Your food is no cleaner than mine

montana_girl

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.

Can I just say, I you? :flowerforyou:

Rose6300

I'm clearly not very convincing in my argument that the term "clean eating" is not a personal attack or judgment. Nor am I convincing in my argument that labels can be useful as a way to shortcut language. So, I'm out.

lemurcat12

As someone pointed out if "clean eaters" just say "I eat healthy" then there would be debate on what that means.

I actually don't think this is true. If someone says "I try to eat healthy," it's understood that people have different ways to understand that and they are just saying they prioritize healthy benefits in choosing their diet. Clearly, not everyone bothers with that--I have gone for years without doing so--so I don't think that's going to be perceived as an insult in the same way, unless you are obnoxious and specifically comment on someone else's food choice. But saying "I'm a clean eater," implies that there are non-clean eaters, I don't think people generally perceive themselves to be eating dirty or disgusting food. Also, rather than acknowledging that we might all have different ideas about what makes for a healthy diet, it sets up this notion that there are clean foods and non clean foods and the best way to eat is to avoid the unclean foods, when I'd argue that a healthier way to eat is just to emphasize nutrition-rich foods and then round out the diet with the other stuff that you happen to like.

Also, not everyone uses labels. IIFYM is a label (not one I use, I'm not cool enough for a label), I suppose, but it's also just a reference to a process, how you choose your food, and more akin to saying "I try to eat healthy" or "I try to focus on fresh foods and cooking" or whatever, none of which would provoke the same reaction in me.

Clearly, however, no one should care that much about my reaction. I just find this an interesting topic, since people can be puzzling.

I also would agree (if I'm understanding you) that of course changing your diet to emphasize healthier things can be a quite positive personal decision and one to be encouraged. I don't think the most unhealthy versions of the SAD necessarily reflect how people have consciously chosen how to eat and prefer such that moving to a healthier diet wouldn't be both beneficial and not especially restrictive.

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.

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:

haha.. love it!!

*a lot* of people are guilty of the 'end all and be all" guru of nutrition. And a lot of them label themselves as iifym believer. If it true for me, then it's true for you. (generic me and you)

As someone pointed out if "clean eaters" just say "I eat healthy" then there would be debate on what that means.

wrong. I recall a (rather recent) subway thread where op asked what is healthy there and a huge argument erupted over what exactly healthy eating means and how it applies to subway.

tennisdude2004

As someone pointed out if "clean eaters" just say "I eat healthy" then there would be debate on what that means.

I actually don't think this is true. If someone says "I try to eat healthy," it's understood that people have different ways to understand that and they are just saying they prioritize healthy benefits in choosing their diet. Clearly, not everyone bothers with that--I have gone for years without doing so--so I don't think that's going to be perceived as an insult in the same way, unless you are obnoxious and specifically comment on someone else's food choice. But saying "I'm a clean eater," implies that there are non-clean eaters, I don't think people generally perceive themselves to be eating dirty or disgusting food. Also, rather than acknowledging that we might all have different ideas about what makes for a healthy diet, it sets up this notion that there are clean foods and non clean foods and the best way to eat is to avoid the unclean foods, when I'd argue that a healthier way to eat is just to emphasize nutrition-rich foods and then round out the diet with the other stuff that you happen to like.

Also, not everyone uses labels. IIFYM is a label (not one I use, I'm not cool enough for a label), I suppose, but it's also just a reference to a process, how you choose your food, and more akin to saying "I try to eat healthy" or "I try to focus on fresh foods and cooking" or whatever, none of which would provoke the same reaction in me.

Clearly, however, no one should care that much about my reaction. I just find this an interesting topic, since people can be puzzling.

I also would agree (if I'm understanding you) that of course changing your diet to emphasize healthier things can be a quite positive personal decision and one to be encouraged. I don't think the most unhealthy versions of the SAD necessarily reflect how people have consciously chosen how to eat and prefer such that moving to a healthier diet wouldn't be both beneficial and not especially restrictive.

No it would be true.

In fact only the other day I read a post with someone demanding (in the normal NBA way) that someone confirmed their definition of what was healthy food.

And then went on to say, well what's healthy for one person doesn't hold the same benefits for another - no win situation!!!!

I've personally been asked that on these sort of threads and my response is always the same - NOT broad bean!

Strokingdiction

When anyone tells me about their clean eating or Paleo diet or Primal etc etc... I just wonder what fad they're going to try next.

Best fad ever. I bought so many of those for gag gifts because once someone opens it up, they are going to give it a try. Then the image is caught on camera phone and eternity awaits.

On topic: Someone asked me if I was eating clean once because I brought their sister a bunch of produce from my garden. I told him I would be if I needed to put a label on my eating habits. I just wish I'd had a snickers in my back pocket at that moment so I could whip it out for my 20% moderation part of that diet.

lemurcat12

In fact only the other day I read a post with someone demanding (in the normal NBA way) that someone confirmed their definition of what was healthy food.

And then went on to say, well what's healthy for one person doesn't hold the same benefits for another - no win situation!!!!

I've personally been asked that on these sort of threads and my response is always the same - NOT broad bean!

I will modify--on MFP certainly you will get challenged if you say "I only eat healthy foods and don't eat unhealthy ones" or if you make an assertion that a particular food item is healthy or not (especially not). But that's different than saying "I try to eat healthy" which is a short form way of saying "I try to eat a healthy diet." I would argue that a healthy diet can be made up of nutrition rich foods (often referred to as healthy) and foods that are less so, that the mix is what decides what is healthy (I think this is also what IIFYM says, although I reject that label like all other labelled diets).

What is different about "I'm a clean eater" is that it doesn't focus on overall mix or on process, but on the rejection of offending food items. That's why it makes sense to call someone on eating an Oreo in that case, but not someone who merely claims to try to eat healthy. (For the record I wouldn't, since I hate all arguments based on alleged hypocrisy. Everyone is hypocritical to some extent and often by hypocrisy people just mean a failure to live up to your goals.)

If people also get critical responses for trying on a personal level to improve their diets or eat healthier, etc., that would be wrong, IMO, but I haven't seen it. It's also possible that this clear distinction I see between the "clean eating" label and "I try to eat whole foods, mostly" is more personal than I'm realizing and I'm just crazy, but so far it seems so obvious to me I don't get why everyone doesn't just agree with me. ;-)

Bernadette60614

Back when most families had a garden, you came into town once a week to buy produce from the local farmers and you ate poultry/beef that came from free range poultry and grass fed beef....they just called it eating food. And, no one debated it...you ate food that had been largely produced without chemicals.

Sugar was a luxury/white flour was a luxury. You had it on holidays and special occasion. They called that "treats". Something you eat on a daily basis wasn't a "treat"..it happened only a few times a year.

I like to say: I eat food. I have occasional treats.

lemurcat12

I think what's really interesting about this is that it's actually all individual perception.

Oh, I agree with this. That's what I was trying to say in my first post on this thread. I do think there are reasons to make the distinctions I've made (which I've tried my best to explain so won't bore everyone again), and that "I try to eat healthy" does not lend itself to the same criticism, but ultimately we are going to have different reactions due to different experiences, social circles, etc. I find it interesting to try to understand the underlying reasons, but acknowledge that others could find it tedious. I hope it's clear that I'm not taking any of this personally and don't intend it as such--I really am interested in why your reaction to the term is so different from mine, in that we don't seem to disagree that much on the things beneath the term.

why can't eating clean just be what works for that person too?

Because saying foods have carbs or not is just a fact. Saying that foods are clean or not (which means unclean) is not a fact, is a value judgment that goes beyond how you like to eat, and one that has weird ties to moral ideas and purity judgments. You are saying that other people eat unclean foods, even that some of the foods you eat are unclean. That's troubling given how weird people react to food stuff anyway--it's where I agree with the original article quoted. None of that follows from saying that you try to eat a healthy diet--there are millions of paths to a healthy diet.

IMO, no vegetarians eat fish or fowl. If they do, they aren't vegetarian. They are misusing the term, which unlike "clean eating" actually does have a defined and generally understood meaning.

