Clean Eating Bashing?
Options
Replies
-
I can't believe people are still swallowing that nonsense about Phelps consuming 12,000 cals a day whilst in training for the Beijing Olympics.
Even Tour de France riders are "only" consuming 6000-7000 calories a day.
Of course, they're also burning 3500-4500 calories a day on their bikes...
Pffft bunch of pigs if only they had a physique like me
*rubs Buddha like belly0 -
What bothers me is the assumption that because I'm happy about my choices I'm, therefore, dissing yours. That's simply not true.
You're not dissing others' choices by being happy with your own. You're dissing others' choices when you compare them to choosing to use dirty glasses.0 -
apples are going to kill me
I dont see cyanide in there though(it should be)0 -
To answer your question, I eat subway. Not often, but my kid loves them. If I ate them all the time, I would be fat. Period - so, I don't. Do I consider them a clean food? Yes and no. But I don't label food clean or dirty. Food either works for me or doesn't. But, I think most people see them as a compromise fast food. Not deep fried, not a veggie burger either. Again, I am not an absolutist. And so called "clean" eaters are not monoliths.
Dammit you sound completely reasonable.
I hate it when that happens. :grumble:
:laugh: :flowerforyou:
Really I didn't think so.
The comment " if I ate there all the time I would be fat period" is completely false. I could eat there for a year and lose weight, it would all depend on how much you ate.
Eating all the time at subway doesn't / wouldn't make you fat. Eating more calories than you burn makes you fat.
1)How do you know what makes me fat or doesn't? 2)Did I say everyone? 3)Did I say you, in particular? 4)I said IF I ATE there more often I would be fat. Self knowledge. I know exactly what made me fat.
I've added numbers to make my answering you easier.
1) - excess calories makes you fat - so yes I know, science.
2) - I didn't say you said everyone, but my statement that it doesn't make anyone fat still stands - it's not the food but the amount.
3) - I just used myself as an example of how your statement was false. Would you prefer - "you could eat there every day for a year and as long as you ate at your maintenance calories you wouldn't get fat"?
4) again - excess calories made you fat, not subway or any other food.
You seem very sensitive about my reply. :huh:0 -
apples are going to kill me
I dont see cyanide in there though(it should be)
second to last line - all you can see are the first few letters unless you view it all. :drinker:0 -
I can't believe people are still swallowing that nonsense about Phelps consuming 12,000 cals a day whilst in training for the Beijing Olympics.
Even Tour de France riders are "only" consuming 6000-7000 calories a day.
Of course, they're also burning 3500-4500 calories a day on their bikes...
Exactly.
Actually speaking of cyclists, Chris Horner springs to mind as an athlete who was notorious for fuelling his training on high amounts of "junk", staying lean and performing well. That is until a crash in 2009. Fearing his diet would accelerate weight gain he "cleaned" up his diet, dropped 10 lbs in the process and had one of his best ever seasons well into his late 30s.
Did he take any drastic steps? Not really. He just reduced his consumption of "junk" a bit and increased his consumption of "clean" foods in its place.
There's a lesson in that somewhere...0 -
I can't believe people are still swallowing that nonsense about Phelps consuming 12,000 cals a day whilst in training for the Beijing Olympics. He retracted that in later years IIRC. It was classic piece of misdirection to psyche out his opponents in my opinion.
However, it is undoubtedly true that many athletes consume sizeable amount of food considered to be "junk." Training requires high amounts of energy availability which logistically can't be supplied only by "clean" foods. You'd be eating forever and cramping due to the large volume of food you would have to deal with whilst also working hard.
It's almost as if elite athletes have workout regimens requiring a caloric intake exceeding that of the average person.
This whole conversation is silly and bringing up Michael Phelps to support so called dirty eating is as silly as claiming so called clean eating cures cancer.
Carry on folks.0 -
This thread makes me crave a candy bar............0
-
Actually speaking of cyclists, Chris Horner springs to mind as an athlete who was notorious for fuelling his training on high amounts of "junk", staying lean and performing well. That is until a crash in 2009. Fearing his diet would accelerate weight gain he "cleaned" up his diet, dropped 10 lbs in the process and had one of his best ever seasons well into his late 30s.
Did he take any drastic steps? Not really. He just reduced his consumption of "junk" a bit and increased his consumption of "clean" foods in its place.
There's a lesson in that somewhere...
