1700 cals of Junk vs 1700cals of clean eating....

124»

Replies

  • ahamm002
    ahamm002 Posts: 1,690 Member
    The colon cancer/ fiber correlation is so weak. Why bother?

    Fiber also affects your cholesterol. Also, foods high in fiber are usually more filling than lower fiber foods with similar amounts of calories and macro-nutrients.

    I'm not saying that fiber is a pancea or anything. It's just one of the many benefits of eating clean over eating dirty.

    Ohhhhh....what does cholesterol in your diet do?
    http://www.ravnskov.nu/A hypothesis out of date.pdf

    seriously, this is old news....
    "The truth is, however, that there is no direct connection between the amount of cholesterol you eat and the concentration of cholesterol in your blood. In most people, eating cholesterol has little or no effect on this amount. In about 30 percent of the population, eating cholesterol does in fact increase the concentration of cholesterol in the blood — but it increases the "good" cholesterol.

    To put it in more scientific terms, eating cholesterol "results in a less atherogenic lipoprotein profile."

    Huh? Where did dietary cholesterol come from? Nobody here is talking about dietary cholesterol. I was talking about dietary FIBER and BLOOD cholesterol. There're not even remotely similar topics.
  • ahamm002
    ahamm002 Posts: 1,690 Member
    Paul Rosin, at the University of Pennsylvania asked people to “Assume you are alone on a desert island for one year and you can have water and one other food. Pick the food that you think would be best for your health.” Choices: “corn, alfalfa sprouts, hot dogs, spinach, peaches, bananas, milk chocolate.” So which food did you choose?

    Hot dogs and milk chocolate win. ;)

    Of course, is that supposed to be surprising? You'd have to be pretty clueless when it comes to nutrition to pick any of the other choices.
  • ahamm002
    ahamm002 Posts: 1,690 Member
    Why wouldn't they be?

    ETA: I would love to see a twinkie with the macros and micros of veggies btw.

    Twinkies don't have the same macro's and micro's as veggies, and they never will. My point is that it's a loaded question to ask if dirty food would be just as healthy as clean foods if they had the same macros and micros because they don't have BOTH the same macros and micros.
  • Sarauk2sf
    Sarauk2sf Posts: 28,072 Member
    Again, the original post in the quotes stated that " As long as you get your required macronutrients and micronutrients, how "clean" your diet is makes no difference to your health"

    Well then it's a loaded quote because the foods will have different amount of micronutrients. It's like saying twinkies would theoretically be just as healthy as veggies if they had the same amount of macronutrients and micronutrients.
    Why wouldn't they be?

    ETA: I would love to see a twinkie with the macros and micros of veggies btw.

    Twinkies don't have the same macro's and micro's as veggies, and they never will. My point is that it's a loaded question to ask if dirty food would be just as healthy as clean foods if they had the same macros and micros because they don't have BOTH the same macros and micros.

    And THAT is exactly the point. However, if they did (you came up with this), why would they be different re health?

    Edited to put back some quotes so this stays in context.
  • ExcelWithMel
    ExcelWithMel Posts: 192 Member
    I think women in their 20s can do this. After 30 (closer to 40) not so much. Haven't followed any guy's diets. I was able to lose weight pretty easily eating like that as long as I kept in my calorie goal. I lost very well eating 100 calorie snacks, and lean cuisines. I also didn't have to workout and the weight came off. Today, I HAVE to eat clean to maintain my weight loss, and have to work out to improve my shape.

    You still may be okay @28, but ask yourself - do you really like eating that crap? Now that I eat clean, I still love to eat out, but only at nice restaurants. I eat fast food very sparingly just because I find it kind of gross most of the time and not worth the calories.
  • Sarauk2sf
    Sarauk2sf Posts: 28,072 Member
    I think women in their 20s can do this. After 30 (closer to 40) not so much. Haven't followed any guy's diets. I was able to lose weight pretty easily eating like that as long as I kept in my calorie goal. I lost very well eating 100 calorie snacks, and lean cuisines. I also didn't have to workout and the weight came off. Today, I HAVE to eat clean to maintain my weight loss, and have to work out to improve my shape.

    You still may be okay @28, but ask yourself - do you really like eating that crap? Now that I eat clean, I still love to eat out, but only at nice restaurants. I eat fast food very sparingly just because I find it kind of gross most of the time and not worth the calories.

    <
    45 year old and does not eat 'clean' for about 40% of her calories, so that is a bit of an assumption (and I am assuming her that milk is 'clean' otherwise its much higher than 40%)
  • tigersword
    tigersword Posts: 8,059 Member
    I think women in their 20s can do this. After 30 (closer to 40) not so much. Haven't followed any guy's diets. I was able to lose weight pretty easily eating like that as long as I kept in my calorie goal. I lost very well eating 100 calorie snacks, and lean cuisines. I also didn't have to workout and the weight came off. Today, I HAVE to eat clean to maintain my weight loss, and have to work out to improve my shape.

    You still may be okay @28, but ask yourself - do you really like eating that crap? Now that I eat clean, I still love to eat out, but only at nice restaurants. I eat fast food very sparingly just because I find it kind of gross most of the time and not worth the calories.
    "Nice" restaurants tend to be about 10 times worse than fast food restaurants, from a health perspective.
  • Jynus
    Jynus Posts: 519 Member
    Why wouldn't they be?

    ETA: I would love to see a twinkie with the macros and micros of veggies btw.

    Twinkies don't have the same macro's and micro's as veggies, and they never will. My point is that it's a loaded question to ask if dirty food would be just as healthy as clean foods if they had the same macros and micros because they don't have BOTH the same macros and micros.
    ]
    Take vitamins with your junk food. voila.
  • HypersonicFitNess
    HypersonicFitNess Posts: 1,219 Member
    Will the junk food junkie still lose weight? Yes, you can still lose weight, but you will lose lean muscle and not fat. You will be thin but "fat" and unhealthy

    Will the clean eater lose more than junk food junkie? Not necessarily, however this person will be leaner, with lower body fat and healthier

    We all know that junk food can cause more health problems than just weight gain....So my question is: Is one calorie deficit better than the other? Depends on what you're trying to do....do you want to be thin and "fat" and unhealthy, sick and yes this person will be susceptible to most diseases and cancer b/c their body is acidic and a breeding ground for cancer? or do you want to be lean, low body fat and healthy, less likely to get sick, body is more alkaline, ph balance is not right for cancer?
  • steponya82
    steponya82 Posts: 5
    Just think of all the bad stuff they are putting in their bodies. I just started this whole "diet" after having my third daughter, i dont have ALOT to lose, but i found my self going up in weight rather than down. The way i have always stayed at a good weight has been a combination of light to heavy exercising (depends on the month) and eating healthy fresh foods. I rarely go out and once in a blue moon go to fast food. Stay away from sodas etc.....trust me it definitely makes a difference!
  • julialdr
    julialdr Posts: 100 Member
    If you are eating junk food but still have a calorie deficit you will lose weight. The difference is in the way your body metabolizes what you are eating. If you have a high sugar intake from junk food your blood sugar will spike and drop and make digesting those sugars and fats more difficult. This also means that those people may be losing lean muscle mass versus fat. Losing weight is not the same as losing fat.
  • Amberonamission
    Amberonamission Posts: 836 Member
    I read this article in this weeks Newsweek. Thought it was pretty smart. It's about how sugar and fat are addictive to the brain and how on scan the brain of obese people and the brain of drug addicts are similar.

    http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2012/10/28/addicted-to-food-the-new-research-suggests-it-s-possible.html
  • Jamie_Lauren
    Jamie_Lauren Posts: 211 Member
    So the general consensus is that calories are calories and eating at a calorie deficit WILL make you lose weight regardless of what food you eat. Yeah, we all get that, it's pretty much common sense.

    If you want to change your lifestyle to go along with your weight loss, then doesn't it make sense to eat more of the good stuff? I mean come on...I cannot understand why one group of people would criticise another for choosing whole foods over processed junk anyway. In fact, if you're striving to better yourself and your health at all then why do a half-assed job of it? "Clean" doesn't have to mean extreme. Like I said previously, I still allow myself treats every now and then.

    I've dieted clean and I've dieted eating "junk". YES I lost weight both ways, but who can guess which diet improved my health and energy levels, lowered my frequency of illness and generally made me feel good all day every day? :wink:

    And with that I leave the beating of the dead horse to someone else.

Categories