Why "clean eating" is a myth

magerum

I think the whole article is utter crap. There ARE foods that are highly nutritious, you know loaded with vitamins, minerals, the stuff your body needs to actually function. There are also foods that are empty calories that offer little more beyond "I eat you because you taste good." Having icecream or a treat here and there while "eating well" (I though there were no bad foods huh) most of the time like he's suggesting--Wow that's hardly revolutionary! Notice how he didn't advocate eating "junk" 100% of the time. But hey Mr, since clean eating doesn't exist is it ok if I go ahead and eat nothing but donuts, Twinkies and the like 90% of the time right? Since there's no bad foods and all foods are equally nutritious my health won't suffer, nah...just wow.

This post makes no sense. You don't get bonus points for getyig way more vitamins than you need.

If certain foods make up the bulk of your diet you won't be getting any vitamins and minerals

Not a single person is debating that.

Also, water generally can aid in hydration.

Breathing is good for sustaining life.

cwsreddy

When it comes to vitamins, I think specific vitamin intake recommendations are largely overblown. I'm the absence of a medical problem or deficiency, a normal diet with several servings of veggies and/or fruits of pretty much any kind will IMO largely take care of that. Antioxidants in particular are not necessarily a good thing. As for minerals, largely the same though there is some merit to making sure you get sufficient potassium.

why do you feel this way?

Which part? I made several specific statements.

lulz, planning out your deflection already?


all of it.

wheird

It's not even about intelligence so much as it is about motivation. Vast majority of people have no interest in spending a lot of time digging into nutritional details - and they are *right* in making that choice.

Reality is, humans can eat almost anything, and if done in reasonable quantities, they'll be just fine health wise.

I wouldn't say they are "right", but I agree with your second statement. Humanity survived long before nutrition science.

cwsreddy

I think the whole article is utter crap. There ARE foods that are highly nutritious, you know loaded with vitamins, minerals, the stuff your body needs to actually function. There are also foods that are empty calories that offer little more beyond "I eat you because you taste good." Having icecream or a treat here and there while "eating well" (I though there were no bad foods huh) most of the time like he's suggesting--Wow that's hardly revolutionary! Notice how he didn't advocate eating "junk" 100% of the time. But hey Mr, since clean eating doesn't exist is it ok if I go ahead and eat nothing but donuts, Twinkies and the like 90% of the time right? Since there's no bad foods and all foods are equally nutritious my health won't suffer, nah...just wow.

This post makes no sense. You don't get bonus points for getyig way more vitamins than you need.

If certain foods make up the bulk of your diet you won't be getting any vitamins and minerals

Not a single person is debating that.

Also, water generally can aid in hydration.

the debate lies in whether fortified nutrients are equivalent to fresh, whole food nutrients tbh. Jonny thinks they're equivalent. Many don't. I tend to believe that the nutrients in a tomato picked today are more bioavailable and potent than the nutrients coming from rocks that are injected into a poptart

Well...the tomato has additional properties that the poptart does not. Antioxidents, enzymes, etc. It really isn't a comparison.

But I do see johnnythan telling people to eat veggies...so I doubt he is against eating that tomato.

Ask jonny if he thinks a pop tart is an equivalent source of fiber, folic acid, niacin, riboflaven, vitamin a, iron etc to a fresh, whole food product with the same properties.

If a pop tart has all the same stuff, it does. Why you gotta demonize the pop tart? The whole food is likely to have properties the pop tart doesn't have and vice versa, but that doesn't make one evil and one good.

1) it's an example. relax.

2) I'm not talking about the foods as a whole, I'm talking about the comparative nutrients from the two different sources, which in my book are going to be more bioavailable and easily absorbed in the whole food vs the processed enriched fortified food.

wheird

I think the whole article is utter crap. There ARE foods that are highly nutritious, you know loaded with vitamins, minerals, the stuff your body needs to actually function. There are also foods that are empty calories that offer little more beyond "I eat you because you taste good." Having icecream or a treat here and there while "eating well" (I though there were no bad foods huh) most of the time like he's suggesting--Wow that's hardly revolutionary! Notice how he didn't advocate eating "junk" 100% of the time. But hey Mr, since clean eating doesn't exist is it ok if I go ahead and eat nothing but donuts, Twinkies and the like 90% of the time right? Since there's no bad foods and all foods are equally nutritious my health won't suffer, nah...just wow.

This post makes no sense. You don't get bonus points for getyig way more vitamins than you need.

If certain foods make up the bulk of your diet you won't be getting any vitamins and minerals

Not a single person is debating that.

Also, water generally can aid in hydration.

the debate lies in whether fortified nutrients are equivalent to fresh, whole food nutrients tbh. Jonny thinks they're equivalent. Many don't. I tend to believe that the nutrients in a tomato picked today are more bioavailable and potent than the nutrients coming from rocks that are injected into a poptart

Well...the tomato has additional properties that the poptart does not. Antioxidents, enzymes, etc. It really isn't a comparison.

But I do see johnnythan telling people to eat veggies...so I doubt he is against eating that tomato.

Ask jonny if he thinks a pop tart is an equivalent source of fiber, folic acid, niacin, riboflaven, vitamin a, iron etc to a fresh, whole food product with the same properties.

If a pop tart has all the same stuff, it does. Why you gotta demonize the pop tart? The whole food is likely to have properties the pop tart doesn't have and vice versa, but that doesn't make one evil and one good.

Every food is different.

jonnythan

When it comes to vitamins, I think specific vitamin intake recommendations are largely overblown. I'm the absence of a medical problem or deficiency, a normal diet with several servings of veggies and/or fruits of pretty much any kind will IMO largely take care of that. Antioxidants in particular are not necessarily a good thing. As for minerals, largely the same though there is some merit to making sure you get sufficient potassium.

why do you feel this way?

Which part? I made several specific statements.

lulz, planning out your deflection already?


all of it.

No, I was wondering if there was some specific part you were talking about.

When it comes to vitamins, I think specific vitamin intake recommendations are largely overblown. I'm the absence of a medical problem or deficiency, a normal diet with several servings of veggies and/or fruits of pretty much any kind will IMO largely take care of that.

This is my personal opinion formed over the many, many scientific articles and studies I've read on the subject. It's not something I will claim is simply true; it is my opinion. I haven't seen anyone do a thorough meta-analysis of this sort of thing. However, it is my personal impression that, irrespective of actual vitamin intake in terms of mass, eating several servings of fruits and/or vegetables a day pretty much takes care of it. Actual vitamin deficiency is rare absent some sort of medical condition, especially among people who get moderate to high vegetable intake.

Antioxidants in particular are not necessarily a good thing.

There have been many studies that seriously question whether antioxidants, particularly in supplement form, are a good thing. For instance, they have been shown to blunt the positive effects of exercise. It's looking increasingly like the body's antioxidant systems are generally quite good and don't need the help with large doses of isolated supplements or from foods.

As for minerals, largely the same though there is some merit to making sure you get sufficient potassium.

Similar to vitamins, mineral deficiency is quite rare. Potassium (and calcium and magnesium to a lesser extent) has been shown to have significant positive effects regardless of method of intake. I think a big difference between minerals like potassium and, say, vitamin A is that potassium is used throughout the body in such large quantities.

Like I said, much of this is personal opinion and conjecture. I'm not asking anyone to believe any of it.

Whambam087

I think the whole article is utter crap. There ARE foods that are highly nutritious, you know loaded with vitamins, minerals, the stuff your body needs to actually function. There are also foods that are empty calories that offer little more beyond "I eat you because you taste good." Having icecream or a treat here and there while "eating well" (I though there were no bad foods huh) most of the time like he's suggesting--Wow that's hardly revolutionary! Notice how he didn't advocate eating "junk" 100% of the time. But hey Mr, since clean eating doesn't exist is it ok if I go ahead and eat nothing but donuts, Twinkies and the like 90% of the time right? Since there's no bad foods and all foods are equally nutritious my health won't suffer, nah...just wow.

This post makes no sense. You don't get bonus points for getyig way more vitamins than you need.

If certain foods make up the bulk of your diet you won't be getting any vitamins and minerals

Not a single person is debating that.