Dropping 10 lbs probably had nothing to do with it, and I'm sure his macro intake and training were identical before and after.0 -
I can't believe people are still swallowing that nonsense about Phelps consuming 12,000 cals a day whilst in training for the Beijing Olympics. He retracted that in later years IIRC. It was classic piece of misdirection to psyche out his opponents in my opinion.
However, it is undoubtedly true that many athletes consume sizeable amount of food considered to be "junk." Training requires high amounts of energy availability which logistically can't be supplied only by "clean" foods. You'd be eating forever and cramping due to the large volume of food you would have to deal with whilst also working hard.
It's almost as if elite athletes have workout regimens requiring a caloric intake exceeding that of the average person.
This whole conversation is silly and bringing up Michael Phelps to support so called dirty eating is as silly as claiming so called clean eating cures cancer.
Carry on folks.
I actually thought it was brought up because someone was trying to claim all top athletes ate clean.
Who really knows or cares at this point.
But I think trying to claim that clean eating cures cancers is way way sillier (and insultingly stupid) than pointing out that a top athlete eats "dirty" and still kicks *kitten*.0 -
Actually speaking of cyclists, Chris Horner springs to mind as an athlete who was notorious for fuelling his training on high amounts of "junk", staying lean and performing well. That is until a crash in 2009. Fearing his diet would accelerate weight gain he "cleaned" up his diet, dropped 10 lbs in the process and had one of his best ever seasons well into his late 30s.
Did he take any drastic steps? Not really. He just reduced his consumption of "junk" a bit and increased his consumption of "clean" foods in its place.
There's a lesson in that somewhere...
Dropping 10 lbs probably had nothing to do with it, and I'm sure his macro intake and training were identical before and after.
Couldn't agree more, I mean carrying an extra 10lbs of weight wouldn't have made any difference. It was clearly the clean food.0 -
Actually speaking of cyclists, Chris Horner springs to mind as an athlete who was notorious for fuelling his training on high amounts of "junk", staying lean and performing well. That is until a crash in 2009. Fearing his diet would accelerate weight gain he "cleaned" up his diet, dropped 10 lbs in the process and had one of his best ever seasons well into his late 30s.
Did he take any drastic steps? Not really. He just reduced his consumption of "junk" a bit and increased his consumption of "clean" foods in its place.
There's a lesson in that somewhere...
Dropping 10 lbs probably had nothing to do with it, and I'm sure his macro intake and training were identical before and after.
Eh? Of course dropping 10 lbs had something to do with it. It improved his power to weight ratio and he was well known for climbing where this is particularly important.
No idea about his macros though and yes, I am sure his training was almost identical after getting back on the bike.0 -
Actually speaking of cyclists, Chris Horner springs to mind as an athlete who was notorious for fuelling his training on high amounts of "junk", staying lean and performing well. That is until a crash in 2009. Fearing his diet would accelerate weight gain he "cleaned" up his diet, dropped 10 lbs in the process and had one of his best ever seasons well into his late 30s.
Did he take any drastic steps? Not really. He just reduced his consumption of "junk" a bit and increased his consumption of "clean" foods in its place.
There's a lesson in that somewhere...
Dropping 10 lbs probably had nothing to do with it, and I'm sure his macro intake and training were identical before and after.
The obvious reason/lesson in this is any improvements were because clean. All of those other possible explanations (like weight, macros, training, benefits of (forced) down time for full recovery, etc.) should not be considered...because clean. And not just entirely clean, but just "increased his consumption of" clean...because any amount of more clean causes positive results...unless, of course, your level of clean is not sufficient to call it clean and then you obviously need more clean so you can call it clean...
...because clean.0 -
I don't have a problem with people who have their opinion that clean eating is good for them. Just don't preach it at me looking down your nose. Same with anything really.0
-
Actually speaking of cyclists, Chris Horner springs to mind as an athlete who was notorious for fuelling his training on high amounts of "junk", staying lean and performing well. That is until a crash in 2009. Fearing his diet would accelerate weight gain he "cleaned" up his diet, dropped 10 lbs in the process and had one of his best ever seasons well into his late 30s.
Did he take any drastic steps? Not really. He just reduced his consumption of "junk" a bit and increased his consumption of "clean" foods in its place.
There's a lesson in that somewhere...
Dropping 10 lbs probably had nothing to do with it, and I'm sure his macro intake and training were identical before and after.
Eh? Of course dropping 10 lbs had something to do with it. It improved his power to weight ratio and he was well known for climbing where this is particularly important.
No idea about his macros though and yes, I am sure his training was almost identical after getting back on the bike.
yes, I've heard about how you train exactly the same after a major injury like fracturing your pelvis. Certainly there wouldn't have been any rehab or extra cross training that would have helped. :noway:0 -
yes, I've heard about how you train exactly the same after a major injury like fracturing your pelvis. Certainly there wouldn't have been any rehab or extra cross training that would have helped. :noway:
Helped what exactly? His power to weight ratio?
If you want cycle specific adaptations you do cycle specific training. Rehab and cross training have little if no impact on that.0 -
yes, I've heard about how you train exactly the same after a major injury like fracturing your pelvis. Certainly there wouldn't have been any rehab or extra cross training that would have helped. :noway:
Helped what exactly? His power to weight ratio?
If you want cycle specific adaptations you do cycle specific training. Rehab and cross training have little if no impact on that.
You're right silly me - it was the slight increase in clean food alone that made the difference.
That's the lesson you want us to take isn't it..........0 -
Why do other people seem to really care what the hell I eat, as long it is not cannibilism and Im not eating any domesticated animals. Personally I normally eat around 80-20 80 percent whole foods and 20 percent not whole foods (ICE CREAM anyone).
Cows aren't domesticated?? lol0 -
yes, I've heard about how you train exactly the same after a major injury like fracturing your pelvis. Certainly there wouldn't have been any rehab or extra cross training that would have helped. :noway:
Helped what exactly? His power to weight ratio?
If you want cycle specific adaptations you do cycle specific training. Rehab and cross training have little if no impact on that.
You're right silly me - it was the slight increase in clean food alone that made the difference.
That's the lesson you want us to take isn't it..........
Not particularly.
The lesson was you don't have to take drastic steps when modifying your diet to reap positive results or get too caught up in eliminating things - it is balance which is important, even for high level performers.
Still, nothing like confirming your own biases eh?0 -
But again, I am clearly not perpetuating any "fallacy" nor am I trying to recruit anyone to my way of thinking. My motto is simple--you don't need to condemn a dirty glass, just set a clean glass beside it and let people chose for themselves.I don't post much, but have stalked these boards for quite a while and the clean-eating bashing is a big turn-off for me personally. These are the reasons I choose to eat "cleaner":
1. I enjoy cooking
2. I want to know where as many elements of my food come from as possible
3. I want to maintain the energy to sustain an active lifestyle
4. I want good skin, hair, and teeth
5. I want good digestion
6. I want to set a good example for my children
7. I don't want to rely on supplements or medications
8. I don't want to feel bad if I chose to have some candy
9. When I know better, I do better
Of course all of this is subjective, but the great thing is I don't have to rely on anyone else's experiences but my own. I don't have to quantify or qualify or justify. Period.
And those who choose not to eat clean get the same results...that is not relegated to "clean" eaters.
And we don't bash clean eaters for their choices the bashing happens when they tell someone new that it is the only way to lose weight and be healthy. That is false and misleading and can and will lead to the downfall of those who really don't understand what they are being told...most people go gung ho and end up binging on the stuff they are deprived of when they don't have to be deprived.
Choosing to have candy and not feeling bad? how is that only for a clean eater?
[\quote]
Here's exactly what I mean. Why do you feel the need to respond to a post all about me? I did not make one reference to those who don't eat clean. I only reported what clean eating (and living, by the way) has done for me.
I'm not foolish enough to make statements about "most, all, or none" because I know that any statement using those words should be backed up with evidence, not opinion.
I stated that I eat clean (most of the time) so that I can enjoy my occasional treat because I personally would feel like crap if all I ate was crap.
Because you said clean eating bashing is a big turn off and I pointed out we don't bash clean eaters we bash the fallacy that it is the only way to eat to lose weight or if you don't eat clean you will not be healthy. Which I bolded...
I did not bash you or your choices just pointed out they are not just results of clean eating but can happen even if you don't "eat clean".
PS post on a public forum expect someone to possibly read it, even quote it there is no automomy here.
I was simply stating what cleaner eating has done FOR ME in hopes that someone who feels the same way might read it and be encouraged, get a laugh or respond on this public forum.
And here I had such hope for you.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.4K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 388 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.2K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 916 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions