"Clean" vs. "unclean" eating studies?

WinoGelato

Let me agree and be contrarian to my contrarian attitude.

I live in France and buying cheese is an art - "cheese product" doesn't cross my lips. But it is more related to taste, provenance and seller. I as my fromagier to make a recommendation based on a relationship we've built - I let him know what I didn't like, etc... It isn't about the processing - it's about taste. Cheese is processed, end of story. I like a lot of unpasteurized blue type and goat and some of the stinkier stuff and my daughters like the northern cheese (kids....).

But my cheese isn't clean! It's full of live cultures and mold and even flies (ah, I love tome cheese) and it's healthy. It's about taste. And taste dictates freshness and local produce and made to limited quantities not focused on volume, margin and price point.

Focus on food quality - not cleanliness or processing.

Now back to regularly scheduled butthead Evgeni, because even alimentary "quality" has all sorts of issues.

I mentioned in an earlier post (much earlier) in this thread that I do really love the European slow food movement. I was very impressed when I went to Europe with how dedicated everyone is to knowing what they are eating. Many restaurants have calories listed on the menu, its common to shop more frequently and buy smaller quantities of food at a time (maybe shopping just for the evening meal at a farmers market in the morning) and if you want to know where your food came from and who made it you can. Restaurants serve reasonable size portions that don't encourage overeating etc. Just a much healthier attitude overall I'd say.

But this also gets back to the problem I also mentioned earlier of why so many low income people in the United States are severely obese. They don't have the option to visit their local bakery or cheese shop to hand pick the foods they put in their mouths. If they do happen to have a place like this nearby the prices are double or triple what you'd pay somewhere else. (Whole Foods or Trader Joes anyone?) Not everyone has the the chance to meet the person who made their cheese or talk to them about how they made it. Many Americans are limited by their income (and the way life is here) to purchasing mass made products which they know little about sold through large retail chains and fast food restaurants.

I'm happy more people want to know what is in their food. Maybe one day we'll be able to have a healthier system... there's certainly a growing demand for it.

I think I see what you mean - except we don't call it slow food. We call it food.

When I am in France I have access to one of Europe's largest open air markets two-three times a week - a block away. And it's true that overall French (and German's to a lesser extent) have access to small shops for butchers, bakeries, etc... that are less present in the US. However, the cost of food isn't lower in Europe.
I've lived in the US and frankly the argument that quality food is somehow more cheaply available here is false. It's also largely incorrect to assume that processed produce is what makes the poor in America obese. It isn't some magical element of processing - it's cheap flavorful calories. Food has never been more readily available as a cheap convenience. Food is very inexpensive in America.

If I remember correctly, Americans spend a lot less on food than Europeans both in terms of GDP and absolute per capita.

I really appreciate hearing your thoughts on this.

We definitely have cheap food here. But its not quality food. Its cheap, flavorful, high in calories and low in nutritional value. Low income families can eat off the dollar menu at McDonalds and get a large volume of food very cheaply. Buying fresh fruits and veggies from a local market is much more expensive. I wonder though if we shopped for quality ingredients of the same kind (locally made specialty foods), if they wouldn't be similar in price in both countries? I'm not sure. Perhaps it is that Europeans place a different value on the quality of their food? In your opinion is that the case?

I remember spending about 6 euros for a picnic lunch in Paris and maybe 25 euros for a very nice dinner at a restaurant. It felt similar to what I would have paid in the U.S. equivalent for similar quality food. But that was several years ago and perhaps things have changed.

I really appreciate hearing your perspective.

Well - let's see what we can find:
It seems that for products like beef and chicken - per pound it's about 1/2 to 1/6th the price in the US. Lettuce and pasta, about the same potatoes are twice as expensive in France. White rice ... 20% more expensive in Germany.
But that's just one reference and I'm not even sure it's indexed on cost of living.

(http://www.dailyfinance.com/photos/food-price-comparison-around-the-world/?photo=2#!slide=988849)

Even within Europe I've found that we have a large difference in food attitudes and focus - a lot of it might be due to shopping attitudes - you mentioned we shop more often. It's true. Bigger fridges are called American here. We shop 2-3 times a week for small amounts (it isn't unusual to see shoppers go to shops on bikes - much less seen in the US).

We joke that the French only talk about a prior meal they've had whenever they are eating. There is some truth in that. And having Americans over for a meal - we tend to warn not to take seconds on the early dishes because we tend to serve a starter, main, salad, cheese, dessert... All anecdotal but varying attitudes do exist. Both geography and urban design means Europeans tend to use cars less - that certainly must have an influence on activity levels, etc... Obesity reasons are complex.

As to the cost of meals - I recently spent $40 for two including wine for a nice meal in Berlin - the same meal in Frankfurt or Paris would have been 2-3 times that.

Great information. Thank you for sharing.

I suppose that's why Americans have developed the term "slow food" for the European style then. I do remember dinner would often take much longer and was very relaxed.It was lovely to go for a meal in the evening and have it last several hours with smaller courses. It felt much nicer than the stressful rush at restaurants here where you eat a big portion of one or two things quickly.

Physical activity can definitely be a contributing factor. I'm fortunate to live in an area where I can walk to get most of the things I need but that is pretty uncommon here.

I spent some time in Europe this past summer, in Italy for a month while my husband was teaching, and then in Switzerland and Germany for work. I definitely noticed the difference in the pace of meals at restaurants, and commented about it with my German colleagues when I was with them. They said that in Europe, the meal is at the diner's pace. The diner dictates when they want to order food, whether they want to order more food, and when the bill should be presented. Whereas when they have visited the US, they have observed that they feel almost rushed out of a restaurant by a server, hounding them with questions like, Are you ready to order? Would you like dessert? Here is your check! We speculated that some of that may also be related to the fact that American servers depend primarily on tips, where tipping is much less prevalent in Europe. It behooves American servers to turn their tables faster, increasing their potential for tips.

earlnabby

Diabetes in particular is attributed to poor diet. While the foods you eat aren't the only factor in health...they do play an important part.

You can't control your genetics. But you can control what you eat.

Diabetes is actually NOT the result of a poor diet. People who develop it will have 2 or more risk factors, and poor diet is actually not one of them. Genetics is the #1 risk factor, then you add in obesity (too much food, not necessarily poor quality food), long term antidepressant use, long term statin use, if your mother had gestational diabetes when you were in the womb, increased risk as you (and your pancreas) age, sleep disturbances like chronic insomnia, and there is even some correlation (but not proven causation) with environmental factors like exposure to atrazine in herbicides, arsenic, BPA's. etc.

Perhaps by "poor diet" the poster meant something more along the lines of "poor dietary choices." Which is quite accurate.

Actually, it isn't accurate and that was the whole point. Obesity is a risk factor for diabetes. Poor food choices, unless you are talking about the quantity needed to become obese, are not. Once a person has diabetes, food choices are a factor in managing it, but not preventing it. Blood Sugar 101 ( http://www.phlaunt.com/ ) has much more detail and links to various scientific studies.

lemurcat12

Perhaps we just need better, more descriptive words to use. Many of the people here voicing opinions in support of processed foods are lumping all "processing" together. This is not a black and white issue by any means. Nobody is saying freezing something is the work of the devil. Canning, steaming, freezing, and generally any "processing" that keeps the food very close to it's original state and does not introduce harmful elements or remove significant nutrients is ok in my book. I am well aware that being able to freeze things helps us get through the winter. I am glad we steam cashews now that I know they are toxic because cashews are delicious. Fermented foods are actually quite good for you and introduce beneficial bacteria that help our digestive system. However, there are types of "processing" which are not as benign. To say the whole notion is stupid by lumping everything together is shortsighted, in my opinion.

Lumping everything together is certainly one of my objections, but I think it's the "clean" eaters who do it. At least, those who don't insist "clean eating" is eating paleo or not eating "white foods" or whatever typically claim the issue is eating "processed foods," thereby lumping together foods that seem to me undeniably healthy and others to which there may be specific objections (i.e., transfats, HFCS, whatever specific additives worry you). It makes more sense to me to focus on the specifics, and also not to mix up issues of calorie density (which has nothing to do with processing), nutrient density (usually same), and additives that worry you.

And also, I recognize the fact that I will never be a 100% clean eater. In this day and age, I am not sure that is even possible. I make exceptions and do what is within my means, otherwise I would go nuts. But I do try as much as I can. I don't think you have to be perfect at something or do it 100% of the time to advocate it.

Again, I think there's a problem with the term "clean" and with the idea that health is determined by eating 0% of something vs. focusing one's diet on foods that are nutrient-dense, etc., but interestingly this goes back to what the concern is. If you are really worried about additives, then maybe trying to be as "clean" as possible would be sensible (and we can discuss the evidence relating to the particular additives--there are various ingredients that I choose to avoid, even if I think your particular concern about sugar, for example, is not particularly convincing). But if you are concerned about nutrition, as people espousing "clean" are usually arguing, then it makes no sense to think in terms of "clean" and "unclean" vs. the diet as a whole. I think "clean" promotes a screwed up way of thinking about food.

I don't like a lot of the same things the "clean" people don't like, but that's purely on a taste basis. (I can't comprehend that someone would intentionally buy a cheese product or boxed potatoes, but I'm sure I eat things others find odd.) But I can't bring myself to feel like the fact I can't be a locovore in the climate I live in is a terrible thing or that I'd be better off and healthier if I canned and otherwise preserved foods for the winter vs. being able to go to the store. That seems like a romantic idea, but not really a grounded one.

independant2406

Actually, it isn't accurate and that was the whole point. Obesity is a risk factor for diabetes. Poor food choices, unless you are talking about the quantity needed to become obese, are not. Once a person has diabetes, food choices are a factor in managing it, but not preventing it. Blood Sugar 101 ( http://www.phlaunt.com/ ) has much more detail and links to various scientific studies.

I'm sure what your saying is correct. I definitely don't want to argue at all. Just sharing what I've read. Perhaps this research I found is too new to be considered conclusive. I'm not sure.

American Diabetic Association's journal article relating to the Glycemic Index does indicate there are food choices that may help prevent diabetes. (Low GI foods). And that high GI foods can contribute to a person getting diabetes. Since the Glycemic Index really just ranks foods in relation to health it says what common sense tells us. Fruits, veggies and whole grains are the best, its probably not earth shattering material anyway. Someone who eats this way will likely weigh less and reduce their risk of diabetes.

If you interpret the information differently than I do in the studies though I'd love to hear your perspective. I'm open minded

snowflake954

I've lived in Italy for 29 years now. My husband is Italian, so I know how they think. Food here is a cultural thing. Food is discussed at the table, quality, recipes, origin etc. If something is very good, there is a discussion on why---because they care and want to duplicate the result. The same happens when eating food that is so-so. It will be criticized and picked apart, so as not to repeat the mistake, or eat in that restaurant again. As you get used to good food with superior taste and ingredients, it's difficult to eat something inferior. Good restaurants are talked about, and they are not necessarily the most expensive. Different regions have their specialties, and guard them jealously. It's hard to understand this if you don't live here.

lemurcat12

If they do happen to have a place like this nearby the prices are double or triple what you'd pay somewhere else. (Whole Foods or Trader Joes anyone?)

Trader Joe's is much cheaper than WF. I live right between (walking distance to) each of those plus a Jewel (standard US supermarket), and the TJ is consistently cheaper in a lot of ways than the Jewel, which is of course cheaper than the WF. (There are also lots of farmers markets around throughout the summer and fall.)

I don't disagree that there's a lot of difference as to what is available in different neighborhoods, but just wanted to point out that TJ's isn't really the same as WF.

There are also Aldi's around here, and I believe that's a more inexpensive grocery, as well as various other chains, food shops of a wide variety of kinds, and ethnic markets.

WinoGelato

If they do happen to have a place like this nearby the prices are double or triple what you'd pay somewhere else. (Whole Foods or Trader Joes anyone?)

Trader Joe's is much cheaper than WF. I live right between (walking distance to) each of those plus a Jewel (standard US supermarket), and the TJ is consistently cheaper in a lot of ways than the Jewel, which is of course cheaper than the WF. (There are also lots of farmers markets around throughout the summer and fall.)

I don't disagree that there's a lot of difference as to what is available in different neighborhoods, but just wanted to point out that TJ's isn't really the same as WF.

There are also Aldi's around here, and I believe that's a more inexpensive grocery, as well as various other chains, food shops of a wide variety of kinds, and ethnic markets.

One thing I think is sort of ironic is that when I go to Trader Joe's, it is rarely for the produce or the meat, rather it is for all the delicious and unusual convenience foods that are available there. Hummus, cookie butter, green chili chicken burgers, other frozen foods, etc. Now Whole Foods on the other hand, I spend most of my time (and money) on the produce, cheeses, meats, and seafood, and don't usually even look through the frozen food section.

lemurcat12

I suppose that's why Americans have developed the term "slow food" for the European style then. I do remember dinner would often take much longer and was very relaxed.It was lovely to go for a meal in the evening and have it last several hours with smaller courses. It felt much nicer than the stressful rush at restaurants here where you eat a big portion of one or two things quickly.

But of course there are a huge variety of restaurants in the US, including those where you can go and spend hours and/or get numerous smaller courses or a tasting menu and on and on. And of course we have those other restaurants too. I assume that the people who go to them do so because they meet their preferences. It's not my thing, but that's why it's nice that I can choose to go to restaurants without being rushed or having food that I don't appreciate.

Physical activity is probably a huge factor--in much of the US (although not where I live) it's hard to walk for routine errands, everything is by car.

lemurcat12

I spent some time in Europe this past summer, in Italy for a month while my husband was teaching, and then in Switzerland and Germany for work. I definitely noticed the difference in the pace of meals at restaurants, and commented about it with my German colleagues when I was with them. They said that in Europe, the meal is at the diner's pace. The diner dictates when they want to order food, whether they want to order more food, and when the bill should be presented. Whereas when they have visited the US, they have observed that they feel almost rushed out of a restaurant by a server, hounding them with questions like, Are you ready to order? Would you like dessert? Here is your check! We speculated that some of that may also be related to the fact that American servers depend primarily on tips, where tipping is much less prevalent in Europe. It behooves American servers to turn their tables faster, increasing their potential for tips.

I think a lot of this is cultural difference and the fact that for many Americans fast service is a positive, because they are eating before other activities, the meal not being the centerpiece of the evening.

Like I said above, I think it's not that hard to find a more leisurely meal in the US, but many people (my dad being one example who comes to mind) get upset if they don't get quick service or have to linger after a meal. Some years ago my sister and I traveled around Italy together and we were joking about how my dad would have been going crazy. (Actually, I hope he'd adjust when abroad, but suspect he wouldn't like the meal style.)

Edit: I think snowflake's comments above about Italy kind of go along with this. Food in that sense really isn't that important for much of the US, only in certain subcultures. And that's why it's not surprising that we have a different idea of what it should cost, tend to see value as the main consideration on average (and thus get marketing focused on size) and so on. But again it's a big and diverse country, and you can seek out other approaches too. There certainly are restaurants where they will tell you the farm the various items came from, etc. (and not only on Portlandia).

independant2406

I spent some time in Europe this past summer, in Italy for a month while my husband was teaching, and then in Switzerland and Germany for work. I definitely noticed the difference in the pace of meals at restaurants, and commented about it with my German colleagues when I was with them. They said that in Europe, the meal is at the diner's pace. The diner dictates when they want to order food, whether they want to order more food, and when the bill should be presented. Whereas when they have visited the US, they have observed that they feel almost rushed out of a restaurant by a server, hounding them with questions like, Are you ready to order? Would you like dessert? Here is your check! We speculated that some of that may also be related to the fact that American servers depend primarily on tips, where tipping is much less prevalent in Europe. It behooves American servers to turn their tables faster, increasing their potential for tips.

I think a lot of this is cultural difference and the fact that for many Americans fast service is a positive, because they are eating before other activities, the meal not being the centerpiece of the evening.

Like I said above, I think it's not that hard to find a more leisurely meal in the US, but many people (my dad being one example who comes to mind) get upset if they don't get quick service or have to linger after a meal. Some years ago my sister and I traveled around Italy together and we were joking about how my dad would have been going crazy. (Actually, I hope he'd adjust when abroad, but suspect he wouldn't like the meal style.)

Very true. I think Americans expect quick service. My uncle is this way... he's very demanding and I can only imagine how rude he'd seem to a server at a European restaurant. Ack!

Its interesting to see the perspectives about food from other places. We can definitely find restaurants with a slower pace and smaller portions here in the U.S., but its not something consistent or "normal". Just a different way of living life I guess.

Timshel_

I am sure these people ate "clean" all there lives and these picture are just flukes. I wonder if those cakes are clean, non-processed,sugar-free, gluten-free, flour-free etc.

That is most certainly the exception and not the rule. It is akin to all these people who talk about not getting a degree because, "look at Bill Gates and other millionaires."

Yeah, let's see how that works out for most people.

SnuggleSmacks

Diabetes in particular is attributed to poor diet. While the foods you eat aren't the only factor in health...they do play an important part.

You can't control your genetics. But you can control what you eat.

Diabetes is actually NOT the result of a poor diet. People who develop it will have 2 or more risk factors, and poor diet is actually not one of them. Genetics is the #1 risk factor, then you add in obesity (too much food, not necessarily poor quality food), long term antidepressant use, long term statin use, if your mother had gestational diabetes when you were in the womb, increased risk as you (and your pancreas) age, sleep disturbances like chronic insomnia, and there is even some correlation (but not proven causation) with environmental factors like exposure to atrazine in herbicides, arsenic, BPA's. etc.

Perhaps by "poor diet" the poster meant something more along the lines of "poor dietary choices." Which is quite accurate.

Actually, it isn't accurate and that was the whole point. Obesity is a risk factor for diabetes. Poor food choices, unless you are talking about the quantity needed to become obese, are not. Once a person has diabetes, food choices are a factor in managing it, but not preventing it. Blood Sugar 101 ( http://www.phlaunt.com/ ) has much more detail and links to various scientific studies.

I'm sorry, I feel that we're failing to communicate clearly somehow, because it appears that you're suggesting that obesity is independent of poor food choices. Admittedly there are some small number of contributing factors regarding medical conditions or medication which might also contribute in some cases, but for the most part obesity is the result of choosing to eat too much food -- a poor choice. Does that clear up the confusion?

Timshel_

Depending on who is paying for the study, they can show both ways.

Look at all the BS McDonalds went through because of that guys glutonizing their menu. Of course he gained weight eating like that. But have you seen all the other guys who have done the exact same experiment, but moderated their eating...and lost weight?

Eating clean is a good way to moderate intake, but it isn't magical in any way.

SnuggleSmacks

If they do happen to have a place like this nearby the prices are double or triple what you'd pay somewhere else. (Whole Foods or Trader Joes anyone?)

Trader Joe's is much cheaper than WF. I live right between (walking distance to) each of those plus a Jewel (standard US supermarket), and the TJ is consistently cheaper in a lot of ways than the Jewel, which is of course cheaper than the WF. (There are also lots of farmers markets around throughout the summer and fall.)

I don't disagree that there's a lot of difference as to what is available in different neighborhoods, but just wanted to point out that TJ's isn't really the same as WF.

There are also Aldi's around here, and I believe that's a more inexpensive grocery, as well as various other chains, food shops of a wide variety of kinds, and ethnic markets.

One thing I think is sort of ironic is that when I go to Trader Joe's, it is rarely for the produce or the meat, rather it is for all the delicious and unusual convenience foods that are available there. Hummus, cookie butter, green chili chicken burgers, other frozen foods, etc. Now Whole Foods on the other hand, I spend most of my time (and money) on the produce, cheeses, meats, and seafood, and don't usually even look through the frozen food section.

Interesting. I buy from every department in Trader Joe's. The produce is pretty much all organic and very reasonably priced, and they often have unusual things like fresh figs or purple carrots, and their cheese are very inexpensive. Whole Foods I find to be prohibitively expensive, for the most part, so I usually only purchase specialty items that are hard to find, or bulk items. I will admit that WF is my main source for rice and legumes. I love exotic rices.

WinoGelato

I spent some time in Europe this past summer, in Italy for a month while my husband was teaching, and then in Switzerland and Germany for work. I definitely noticed the difference in the pace of meals at restaurants, and commented about it with my German colleagues when I was with them. They said that in Europe, the meal is at the diner's pace. The diner dictates when they want to order food, whether they want to order more food, and when the bill should be presented. Whereas when they have visited the US, they have observed that they feel almost rushed out of a restaurant by a server, hounding them with questions like, Are you ready to order? Would you like dessert? Here is your check! We speculated that some of that may also be related to the fact that American servers depend primarily on tips, where tipping is much less prevalent in Europe. It behooves American servers to turn their tables faster, increasing their potential for tips.

I think a lot of this is cultural difference and the fact that for many Americans fast service is a positive, because they are eating before other activities, the meal not being the centerpiece of the evening.

Like I said above, I think it's not that hard to find a more leisurely meal in the US, but many people (my dad being one example who comes to mind) get upset if they don't get quick service or have to linger after a meal. Some years ago my sister and I traveled around Italy together and we were joking about how my dad would have been going crazy. (Actually, I hope he'd adjust when abroad, but suspect he wouldn't like the meal style.)

Edit: I think snowflake's comments above about Italy kind of go along with this. Food in that sense really isn't that important for much of the US, only in certain subcultures. And that's why it's not surprising that we have a different idea of what it should cost, tend to see value as the main consideration on average (and thus get marketing focused on size) and so on. But again it's a big and diverse country, and you can seek out other approaches too. There certainly are restaurants where they will tell you the farm the various items came from, etc. (and not only on Portlandia).

Agreed on all counts. And my father in law is the same way, always getting impatient with servers. He was with us in Italy, and I was often cringing at how he treated the servers there....

I also agree about the transportation and other cultural changes having an impact on the overall attitude toward food. When we were in Italy, we didn't have a car, we literally walked everywhere. To the grocery store, to every meal, sight seeing all day. When we did go grocery shopping, we bought less because 1) we had to carry it back 2) we had limited storage space in our flat and 3) the food is fresher and we didn't want it to go bad. I always love food, cooking food, eating in restaurants, etc, whether I'm in the US or abroad, but it was particularly enjoyable in Italy when we were trying to prepare food in the local style, with minimal ingredients and focusing on bringing out the natural flavors in the food.

On the other hand, I have two small children, and the slow pace of dining in Italy was not always ideal for us. Sometimes you have a limited window and you need quick service and need to get out of there fast before a meltdown ensued. More than the slow pace of the general restaurant population, I was intrigued by how that approach works with young Italian children or in other European countries. Are they raised to be more patient in restaurants? In US restaurants, even at most sit down restaurants (not fine dining, but places like Applebees or Chilis) you will find kids menus with crayons and things to color. Kids (mine included sometimes) are distracted with electronics trying to help them make it through the dining experience. I didn't see any of that in Italy, and I was highly intrigued!

SnuggleSmacks

Depending on who is paying for the study, they can show both ways.

Look at all the BS McDonalds went through because of that guys glutonizing their menu. Of course he gained weight eating like that. But have you seen all the other guys who have done the exact same experiment, but moderated their eating...and lost weight?

Eating clean is a good way to moderate intake, but it isn't magical in any way.

Are you talking about Supersize Me? I haven't watched the full video, but I think the point of it had more to do with our culture being one of greed and excess, making a "super size" menu possible, and which our food industry contributes and caters to. I think it was less a critique of the quality of McDonald's food...although, again, I haven't watched the whole thing, but that was the impression I got.

earlnabby

I'm sorry, I feel that we're failing to communicate clearly somehow, because it appears that you're suggesting that obesity is independent of poor food choices. Admittedly there are some small number of contributing factors regarding medical conditions or medication which might also contribute in some cases, but for the most part obesity is the result of choosing to eat too much food -- a poor choice. Does that clear up the confusion?

I am trying to remind everyone that people can be obese eating very good nutritious foods, or they can be obese by eating non-nutritious foods. It is calories in vs. calories out and what makes up those calories isn't important for weight gain or loss.

Also, eating less nutritious foods does not cause diabetes. A combination of several factors, including obesity, is what causes it.

Remember, correlation is not causation. Yes, many who have T2 diabetes are overweight, and yes, many who are overweight eat less nutritious food. This does not equal eating less nutritious food makes you develop diabetes.

SnuggleSmacks

I'm sorry, I feel that we're failing to communicate clearly somehow, because it appears that you're suggesting that obesity is independent of poor food choices. Admittedly there are some small number of contributing factors regarding medical conditions or medication which might also contribute in some cases, but for the most part obesity is the result of choosing to eat too much food -- a poor choice. Does that clear up the confusion?

I am trying to remind everyone that people can be obese eating very good nutritious foods, or they can be obese by eating non-nutritious foods. It is calories in vs. calories out and what makes up those calories isn't important for weight gain or loss.

Also, eating less nutritious foods does not cause diabetes. A combination of several factors, including obesity, is what causes it.

Remember, correlation is not causation. Yes, many who have T2 diabetes are overweight, and yes, many who are overweight eat less nutritious food. This does not equal eating less nutritious food makes you develop diabetes.

Agreed. I do feel, however, that it's rather pedantic to argue that "poor diet" cannot in any way be construed to mean the same thing as what you just said. We'll just agree to disagree regarding the phrasing. I understood it. But thanks for clarifying for anyone who comes after us and is unclear on what forms of poor dietary choices might lead to obesity.

Meanwhile, I have never been to Europe, but I have spent four months in the Philippines. While meals there are a great deal more leisurely than in the U.S., and the portions are much more reasonable, they don't seem to eat as many vegetables. Most meals consist of rice and a small amount of meat, chicken or fish, seasoned in various different ways with sauces or things like pandan leaves (which I grew quite fond of). Their groceries are all inside malls, at least in the cities, because traffic is so vicious that you want to make as few stops as possible. The grocery shelves are filled with ultra-processed foods flavored with seafood...shrimp crackers, crab chips, etc. But they also rarely eat sweets. Unfortunately, American restaurants are encroaching on their culture and their waistlines are starting to show it.

But that also makes me wonder...with so little access to vegetables, and so much ultra-processed foods and refined carbs in their diets, the people who live in the cities of the Philippines might be a good population to look at for comparisons of health markers. I'm sure genetics will play some part, and I'm sure that the diet is very different in the provences where there's plenty of land for farming. I'll have to check that out.

RaspberryKeytoneBoondoggle

I guess before you do a study like that you would have to have a clear definition if what "clean" means and what "processed" means. I just try to eat what unlike and get some protein in there. I enjoy vegetables but don't eat nearly enough of them. I could eat potatoes, rice and quinoa all day but i think that would be unhealthy because is be lacking something (but would I be eating clean?). Funny thing is, people often comment on how healthy my diet is. I know it could be much better.

SnuggleSmacks

I guess before you do a study like that you would have to have a clear definition if what "clean" means and what "processed" means. I just try to eat what unlike and get some protein in there. I enjoy vegetables but don't eat nearly enough of them. I could eat potatoes, rice and quinoa all day but i think that would be unhealthy because is be lacking something (but would I be eating clean?). Funny thing is, people often comment on how healthy my diet is. I know it could be much better.

I do believe that WOULD be clean. :laugh: Especially if you wash them!

I guess this topic really concerns me because I see so very much rather astonishing misinformation touted under the catchphrase "clean."

For example, on this very site, I saw someone post that eating clean was more important than working out, that the effort it took to eat clean was far less lazy than merely lifting things.

On another site I read that one could eat all the halva they wanted (a confection made from honey and sesame tahini) because it was clean. You could eat the entire batch and never gain weight.

I have read that it is impossible to get fat on clean food.

It boggles the mind that anyone might actually believe any of these things, but they do. *sigh*