Your food is no cleaner than mine
Options
Replies
-
I just eat ALL foods.
I must be doing something right cause I basically almost cured my heart issues.
And that's with eating cookies, diet soda, ice cream, cake, etc.
:bigsmile:0 -
I've known several "clean eating" "Paleo diet" people who've been doing it for over 1½ to 2 years and have yet to lose a single pound or improve their health in any way. I just shrug when they ask me how I've managed to lose weight without really dieting.
There's a user here I used to argue with, had Paleo as part of her name and everything. She was all about the clean eating and processed foods are what makes us fat and all of it.
She'd been a member here for years. She'd lost 2lbs.
She's sticking with Paleo, but she took down her weight loss ticker.
Actually it related perfectly to what was being discussed.
But nothing you've ever said has had any meaning whatsoever, or been even the slightest bit helpful. So... *grain of salt* *drink water*
Just because you've maybe not understood or related to things I've said, doesn't mean they've not been helpful.
But thanks for the feedback!0 -
Why not just call it food? I don't label my food, other than to say, "breakfast," "lunch," "dinner," "dessert," or "snack."
Balance is definitely relative to lifestyle, just as "yummy" food or "gross" food is relative to taste buds.
Because we label everything. Everything. Dinner is a label. Its what humans do to make sense of the world around them. Its how we know what we are looking at or for. Its how we decide on one thing versus another.
Dinner is a label for the food I eat during dinner time. There is no connotation to it.
It is still a label. Any connotation you apply to a label is your issue with the label. If what you eat matters not and labels are not important, why even label it dinner, why not just say my 3rd meal consisted of, or i ate XYZ after work? You do so, so people know you are talking abut the meal you eat later in the day, its easier, shorter and quicker. If i object to the label dinner for whatever reason i make up, it's my issue right? Same premise. I say i eat clean because its shorter and easier then explaining my diet in detail. Most rationally thinking people understand that means i cook at home using fresh raw whole food and don't buy premade foods or foods that have a lot of additives. My exact diet is not important. Just like what you eat for dinner isn't irrelevant to the phrase "i eat dinner at 6 everyday". But if asked you will explain it in more details.(I had this food for dinner. I do not eat xyz in my diet) And then if you happen to be on MFP, your choices get labeled as wrong and people demand you defend and explain them and then push their preferred method of diet on you. If it turns out in 20 years that added sugar really isn't unhealthy for you at all, then I am still not harming myself by avoiding it. Its still means i eat more healthier foods (like fresh veggies and fruit) and makes it easier to reach my goals.
The connotation is the difference. "Clean" has a plethora of connotation. "Dinner" has none at all.
Only because you assign it one... that was my point. You may replace the label dinner, with any label of your choosing that will help you understand my point..0 -
I fully agree! The problem is on the forum it i those who are vocally not clean eater that start these threads solely to stir the pot. They are not going to say anything that would make me change the way I eat nor do I expect anything I say to change the way they eat. While I can't speak for all clean eaters, I'm sure they feel the same way. I honestly don't care what anyone else eat! It makes me wonder if the so called unclean eaters are lacking some dietary nutrient that brings out their aggression towards the word clean :laugh:
+10 -
Seriously. I'm not a healthy eater by any means, love me some pop tarts icecream or whatever but this is getting so old :yawn: Eat what you wanna eat, let others eat what they wanna eat, no need to brag about your ice cream/gelato cleanse or whatever it is you're doing. WHO CARES /end thread
Hey, if you don't want to participate in an ice cream cleanse, then don't go in that thread.
I do what I want.
Apparently not. :laugh:0 -
Why not just call it food? I don't label my food, other than to say, "breakfast," "lunch," "dinner," "dessert," or "snack."
Balance is definitely relative to lifestyle, just as "yummy" food or "gross" food is relative to taste buds.
Because we label everything. Everything. Dinner is a label. Its what humans do to make sense of the world around them. Its how we know what we are looking at or for. Its how we decide on one thing versus another.
Dinner is a label for the food I eat during dinner time. There is no connotation to it.
It is still a label. Any connotation you apply to a label is your issue with the label. If what you eat matters not and labels are not important, why even label it dinner, why not just say my 3rd meal consisted of, or i ate XYZ after work? You do so, so people know you are talking abut the meal you eat later in the day, its easier, shorter and quicker. If i object to the label dinner for whatever reason i make up, it's my issue right? Same premise. I say i eat clean because its shorter and easier then explaining my diet in detail. Most rationally thinking people understand that means i cook at home using fresh raw whole food and don't buy premade foods or foods that have a lot of additives. My exact diet is not important. Just like what you eat for dinner isn't irrelevant to the phrase "i eat dinner at 6 everyday". But if asked you will explain it in more details.(I had this food for dinner. I do not eat xyz in my diet) And then if you happen to be on MFP, your choices get labeled as wrong and people demand you defend and explain them and then push their preferred method of diet on you. If it turns out in 20 years that added sugar really isn't unhealthy for you at all, then I am still not harming myself by avoiding it. Its still means i eat more healthier foods (like fresh veggies and fruit) and makes it easier to reach my goals.
The connotation is the difference. "Clean" has a plethora of connotation. "Dinner" has none at all.
Only because you assign it one... that was my point. You may replace the label dinner, with any label of your choosing that will help you understand my point..
Everyone assigns it a connotation, some differing more than others. Your point is moot.0 -
You do realize that by and large the only people who talk about dirty food are those who are against clean eating right? I've never heard any clean eater talk about food being dirty; most don't get close to even judging other people's food choices. Most of the clean eaters I know or those like me who subscribe to the idea of clean eating don't think of clean as being a moral judgment or of other foods are dirty. Usually clean is used in these contexts to mean not possessing things that individual doesn't want to put in their body - therefore, the opposite to clean isn't dirty, it's things they just don't want to put in their body. At worst the opposite of clean eating is eating 'undesirable' things, but since it's more or less defined individually, I hardly see how that's prblematic. Food is always desriable or undesirable on an individual basis - just because I hate celery because it tastes icky to me, and therefore its undesirable and I don't want to eat it, does that somehow affect you and your relationship with celery? If it does, that's a problem with you, not with me.
People all have different views on what is healthy or unhealthy, and what they want to put in their body. If someone wants to chose not to put animal products, or processed food, or pesticides, or GMOs into their body, why do you care? Its their personal food choices, and you shouldn't get to judge them for it, even if what you're judging is how they describe their eating style.
I think it's argumentative to try and say that labelling something clean MUST mean that anything else is dirty, and that it's ridiculous to judge a way of eating on nothing more than its name. Naming conventions aren't about being perfectly descriptive, they're about being catchy. If you have to get all philosophical to find a good argument against a person choosing to eat clean, I think you're really reaching. That, and clean's a perfectly acceptable way of describing most of these food plans. They're based largely on eliminating undesirable (defined by each individual or individual plan) elements from our food and diet - that's one meaning of clean.
It can't be forgotten that words have many meanings or slightly different meanings depending on context. Yes, in some contexts clean and dirty have moral connotations; in others, they really really don't. Reading those kinds of things into this context is quite beside the point and actually rather inappropriate. I'd say that to anyone on either side of the debate, but honestly, I've only ever seen it from clean eating bashers.
Bolded part is false! There are a lot of elitist clean eaters that will come out of the woodwork to label a single food item as bad, dirty, junk, etc.
That is true for both ends of the spectrum. In my experience ( relatively short....only 390 days on MFP ) when the subject comes up there are more (especially young men) who brag how dirty they eat consuming 4300 calories a day in doughnuts, pizza, fast food and full sugar soft drinks, usually in a " bulking phase " ( which has nothing to do with the subject of eating while losing weight ), than people who are arrogant about their food intake when it comes to largely natural food. But that is just my experience other people's mileage probably varies.
I think on either side of the issue there are many people who read elitist and arrogant as well as loud mouthed and offensive attitudes in posts where there are actually none.
The thing I don't like are the really childish remarks, to put clean eaters down, I imagine like:
I wash my food with soap, so it must be clean
But, but, I scrubbed my food with tooth paste, is that clean enough ?