Also, water generally can aid in hydration.

the debate lies in whether fortified nutrients are equivalent to fresh, whole food nutrients tbh. Jonny thinks they're equivalent. Many don't. I tend to believe that the nutrients in a tomato picked today are more bioavailable and potent than the nutrients coming from rocks that are injected into a poptart

Put someone on a diet of fortified foods and someone else on a diet of fresh whole foods. Compare...

Blue801

2) I'm not talking about the foods as a whole, I'm talking about the comparative nutrients from the two different sources, which in my book are going to be more bioavailable and easily absorbed in the whole food vs the processed enriched fortified food.

Really? How bizarre! Where does this idea come from. I'd love to read a study that culminated in that conclusion. Can you point me in the right direction? I'm noob.

jonnythan

I think the whole article is utter crap. There ARE foods that are highly nutritious, you know loaded with vitamins, minerals, the stuff your body needs to actually function. There are also foods that are empty calories that offer little more beyond "I eat you because you taste good." Having icecream or a treat here and there while "eating well" (I though there were no bad foods huh) most of the time like he's suggesting--Wow that's hardly revolutionary! Notice how he didn't advocate eating "junk" 100% of the time. But hey Mr, since clean eating doesn't exist is it ok if I go ahead and eat nothing but donuts, Twinkies and the like 90% of the time right? Since there's no bad foods and all foods are equally nutritious my health won't suffer, nah...just wow.

This post makes no sense. You don't get bonus points for getyig way more vitamins than you need.

If certain foods make up the bulk of your diet you won't be getting any vitamins and minerals

Not a single person is debating that.

Also, water generally can aid in hydration.

the debate lies in whether fortified nutrients are equivalent to fresh, whole food nutrients tbh. Jonny thinks they're equivalent. Many don't. I tend to believe that the nutrients in a tomato picked today are more bioavailable and potent than the nutrients coming from rocks that are injected into a poptart

Put someone on a diet of fortified foods and someone else on a diet of fresh whole foods. Compare...

There's no way to fortify foods with all the good things that are in vegetables, which is why all reasonable people such as myself consider several servings of vegetables an obligatory part of any healthy diet.

jonnythan

2) I'm not talking about the foods as a whole, I'm talking about the comparative nutrients from the two different sources, which in my book are going to be more bioavailable and easily absorbed in the whole food vs the processed enriched fortified food.

Really? How bizarre! Where does this idea come from. I'd love to read a study that culminated in that conclusion. Can you point me in the right direction? I'm noob.

He's right, to an extent. There are many vitamins and minerals and other substances in "whole" foods that are far more bioavailable in that form than from a supplement or fortified food. For example, many foods are fortified with magnesium oxide, which has very low bioavailability. The magnesium naturally found in many foods is more readily absorbed. Vitamin A also comes in many forms, and some of the most bioavailable forms are found naturally in foods whereas some forms used to fortify foods are much less so.

So you can't just count up your vitamin A intake in terms of %RDA and call it equivalent whether it came from a Pop Tart or carrot.

wheird

I think the whole article is utter crap. There ARE foods that are highly nutritious, you know loaded with vitamins, minerals, the stuff your body needs to actually function. There are also foods that are empty calories that offer little more beyond "I eat you because you taste good." Having icecream or a treat here and there while "eating well" (I though there were no bad foods huh) most of the time like he's suggesting--Wow that's hardly revolutionary! Notice how he didn't advocate eating "junk" 100% of the time. But hey Mr, since clean eating doesn't exist is it ok if I go ahead and eat nothing but donuts, Twinkies and the like 90% of the time right? Since there's no bad foods and all foods are equally nutritious my health won't suffer, nah...just wow.

This post makes no sense. You don't get bonus points for getyig way more vitamins than you need.

If certain foods make up the bulk of your diet you won't be getting any vitamins and minerals

Not a single person is debating that.

Also, water generally can aid in hydration.

the debate lies in whether fortified nutrients are equivalent to fresh, whole food nutrients tbh. Jonny thinks they're equivalent. Many don't. I tend to believe that the nutrients in a tomato picked today are more bioavailable and potent than the nutrients coming from rocks that are injected into a poptart

Put someone on a diet of fortified foods and someone else on a diet of fresh whole foods. Compare...

When I travel I consume mainly fortified foods. I am healthier than I have been in years. My weight is coming down, my strength is increasing, my cardiovascular endurance is increasing, my blood pressure is lowering, and I suspect that my cholesterol is falling as well.

cwsreddy

2) I'm not talking about the foods as a whole, I'm talking about the comparative nutrients from the two different sources, which in my book are going to be more bioavailable and easily absorbed in the whole food vs the processed enriched fortified food.

Really? How bizarre! Where does this idea come from. I'd love to read a study that culminated in that conclusion. Can you point me in the right direction? I'm noob.

He's right, to an extent. There are many vitamins and minerals and other substances in "whole" foods that are far more bioavailable in that form than from a supplement or fortified food. For example, many foods are fortified with magnesium oxide, which has very low bioavailability. The magnesium naturally found in many foods is more readily absorbed. Vitamin A also comes in many forms, and some of the most bioavailable forms are found naturally in foods whereas some forms used to fortify foods are much less so.

So you can't just count up your vitamin A intake in terms of %RDA and call it equivalent whether it came from a Pop Tart or carrot.

I'm shocked. :noway:

cwsreddy

I think the whole article is utter crap. There ARE foods that are highly nutritious, you know loaded with vitamins, minerals, the stuff your body needs to actually function. There are also foods that are empty calories that offer little more beyond "I eat you because you taste good." Having icecream or a treat here and there while "eating well" (I though there were no bad foods huh) most of the time like he's suggesting--Wow that's hardly revolutionary! Notice how he didn't advocate eating "junk" 100% of the time. But hey Mr, since clean eating doesn't exist is it ok if I go ahead and eat nothing but donuts, Twinkies and the like 90% of the time right? Since there's no bad foods and all foods are equally nutritious my health won't suffer, nah...just wow.

This post makes no sense. You don't get bonus points for getyig way more vitamins than you need.

If certain foods make up the bulk of your diet you won't be getting any vitamins and minerals

Not a single person is debating that.

Also, water generally can aid in hydration.

the debate lies in whether fortified nutrients are equivalent to fresh, whole food nutrients tbh. Jonny thinks they're equivalent. Many don't. I tend to believe that the nutrients in a tomato picked today are more bioavailable and potent than the nutrients coming from rocks that are injected into a poptart

Put someone on a diet of fortified foods and someone else on a diet of fresh whole foods. Compare...

When I travel I consume mainly fortified foods. I am healthier than I have been in years. My weight is coming down, my strength is increasing, my cardiovascular endurance is increasing, my blood pressure is lowering, and I suspect that my cholesterol is falling as well.

fallacious. correlation and all that.

wheird

I think the whole article is utter crap. There ARE foods that are highly nutritious, you know loaded with vitamins, minerals, the stuff your body needs to actually function. There are also foods that are empty calories that offer little more beyond "I eat you because you taste good." Having icecream or a treat here and there while "eating well" (I though there were no bad foods huh) most of the time like he's suggesting--Wow that's hardly revolutionary! Notice how he didn't advocate eating "junk" 100% of the time. But hey Mr, since clean eating doesn't exist is it ok if I go ahead and eat nothing but donuts, Twinkies and the like 90% of the time right? Since there's no bad foods and all foods are equally nutritious my health won't suffer, nah...just wow.

This post makes no sense. You don't get bonus points for getyig way more vitamins than you need.

If certain foods make up the bulk of your diet you won't be getting any vitamins and minerals

Not a single person is debating that.

Also, water generally can aid in hydration.

the debate lies in whether fortified nutrients are equivalent to fresh, whole food nutrients tbh. Jonny thinks they're equivalent. Many don't. I tend to believe that the nutrients in a tomato picked today are more bioavailable and potent than the nutrients coming from rocks that are injected into a poptart

Put someone on a diet of fortified foods and someone else on a diet of fresh whole foods. Compare...

There's no way to fortify foods with all the good things that are in vegetables, which is why all reasonable people such as myself consider several servings of vegetables an obligatory part of any healthy diet.

Are the veggies in my Mcdonalds salads, and Panda express mixed veggies considered veggies, or are they, magically fortified?

jonnythan

He's right, to an extent. There are many vitamins and minerals and other substances in "whole" foods that are far more bioavailable in that form than from a supplement or fortified food. For example, many foods are fortified with magnesium oxide, which has very low bioavailability. The magnesium naturally found in many foods is more readily absorbed. Vitamin A also comes in many forms, and some of the most bioavailable forms are found naturally in foods whereas some forms used to fortify foods are much less so.

So you can't just count up your vitamin A intake in terms of %RDA and call it equivalent whether it came from a Pop Tart or carrot.

I'm shocked. :noway:

If you could look beyond the fact that I often disagree with you and realize that I base my decisions and recommendations in real science, you wouldn't be shocked. The things I said in this post are firmly established by solid scientific evidence.

Solid evidence trumps all.

jonnythan

Are the veggies in my Mcdonalds salads, and Panda express mixed veggies considered veggies, or are they, magically fortified?

They're just veggies, as far as I'm concerned. I dunno if some people might consider McDonald's tomatoes, or Panda Express broccoli, to be unclean or something. That's not really my bag.

wheird

I think the whole article is utter crap. There ARE foods that are highly nutritious, you know loaded with vitamins, minerals, the stuff your body needs to actually function. There are also foods that are empty calories that offer little more beyond "I eat you because you taste good." Having icecream or a treat here and there while "eating well" (I though there were no bad foods huh) most of the time like he's suggesting--Wow that's hardly revolutionary! Notice how he didn't advocate eating "junk" 100% of the time. But hey Mr, since clean eating doesn't exist is it ok if I go ahead and eat nothing but donuts, Twinkies and the like 90% of the time right? Since there's no bad foods and all foods are equally nutritious my health won't suffer, nah...just wow.

This post makes no sense. You don't get bonus points for getyig way more vitamins than you need.

If certain foods make up the bulk of your diet you won't be getting any vitamins and minerals

Not a single person is debating that.

Also, water generally can aid in hydration.

the debate lies in whether fortified nutrients are equivalent to fresh, whole food nutrients tbh. Jonny thinks they're equivalent. Many don't. I tend to believe that the nutrients in a tomato picked today are more bioavailable and potent than the nutrients coming from rocks that are injected into a poptart

Put someone on a diet of fortified foods and someone else on a diet of fresh whole foods. Compare...

When I travel I consume mainly fortified foods. I am healthier than I have been in years. My weight is coming down, my strength is increasing, my cardiovascular endurance is increasing, my blood pressure is lowering, and I suspect that my cholesterol is falling as well.

fallacious. correlation and all that.

Oh? How so?

jonnythan

fallacious. correlation and all that.

Oh? How so?

Your n=1 study doesn't establish much. I guess the claim would be that you would be EVEN HEALTHIER if you ate more whole foods and less fortified foods? I think that's doubtful if you've been getting sufficient nutrient intake. I don't really keep a close eye on your diary so I couldn't say

wheird

Are the veggies in my Mcdonalds salads, and Panda express mixed veggies considered veggies, or are they, magically fortified?

They're just veggies, as far as I'm concerned. I dunno if some people might consider McDonald's tomatoes, or Panda Express broccoli, to be unclean or something. That's not really my bag.

Nor mine. In my opinion, I eat an adequate amount of veggies and fruits.

Blue801

2) I'm not talking about the foods as a whole, I'm talking about the comparative nutrients from the two different sources, which in my book are going to be more bioavailable and easily absorbed in the whole food vs the processed enriched fortified food.

Really? How bizarre! Where does this idea come from. I'd love to read a study that culminated in that conclusion. Can you point me in the right direction? I'm noob.

He's right, to an extent. There are many vitamins and minerals and other substances in "whole" foods that are far more bioavailable in that form than from a supplement or fortified food. For example, many foods are fortified with magnesium oxide, which has very low bioavailability. The magnesium naturally found in many foods is more readily absorbed. Vitamin A also comes in many forms, and some of the most bioavailable forms are found naturally in foods whereas some forms used to fortify foods are much less so.

So you can't just count up your vitamin A intake in terms of %RDA and call it equivalent whether it came from a Pop Tart or carrot.

I see. So they might have different forms of magnesium and one is more bioavailable than the fortified one. So tomato paste from a can with no additives is the same as a tomato picked right off the vine then? Same stuff right?