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

See, this is about the only way I haven't seen it used. Clean eating, IME, means that you don't eat (or try to limit) certain specific foods which you deem unacceptable (unclean). People who regularly eat those foods thus don't eat "clean" (even if they don't accept your view that the foods are unacceptable). That's not the same as healthy eating, although obviously people who label themselves as "clean eaters" obviously might also try to eat in a healthy fashion, and I might frequently agree that they do (even if I am annoyed by their label). That's because there are plenty of ways to eat healthy that are unlike the way I personally try to follow.

Acg67

Back when most families had a garden, you came into town once a week to buy produce from the local farmers and you ate poultry/beef that came from free range poultry and grass fed beef....they just called it eating food. And, no one debated it...you ate food that had been largely produced without chemicals.

Sugar was a luxury/white flour was a luxury. You had it on holidays and special occasion. They called that "treats". Something you eat on a daily basis wasn't a "treat"..it happened only a few times a year.

I like to say: I eat food. I have occasional treats.

How did the food grow without lots and lots of chemicals? Bread was only eaten a few times a year? What time period are you talking about?

Bernadette60614

The answer to those questions could go on for pages (and then I wouldn't have time to track!), but you might google "sugar history" and "processed foods history".

Or, you could try your own variation of above.

Thanks for your question.

Strokingdiction

The answer to those questions could go on for pages (and then I wouldn't have time to track!), but you might google "sugar history" and "processed foods history".

Or, you could try your own variation of above.

Thanks for your question.

Makes claim.

Unwilling to back claim up.

Bernadette60614

Thanks for your interest in this exchange. Best of success in your own journey. If anyone would like to explore this further, there is a Clean Eating Group on MFP.

Strokingdiction

Thanks for your interest in this exchange. Best of success in your own journey. If anyone would like to explore this further, there is a Clean Eating Group on MFP.

Will you be backing your claims up there?

rml_16

Back when most families had a garden, you came into town once a week to buy produce from the local farmers and you ate poultry/beef that came from free range poultry and grass fed beef....they just called it eating food. And, no one debated it...you ate food that had been largely produced without chemicals.

Sugar was a luxury/white flour was a luxury. You had it on holidays and special occasion. They called that "treats". Something you eat on a daily basis wasn't a "treat"..it happened only a few times a year.

I like to say: I eat food. I have occasional treats.

How did the food grow without lots and lots of chemicals? Bread was only eaten a few times a year? What time period are you talking about?

Wheat flour was pretty abundant and widely consumed for centuries and centuries. Grain has been a staple for thousands of years.

The domestication of cats is directly related to how much humans relied on grain for sustenance.

tennisdude2004

In fact only the other day I read a post with someone demanding (in the normal NBA way) that someone confirmed their definition of what was healthy food.

And then went on to say, well what's healthy for one person doesn't hold the same benefits for another - no win situation!!!!

I've personally been asked that on these sort of threads and my response is always the same - NOT broad bean!

I will modify--on MFP certainly you will get challenged if you say "I only eat healthy foods and don't eat unhealthy ones" or if you make an assertion that a particular food item is healthy or not (especially not). But that's different than saying "I try to eat healthy" which is a short form way of saying "I try to eat a healthy diet." I would argue that a healthy diet can be made up of nutrition rich foods (often referred to as healthy) and foods that are less so, that the mix is what decides what is healthy (I think this is also what IIFYM says, although I reject that label like all other labelled diets).

What is different about "I'm a clean eater" is that it doesn't focus on overall mix or on process, but on the rejection of offending food items. That's why it makes sense to call someone on eating an Oreo in that case, but not someone who merely claims to try to eat healthy. (For the record I wouldn't, since I hate all arguments based on alleged hypocrisy. Everyone is hypocritical to some extent and often by hypocrisy people just mean a failure to live up to your goals.)

If people also get critical responses for trying on a personal level to improve their diets or eat healthier, etc., that would be wrong, IMO, but I haven't seen it. It's also possible that this clear distinction I see between the "clean eating" label and "I try to eat whole foods, mostly" is more personal than I'm realizing and I'm just crazy, but so far it seems so obvious to me I don't get why everyone doesn't just agree with me. ;-)

Really? Okay!

SymphonynSonata

In

chivalryder

All of my food is clean! I wash every meal with soap before I eat it!

suremeansyes

Strokingdiction

All of my food is clean! I wash every meal with soap before I eat it!

I just eat soap. Beat that!