I use bleach on my food, I eat super clean
hundreds if not thousands of b-o-r-i-n-g remarks like that.....do people really think they are still funny ?0 -
Why "clean eating" is a meaningless term that does more harm than good to our discourse about food.
http://www.theage.com.au/lifestyle/diet-and-fitness/your-food-is-no-cleaner-than-mine-20140509-zr7bj.htmlBuzzFeed unveiled "a two-week detox plan that's actually realistic" this week, and it made me want to throw a head of broccoli at my computer screen. Not because the menu is unappealing - the pictures and recipes appear delicious, actually. Not because the idea of detoxifying your body via a diet is a scam (although it is). Not because it proscribes caffeine and alcohol and provides 1,300 to 1,600 calories a day (which don't exactly sound "realistic" to me). No, the thing that drives me crazy is that the plan is called the "BuzzFeed Food Clean Eating Challenge," and "clean eating" is a meaningless term that does more harm than good to our discourse about food.
To be fair, BuzzFeed is hardly the first publication to use the phrase "clean eating" to sex up a low-calorie, plant-based diet regime. The phrase has been in the lexicon for years. There are a multitude of cookbooks and diet books with the word "clean" in their titles (Clean Food, Clean Eating for Busy Families, Clean Eats and even Eating Clean for Dummies). There is a monthly magazine called Clean Eating that purportedly "takes you beyond the food you eat, exploring the multitude of health and nutritional benefits that can be yours when you subscribe to a clean lifestyle." There are clean eating explainers, FAQs and "core principles." The buzzword has diffused so thoroughly through the media that it would be surprising if BuzzFeed didn't use the word "clean" in its two-week diet plan.
Clean eating's ubiquity is part of the problem: The term has been adopted so widely, by people promoting so many different eating choices, that it has no agreed upon definition. If you're BuzzFeed, clean eating means "low-carb and gluten-free with an emphasis on lean protein (no red meat) and fresh produce." If you're Terry Walters, the author of "Clean Food," it means forsaking all animal products. If you're Prevention magazine, which issues an annual list of the "100 Cleanest Packaged Food Awards," it means foods that contain less than 10 grams of sugar and less than 200 milligrams of sodium, that come in bisphenol-A-free packaging, and aren't genetically modified. Most "clean" diets focus on unprocessed, plant-based foods, but "clean eating" can mean pretty much anything you want it to mean.
Which brings us to the most pernicious part of the "clean eating" craze: It implies that anyone who doesn't eat in the way you deem "clean" is eating "dirty." As fat-acceptance activist Marianne Kirby astutely put it in xoJane last year, "When you tell someone their food is dirty, even by implication, you [expletive] all over their own body autonomy, issues of class and access, cultural food traditions, their own tastes and needs, and issues of health."
Even more to the point, as Kirby acknowledges, "clean" eating assigns moral value where none exists (since, contrary to popular belief, dieting does not actually make you a better person). Notions of clean and dirty are inextricably tied up with notions of right and wrong; as Steven Pinker in particular has argued in The New York Times, purity is a universal theme of human moral codes. Progressive people generally agree that describing the complex, deep-seated pleasures of sexuality as "dirty" is both inaccurate and psychologically harmful to impressionable minds. We recoil when religious fundamentalists compare a woman who has had sex with multiple partners to a dirty stick of gum. Why should we be OK with describing food - another one of life's fundamental, complicated pleasures - in similarly loaded terms?
Calling your latest low-cal, gluten-free diet a "clean eating challenge" gives it a misplaced and emotionally charged moral cast. There are plenty of complicated moral problems surrounding food, among them animal welfare, labour rights and environmental protection. But none of them can be adequately discussed with oversimplified labels like "clean" and "dirty."
0 -
bump0
-
I've known several "clean eating" "Paleo diet" people who've been doing it for over 1½ to 2 years and have yet to lose a single pound or improve their health in any way. I just shrug when they ask me how I've managed to lose weight without really dieting.
There's a user here I used to argue with, had Paleo as part of her name and everything. She was all about the clean eating and processed foods are what makes us fat and all of it.
She'd been a member here for years. She'd lost 2lbs.
She's sticking with Paleo, but she took down her weight loss ticker.
Actually it related perfectly to what was being discussed.
But nothing you've ever said has had any meaning whatsoever, or been even the slightest bit helpful. So... *grain of salt* *drink water*
^agreed that it is relevant especially seeing the first few pages, there were posts about "the lack" of elitist clean eaters and such.0 -
Right TennisDude.
Someone who's not Paleo telling me I'm not Paleo is just about as valid as someone who's not a clean eater telling a clean eater their diet isn't clean.
But, sometimes it's good to have something to argue about, and diet theories are relatively harmless in the grand scheme of things.
(I will now patiently await someone to search my journal and see that I ate OMG PIZZA!!! this week!)
Make sure to point out that PIZZA is NOT paleo.
Simple, ask a clean eater what clean eating, 99% of the time, they do not adhere to their own definition. But apparently that isn't valid
Which blows my mind. Do they not realize by saying "I eat clean 80% of the time and 20% I eat what I want"...OH, so...moderation? Like the rest of us?
Do they just need the label?
It's just a way for them to feel superior since they don't have much to brag about!
So why is your label/name of how to eat (moderation, IIFYM, etc.) better than ours? Or is your opinion of a lifestyle/diet that you must follow it to the letter 100% of the time, no exceptions ever, or you're not following it? What about diets that PURPOSEFULLY have you follow an 80%/20% type of plan? What do you call those then?
It's INCREDIBLY rude, arrogant and superior to say that those whe call themselves clean eaters are just doing it to be superior becuase they have nothing else to brag about. Labels exist to be an easier way of describing something - instead of specifically stating everything you do or don't eat, or everything you think about food, it's much more practical to simply say clean, or Primal, or IIFYM, etc.You label your way of eating too - so are you just a person who wants a label to feel superior because you have nothing to brag about?
I fully agree! The problem is on the forum it i those who are vocally not clean eater that start these threads solely to stir the pot. They are not going to say anything that would make me change the way I eat nor do I expect anything I say to change the way they eat. While I can't speak for all clean eaters, I'm sure they feel the same way. I honestly don't care what anyone else eat! It makes me wonder if the so called unclean eaters are lacking some dietary nutrient that brings out their aggression towards the word clean :laugh:
I've watched quite a few people change their minds over time and move from "clean" eating to IIFYM. Look at the diets of all so many of us who have lost, kept it off, and recomped.
You might not have thought about this, but you can eat " clean " ( I am using that word, because this is what the thread is about, even though I don't like the expression ) and also eat IIFYM. It is a mistake to automatically assume that IIFYM can only be done while eating " dirty " ( or partially dirty ) as it is a mistake to assume that automatically all people who eat clean also will meet their macros without efforts.
I eat a natural diet and still need to plan to get all my macros and once they are met, I eat exactly what I want paying no attention to the specific nutritional value of my food, just like any " dirty " eater. But I do eat within a deficit and have lost 50 pounds.0 -
Why not just call it food? I don't label my food, other than to say, "breakfast," "lunch," "dinner," "dessert," or "snack."
Balance is definitely relative to lifestyle, just as "yummy" food or "gross" food is relative to taste buds.
Because we label everything. Everything. Dinner is a label. Its what humans do to make sense of the world around them. Its how we know what we are looking at or for. Its how we decide on one thing versus another.
Dinner is a label for the food I eat during dinner time. There is no connotation to it.
It is still a label. Any connotation you apply to a label is your issue with the label. If what you eat matters not and labels are not important, why even label it dinner, why not just say my 3rd meal consisted of, or i ate XYZ after work? You do so, so people know you are talking abut the meal you eat later in the day, its easier, shorter and quicker. If i object to the label dinner for whatever reason i make up, it's my issue right? Same premise. I say i eat clean because its shorter and easier then explaining my diet in detail. Most rationally thinking people understand that means i cook at home using fresh raw whole food and don't buy premade foods or foods that have a lot of additives. My exact diet is not important. Just like what you eat for dinner isn't irrelevant to the phrase "i eat dinner at 6 everyday". But if asked you will explain it in more details.(I had this food for dinner. I do not eat xyz in my diet) And then if you happen to be on MFP, your choices get labeled as wrong and people demand you defend and explain them and then push their preferred method of diet on you. If it turns out in 20 years that added sugar really isn't unhealthy for you at all, then I am still not harming myself by avoiding it. Its still means i eat more healthier foods (like fresh veggies and fruit) and makes it easier to reach my goals.
The connotation is the difference. "Clean" has a plethora of connotation. "Dinner" has none at all.
Only because you assign it one... that was my point. You may replace the label dinner, with any label of your choosing that will help you understand my point..
Everyone assigns it a connotation, some differing more than others. Your point is moot.
which makes this entire conversation moot. I don't assign it a bad connotation. Just like i don't assign paleo or primal or WW etc a bad connotation. I don't agree with a bunch of those diets, but I don't view it as those people saying "i am superior to you because I eat chosen diet". If you do *that's your problem* not the person describing their diet.
I'm not going to sit here and type out a paragraph describing my diet, because it might offend you, when saying "i eat clean" does the same thing in 3 little words.0 -
You do realize that by and large the only people who talk about dirty food are those who are against clean eating right? I've never heard any clean eater talk about food being dirty; most don't get close to even judging other people's food choices. Most of the clean eaters I know or those like me who subscribe to the idea of clean eating don't think of clean as being a moral judgment or of other foods are dirty. Usually clean is used in these contexts to mean not possessing things that individual doesn't want to put in their body - therefore, the opposite to clean isn't dirty, it's things they just don't want to put in their body. At worst the opposite of clean eating is eating 'undesirable' things, but since it's more or less defined individually, I hardly see how that's prblematic. Food is always desriable or undesirable on an individual basis - just because I hate celery because it tastes icky to me, and therefore its undesirable and I don't want to eat it, does that somehow affect you and your relationship with celery? If it does, that's a problem with you, not with me.
People all have different views on what is healthy or unhealthy, and what they want to put in their body. If someone wants to chose not to put animal products, or processed food, or pesticides, or GMOs into their body, why do you care? Its their personal food choices, and you shouldn't get to judge them for it, even if what you're judging is how they describe their eating style.
I think it's argumentative to try and say that labelling something clean MUST mean that anything else is dirty, and that it's ridiculous to judge a way of eating on nothing more than its name. Naming conventions aren't about being perfectly descriptive, they're about being catchy. If you have to get all philosophical to find a good argument against a person choosing to eat clean, I think you're really reaching. That, and clean's a perfectly acceptable way of describing most of these food plans. They're based largely on eliminating undesirable (defined by each individual or individual plan) elements from our food and diet - that's one meaning of clean.
It can't be forgotten that words have many meanings or slightly different meanings depending on context. Yes, in some contexts clean and dirty have moral connotations; in others, they really really don't. Reading those kinds of things into this context is quite beside the point and actually rather inappropriate. I'd say that to anyone on either side of the debate, but honestly, I've only ever seen it from clean eating bashers.
Bolded part is false! There are a lot of elitist clean eaters that will come out of the woodwork to label a single food item as bad, dirty, junk, etc.
That is true for both ends of the spectrum. In my experience ( relatively short....only 390 days on MFP ) when the subject comes up there are more (especially young men) who brag how dirty they eat consuming 4300 calories a day in doughnuts, pizza, fast food and full sugar soft drinks, usually in a " bulking phase " ( which has nothing to do with the subject of eating while losing weight ), than people who are arrogant about their food intake when it comes to largely natural food. But that is just my experience other people's mileage probably varies.
I think on either side of the issue there are many people who read elitist and arrogant as well as loud mouthed and offensive attitudes in posts where there are actually none.
The thing I don't like are the really childish remarks, to put clean eaters down, I imagine like:
I wash my food with soap, so it must be clean
But, but, I scrubbed my food with tooth paste, is that clean enough ?
I use bleach on my food, I eat super clean
hundreds if not thousands of b-o-r-i-n-g remarks like that.....do people really think they are still funny ?
And at the same time, there are thousands of comment also calling the mentioned foods "junk", "unheatlhy", "gross", "garbage", etc.
I especially love it when people then try to backpedal and say things like, "Oh. I'm not judging what others eat but I eat "real" food."
Rrrriiiggghhhttt..0 -
I've known several "clean eating" "Paleo diet" people who've been doing it for over 1½ to 2 years and have yet to lose a single pound or improve their health in any way. I just shrug when they ask me how I've managed to lose weight without really dieting.
There's a user here I used to argue with, had Paleo as part of her name and everything. She was all about the clean eating and processed foods are what makes us fat and all of it.
She'd been a member here for years. She'd lost 2lbs.
She's sticking with Paleo, but she took down her weight loss ticker.
Actually it related perfectly to what was being discussed.
But nothing you've ever said has had any meaning whatsoever, or been even the slightest bit helpful. So... *grain of salt* *drink water*
^agreed that it is relevant especially seeing the first few pages, there were posts about "the lack" of elitist clean eaters and such.
Yes agreed everyone was waiting for the elitist clean eaters and then attack them for turning up. Great logic, hate the fact people claim to eat healthier than other, but then start threads to draw those people out so you can get them to claim they are eating healthier than other and then be outraged by it!!0 -
You do realize that by and large the only people who talk about dirty food are those who are against clean eating right? I've never heard any clean eater talk about food being dirty; most don't get close to even judging other people's food choices. Most of the clean eaters I know or those like me who subscribe to the idea of clean eating don't think of clean as being a moral judgment or of other foods are dirty. Usually clean is used in these contexts to mean not possessing things that individual doesn't want to put in their body - therefore, the opposite to clean isn't dirty, it's things they just don't want to put in their body. At worst the opposite of clean eating is eating 'undesirable' things, but since it's more or less defined individually, I hardly see how that's prblematic. Food is always desriable or undesirable on an individual basis - just because I hate celery because it tastes icky to me, and therefore its undesirable and I don't want to eat it, does that somehow affect you and your relationship with celery? If it does, that's a problem with you, not with me.
People all have different views on what is healthy or unhealthy, and what they want to put in their body. If someone wants to chose not to put animal products, or processed food, or pesticides, or GMOs into their body, why do you care? Its their personal food choices, and you shouldn't get to judge them for it, even if what you're judging is how they describe their eating style.
I think it's argumentative to try and say that labelling something clean MUST mean that anything else is dirty, and that it's ridiculous to judge a way of eating on nothing more than its name. Naming conventions aren't about being perfectly descriptive, they're about being catchy. If you have to get all philosophical to find a good argument against a person choosing to eat clean, I think you're really reaching. That, and clean's a perfectly acceptable way of describing most of these food plans. They're based largely on eliminating undesirable (defined by each individual or individual plan) elements from our food and diet - that's one meaning of clean.
It can't be forgotten that words have many meanings or slightly different meanings depending on context. Yes, in some contexts clean and dirty have moral connotations; in others, they really really don't. Reading those kinds of things into this context is quite beside the point and actually rather inappropriate. I'd say that to anyone on either side of the debate, but honestly, I've only ever seen it from clean eating bashers.
Bolded part is false! There are a lot of elitist clean eaters that will come out of the woodwork to label a single food item as bad, dirty, junk, etc.
That is true for both ends of the spectrum. In my experience ( relatively short....only 390 days on MFP ) when the subject comes up there are more (especially young men) who brag how dirty they eat consuming 4300 calories a day in doughnuts, pizza, fast food and full sugar soft drinks, usually in a " bulking phase " ( which has nothing to do with the subject of eating while losing weight ), than people who are arrogant about their food intake when it comes to largely natural food. But that is just my experience other people's mileage probably varies.
I think on either side of the issue there are many people who read elitist and arrogant as well as loud mouthed and offensive attitudes in posts where there are actually none.
The thing I don't like are the really childish remarks, to put clean eaters down, I imagine like:
I wash my food with soap, so it must be clean
But, but, I scrubbed my food with tooth paste, is that clean enough ?
I use bleach on my food, I eat super clean
hundreds if not thousands of b-o-r-i-n-g remarks like that.....do people really think they are still funny ?
And at the same time, there are thousands of comment also calling the mentioned foods "junk", "unheatlhy", "gross", "garbage", etc.
I especially love it when people then try to backpedal and say things like, "Oh. I'm not judging what others eat but I eat "real" food."
Rrrriiiggghhhttt..
Junk food is a legitimate terms - what's wrong with it?0 -
BuzzFeed
Theres where I learned what 1980s movie super hero I am.0 -
You do realize that by and large the only people who talk about dirty food are those who are against clean eating right? I've never heard any clean eater talk about food being dirty; most don't get close to even judging other people's food choices. Most of the clean eaters I know or those like me who subscribe to the idea of clean eating don't think of clean as being a moral judgment or of other foods are dirty. Usually clean is used in these contexts to mean not possessing things that individual doesn't want to put in their body - therefore, the opposite to clean isn't dirty, it's things they just don't want to put in their body. At worst the opposite of clean eating is eating 'undesirable' things, but since it's more or less defined individually, I hardly see how that's prblematic. Food is always desriable or undesirable on an individual basis - just because I hate celery because it tastes icky to me, and therefore its undesirable and I don't want to eat it, does that somehow affect you and your relationship with celery? If it does, that's a problem with you, not with me.
People all have different views on what is healthy or unhealthy, and what they want to put in their body. If someone wants to chose not to put animal products, or processed food, or pesticides, or GMOs into their body, why do you care? Its their personal food choices, and you shouldn't get to judge them for it, even if what you're judging is how they describe their eating style.
I think it's argumentative to try and say that labelling something clean MUST mean that anything else is dirty, and that it's ridiculous to judge a way of eating on nothing more than its name. Naming conventions aren't about being perfectly descriptive, they're about being catchy. If you have to get all philosophical to find a good argument against a person choosing to eat clean, I think you're really reaching. That, and clean's a perfectly acceptable way of describing most of these food plans. They're based largely on eliminating undesirable (defined by each individual or individual plan) elements from our food and diet - that's one meaning of clean.
It can't be forgotten that words have many meanings or slightly different meanings depending on context. Yes, in some contexts clean and dirty have moral connotations; in others, they really really don't. Reading those kinds of things into this context is quite beside the point and actually rather inappropriate. I'd say that to anyone on either side of the debate, but honestly, I've only ever seen it from clean eating bashers.
Bolded part is false! There are a lot of elitist clean eaters that will come out of the woodwork to label a single food item as bad, dirty, junk, etc.
That is true for both ends of the spectrum. In my experience ( relatively short....only 390 days on MFP ) when the subject comes up there are more (especially young men) who brag how dirty they eat consuming 4300 calories a day in doughnuts, pizza, fast food and full sugar soft drinks, usually in a " bulking phase " ( which has nothing to do with the subject of eating while losing weight ), than people who are arrogant about their food intake when it comes to largely natural food. But that is just my experience other people's mileage probably varies.
I think on either side of the issue there are many people who read elitist and arrogant as well as loud mouthed and offensive attitudes in posts where there are actually none.
The thing I don't like are the really childish remarks, to put clean eaters down, I imagine like:
I wash my food with soap, so it must be clean
But, but, I scrubbed my food with tooth paste, is that clean enough ?
I use bleach on my food, I eat super clean
hundreds if not thousands of b-o-r-i-n-g remarks like that.....do people really think they are still funny ?
And at the same time, there are thousands of comment also calling the mentioned foods "junk", "unheatlhy", "gross", "garbage", etc.
I especially love it when people then try to backpedal and say things like, "Oh. I'm not judging what others eat but I eat "real" food."
Rrrriiiggghhhttt..
Junk food is a legitimate terms - what's wrong with it?
*facepalm* Nevermind. I'm out of this thread.0 -
The original article really helped me put my finger on why I find 'clean' eaters so objectionable sometimes - usually I truly don't mind hearing about what people eat, especially when it's working for them long-term (one of those miraculous lifestyle changes we hear about).
I do mind, however, when people complain that they're eating clean but still not losing weight, or assume that I'm eating clean because I'm trying to lose weight. IMO, 'clean' is more of a marketing term. You can sell books based on the premise of clean-eating, your magazine will sell more if it contains clean recipes, and clean-eating websites can generate loads of ad revenue.
No one is making money on the eat-whatever-you-want-but-learn-portion-control and move-more and lift-heavy-so-you-can-eat-even-MORE diet. Yet.0 -
Wow, yet another in a seemingly endless stream of threads on this topic initiated to slam other people's choices and belittle their efforts to improve their health.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.9K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.8K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.7K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 400 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.8K Motivation and Support
- 7.9K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.4K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 988 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.4K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions