board, talk a big twinkie and poptart, but in reality, don't do much of them either. They choose not to. Not because they are "bad" but because they don't fit their "macros." Choices. And my guess is that 99% of us do not stick to anything 100% of the time.
Healthy? Happy? Losing weight? Or gaining muscle? Feel good? Then it is all good. Who cares what anyone else thinks.0 -
Great post. I tried saying something similar, but you said it more eloquently. I have often wondered if some of us post with great fervor about what we eat about 20% of the time, while others post with gusto about what they eat 80% (or whatever percentage) of the time.I haven't got 6K posts and years on this board, but I will say a couple of things:
Flaunting a McDonalds habit and love of poptarts flies in the face of everything most newbie (and old) dieters, as well as others, have learned or in the process of learning about diet,health, and nutrition. And that is exactly why it is done. But it is a knee jerk - in your face response that provokes. I get why. I get I the " I lost a million pounds eating Mickey D's, candy bars, and drinking pepsi" and it worked for me. But just as valid are those of us who eating snickers makes us feel like crap. Who believe that eating whole foods is better for our health - because we feel better eating that way. And I don't think either perspective is wrong. And, in fact, I think most folks on this board, talk a big twinkie and poptart, but in reality, don't do much of them either. They choose not to. Not because they are "bad" but because they don't fit their "macros." Choices. And my guess is that 99% of us do not stick to anything 100% of the time.
Healthy? Happy? Losing weight? Or gaining muscle? Feel good? Then it is all good. Who cares what anyone else thinks.
I too find that building my diet around whole foods makes me feel better. I eat snacks and the occasional meal that aren't nutritious as well, but don't consider those snacks the basis of my diet.
The way I see it, none of this has anything to do with how often anyone eats anything.
This entire argument is about whether certain foods are automatically bad. You warn of dangerous health consequences for people who eat "unclean" food, and I think those crazy scare tactics are not only wrong but horrendously counterproductive.
The fact you keep saying this over and over again does not make it true. I have never warned anyone of dangerous health consequences - the VAST majority of the people on this thread have not warned or scorned and most don't give a *kitten* about what other people eat. There will always be the outliers, the heretics, the fanatics, but to paint EVERYONE with the same brush is not only wrong, but horrendously counterproductive.0 -
If people say “I want to be strong”, “I want to be fit”, “I want to be attractive” on MFP, what does that mean? It has to be bullsh*t, right, because no one can clearly, scientifically, objectively define what being strong, fit, and attractive is? And yet these types of comments are posted all the time and don’t cause a sh*tstorm - no one calls these people smug and arrogant.
Stroger is a measurable quantity. Fitter is a measurable quantity, depending on your metric (5k time, resting heart rate, VO2max, etc). Attractive... well, I don't know, but generally people mean lower body fat percentage and/or greater quantity of lean mass, which are both measurable (as are waist/hip ratio, pants size, etc).
"Clean" is not a measurable quantity.
The comparison here is invalid.0 -
Subscribed for the conversation.
OP, I agree with you. I don't believe you "have" to eat clean to be healthy, but it definitely can't hurt. It does make me feel better as well when I eat clean. That being said, it could just be psychological as I have lost most my weight eating rather dirty at times.
I just don't see how on earth it can be good to eat something that can live in a can for a year and not spoil.
But I make my own canned food that can last a year or more and not spoil using fresh ingredients. That doesn't make it not good for you. It means I treated the food so it doens't contain bacteria and then removed all the air until I'm ready to eat it.0 -
Of course everything is made up of chemicals. So are we, and everything around us. What does that have to do with it?0 -
If I say “I want to be fit”, the response could be, “what does that mean, brah?” Maybe fit means being able to run a marathon to me. “How arrogant, not everyone can run a marathon or wants to, do you think that only runners are fit, they are scientifically harmful, blah blah blah.” You can be offended by damn near everything.
I'm often offended by the use of fit around here. It's often equated to low bf%. Which is ridiculous. In fact, once you start reducing your bf below a certain percentage you'll find your performance suffers at a certain point.
Just for your future reference fit means "apt for a particular task". You can cash this out anyway you want: Marathons, sprints, downhill skiing, Powerlifting, Oly lifting, Cycling, Martial Arts, Canoeing, etc.... (the list goes on a bit and is seemingly endless).0 -
Of course everything is made up of chemicals. So are we, and everything around us. What does that have to do with it?
You don't associate much with other clean eaters, do you?
At the root of most clean eaters beliefs is some form of technophobia; the fear of chemicals, the fear of processing, mistrust of gov't safety standards, fear of corporations, mistrust in scientific consensus, etc...0 -
Of course everything is made up of chemicals. So are we, and everything around us. What does that have to do with it?
You don't associate much with other clean eaters, do you?
jayrudq appears pretty new to this conversation.0 -
If people say “I want to be strong”, “I want to be fit”, “I want to be attractive” on MFP, what does that mean? It has to be bullsh*t, right, because no one can clearly, scientifically, objectively define what being strong, fit, and attractive is? And yet these types of comments are posted all the time and don’t cause a sh*tstorm - no one calls these people smug and arrogant.
So why is “clean eating” found to be offensive while these other subjective goals are fine? Whenever a thread mentions it, the “anti-clean eaters” relentlessly dissect the definition until they find something that they can take offense to, and then go after the person.
If I say “I want to be fit”, the response could be, “what does that mean, brah?” Maybe fit means being able to run a marathon to me. “How arrogant, not everyone can run a marathon or wants to, do you think that only runners are fit, they are scientifically harmful, blah blah blah.” You can be offended by damn near everything.
Great post0 -
I agree! This is myFITNESSpal, not myWEIGHTLOSSpal. Eating clean contributes to fitness in more ways than eating twinkies at a deficit does.
Why does eating twinkies mean you aren't fit?
NO ONE SAID THAT! This is exactly what I'm talking about.
:huh:
Nobody said that, but implied that eating twinkies at a deficit is somehow inferior to fitness related goals than "eating clean". Right. It's the Twinkie eaters that are hating.0 -
I started here in March eating Paleo and lost 25lbs doing so. I had bloodwork done and my numbers showed remarkable improvment (triglycerides, cholesterol, A1C and magnesium/iron) I missed the foods I had previously enjoyed and thanks to one of Jonnythan's posts I said "I'll try it" I eat a lot of what people would consider "good" and also "bad" food but since I stopped seeing food as good or bad, I've been able to stay the course and go on to lose another 33lbs. I recently had more bloodwork and I'm happy to report even more improvments!
I find that I can eat more whole foods vs fast foods so if I'm really hungry I'll try and keep it leaner and cleaner but if I want McNuggets or a pizza, Ima have it. Balance.0 -
I'm often offended by the use of fit around here. It's often equated to low bf%. Which is ridiculous. In fact, once you start reducing your bf below a certain percentage you'll find your performance suffers at a certain point.
Performance at what?
Have you ever watched the Olympics? Aside for a few sports, most male athletes are well into the single digits, and most female athletes have a strong 6 pack.
Pro fighters? Single digits.
Suffering performance is largely an excuse to stay fat used by noncompetitive recreational weight lifters.0 -
In fact, once you start reducing your bf below a certain percentage you'll find your performance suffers at a certain point.
Says who? Proof? Studies? Articles?
I'd like to know what % of BF that is?
Most people don't every come anywhere near low teens single digit BF%. And Top atheletes are CLEARLY not suffering and they are all low teens/singles.0 -
I'm often offended by the use of fit around here. It's often equated to low bf%. Which is ridiculous. In fact, once you start reducing your bf below a certain percentage you'll find your performance suffers at a certain point.
Performance at what?
Have you ever watched the Olympics? Aside for a few sports, most male athletes are well into the single digits, and most female athletes have a strong 6 pack.
Pro fighters? Single digits.
Suffering performance is largely an excuse to stay fat used by noncompetitive recreational weight lifters.
Pro fighters don't live at single digits. In fact they tend loosen up a bit between fights. Then they "make weight" before the bout.
And I wasn't talking about genetically gifted uber-mortals in the olympics. Does everything have to be taken to such ridiculous extremes around here?
I was talking about us mere mortals. I've found that when I was training a lot as a martial artist, I suffered less injuries and was sick less at a slightly higher bf %. When I dropped too low, then things start going south. Sorry, can't link you to a study. Just speaking from personal experience.
Remember top athletes are a small % of the population for a reason. Not everyone is cut out to win olympic gold or play in the NFL.0 -
I'm often offended by the use of fit around here. It's often equated to low bf%. Which is ridiculous. In fact, once you start reducing your bf below a certain percentage you'll find your performance suffers at a certain point.
Performance at what?
Have you ever watched the Olympics? Aside for a few sports, most male athletes are well into the single digits, and most female athletes have a strong 6 pack.
Pro fighters? Single digits.
Suffering performance is largely an excuse to stay fat used by noncompetitive recreational weight lifters.
Pro fighters don't live at single digits. In fact they tend loosen up a bit between fights. Then they "make weight" before the bout.
And I wasn't talking about genetically gifted uber-mortals in the olympics. Does everything have to be taken to such ridiculous extremes around here?
I was talking about us mere mortals. I've found that when I was training a lot as a martial artist, I suffered less injuries and was sick less at a slightly higher bf %. When I dropped too low, then things start going south. Sorry, can't link you to a study. Just speaking from personal experience.
Remember top athletes are a small % of the population for a reason. Not everyone is cut out to win olympic gold or play in the NFL.
And can we also remember 99% of these guys are on juice, its not a fair comparison0 -
Does everything have to be taken to such ridiculous extremes around here?
Just speaking from personal experience.
Extrapolating "just my personal experience" to "in fact, your performance will suffer" is quite a ridiculous extreme IMO.0 -
Of course everything is made up of chemicals. So are we, and everything around us. What does that have to do with it?
You don't associate much with other clean eaters, do you?
jayrudq appears pretty new to this conversation.
Ha! Yeah, in comparison, I am new to this conversation on this site. But I don't consider myself new to science, nutrition, and critical thinking. I am also a skeptic and do not believe in the goodness of the free market (a little healthy paranoia has served me well over the years).
Eating so-called healthy is a preference. I think it serves me well, too. I prefer to think about the chicken I just ate running around on the farm where I buy it, pecking away, as opposed to the grocery store one who lived in a cage and was processed in a factory - it tastes better to me and I am happier keeping my dollars local. Same with vegetables, meat, etc. Do I buy organic? In some cases, yes. Am I healthier than anyone else? I doubt it. I have lots of bad habits, have lived hard, and partied harder. So who am I to judge others? Do I think it is easier to lose weight and maintain a healthy weight eating this way. Hell yes. Do I think I know more and am right? Of course, who doesn't?
But people aren't going to die from McDonalds or poptarts. It is the heart disease they get from them! :sad: Ok, I just had to.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K 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
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions