Why "clean eating" is a myth

ksuh999

I am sure that you know the difference between " process " and " process " as far as food is concerned.. One is the action of chipping, slicing, peeling, grinding, salting, kneading,bloiling, baking, drying etc to get a food ready for human consumption by being prepared in conventional ways.
The other is an often chemical process that allows the foods to be transported over long distances ( 1200 miles in the US on statistical average for each food item ), being kept from spoiling, ensuring an absurdely long shelf life ( I wonder what is in the corn bread jalapeño mix that a friends brought from the US that does not expire until October 2016 ? ), plus easy preparation by often just heating, freezing or adding an atypical ingredient ( like water only to a cake mix ).
I am sure you know what most people mean with " processed food " and it's not chopping and grinding for example.
I really enjoyed our exchange, but would prefer to just step back from the thread, if we are going to nitpick expressions. I am interested in hearing the opinions of others, but have not much time for useless back & forth.....unless of course I misunderstood you completely.

Keeping things dry keeps food from spoiling.

Adding salt, which is a chemical, extends the life of meat greatly (jerky). It's processed! Or not?

Water only to a cake mix? So yeah, they just dried stuff and presto, that's how they make it water only. So according to you it's not processed.

That's what I meant....nitpicking over a term that while not 100% defined does have an agreed upon meaning within many developed cultures defined through usage.
If I say I don't eat processed food, do you seriously think that when I eat a salad I bite in a whole head of lettuce, or munch on a whole unpeeled cucumber and eat a carrot the way it comes out of the ground, because after all washing the carrot, peeling the cucumber and pulling the lettuce into bite sized pieces would mean it is " processed " ? Or does my statement by generally accepted definition mean that I don't eat Rice-a-roni, Hamburger Helper or bottled dressing on my salad ? In which country do you think that as far as processing in concerned these two are the same ?
And if you look at commercial jerky or cake mix, they did a lot more than just " dry" the stuff.
It seems to be really important that you are right and I concede that all this is indeed " processing " even though one is for immediate food preparation and the other ( commonly accepted term ) for food altering for other purposes than consumption......in a kind of nitpicking way.

I think you're just really, really confused. You've conflated so many issues that you have somehow come to the conclusion that eating bottle salad dressing is going to make you sick.

Blue801

I am sure that you know the difference between " process " and " process " as far as food is concerned.. One is the action of chipping, slicing, peeling, grinding, salting, kneading,bloiling, baking, drying etc to get a food ready for human consumption by being prepared in conventional ways.
The other is an often chemical process that allows the foods to be transported over long distances ( 1200 miles in the US on statistical average for each food item ), being kept from spoiling, ensuring an absurdely long shelf life ( I wonder what is in the corn bread jalapeño mix that a friends brought from the US that does not expire until October 2016 ? ), plus easy preparation by often just heating, freezing or adding an atypical ingredient ( like water only to a cake mix ).
I am sure you know what most people mean with " processed food " and it's not chopping and grinding for example.
I really enjoyed our exchange, but would prefer to just step back from the thread, if we are going to nitpick expressions. I am interested in hearing the opinions of others, but have not much time for useless back & forth.....unless of course I misunderstood you completely.

I believe you have been misinformed and it has narrowed your understanding of what constitutes processed foods. Here is a wiki definition that may clear things up.
"Food processing is the transformation of raw ingredients into food, or of food into other forms. Food processing typically takes clean, harvested crops or butchered animal products and uses these to produce attractive, marketable and often long shelf-life food products."
Simply washing, cutting, and bagging salad greens would provide a "minimally processed" food.

Isn't that what I said at least in one of my several posts ?

Calling your chalupa a 100% whole food and stating "I am sure that you know the difference between " process " and " process " as far as food" lead me to believe there might be some misunderstanding.

Anywho, I fear real terms like "whole foods" and "processed foods" have become as murky as "clean foods" and it irks me.

ironanimal

^ You should be a rapper

geebusuk

On the '18 year old' thing - the beauty of it and REASON why he is respected is that he provides citations to the studies he has drawn his knowledge from. Certainly when I first read some of his stuff, I did go and check to ensure he was drawing reasonable conclusions from the studies. If there's an area of particularly interest, I may still inspect the study myself anyway.

aribugg

I personally liked it, Mostly because i've gotten SO much crap for always using sweeteners. Well, im hypoglycemic. sugar will raise my blood sugar, then double the crash. crashes give me seizures. so I always tell the people who nag me about it to pay for my hospital bills and possible brain damage, then tell me eat it.

bcattoes

Anywho, I fear real terms like "whole foods" and "processed foods" have become as murky as "clean foods" and it irks me.

