How important is it to "eat clean"

eric_sg61

This is totally untrue. It's a proven scientific fact that when you eat a lot of sugar, it eventually ends up as fat.

http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/nutrition/nutrient-intake-nutrient-storage-and-nutrient-oxidation.html
FTA:
"Carbohydrates can be stored as liver or muscle glycogen, under rare circumstances they are converted to and stored as fat."

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10365981

No offense but the bodyrecomposition website doesn't back anything up with sources and has some blatantly incorrect information.

It's Lyle McDonalds site, he'll have all the references you need and then some

psuLemon

Prediabetic =/= diabetic. And even the CDC only projects that 15%-30% of them will develop Type II

Except in both cases they have insulin resistance which has the same effects. It's just Type 2 diabetics have worse effects.

It's no different than being overweight. Just because you are overweight, doesn't mean you are unhealthy or going to have issues.

Except that being overweight is a health issue and has direct contributions to increased fat deposition in organs, stress on the body, etc. You might not have CVD, cancer, or other chronic issues but again being overweight is still an issue by itself.

Same goes for high cholesterol. Essentially, it means you are at greater risk.

Except that cholesterol by itself is not an independent risk factor of anything. In fact over 80% of people that have cardiovascular incident have normal cholesterol. The AHA defines cholesterol as one of seven dependent risk factors and the risk depends on how many of them you have.

But if you really want to talk FACTS, not estimates, lets talk about the 8.3% of people who actually have diabetes.

Sure let's talk about it, except you just brought that up and dropped it. P.S. that 8.3% is just an estimate that include over 7 million people estimated to be undiagnosed.

Additionally, no one I have ever met eats nothing but candy. So there is no reason to use that extreme when it comes to comparing health.

Except that it illustrates a point and even one soda a day contributes to diabetes.

The fact is, there are foods that have more nutrients than other, but eating ice cream occasionally or eating dirty occasionally doesn't mean you are unhealthy.

True, but it still raises risk of diabetes.

1. One soda can lead to diabetes; I highly doubt it... Do you have any facts to back that up? Keeping in mind that coorelation =/= causing.

2. Prediabetes =/= mean insulin resistant. It means your A1C between 5.7 and 6.4 which as the CDC suggest "People with prediabetes have an increased risk of developing type 2 diabetes, heart disease, and stroke." But then also mention "Studies have shown that people with prediabetes who lose weight and increase their physical activity can prevent or delay type 2 diabetes and in some cases return their blood glucose levels to normal."

So again prediabetes =/= diabetes. Just like obesity, it prediabetes can be reversed.

3. High cholesterol increase your risk of CVD by 50% - http://www.cdc.gov/dhdsp/data_statistics/fact_sheets/fs_cholesterol.htm
So where do you get that 80% of people with CVD don't have high cholesterol?

4. I do realize that 8.3% is an estimate <-- I should have been more clear.

BusyRaeNOTBusty

I'm open.

Tell me how much healthier you are than me because you "eat clean".

How does one define a healthy individual? Fitness? Body fat percentage? BMI? Cholesterol? Blood pressure? Blood sugar? Frequency of illness?

Maybe I'm the only one, but I notice if I fill up on junk food I feel tired, bloaty and well crappy. Hardly the picture of health. Having a little here and there doesn't have that affect, but I would hardly make "unclean foods" the bulk of my diet unless I want to feel like crap.

That's the thing though. No one is arguing to make junk food the bulk of your diet. But just because a food isn't "clean" doesn't mean it's junk.

I had a salad from Wendy's for lunch yesterday. Not clean. Not junk. It was grilled chicken, vegetables, apples, blue cheese, pecans. Awesome actually. Sure maybe it had a little bit of extra salt and preservatives but not enough to offset the nutritional benefits.

psuLemon

I'm open.

Tell me how much healthier you are than me because you "eat clean".

How does one define a healthy individual? Fitness? Body fat percentage? BMI? Cholesterol? Blood pressure? Blood sugar? Frequency of illness?

