The Clean Eating Myth; Why Insulin Isn't the Bad Guy

SapiensPisces

Nice writeup how flexible dieting works and why insulin isn't necessarily the boogieman some of us have been brought to believe it is. I really like how the author of this article defines flexible dieting and explains that it's not all about ice cream and poptarts either.

http://www.liftbigeatbig.com/2013/12/the-clean-eating-myth-why-insulin-isnt.html

The way I see it, if you can’t enjoy some pizza during a big football game,dinner at a nice restaurant or grandma’s apple pie during the Holidays, there’s a serious problem there, especially if strength sports or bodybuilding are nothing more than a hobby (which is the case for the majority of us). If you’re compromising relationships and the enjoyment of time spent with family and friends for ‘clean eating’, I would contend that your priorities need to be reevaluated. Even for the select few individuals who are professional athletes, the ‘sacrifice to win” mentality is completely masochistic if it doesn’t offer some tangible performance advantage. It seems that many people in the fitness industry like to wear masochism as a badge of honor; as if not eating food that tastes good is some type of moral imperative. The adherence to ‘clean eating’ can almost be religious in nature, even imparting a sense of piety to the clean eater. I’m sorry, but you’re not better than someone else because of what you eat; you aren’t more committed and flexible dieters aren’t more ‘lazy’ just because they enjoy food that doesn’t taste like cardboard. The sense of piety that often accompanies ‘clean eating’ reinforces the superiority complex that begets what is essentially an eating disorder, and we certainly see a good number of cases of orthorexia when clean eating becomes compulsive

AND then this,

In the end, moderation and flexibility are the cornerstones to healthy, sustainable dieting. I think it’s time that we stop selectively demonizing particular foods, and realize that, in the correct quantities, all foods from ice cream and pizza to egg whites and broccoli can be consumed in calculated portions to achieve optimal health and performance. With flexible dieting, we can have our cake and eat it too.

Citations included in the article.

magerum

In for evil sugar and sugar addiction.

_Terrapin_

in for boogieman and evil....MUAH MUAH HAHA HAHAHAHA

eric_sg61

In for evil sugar and sugar addiction.

The devils horns are insulin spikes

Yanicka1

Bump

_Terrapin_

yep, solid article; liked the pizza, ice cream, and grandma reference. The other part was re-eval. life, competitive and hobby, etc. well done OP nice link.

SunofaBeach14

I'm going to go flagellate myself with Girl Scout cookies and ice cream

magerum

I'm going to go flagellate myself with Girl Scout cookies and ice cream

I ate an entire box of girl scout cookies last night.

#notashamed

DamePiglet

In for self flagellation

SapiensPisces

I'm going to go flagellate myself with Girl Scout cookies and ice cream

I ate an entire box of girl scout cookies last night.

#notashamed

Which ones?

and this

SunofaBeach14

I'm going to go flagellate myself with Girl Scout cookies and ice cream

I ate an entire box of girl scout cookies last night.

#notashamed

Which ones?

and this

The cat has it right. Thin Mints or go home!

Iwishyouwell

There are people who legitimately do not "love" food, or who don't feel miserable without the presence of poptarts and cookies.

I get what the author is saying, but it is a bit disconcerting that so many people believe that everyone HAS to love modern, processed foods in order to enact or sustain weight loss. As if all human beings were born with an inalienable right to Oreos. There does seem to be a very interesting attitude on the MFP boards that suggest all people like the same foods, and anybody limiting for any reason is setting themselves up for failure.

Serah87

:flowerforyou:

SapiensPisces

There are people who legitimately do not "love" food, or who don't feel miserable without the presence of poptarts and cookies.

I get what the author is saying, but it is a bit disconcerting that so many people believe that everyone HAS to love modern, processed foods in order to enact or sustain weight loss. As if all human beings were born with an inalienable right to Oreos. There does seem to be a very interesting attitude on the MFP boards that suggest all people like the same foods, and anybody limiting for any reason is setting themselves up for failure.

I think you may have missed the point of the article.

The author isn't saying that you have to enjoy poptarts, cookies, oreos, or other "processed" foods. He's simply saying that there's no reason to eliminate them from your diet if you do enjoy them, and that insisting on a perfect diet 100% of the time can lead to a poor relationship with food and the people around you. Flexible dieting is about eating the food you like to eat but ensuring that you meet your nutritional goals, whatever they may be. For most people, this will require a large portion of their intake to be wholesome vitamin-rich foods anyway (if they truly are aiming to adhere to a healthy macro and micro nutrient-rich diet). The notion that flexible dieting = all processed/junk/whatever-you-want-to-call-it all the time is a misnomer often employed by people who oppose flexible dieting in order to attempt to discredit it.

DamePiglet

There are people who legitimately do not "love" food, or who don't feel miserable without the presence of poptarts and cookies.

I get what the author is saying, but it is a bit disconcerting that so many people believe that everyone HAS to love modern, processed foods in order to enact or sustain weight loss. As if all human beings were born with an inalienable right to Oreos. There does seem to be a very interesting attitude on the MFP boards that suggest all people like the same foods, and anybody limiting for any reason is setting themselves up for failure.

I wasn't born with an inalienable right to Oreos. I have to work to earn money to BUY Oreos.
Good thing I ate some just a few minutes ago, or I'd be saying, "thanks a lot, now I want Oreos"

LoraF83

There are people who legitimately do not "love" food, or who don't feel miserable without the presence of poptarts and cookies.

I get what the author is saying, but it is a bit disconcerting that so many people believe that everyone HAS to love modern, processed foods in order to enact or sustain weight loss. As if all human beings were born with an inalienable right to Oreos. There does seem to be a very interesting attitude on the MFP boards that suggest all people like the same foods, and anybody limiting for any reason is setting themselves up for failure.

I think you may have missed the point of the article.

The author isn't saying that you have to enjoy poptarts, cookies, oreos, or other "processed" foods. He's simply saying that there's no reason to eliminate them from your diet if you do enjoy them, and that insisting on a perfect diet 100% of the time can lead to a poor relationship with food and the people around you. Flexible dieting is about eating the food you like to eat but ensuring that you meet your nutritional goals, whatever they may be. For most people, this will require a large portion of their intake to be wholesome vitamin-rich foods anyway (if they truly are aiming to adhere to a healthy macro and micro nutrient-rich diet). The notion that flexible dieting = all processed/junk/whatever-you-want-to-call-it all the time is a misnomer often employed by people who oppose flexible dieting in order to attempt to discredit it.

:flowerforyou: :flowerforyou:

Iwishyouwell

There are people who legitimately do not "love" food, or who don't feel miserable without the presence of poptarts and cookies.

I get what the author is saying, but it is a bit disconcerting that so many people believe that everyone HAS to love modern, processed foods in order to enact or sustain weight loss. As if all human beings were born with an inalienable right to Oreos. There does seem to be a very interesting attitude on the MFP boards that suggest all people like the same foods, and anybody limiting for any reason is setting themselves up for failure.

I think you may have missed the point of the article.

The author isn't saying that you have to enjoy poptarts, cookies, oreos, or other "processed" foods. He's simply saying that there's no reason to eliminate them from your diet if you do enjoy them, and that insisting on a perfect diet 100% of the time can lead to a poor relationship with food and the people around you. Flexible dieting is about eating the food you like to eat but ensuring that you meet your nutritional goals, whatever they may be. For most people, this will require a large portion of their intake to be wholesome vitamin-rich foods anyway (if they truly are aiming to adhere to a healthy macro and micro nutrient-rich diet). The notion that flexible dieting = all processed/junk/whatever you want to call it all the time is a misnomer.

The point of the article wasn't difficult to grasp.

I have to wonder if you did, however, because I am speaking to the attitude expressed in statements like:

"The way I see it, if you can’t enjoy some pizza during a big football game,dinner at a nice restaurant or grandma’s apple pie during the Holidays, there’s a serious problem there..."

"It seems that many people in the fitness industry like to wear masochism as a badge of honor; as if not eating food that tastes good is some type of moral imperative..."

" ...just because they enjoy food that doesn’t taste like cardboard..."

In these discussions, which pop up here just about daily from what I see, there is almost very little perspective given on the fact that plenty of "clean eaters" actually quite enjoy the food they do eat, aren't necessarily "sacrificing" anything, and that simply because many people (myself included) enjoy a nice bit of cake and cookies, not everyone does. There is this definite attitude on MFP, an attitude that I see reflected in the article, that it's almost impossible for "clean eaters" to actually, genuinely be satisfied with their restrictions.

And this:

In the end, moderation and flexibility are the cornerstones to healthy, sustainable dieting. I think it’s time that we stop selectively demonizing particular foods, and realize that, in the correct quantities, all foods from ice cream and pizza to egg whites and broccoli can be consumed in calculated portions to achieve optimal health and performance. With flexible dieting, we can have our cake and eat it too.

Is patently incorrect. There too many people who live, and thrive, on restricted eating due to diseases such as diabetes and epilepsy, by choice such as vegans, or who are amongst the hundreds of millions of human beings who live in cultures and food environments that inherently don't come with tons of "flexibility".

To suggest that the modern, western idea of moderation and "flexibility" is the "cornerstone of healthy, sustainable dieting" is pure, absolute nonsense. Too many people the world over don't even have such options. Never mind the fact that there are no actual facts that back this up. We've been pushing "moderation" and "lifestyle changes" for decades, and yet the long term success rate for those who adhere to these principles are just as horrendous as those who follow more restricted eating.

SapiensPisces

There are people who legitimately do not "love" food, or who don't feel miserable without the presence of poptarts and cookies.

I get what the author is saying, but it is a bit disconcerting that so many people believe that everyone HAS to love modern, processed foods in order to enact or sustain weight loss. As if all human beings were born with an inalienable right to Oreos. There does seem to be a very interesting attitude on the MFP boards that suggest all people like the same foods, and anybody limiting for any reason is setting themselves up for failure.

I think you may have missed the point of the article.

The author isn't saying that you have to enjoy poptarts, cookies, oreos, or other "processed" foods. He's simply saying that there's no reason to eliminate them from your diet if you do enjoy them, and that insisting on a perfect diet 100% of the time can lead to a poor relationship with food and the people around you. Flexible dieting is about eating the food you like to eat but ensuring that you meet your nutritional goals, whatever they may be. For most people, this will require a large portion of their intake to be wholesome vitamin-rich foods anyway (if they truly are aiming to adhere to a healthy macro and micro nutrient-rich diet). The notion that flexible dieting = all processed/junk/whatever you want to call it all the time is a misnomer.

The point of the article wasn't difficult to grasp.

I have to wonder if you did, however, because I am speaking to the attitude expressed in statements like:

"The way I see it, if you can’t enjoy some pizza during a big football game,dinner at a nice restaurant or grandma’s apple pie during the Holidays, there’s a serious problem there..."

"It seems that many people in the fitness industry like to wear masochism as a badge of honor; as if not eating food that tastes good is some type of moral imperative..."

" ...just because they enjoy food that doesn’t taste like cardboard..."

In these discussions, which pop up here just about daily from what I see, there is almost very little perspective given on the fact that plenty of "clean eaters" actually quite enjoy the food they do eat, aren't necessarily "sacrificing" anything, and that simply because many people (myself included) enjoy a nice bit of cake and cookies, not everyone does. There is this definite attitude on MFP, an attitude that I see reflected in the article, that it's almost impossible for "clean eaters" to actually, genuinely be satisfied with their restrictions.

And this:

In the end, moderation and flexibility are the cornerstones to healthy, sustainable dieting. I think it’s time that we stop selectively demonizing particular foods, and realize that, in the correct quantities, all foods from ice cream and pizza to egg whites and broccoli can be consumed in calculated portions to achieve optimal health and performance. With flexible dieting, we can have our cake and eat it too.

Is patently incorrect. There too many people who live, and thrive, on restricted eating due to diseases such as diabetes and epilepsy, by choice such as vegans, or who are amongst the hundreds of millions of human beings who live in cultures and food environments that inherently don't come with tons of "flexibility".

To suggest that the modern, western idea of moderation and "flexibility" is the "cornerstone of healthy, sustainable dieting" is pure, absolute nonsense. Too many people the world over don't even have such options. Never mind the fact that there are no actual facts that back this up. We've been pushing "moderation" and "lifestyle changes" for decades, and yet the long term success rate for those who adhere to these principles are just as horrendous as those who follow more restricted eating.

The article was CLEARLY addressing people who do not have metabolic problems or other health-related dietary restrictions. Nor was it aimed at people who are vegan, vegetarian, etc. due to lifestyle or personal choices.

I also find it a bit odd that you take so much issue with this article given that you are indeed practicing flexible dieting as demonstrated by your comment about how you enjoy cake and cookies yourself. If you feel like moderation and flexible dieting are paths to failure and no better than a restrictive diet long-term, why do still eat the foods you enjoy? Why not stick to a more restrictive eating plan that may give you some minor marginal benefit?

Also this comment:

To suggest that the modern, western idea of moderation and "flexibility" is the "cornerstone of healthy, sustainable dieting" is pure, absolute nonsense

Is not even remotely what the author's context implied or what he said. These are YOUR words, not the ones from the article. What he actually said was:

In the end, moderation and flexibility are the cornerstones to healthy, sustainable dieting.

He in no way implied nor said that a modern, western diet is "required" or a "cornerstone" of a good diet.

nikkihk

<

---

Mcdonalds everyday this week... down 2 pounds. BUMP!!

PhearlessPhreaks

With respect to the issue Iwishyouwell takes with this, I would just like to point out that, clean eaters who do not have a taste for sweets, treats or less-than-wholesome snacks likely wouldn't have a weight issue. I would imagine it's exceedingly difficult to gain significant amounts of excess weight eating "clean"- if you're truly eating clean. Ergo, if one is overweight and has made the lifestyle change of eating clean; it stands to reason they do enjoy "dirty" foods, be they processed things like poptarts, or something homemade like grandma's apple pie. And if they do enjoy these things, this article is directed towards them; to explain that they don't have to give up occasional treats (like during the holidays or a special event) in order to be healthy and lose weight.

Iwishyouwell

The article was CLEARLY addressing people who do not have metabolic problems or other health-related dietary restrictions. Nor was it aimed at people who are vegan, vegetarian, etc. due to lifestyle or personal choices.

So are vegetarians, vegans, or human beings who live in areas with limited flexibility all special snowflakes? If, as the author contends, "flexible dieting" is the only real way to lose or maintain weight, why are there so many hundreds of millions of exceptions to this rule?

I also find it a bit odd that you take so much issue with this article given that you are indeed practicing flexible dieting as demonstrated by your comment about how you enjoy cake and cookies yourself. If you feel like moderation and flexible dieting are paths to failure and no better than a restrictive diet long-term, why do still eat the foods you enjoy?

I've been on "restricted" eating plans in the past where I enjoyed what I ate and was not miserable. I sympathize with people who are on restricted path, either by necessity or choice, who all too often face endless suggestions that they must be miserable with their restrictions. This is incorrect.

I also take issue with the myth that "flexible dieting" and "moderation" lead to some significant increase in the chances of long term weight loss management, when the statistics don't back it up at all.

Also my personal path to weight loss does not include any calorie counting, weighing, or daily "moderation". So I'm likely not practicing "moderation" or flexibility in the way you assume.

Also note that I never said that moderation and flexible dieting are paths to "failure"', that's your interpretation. I'm merely challenging the idea that they offer significant increases for success, or that more restrictive diets are inherently bad for all, or even most.

Unknown

This content has been removed.

LiftAllThePizzas

I keep refreshing the comments on the article to see how long it takes for a commenter to complain that the article says everyone should eat nothing but poptarts and ice cream.

ndj1979

in…to see where this goes, and for the potential roll!

SunofaBeach14

The article was CLEARLY addressing people who do not have metabolic problems or other health-related dietary restrictions. Nor was it aimed at people who are vegan, vegetarian, etc. due to lifestyle or personal choices.

So are vegetarians, vegans, or human beings who live in areas with limited flexibility all special snowflakes? If, as the author contends, "flexible dieting" is the only real way to lose or maintain weight, why are there so many hundreds of millions of exceptions to this rule?

I also find it a bit odd that you take so much issue with this article given that you are indeed practicing flexible dieting as demonstrated by your comment about how you enjoy cake and cookies yourself. If you feel like moderation and flexible dieting are paths to failure and no better than a restrictive diet long-term, why do still eat the foods you enjoy?

I've been on "restricted" eating plans in the past where I enjoyed what I ate and was not miserable. I sympathize with people who are on restricted path, either by necessity or choice, who all too often face endless suggestions that they must be miserable with their restrictions. This is incorrect.

I also take issue with the myth that "flexible dieting" and "moderation" lead to some significant increase in the chances of long term weight loss management, when the statistics don't back it up at all.

Also my personal path to weight loss does not include any calorie counting, weighing, or daily "moderation". So I'm likely not practicing "moderation" or flexibility in the way you assume.

Also note that I never said that moderation and flexible dieting are paths to "failure"', that's your interpretation. I'm merely challenging the idea that they offer significant increases for success, or that more restrictive diets are inherently bad for all, or even most.

So how many years have you been at maintenance or on cut and bulk cycles simply improving muscle mass?

Iwishyouwell

With respect to the issue Iwishyouwell takes with this, I would just like to point out that, clean eaters who do not have a taste for sweets, treats or less-than-wholesome snacks likely wouldn't have a weight issue. I would imagine it's exceedingly difficult to gain significant amounts of excess weight eating "clean"- if you're truly eating clean. Ergo, if one is overweight and has made the lifestyle change of eating clean; it stands to reason they do enjoy "dirty" foods, be they processed things like poptarts, or something homemade like grandma's apple pie. And if they do enjoy these things, this article is directed towards them; to explain that they don't have to give up occasional treats (like during the holidays or a special event) in order to be healthy and lose weight.

Yes, a fair and sound point.

Just pointing out the exceptions. My father, for example, was naturally a "clean eater". Not a dieter at all, but he wasn't a big fan of sweets or lots of processed food. He did, however, develop a serious weight problem in his middle age thanks to drinking far too much beer. Sigh. If it's not one thing, it's another.

LiftAllThePizzas

There are people who legitimately do not "love" food, or who don't feel miserable without the presence of poptarts and cookies.
...
There does seem to be a very interesting attitude on the MFP boards that suggest all people like the same foods, and anybody limiting for any reason is setting themselves up for failure.

No, it's not the assumption that everyone likes the same foods. It's the assumption that when people on this site who want to lose weight (in other words, they have managed to get overweight, most likely by bad eating habits) claim they can only be successful by completely giving up some food or group of foods, that they actually like the foods they are "giving up." Otherwise, why would they need to make any sort of effort to "give up" foods they don't like?

ETA someone already beat me to it.:laugh:

ndj1979

There are people who legitimately do not "love" food, or who don't feel miserable without the presence of poptarts and cookies.

I get what the author is saying, but it is a bit disconcerting that so many people believe that everyone HAS to love modern, processed foods in order to enact or sustain weight loss. As if all human beings were born with an inalienable right to Oreos. There does seem to be a very interesting attitude on the MFP boards that suggest all people like the same foods, and anybody limiting for any reason is setting themselves up for failure.

from the article:

"It is a limiting protocol, not a copout to consume large amounts of calorie dense, processed foods. Flexible dieting is all about eating in moderation; being able to enjoy the foods you like to eat, without compromising one’s health or one’s macronutrient goals for the day"

SapiensPisces

The article was CLEARLY addressing people who do not have metabolic problems or other health-related dietary restrictions. Nor was it aimed at people who are vegan, vegetarian, etc. due to lifestyle or personal choices.

So are vegetarians, vegans, or human beings who live in areas with limited flexibility all special snowflakes? If, as the author contends, "flexible dieting" is the only real way to lose or maintain weight, why are there so many hundreds of millions of exceptions to this rule?

I never said nor implied that those with a medical or personal reason for a dietary restriction are "special snowflakes." It seems to me that you're just wanting to argue with me over some perceived bias that isn't there. I simply pointed out that the article was written to an audience who is considering "clean" eating or dietary restriction for nutritional (non-medical or personal) reasons. The author also never said that "flexible dieting" is the only real way to lose or maintain weight either.

I've been on "restricted" eating plans in the past where I enjoyed what I ate and was not miserable. I sympathize with people who are on restricted path, either by necessity or choice, who all too often face endless suggestions that they must be miserable with their restrictions. This is incorrect.

I suppose my original question about this still stands: why are you not still on a more restricted plan?

I also take issue with the myth that "flexible dieting" and "moderation" lead to some significant increase in the chances of long term weight loss management, when the statistics don't back it up at all.

I do not have good science to backup this claim (mostly because I haven't looked, but will dig tonight to see if I can find some information on this form a more reputable source), but I have seen in my years here (this isn't my first MFP account) many people fail or feel as though they've failed because they couldn't adhere to a very food-restricted diet. I experienced this myself early on, and I wish I had known about flexible dieting at the time. It would've saved me a lot of stress and time. I acknowledge that this is anecdotal (not statistical or scientific "proof"), but it has been the experience of many who have been here a while.

Also my personal path to weight loss does not include any calorie counting, weighing, or daily "moderation". So I'm likely not practicing "moderation" or flexibility in the way you assume.

I have a hard time understanding how you can lose weight without some type of moderation, especially given that you're not one of the tiny minority of people who don't like sweets/cake/cookies/etc. Are these items a part of your diet at all? Moderation isn't necessarily about calorie counting or weighing and measuring your food. It's about not overindulging in calorie-rich foods at the expense of foods that will help you reach your nutritional goals.

Iwishyouwell

There are people who legitimately do not "love" food, or who don't feel miserable without the presence of poptarts and cookies.

I get what the author is saying, but it is a bit disconcerting that so many people believe that everyone HAS to love modern, processed foods in order to enact or sustain weight loss. As if all human beings were born with an inalienable right to Oreos. There does seem to be a very interesting attitude on the MFP boards that suggest all people like the same foods, and anybody limiting for any reason is setting themselves up for failure.

I think you may have missed the point of the article.

The author isn't saying that you have to enjoy poptarts, cookies, oreos, or other "processed" foods. He's simply saying that there's no reason to eliminate them from your diet if you do enjoy them, and that insisting on a perfect diet 100% of the time can lead to a poor relationship with food and the people around you. Flexible dieting is about eating the food you like to eat but ensuring that you meet your nutritional goals, whatever they may be. For most people, this will require a large portion of their intake to be wholesome vitamin-rich foods anyway (if they truly are aiming to adhere to a healthy macro and micro nutrient-rich diet). The notion that flexible dieting = all processed/junk/whatever you want to call it all the time is a misnomer.

The point of the article wasn't difficult to grasp.

I have to wonder if you did, however, because I am speaking to the attitude expressed in statements like:

"The way I see it, if you can’t enjoy some pizza during a big football game,dinner at a nice restaurant or grandma’s apple pie during the Holidays, there’s a serious problem there..."

"It seems that many people in the fitness industry like to wear masochism as a badge of honor; as if not eating food that tastes good is some type of moral imperative..."

" ...just because they enjoy food that doesn’t taste like cardboard..."

In these discussions, which pop up here just about daily from what I see, there is almost very little perspective given on the fact that plenty of "clean eaters" actually quite enjoy the food they do eat, aren't necessarily "sacrificing" anything, and that simply because many people (myself included) enjoy a nice bit of cake and cookies, not everyone does. There is this definite attitude on MFP, an attitude that I see reflected in the article, that it's almost impossible for "clean eaters" to actually, genuinely be satisfied with their restrictions.

And this:

In the end, moderation and flexibility are the cornerstones to healthy, sustainable dieting. I think it’s time that we stop selectively demonizing particular foods, and realize that, in the correct quantities, all foods from ice cream and pizza to egg whites and broccoli can be consumed in calculated portions to achieve optimal health and performance. With flexible dieting, we can have our cake and eat it too.

Is patently incorrect. There too many people who live, and thrive, on restricted eating due to diseases such as diabetes and epilepsy, by choice such as vegans, or who are amongst the hundreds of millions of human beings who live in cultures and food environments that inherently don't come with tons of "flexibility".

To suggest that the modern, western idea of moderation and "flexibility" is the "cornerstone of healthy, sustainable dieting" is pure, absolute nonsense. Too many people the world over don't even have such options. Never mind the fact that there are no actual facts that back this up. We've been pushing "moderation" and "lifestyle changes" for decades, and yet the long term success rate for those who adhere to these principles are just as horrendous as those who follow more restricted eating.

Let's cut to the chase.

What percentage of the population do you think really doesn't enjoy cookies and cake? Honestly. Maybe 5%? Now what percentage of a website used primarily for weight loss do you think honestly doesn't enjoy sweets or processed foods and the like?

The minority you're standing up for is insanely small. The VAST majority of people honestly do enjoy sweets, junk food, whatever you want to call it. That's who the article is aimed at because why on Earth would you write an article geared towards people who already eat healthy and love it? What advice do you think they need?

Put your outrage aside. It makes sense for most people who would read it.

Like I said, the "moderate" approach, for all it's lauding, has just as abysmal long term success rates as the restricted eating.

If you're going to post an article that suggests "clean eating" leads to unnecessary restrictions that hinder weight loss and management, please do back up the claims with studies and sound evidence that show "moderation" and "flexible dieting" lead to a significant increase in weight lost and maintained in the long run.

I'd love to read such studies, genuinely. So far they've eluded me.

PhearlessPhreaks

With respect to the issue Iwishyouwell takes with this, I would just like to point out that, clean eaters who do not have a taste for sweets, treats or less-than-wholesome snacks likely wouldn't have a weight issue. I would imagine it's exceedingly difficult to gain significant amounts of excess weight eating "clean"- if you're truly eating clean. Ergo, if one is overweight and has made the lifestyle change of eating clean; it stands to reason they do enjoy "dirty" foods, be they processed things like poptarts, or something homemade like grandma's apple pie. And if they do enjoy these things, this article is directed towards them; to explain that they don't have to give up occasional treats (like during the holidays or a special event) in order to be healthy and lose weight.

Yes, a fair and sound point.

Just pointing out the exceptions. My father, for example, was naturally a "clean eater". Not a dieter at all, but he wasn't a big fan of sweets or lots of processed food. He did, however, develop a serious weight problem in his middle age thanks to drinking far too much beer. Sigh. If it's not one thing, it's another.

Calls to mind an adage... there's always an exception that makes the rule.