This is true to varying degrees of any term in the diet world, but I think most people have a fairly clear meaning of what is meant by processed and whole foods. They just like to pick apart definitions for the sake of argument.

cwsreddy

The part about "health nuts" getting enough vitamin D from "nutrient dense foods" and "adequate sun exposure" is completely inaccurate. Unless you're at 40% body exposure (think one piece swim suit) for 20 min daily during the high hours of the sun with no sunscreen, you aren't getting enough. And I don't know one person that walks around in a swimsuit in the Midwest in the middle of winter. Always supplement for adequate vitamin D levels and don't forget to get your 25(OH)D test annually. A level of over 50 ng/ml is ideal.

While I don't disagree with that some places lack UV exposure due to cloud cover or weather, I think that the 20 minutes you mentioned may be off a little. Still it's important to get enough vitamin D daily regardless of how you obtain it.

It has been suggested by some vitamin D researchers, for example, that approximately 5–30 minutes of sun exposure between 10 AM and 3 PM at least twice a week to the face, arms, legs, or back without sunscreen usually lead to sufficient vitamin D synthesis

http://ods.od.nih.gov/factsheets/VitaminD-HealthProfessional/

Glad I live in CA

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

Indeed! I run 3 to 4 times a week during peak sun hours. No sunscreen on my arms and legs and I sometimes go without it on my face too. *shock*

^ amazing stuff. Vitamin D will do wonders for just about anything.

cwsreddy

Anywho, I fear real terms like "whole foods" and "processed foods" have become as murky as "clean foods" and it irks me.

This is true to varying degrees of any term in the diet world, but I think most people have a fairly clear meaning of what is meant by processed and whole foods. They just like to pick apart definitions for the sake of argument.

very true.

Acg67

The part about "health nuts" getting enough vitamin D from "nutrient dense foods" and "adequate sun exposure" is completely inaccurate. Unless you're at 40% body exposure (think one piece swim suit) for 20 min daily during the high hours of the sun with no sunscreen, you aren't getting enough. And I don't know one person that walks around in a swimsuit in the Midwest in the middle of winter. Always supplement for adequate vitamin D levels and don't forget to get your 25(OH)D test annually. A level of over 50 ng/ml is ideal.

While I don't disagree with that some places lack UV exposure due to cloud cover or weather, I think that the 20 minutes you mentioned may be off a little. Still it's important to get enough vitamin D daily regardless of how you obtain it.

It has been suggested by some vitamin D researchers, for example, that approximately 5–30 minutes of sun exposure between 10 AM and 3 PM at least twice a week to the face, arms, legs, or back without sunscreen usually lead to sufficient vitamin D synthesis

http://ods.od.nih.gov/factsheets/VitaminD-HealthProfessional/

Glad I live in CA

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

Indeed! I run 3 to 4 times a week during peak sun hours. No sunscreen on my arms and legs and I sometimes go without it on my face too. *shock*

^ amazing stuff. Vitamin D will do wonders for just about anything.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/stevensalzberg/2014/01/13/the-top-six-vitamins-you-shouldnt-take/

Sunbrooke

I personally liked it, Mostly because i've gotten SO much crap for always using sweeteners. Well, im hypoglycemic. sugar will raise my blood sugar, then double the crash. crashes give me seizures. so I always tell the people who nag me about it to pay for my hospital bills and possible brain damage, then tell me eat it.

So.. You liked it mostly because it validates what you already do, because you can't stand life without sweetener. A good example why so many people are so passionately anti clean eating. Makes them feel better.

SunofaBeach14

Anywho, I fear real terms like "whole foods" and "processed foods" have become as murky as "clean foods" and it irks me.

This is true to varying degrees of any term in the diet world, but I think most people have a fairly clear meaning of what is meant by processed and whole foods. They just like to pick apart definitions for the sake of argument.

very true.

A definition that cannot withstand critical analysis is not of much use. Don't blame the debate, blame your definition.

cwsreddy

The part about "health nuts" getting enough vitamin D from "nutrient dense foods" and "adequate sun exposure" is completely inaccurate. Unless you're at 40% body exposure (think one piece swim suit) for 20 min daily during the high hours of the sun with no sunscreen, you aren't getting enough. And I don't know one person that walks around in a swimsuit in the Midwest in the middle of winter. Always supplement for adequate vitamin D levels and don't forget to get your 25(OH)D test annually. A level of over 50 ng/ml is ideal.

While I don't disagree with that some places lack UV exposure due to cloud cover or weather, I think that the 20 minutes you mentioned may be off a little. Still it's important to get enough vitamin D daily regardless of how you obtain it.

It has been suggested by some vitamin D researchers, for example, that approximately 5–30 minutes of sun exposure between 10 AM and 3 PM at least twice a week to the face, arms, legs, or back without sunscreen usually lead to sufficient vitamin D synthesis

http://ods.od.nih.gov/factsheets/VitaminD-HealthProfessional/

Glad I live in CA

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

Indeed! I run 3 to 4 times a week during peak sun hours. No sunscreen on my arms and legs and I sometimes go without it on my face too. *shock*

^ amazing stuff. Vitamin D will do wonders for just about anything.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/stevensalzberg/2014/01/13/the-top-six-vitamins-you-shouldnt-take/

1) not reading because you clearly didnt read
2) we were talking about the sun.

geebusuk

I have yet to find anyone provide a consistent definition of 'processed'.
Again, it seems to me to be another thing used to justify choices without really thinking about them.
Usually the answer seems to be "If I do it, it's not processing, if someone else I don't know does the same thing and I can't see them doing it" (also often that it's packaged in some kind of sealed container at some point, it's processed.)

cwsreddy

I have yet to find anyone provide a consistent definition of 'processed'.
Again, it seems to me to be another thing used to justify choices without really thinking about them.
Usually the answer seems to be "If I do it, it's not processing, if someone else I don't know does the same thing and I can't see them doing it" (also often that it's packaged in some kind of sealed container at some point, it's processed.)

if you take a whole food and run it through a food processor it does not count as processed. being intentionally obtuse for the win!

bcattoes

Anywho, I fear real terms like "whole foods" and "processed foods" have become as murky as "clean foods" and it irks me.

This is true to varying degrees of any term in the diet world, but I think most people have a fairly clear meaning of what is meant by processed and whole foods. They just like to pick apart definitions for the sake of argument.

very true.

A definition that cannot withstand critical analysis is not of much use. Don't blame the debate, blame your definition.

It doesn't matter if there is a recognized definition or not. Look how many people trying to lose weight will argue that they are not on a diet.

SunofaBeach14

Anywho, I fear real terms like "whole foods" and "processed foods" have become as murky as "clean foods" and it irks me.

This is true to varying degrees of any term in the diet world, but I think most people have a fairly clear meaning of what is meant by processed and whole foods. They just like to pick apart definitions for the sake of argument.

very true.

A definition that cannot withstand critical analysis is not of much use. Don't blame the debate, blame your definition.

It doesn't matter if there is a recognized definition or not. Look how many people trying to lose weight will argue that they are not on a diet.

Um. Ok. What?

Ang108

I am sure that you know the difference between " process " and " process " as far as food is concerned.. One is the action of chipping, slicing, peeling, grinding, salting, kneading,bloiling, baking, drying etc to get a food ready for human consumption by being prepared in conventional ways.
The other is an often chemical process that allows the foods to be transported over long distances ( 1200 miles in the US on statistical average for each food item ), being kept from spoiling, ensuring an absurdely long shelf life ( I wonder what is in the corn bread jalapeño mix that a friends brought from the US that does not expire until October 2016 ? ), plus easy preparation by often just heating, freezing or adding an atypical ingredient ( like water only to a cake mix ).
I am sure you know what most people mean with " processed food " and it's not chopping and grinding for example.
I really enjoyed our exchange, but would prefer to just step back from the thread, if we are going to nitpick expressions. I am interested in hearing the opinions of others, but have not much time for useless back & forth.....unless of course I misunderstood you completely.

Keeping things dry keeps food from spoiling.

Adding salt, which is a chemical, extends the life of meat greatly (jerky). It's processed! Or not?

Water only to a cake mix? So yeah, they just dried stuff and presto, that's how they make it water only. So according to you it's not processed.

That's what I meant....nitpicking over a term that while not 100% defined does have an agreed upon meaning within many developed cultures defined through usage.
If I say I don't eat processed food, do you seriously think that when I eat a salad I bite in a whole head of lettuce, or munch on a whole unpeeled cucumber and eat a carrot the way it comes out of the ground, because after all washing the carrot, peeling the cucumber and pulling the lettuce into bite sized pieces would mean it is " processed " ? Or does my statement by generally accepted definition mean that I don't eat Rice-a-roni, Hamburger Helper or bottled dressing on my salad ? In which country do you think that as far as processing in concerned these two are the same ?
And if you look at commercial jerky or cake mix, they did a lot more than just " dry" the stuff.
It seems to be really important that you are right and I concede that all this is indeed " processing " even though one is for immediate food preparation and the other ( commonly accepted term ) for food altering for other purposes than consumption......in a kind of nitpicking way.

I think you're just really, really confused. You've conflated so many issues that you have somehow come to the conclusion that eating bottle salad dressing is going to make you sick.

Where do you draw such a conclusion from ? I did not mention the word " sick " or " ill " in any of my posts in regard to diet and also did not mention anything in regard to my health. I used bottled ( meaning store bought )salad dressing as an example , because it is a processed food. Please don't put words in my mouth and don't assume for a second you know what I think......

bcattoes

Anywho, I fear real terms like "whole foods" and "processed foods" have become as murky as "clean foods" and it irks me.

This is true to varying degrees of any term in the diet world, but I think most people have a fairly clear meaning of what is meant by processed and whole foods. They just like to pick apart definitions for the sake of argument.

very true.

A definition that cannot withstand critical analysis is not of much use. Don't blame the debate, blame your definition.

It doesn't matter if there is a recognized definition or not. Look how many people trying to lose weight will argue that they are not on a diet.

Um. Ok. What?

Diet is a word with established definitions. Everyone who eats has a diet. Everyone who is actively trying to lose weight is on a diet. These are the definitions of the word. But an awful lot of MFP members insist they are not on a diet.

Ang108

Anywho, I fear real terms like "whole foods" and "processed foods" have become as murky as "clean foods" and it irks me.

This is true to varying degrees of any term in the diet world, but I think most people have a fairly clear meaning of what is meant by processed and whole foods. They just like to pick apart definitions for the sake of argument.

very true.

A definition that cannot withstand critical analysis is not of much use. Don't blame the debate, blame your definition.

As I mentioned before; I am a non-native speaker of English. Since you seem to imply that it is my definition that is wrong ; which very well might be possible, even though It seems to not be more wrong than most people's....But let's assume that we pretty much are all wrong....:o) ) and since I personally am interested in better communication, what definition would you suggest one should use ?

SunofaBeach14

Anywho, I fear real terms like "whole foods" and "processed foods" have become as murky as "clean foods" and it irks me.

This is true to varying degrees of any term in the diet world, but I think most people have a fairly clear meaning of what is meant by processed and whole foods. They just like to pick apart definitions for the sake of argument.

very true.

A definition that cannot withstand critical analysis is not of much use. Don't blame the debate, blame your definition.

It doesn't matter if there is a recognized definition or not. Look how many people trying to lose weight will argue that they are not on a diet.

Um. Ok. What?

Diet is a word with established definitions. Everyone who eats has a diet. Everyone who is actively trying to lose weight is on a diet. These are the definitions of the word. But an awful lot of MFP members insist they are not on a diet.

Your example doesn't work because the word "diet" does have established definitions, and people cutting calories and claiming that they're not on a "diet" are usually arguing that it isn't just a temporary change, i.e., "it's not a diet, it's a lifestyle change," but a serious statement it is not. Clean eating, if it is to be taken seriously, needs to be able to withstand rigorous scrutiny, and yet it doesn't seem capable of that. It's simply a "rule of thumb" at best.