Maybe I'm the only one, but I notice if I fill up on junk food I feel tired, bloaty and well crappy. Hardly the picture of health. Having a little here and there doesn't have that affect, but I would hardly make "unclean foods" the bulk of my diet unless I want to feel like crap.

That's the thing though. No one is arguing to make junk food the bulk of your diet. But just because a food isn't "clean" doesn't mean it's junk.

I had a salad from Wendy's for lunch yesterday. Not clean. Not junk. It was grilled chicken, vegetables, apples, blue cheese, pecans. Awesome actually. Sure maybe it had a little bit of extra salt and preservatives but not enough to offset the nutritional benefits.

Exactly this. Most of us eat healthy, whole nutrient dense foods 80-90% of the time, but like to splurge occasionally. Eating clean doesn't mean you are automatically healthier.

jmv7117

I think it's more important to eat the amount of calories that will lead to an ideal body weight/ body fat percentage and eat the amount of macro and micro nutrients that will allow your body to function well. The idea of eating "clean" can be taken to extremes- such as orthorexia (definition: a medical condition in which the sufferer systematically avoids specific foods in the belief that they are harmful.) There's nothing wrong with trying to focus on healthful foods and there's nothing wrong with treats in moderation. I think you'll be ok eating out every once in awhile.

I would counter that with by far more abuse calorie counting and calorie restriction to maintain their ED. In fact, there is currently a few threads started by an individual who clearly is using this site to maintain her ED. Some feel that calorie counting in and of itself leads to the development of an ED in predisposed folk AND I would hazard a guess anorexia nervosa is a heck of a lot more common than orthorexia nervosa. So, if you are saying don't eat clean because you might develop an ED then you shouldn't be counting calories either.

GBrady43068

calories in vs calories out for weight loss, everything else is for general health. if you eat 500 cals of candy vs 500 cals of chicken and broccoli you would lose the same amount of weight, but the chicken and broccoli will be more filling and give you more nutrients

This ^

nancy10272004

I generally don't like it when someone calls other people stupid, but OMG it's no f***ing wonder that people all over the word are becoming increasingly overweight!
I am no saint when it comes to cookies and cakes, but I am very well aware that they hold no nutritional value for me, and I only eat them in limited amounts if I feel like a treat. Pre-processed foods, fast foods and pretty much anything that is full of e-number is just **** you stuff into your systems that will do you absolutely no good EVER! Anyone who says anything else should consider if they have been living unhealthy for so long that their brain has starter to deteriorate. And yes that will happen according to the latest studies in neuroscience.
I thought this forum was for people who wanted to improve their lives and live better, not bully others (and yes I know I will get shot for this post by all the ignorant ****** that think they know better) because they don't sit down with a bag of chips and claim they eat well because they eat within their calorie limit, COME ON, how stupid are you!?
I think I'm done with the forum now, nothing but utter idiocy around here.....

lol where did this come from

I think it might be the result of my delicious dinner the other night when I had a bag of Doritos after a day of greens, fruits, bean salad and healthy snacks.

I'm pretty sure I got called stupid for this. Stupid? Meh. Not the best choice I could have made? Sure. Something I enjoyed immensely and without guilt? Yup.

GBrady43068

Just because something is low in calories/fat doesn't mean it is inherently healthy.

And ALSO this. ^
/thread

SoDamnHungry

Not at all important when it comes to losing weight. However, there's a lot more nutrients and fiber in the good ol' fruits and veggies, which is why my diet isn't 100% cake.

lemurcat12

calories in vs calories out for weight loss, everything else is for general health. if you eat 500 cals of candy vs 500 cals of chicken and broccoli you would lose the same amount of weight, but the chicken and broccoli will be more filling and give you more nutrients

^^ this.

If it is just about weightloss you can eat anything, if you want to do something for your health it is important.
Stef.

I'm going to disagree with this, at least because "clean" has not been defined.

As it has been explained to me (and as follows from the name), "clean" eating means eliminating certain kinds of foods (presumably, the unclean ones) from your diet and eating only "clean" ones. Of course, what that means varies to such an extent that it makes no sense to lump it all under one category: it may mean not eating dairy or grains or legumes (if one is paleo), it may mean not eating animal products (for example, the vegetarian "clean" diets promoted by McDougall or Fuhrman), it may mean not eating processed foods (although what "processed" means is another question), it may mean not eating sugar (the Fed Up! thing), so on.

In any of these cases, I simply do not agree that it is "important" to eliminate the maligned foods in order to "do something for your health." I think that for health (not weight loss) it matters a lot what you eat and try to eat a generally healthy diet. I see no reason why my diet--or anyone else's who eats in a generally healthy way--would be more beneficial or better for health if ALL of the foods in question (depending on the particular definition of "clean" used) were eliminated.

On the other hand, is it better to eat a lower calorie meal vs. a higher calorie "clean" meal? I certainly hope that I never start referring to food as clean, but no, it's not better to eat a lower calorie meal no matter what. If you want to lose weight, however, it's better to meet your calorie goal, and you don't get a special pass that allows weight loss to occur if you go over maintenance regularly or don't have a deficit, even if you eat only foods that you have self-defined as "clean." (Of course!) I find it easier to keep to my deficit when I eat in a way I consider healthy and when I feel good and energetic, which is related. But I don't buy that I'd feel even better and lose faster if I never let added sugar (however one defines that!) or grains or "white foods" or those dreaded processed frozen vegetables and yogurt pass my lips.

eric_sg61

It's Lyle McDonalds site, he'll have all the references you need and then some

Doesn't mean he's always right. It's not like he's the proclaimed authority on the matter.

And somehow you are?

lemurcat12

If you are concerned over weight loss only then it doesn't matter what you eat. If you are concerned over healthy eating then eating clean is paramount, IMO.

Again, the assertion that one can't have a healthy diet or eat in a way that is good for you and makes you feel physically good exept by eliminating foods. Even apart from the problem that "clean eaters" have diametrically opposed ideas about what needs to be eliminated in many cases, and that processed foods may be the primary way that certain kinds of healthy foods are made available to people with fewer resources or in climates where fresh fruits and vegetables are not available for much of the year, what's the evidence that eliminating the foods in question is more beneficial to the average person than just eating an overall healthy diet and not overeating non-nutrient dense foods, but saving them for a treat.

lemurcat12

screw nutritional value and just eat whatever the eff you want, always, as long as you count calories!

Who has said this?

lemurcat12

Exactly this. Most of us eat healthy, whole nutrient dense foods 80-90% of the time, but like to splurge occasionally. Eating clean doesn't mean you are automatically healthier.

Should have read through the thread before I posted. This, in a nutshell.

tedrickp

If we're talking about doing a figure competition where the goal is to be lean with good muscle definition and symmetry then yes it is important to eat clean. You don't want to lose hard-earned muscle when you're cutting fat and you need the energy for your workouts. IIFYM might probably work in this regard, but in that case you're still paying attention to macros and its kind of hard to reach certain ones if you're filling up on junk.

I wonder about this. I used to take this as gospel and had the same view as you, but now that I see people actively cutting to ridiculously lean levels (i.e. Alberto Nunez & Ogus) while not eating totally "clean" (for the purposes of this discussion I will assume clean means unprocessed or non-"junk" food - but I really have no idea what it means anymore).

Danny Keane having a slice of cake...4 days before his contest...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7y7Ov7Smk9g

J72FIT

For people who want to "eat clean", I'm sure it's very important.

For people who don't, I'm not sure its important at all.

Hope that answers your question.

+1
Bravo!

Confuzzled4ever

For people who want to "eat clean", I'm sure it's very important.

For people who don't, I'm not sure its important at all.

Hope that answers your question.

:flowerforyou: :drinker: