Your food is no cleaner than mine

jofjltncb6

Fascinating to see how bias and perception are so intermingled. Not just this thread, but so many threads.

Rose6300

I actually don't need a label. And I pretty much never talk about how I eat, except to my daughter who likes to eat this way too. I just jumped into this thread because I think it's pretty funny that people get so butthurt about people using the term "clean eating", as if it's some kind of personal affront to them.

I wouldn't say butthurt, it just seems self-righteous, and self-righteousness bugs me (which may be non-self-aware, admittedly). Also, I think the discussion of labeling, the labels chosen, etc., is interesting, as is the discussion about people's attitudes toward food and our cultural tendency to link food to morals, all of which seem implicated by the discussion and the original post.

People do express disgust about food in a way that is pretty extreme and which is related to disgust at the people who eat those foods, however, so that people get butthurt on occasion shouldn't seem weird. In the US there are definitely class issues involved, for example. And more moderately, it just seems offensive to say that what someone else is eating is disgusting--it makes them feel that they are being insulted (for eating something disgusting) even if that's not intended.

Also, of course, this topic is related to the broader claim about "processed food" or sugar or wheat or whatever the current cuprit is being responsible for people getting fat--the idea that if you don't eat clean you are addicted or some such.

Well, I guess that's where our differences lie. I never even considered that people who say they eat clean are being self-righteous. Maybe because I truly don't have any opinions on the morality of food choices. I get a good clear picture of what the person eats in my head without them having to utter too many words. And that's why I find it's a useful label.

I also don't think a person needs to do it 100% of the time in order to say they eat clean. Who cares if they ate an Oreo? Their overall food preferences lean toward whole foods, plant-based foods, non-box foods, etc. So someone who says "I eat clean" is not a hypocrite if you see them with a donut.

On the other hand, I do judge certain foods as disgusting. Mind you, I don't say it aloud or make faces or anything, but I get sick if I eat fried, gooey, gloppy food. So to me these foods are disgusting. I don't, however, think the people who eat them are disgusting. I think they must have cast-iron stomachs. That's all.

tennisdude2004

I actually don't need a label. And I pretty much never talk about how I eat, except to my daughter who likes to eat this way too. I just jumped into this thread because I think it's pretty funny that people get so butthurt about people using the term "clean eating", as if it's some kind of personal affront to them.

I wouldn't say butthurt, it just seems self-righteous, and self-righteousness bugs me (which may be non-self-aware, admittedly). Also, I think the discussion of labeling, the labels chosen, etc., is interesting, as is the discussion about people's attitudes toward food and our cultural tendency to link food to morals, all of which seem implicated by the discussion and the original post.

People do express disgust about food in a way that is pretty extreme and which is related to disgust at the people who eat those foods, however, so that people get butthurt on occasion shouldn't seem weird. In the US there are definitely class issues involved, for example. And more moderately, it just seems offensive to say that what someone else is eating is disgusting--it makes them feel that they are being insulted (for eating something disgusting) even if that's not intended.

Also, of course, this topic is related to the broader claim about "processed food" or sugar or wheat or whatever the current cuprit is being responsible for people getting fat--the idea that if you don't eat clean you are addicted or some such.

Well, I guess that's where our differences lie. I never even considered that people who say they eat clean are being self-righteous. Maybe because I truly don't have any opinions on the morality of food choices. I get a good clear picture of what the person eats in my head without them having to utter too many words. And that's why I find it's a useful label.

I also don't think a person needs to do it 100% of the time in order to say they eat clean. Who cares if they ate an Oreo? Their overall food preferences lean toward whole foods, plant-based foods, non-box foods, etc. So someone who says "I eat clean" is not a hypocrite if you see them with a donut.

On the other hand, I do judge certain foods as disgusting. Mind you, I don't say it aloud or make faces or anything, but I get sick if I eat fried, gooey, gloppy food. So to me these foods are disgusting. I don't, however, think the people who eat them are disgusting. I think they must have cast-iron stomachs. That's all.

It's great, when anybody eating a (what some call restrictive diet - ridiculous really as calorie counting is a restrictive diet) is seen as being obsessive and the diet seen as having an unhealthy association with food.

And then in the next breath the very people making the obsessive comments are have a pop at people who do not following the diet 100% - ???????????

Rose6300

It's great, when anybody eating a (what some call restrictive diet - ridiculous really as calorie counting is a restrictive diet) is seen as being obsessive and the diet seen as having an unhealthy association with food.

And then in the next breath the very people making the obsessive comments are have a pop at people who do not following the diet 100% - ???????????

I find it pretty useful when people do this in arguments, as it makes it clear to me they're arguing with their emotions and not their brains.

DeadliftAddict

oh rats!! another soul that won't give me his candy since he'll eat it... this sucks... Please please promote 'clean' eating so that there will be more unclean food for me.

^This is awesome.

montana_girl

What is if I call my way of eating "The Cut Down On Processed Foods and Grains; Eat More Non-Starchy Vegetables, and Lean Protein Diet?" Is that acceptable? :happy: :laugh: :happy:

I eat like that because of my eating plan, I call it my eating plan. The shakes I drink are definitely processed to the nth degree though, but they help me get enough protein.

^^ And you just threw a label on what you call it!

This seems to be the issue. If we label it... Eating Clean... Paleo... Primal... etc, then the thread takes a negative term. But what about IIFYM? Isn't that a label? But I don't see those threads become 10 pages of debate about what that means, as in "how many macros? why so much protein? Why not more carbs?" etc.

As someone pointed out if "clean eaters" just say "I eat healthy" then there would be debate on what that means. So the IIFYM group doesn't like those terms, how do we describe how we eat? Call it IIFYM with less processed foods? Then it becomes the debate on "Hey, what's wrong with processed foods?"

I just want to be able to tell people how I eat (only when they ask - I never it push it on anyone, I am not a food elitist). I explain this is what works for me, but everyone needs to find what works for them and their lifestyle. And the way I eat now is miles from how I ate 3, 5, or 10 years ago. It's been a gradual transition over 10 years. I no longer drink diet pop, I have cut way down on processed foods, fast food, grains. Have I totally cut them out? No, but eating those foods is not an everyday occurrence for me. This is what works for me.


***edited because I can't type as fast as think....

Confuzzled4ever

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.

This seems to be the issue. If we label it... Eating Clean... Paleo... Primal... etc, then the thread takes a negative term. But what about IIFYM? Isn't that a label? But I don't see those threads become 10 pages of debate about what that means, as in "how many macros? why so much protein? Why not more carbs?" etc.

As someone pointed out if "clean eaters" just say "I eat healthy" then there would be debate on what that means. So the IIFYM group doesn't like those terms, how do we describe how we eat? Call it IIFYM with less processed foods? Then it becomes the debate on what is wrong with processed foods.

100% agreed

DeadliftAddict

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.

This is all great. I agree with most of it. I do however see people on here as well as in life who label food as dirty. Or, those that say don't eat this food because you it will make you gain weight. The food itself will not make you lose weight. Eating to much of anything can make you gain weight. Some of it just takes a whole lot more so it's a better option. What a person eats is their business. What a lot of people have issue with is that some clean eaters will claim that it is the only way to lose weight and all processed food is so bad for you.

WendyTerry420

I am just glad that I ran across SideSteel as soon as I found the forums and send him a friend request. (One of the few FRs that I've sent) I honestly believed the mythical hokey that you had to give up certain nutrient subsets in order to lose weight. I never would have made it more than a month if I had continued with that line of thinking. Once I understood macronutrients and what a calorie actually is, it made it *very* easy to drop 80 pounds over the course of a year.

If it wasn't for my fake, processed faux dessert with sucrose, I would be eating sugar, getting the calories and losing less weight, because I have to have my dessert one way or the other. I also have some fake faux processed snacks I like when I have a craving for chocolate, otherwise, I would eat chocolate, which is more fat and more calories. This is what I do...it is just the way it is, and I don't care who likes it or not.

darkangel45422

I've never thought that someone saying they eat clean means they think that I eat dirty.

Interesting, because the implication that that's what they are saying is what bothers me about it, and makes me think it's kind of rude. I think it's because it's a label. If someone says "oh, I try to eat healthy" or "I'm focusing more on eating healthy than I was," I see that as talking about their focus on their own diet, on priorities on a continuum. It doesn't seem to break the world down into self-proclaimed "healthy eaters" and everyone else, who eat taco bell and brownies 24-7. When someone claims the label "clean eater," I definitely read that as them breaking the world into clean eaters and non-clean-eaters (who are here weirdly stereotyped as people who just want to eat taco bell and brownies 24-7, sometimes). It's an us and them thing and a statement about people who reject the label as not eating as well that bothers me. Unlike this, someone who is a vegetarian need not assume that someone who isn't eats worse (although they may have moral objections) and someone who eats low-carb often just sees it as something that works for them, but the clean eater thing is a claim of superiority vs. others. Ironically, often people who eat just about the same, but reject labels or prefer other labels. I'm not saying all "clean eaters" do this, but some do and more significantly it's implicit in the claim.

Note: this is particularly the case because "clean eating" has no real defined meaning. So if someone tells me they are eating clean or a clean eater, I don't know how they are actually eating, what they aren't eating, etc. I just know they think their food choices are cleaner than those of the uninitiated, even though plenty of people who don't use special "clean eating" recipes or the like also don't eat only fast food and sweets (which can be made from whole foods, obviously, and thus be as unprocessed as anything else, except for those who think all sugar and flour is unclean, which again gets to the confusion inherent in the term).

I think what's really interesting about this is that it's actually all individual perception. You perceive clean eating as somehow being an us vs. them thing that classes others who aren't clean eaters whereas something like eating healthy doesn't. But you could just as easily argue that saying you eat healthy means that those who don't eat like you eat unhealthy, and make it into an us vs. them thing like that. I think it's really interesting that you think this kind of breakdown and mentality is implicit in the term clean eating but not in things like vegeterianism, healthy, etc. when really I don't think it's implicit in any of them, but could be read into them if you were so inclined to think that way. You could easily (and people have) say that by saying you eat healthy, you're saying anyone who doesn't eat the foods you say are healthy are eating unhealthily - basically you could make the same arguments for it that you do about eating clean.

I also think it's interesting that you see things like low-carb as just being what works for tha person, but clean eating is a superiority thing; why can't eating clean just be what works for that person too?


While I agree clean eating is more an umbrella term for many more specific ways of eating, I don't seei t as any more confusing that other broad labels like vegeterianism or low-carb or healthy. Healthy could mean ANYTHING; vegeterianism has so many varieties I no longer even know what it means (some eat fish, some eat fowl, some eat not animals but animal products, some eat nothing that's been within 100 feet of an animal, etc.), low carb varies heavily by the amount of carbs and the types, etc. I think it's interesting that the only thing you take away from someone saying they're a clean eater is that they think they're superior to non-clean eaters, when that's probably the only thing it DOESN'T mean. Clean eating isn't a superiority thing (which isn't to say some people don't think they're superior, but that's seperate from clean eating itself) - it's about trying to cut back on things that the person doesn't think are terribly healthy for them to make more room for the healthy stuff. Which is also why it's not an elimination diet - it's not about quitting something entirely (though obviously many people aspire to be in a place in their life where they could easily never eat things like cake, or chocolate, or chips, etc.), it's about reducing the importance of those foods in your diet and focusing instead of healthier fare.

Clean eating's just a slightly more precise way of saying healthy eating.

WendyTerry420

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.

perseverance14

The cancer links are overstated on many websites The links that seem to rise to the level of causation are very specific and have to do with things like not getting sufficient fiber and "processed" meats. The cancer that has arisen in my own family, for example, has either been directly linked to genetics, or in one case was baffling because she ate about as "clean" as a human being can and was privy to all the research. There has to be a middle ground between BSC paranoia and a complete lack of concern.

I have 2 people in my circle with cancer right now. One ate very well, the other way always ate a bunch of junk. My Dad died of cancer, and I have held the belief for many years that it could have been related to all the soda pop he drank, which was in excess even though he looked very fit. He had stomach cancer but by the time they found it, it had spread and there was nothing they could do. I think diet can be related to why you get cancer, but I don't think it has to be.

Confuzzled4ever

I do however see people on here as well as in life who label food as dirty. Or, those that say don't eat this food because you it will make you gain weight. The food itself will not make you lose weight. Eating to much of anything can make you gain weight. Some of it just takes a whole lot more so it's a better option. What a person eats is their business. What a lot of people have issue with is that some clean eaters will claim that it is the only way to lose weight and all processed food is so bad for you.

A person has the right to believe differently then others. If I believe added sugar is wholly unhealthy or processed foods is the reason we are all obese, then that is my business. I am free to express that opinion and you are free to express yours.

jofjltncb6

But I would ask from an health and nutritional point is a clean eating diet inferior to other diets? and if so why?

No it's fine. And no one is saying clean eating is bad. Just the amount of clean eaters telling people who choose to eat some candy or ice cream are doing it wrong is what is annoying. Especially when a lot of new comers get these responses of eliminating some food groups. Restrictions on a diet can help some people, but shouldn't be the first thing recommended, especially with the threat of sugar being evil.
In reality even those clean eaters adhere to a similar diet as the non clean eaters (80-20). This is why there's friction between these two groups a lot of the time.

Based on the fact that a majority of members on MFP are calorie counting and eating in moderation or IIFYM, I'm not sure how the first message newbies get is anything other than the MFP official guidelines.

I don't know if I agree agree with this. I see plenty of forums with either newcomer or those having problems losing weight where members come in and say "eat clean" or "give up [insert food group]" all the time. And then I see members coming in and saying eat the same foods you already do but eat at a reasonable deficit. Then the argument ensues and the newbie gets confused. And for those having problems losing weight without a medical condition it's often a matter of underestimating intake and overestimating calorie burn.

QFT


I am just glad that I ran across SideSteel as soon as I found the forums and send him a friend request. (One of the few FRs that I've sent) I honestly believed the mythical hokey that you had to give up certain nutrient subsets in order to lose weight. I never would have made it more than a month if I had continued with that line of thinking. Once I understood macronutrients and what a calorie actually is, it made it *very* easy to drop 80 pounds over the course of a year.

You've come a long ways these last two years...

...both in knowledge/approach/attitude and in progress. :drinker:

Acg67

I do however see people on here as well as in life who label food as dirty. Or, those that say don't eat this food because you it will make you gain weight. The food itself will not make you lose weight. Eating to much of anything can make you gain weight. Some of it just takes a whole lot more so it's a better option. What a person eats is their business. What a lot of people have issue with is that some clean eaters will claim that it is the only way to lose weight and all processed food is so bad for you.

A person has the right to believe differently then others. If I believe added sugar is wholly unhealthy or processed foods is the reason we are all obese, then that is my business. I am free to express that opinion and you are free to express yours.

Tell the NBA that...

DeadliftAddict

I do however see people on here as well as in life who label food as dirty. Or, those that say don't eat this food because you it will make you gain weight. The food itself will not make you lose weight. Eating to much of anything can make you gain weight. Some of it just takes a whole lot more so it's a better option. What a person eats is their business. What a lot of people have issue with is that some clean eaters will claim that it is the only way to lose weight and all processed food is so bad for you.

A person has the right to believe differently then others. If I believe added sugar is wholly unhealthy or processed foods is the reason we are all obese, then that is my business. I am free to express that opinion and you are free to express yours.

Oh I agree. But, with that keep as an opinion. Not the end all, be all of nutrition. I believe that people give their opinion as fact most of the time. This often confuses or frustrates those that are new and trying to lose weight. One way is not going to work for everyone.

tennisdude2004

I do however see people on here as well as in life who label food as dirty. Or, those that say don't eat this food because you it will make you gain weight. The food itself will not make you lose weight. Eating to much of anything can make you gain weight. Some of it just takes a whole lot more so it's a better option. What a person eats is their business. What a lot of people have issue with is that some clean eaters will claim that it is the only way to lose weight and all processed food is so bad for you.

A person has the right to believe differently then others. If I believe added sugar is wholly unhealthy or processed foods is the reason we are all obese, then that is my business. I am free to express that opinion and you are free to express yours.

Oh I agree. But, with that keep as an opinion. Not the end all, be all of nutrition. I believe that people give their opinion as fact most of the time. This often confuses or frustrates those that are new and trying to lose weight. One way is not going to work for everyone.

Is that your opinion or a fact? :laugh:

JoRocka

I do however see people on here as well as in life who label food as dirty. Or, those that say don't eat this food because you it will make you gain weight. The food itself will not make you lose weight. Eating to much of anything can make you gain weight. Some of it just takes a whole lot more so it's a better option. What a person eats is their business. What a lot of people have issue with is that some clean eaters will claim that it is the only way to lose weight and all processed food is so bad for you.

A person has the right to believe differently then others. If I believe added sugar is wholly unhealthy or processed foods is the reason we are all obese, then that is my business. I am free to express that opinion and you are free to express yours.

The problem is that often times it comes out as

"processed foods and sugars make people fat"

not
"I don't like to eat processed sugars- I personally dislike what they for my body and I have a hard time controlling myself while eating them"

see the difference.

You're entitled to think that my personal coffee drinking habit will give you cancer and that the spaghetti monster really is how the earth was created- but that doesn't make it a fact. You are perfectly entitled to have what ever opinion you wish- no matter how wrong it is.























































honestly now
Everyone knows Cuthula is the beginning and most certainly the end.

Confuzzled4ever

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.

lemurcat12

Well, I guess that's where our differences lie. I never even considered that people who say they eat clean are being self-righteous. Maybe because I truly don't have any opinions on the morality of food choices. I get a good clear picture of what the person eats in my head without them having to utter too many words. And that's why I find it's a useful label.

I think we are mostly disagreeing on the benefit of the label. In that it doesn't communicate anything helpful, why use it? That's why I think I read the attitude into it. And since you said that you don't use the label, I'm not sure why it's important to you to defend it--I'm curious why it's a label that people feel drawn to. The other labels we see--low carb, vegetarian, Paleo--seem to me to at least provide information about how people eat. "I'm a clean eater" does not; it sounds like you are simply patting yourself on the back. Plus, think about it--a friend orders ice cream, you say "oh, we don't eat that, we eat clean." How is that not also saying "you don't eat clean," regardless of what the other person otherwise eats. I know if I'm the other person, I then feel insulted and a little defensive, especially since people are weird about food stuff.

I also don't think a person needs to do it 100% of the time in order to say they eat clean. Who cares if they ate an Oreo?

If this is responding to something I said, I'm not sure what it is. But just as I would not say I am a vegetarian who occasionally eats meat, I wouldn't define myself by a label that supposedly means something and then ignore what it means. Again, this is more about labels than anything else--if someone said "I try to eat a healthy diet" or "I mostly cook from whole foods, try to limit processed stuff to a minimum," but then eats the occasional processed treat, that's expected. It's setting themselves up as someone who AVOIDS those demonic processed foods or sugar or whatever it is that lead to the confusion when someone then buys all the Amy's packaged stuff at WF or whatever. And my guess is the only people who ever get noticed for doing this are those who actually act self-righteous in the first place. The question is why the person needs to distinguish himself from the rest of us slobs, who also mostly try to eat a healthy diet but occasionally eat Oreos (actually, I don't like Oreos, so say ice cream)?

On the other hand, I do judge certain foods as disgusting. Mind you, I don't say it aloud or make faces or anything, but I get sick if I eat fried, gooey, gloppy food. So to me these foods are disgusting. I don't, however, think the people who eat them are disgusting. I think they must have cast-iron stomachs. That's all.

If you've never been exposed to people doing what I was talking about, lucky you. I think it is reasonably pervasive. Of course, most of us judge certain foods as being disgusting, even apart from the "cleanness" of them. I'm not all that picky about most things, but I have an extreme reaction to a few things. Years and years ago (when I was much much younger) I realized how offensive it was to mention this in front of people eating those things, that it could cause them feel like I was talking about them, and so I stopped. But I see something similar, if less extreme, in the kind of comment I referred to above.