Clean vs. Junk - does it really matter?
Replies
-
But no-one is saying to eat junk all the time and no-one is saying you have to eat junk at all. All people are saying it that you do not have to 'eat clean' all the time.
You made a disparaging comment about people - you later admitted that you had only read the first three pages, and it was obvious that you had not read them very well.
Just as you find it annoying that people jump down your throat for 'eating clean' (which is not something they should do - if it works for you, then it is the best 'diet' for you), others, that do incorporate some 'unclean' food in their diet find it annoying to have disparaging comments made about them. It works both ways.
It wasn't meant to be "disparaging".... my personality is dry/ sarcastic... so if it came off that way, then I apologize. I'm cool as a cucumber here... no throat jumping.
I've read the thread, and still do not take back my comments. Disagreeing with what what said=/= not reading.
I'm not hating on people that are in better shape than me... but I also won't agree that we have the same goals. "whaattt your not trying to be rippped???" I didn't say that... but my goal isn't just to lose weight, but to be healthier overall and I don't believe that eating junk is the way to get to where I want to be. I understand that everyone here isn't advocating icecream for breakfast...But the topic title is clean vs. junk... as though its either/ or.
You just do not get it...you have now insinuated that my only goal is to lose weight..../smh
Well, I kind of can't win. I disagree with the IIFYM. I do believe that eating clean is overall better for me... that's not to trump what you are doing. Do what you wanna do.0 -
I have been on alot of other calorie counting websites and this is the only one I have seen rep unhealthy eating. Even to go as far as to spam pictures of highly unhealthy foods. Other forums are not like this, someone asks about slim fast bars or juice fasting and they get a dose of reality, not a bunch of people telling them its a "good idea" like they do on here. No other calorie forum I have ever seen thinks its alright to eat as much junk as the people on this site.0
-
I don't know if you would look the same but what you mentioned about energy, skin, etc are more important to me. Take care of your body if you want increased energy and decreased chances of illness. Or eat crap and feel like crap.
QFT :drinker:0 -
I just eat less of what I have been eating for years and exercise daily. Aim for 5 a day and enjoy.0
-
Well, I kind of can't win.
Not when you continue making assumptions like thatI disagree with the IIFYM.
Because you do not understand it.I do believe that eating clean is overall better for me... that's not to trump what you are doing.
As I said - if it works for you, it is the best 'diet' *for you.0 -
Great topic! I actually started writing out the same thread yesterday, but I couldn't word it right so I deleted it.
I think there are a lot of benefits to eating clean, not just weight loss. I also think that clean, healthy foods keep your blood sugars more levelled out than processed junk.
Not sure who would weigh more or less, but I love your comparison!0 -
Well, I kind of can't win.
Not when you continue making assumptions like thatI disagree with the IIFYM.
Because you do not understand it.I do believe that eating clean is overall better for me... that's not to trump what you are doing.
As I said - if it works for you, it is the best 'diet' *for you.
I understand IIFYM. I disagree with it. Again... disagreeing=/=not understanding/not reading.0 -
In order to make this a more fair comparison you would want to make sure each person is getting identical macronutrients for their needs and sufficient micronutrients.
In the example you've listed the person eating exclusively junk, would have a horrible macro profile and may possible be micronutrient deficient.
The person eating the whole foods diet probably wouldn't have those issues and as such they'd likely end up healthier and with a better body composition.
But that being said, this doesn't mean calories aren't calories nor does it negate the first paragraph you wrote.
The people advocating junk food shouldn't (and hopefully aren't) suggesting a diet exclusively of junk food. There exists a middle ground where macros are set properly, micronutrients are plentiful, and "some" junk food is included into the otherwise already healthy and sufficient diet. In a situation like this I'd expect minimal to zero differences in body composition vs a completely whole foods diet.
Some food for thought, although just a snapshot:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17536194
http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/research-review/hormonal-responses-to-a-fast-food-meal-compared-with-nutritionally-comparable-meals-of-different-composition-research-review.html
Re-quoting here as pertinent0 -
Well, I kind of can't win.
Not when you continue making assumptions like thatI disagree with the IIFYM.
Because you do not understand it.I do believe that eating clean is overall better for me... that's not to trump what you are doing.
As I said - if it works for you, it is the best 'diet' *for you.
I understand IIFYM. I disagree with it. Again... disagreeing=/=not understanding/not reading.
You disagree with it as a concept or you disagree with it for you?0 -
In order to make this a more fair comparison you would want to make sure each person is getting identical macronutrients for their needs and sufficient micronutrients.
In the example you've listed the person eating exclusively junk, would have a horrible macro profile and may possible be micronutrient deficient.
The person eating the whole foods diet probably wouldn't have those issues and as such they'd likely end up healthier and with a better body composition.
But that being said, this doesn't mean calories aren't calories nor does it negate the first paragraph you wrote.
The people advocating junk food shouldn't (and hopefully aren't) suggesting a diet exclusively of junk food. There exists a middle ground where macros are set properly, micronutrients are plentiful, and "some" junk food is included into the otherwise already healthy and sufficient diet. In a situation like this I'd expect minimal to zero differences in body composition vs a completely whole foods diet.
Some food for thought, although just a snapshot:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17536194
http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/research-review/hormonal-responses-to-a-fast-food-meal-compared-with-nutritionally-comparable-meals-of-different-composition-research-review.html
Re-quoting here as pertinent
However, Sara, some DO advocate diets consisting primarily of "junk foods", and because you/magerum/etc align yourselves with them, it leads many to believe that you don't disagree with that.0 -
In terms of calories, if there's a deficit, then it makes no difference what you eat.
The issue with junk vs clean food is that a diet high in junk will be low in nutrition, and that will definitely make a difference.
Junk in the form of sugar or too many carbs can set you up for cravings for more carbs and sugar. Too many refined sugars in the body set you up for all sorts of health problems. Additionally, you can eat more volume of food if you add healthier choices like vegetables, whereas the same number of calories in junk food will reached with fewer foods, leaving you hungry, which will lead to eating more, which will lead to a calorie overage, which will lead to weight gain.0 -
In order to make this a more fair comparison you would want to make sure each person is getting identical macronutrients for their needs and sufficient micronutrients.
In the example you've listed the person eating exclusively junk, would have a horrible macro profile and may possible be micronutrient deficient.
The person eating the whole foods diet probably wouldn't have those issues and as such they'd likely end up healthier and with a better body composition.
But that being said, this doesn't mean calories aren't calories nor does it negate the first paragraph you wrote.
The people advocating junk food shouldn't (and hopefully aren't) suggesting a diet exclusively of junk food. There exists a middle ground where macros are set properly, micronutrients are plentiful, and "some" junk food is included into the otherwise already healthy and sufficient diet. In a situation like this I'd expect minimal to zero differences in body composition vs a completely whole foods diet.
Some food for thought, although just a snapshot:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17536194
http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/research-review/hormonal-responses-to-a-fast-food-meal-compared-with-nutritionally-comparable-meals-of-different-composition-research-review.html
Re-quoting here as pertinent
However, Sara, some DO advocate diets consisting primarily of "junk foods", and because you/magerum/etc align yourselves with them, it leads many to believe that you don't disagree with that.
Please show me where they have done it in *this* thread. Also, where have I ever aligned myself with anyone in that regards?
ETA: actually I am not sure I have ever seen anyone actually advocating it. Saying they do it, yes, I agree. But advocating it? I cannot recall that.0 -
Well, I kind of can't win.
Not when you continue making assumptions like thatI disagree with the IIFYM.
Because you do not understand it.I do believe that eating clean is overall better for me... that's not to trump what you are doing.
As I said - if it works for you, it is the best 'diet' *for you.
I understand IIFYM. I disagree with it. Again... disagreeing=/=not understanding/not reading.
You disagree with it as a concept or you disagree with it for you?
I disagree with it for me, for what I am trying to achieve and if any friend asked for my opinion on their lifestyles, I would say the same.0 -
However, Sara, some DO advocate diets consisting primarily of "junk foods", and because you/magerum/etc align yourselves with them, it leads many to believe that you don't disagree with that.
I have not seen a single person who advocates a diet consisting primarily of junk food. You are setting up a straw man.
People like me do not advocate a diet consisting primarily of "junk food."0 -
Well, I kind of can't win.
Not when you continue making assumptions like thatI disagree with the IIFYM.
Because you do not understand it.I do believe that eating clean is overall better for me... that's not to trump what you are doing.
As I said - if it works for you, it is the best 'diet' *for you.
I understand IIFYM. I disagree with it. Again... disagreeing=/=not understanding/not reading.
You disagree with it as a concept or you disagree with it for you?
I disagree with it for me, for what I am trying to achieve and if any friend asked for my opinion on their lifestyles, I would say the same.
Fair enough...as long as you understand that it works very well, from a body composition, health perspective and for adherence for many people.
Disagreeing with it implies that you disagree with the concept...not that it is something that would not work as well for you.0 -
However, Sara, some DO advocate diets consisting primarily of "junk foods", and because you/magerum/etc align yourselves with them, it leads many to believe that you don't disagree with that.
I have not seen a single person who advocates a diet consisting primarily of junk food. You are setting up a straw man.
People like me do not advocate a diet consisting primarily of "junk food."
hey sara... this guy ^
and yeah jonny, ya do.0 -
<Looks around for pictures of Junk> :ohwell: kicks rock and walks off>0
-
I don't understand why people get so evangelical about eating processed food?
"I don't eat clean" is hardly a badge of honour.
I don't understand why people get so evangelical about eating clean food?
"I eat clean" is hardly a badge of honour.
yep
I agree with all three of you0 -
However, Sara, some DO advocate diets consisting primarily of "junk foods", and because you/magerum/etc align yourselves with them, it leads many to believe that you don't disagree with that.
I have not seen a single person who advocates a diet consisting primarily of junk food. You are setting up a straw man.
People like me do not advocate a diet consisting primarily of "junk food."
hey sara... this guy ^
and yeah jonny, ya do.
No, I absolutely do not, and in your zealous hatred of me you completely misunderstand everything I post and advocate.
I advocate a diet where the person sets appropriate macronutrient goals to achieve their desired results. How they get there really does not matter. I strongly encourage people to eat vegetables. I also encourage them to eat the foods they love, whatever those are, in ways that allow them to hit their macronutrient goals.
I also encourage people to eat fast food if they want. Fast food is not automatically junk. Grilled chicken sandwiches, tacos, broiled fish and shrimp, ice cream, and hamburgers are not junk food if they fit into your macronutrient profile, full stop. For some reason you think a grilled chicken sandwich from McD's is "junk food" but a grilled chicken sandwich you make at home is not, which makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.
You have decided to hate me and everything you understand or interpret about what I say is completely, 100% irrational.0 -
When I first came to this site, I saw some guy talking about how he had cupcakes that morning for breakfast. And another girl was talking about how she had cinnamon buns covered in frosting that morning. And now this guys health bar is all taco bell and junk? hahahahahah who can take it seriously0
-
When I first came to this site, I saw some guy talking about how he had cupcakes that morning for breakfast. And another girl was talking about how she had cinnamon buns covered in frosting that morning. And now this guys health bar is all taco bell and junk? hahahahahah who can take it seriously
It's not a health bar. And if you could give one specific reason that, say, a chicken soft taco from Taco Bell is bad I'd love to hear it.0 -
Taco bell is total ****. I don't eat taco bell or any of the things you have listed. Nor would I go home and make the same thing and call it healthy. I do not eat fast food. So you don't really want to talk to me.When I first came to this site, I saw some guy talking about how he had cupcakes that morning for breakfast. And another girl was talking about how she had cinnamon buns covered in frosting that morning. And now this guys health bar is all taco bell and junk? hahahahahah who can take it seriously
It's not a health bar. And if you could give one specific reason that, say, a chicken soft taco from Taco Bell is bad I'd love to hear it.0 -
Taco bell is total ****. I don't eat taco bell or any of the things you have listed. Nor would I go home and make the same thing and call it healthy. I do not eat fast food. So you don't really want to talk to me.When I first came to this site, I saw some guy talking about how he had cupcakes that morning for breakfast. And another girl was talking about how she had cinnamon buns covered in frosting that morning. And now this guys health bar is all taco bell and junk? hahahahahah who can take it seriously
It's not a health bar. And if you could give one specific reason that, say, a chicken soft taco from Taco Bell is bad I'd love to hear it.
That's not really specific. Is it certain ingredients that are ****? Macro profiles? What?
Which part of the taco is ****? Is it the tortilla, the chicken, the lettuce, or the tomato?0 -
Its processed garbage I won't touch. You can however eat whatever you want. I do not eat fast food.
Taco bell is total ****. I don't eat taco bell or any of the things you have listed. Nor would I go home and make the same thing and call it healthy. I do not eat fast food. So you don't really want to talk to me.When I first came to this site, I saw some guy talking about how he had cupcakes that morning for breakfast. And another girl was talking about how she had cinnamon buns covered in frosting that morning. And now this guys health bar is all taco bell and junk? hahahahahah who can take it seriously
It's not a health bar. And if you could give one specific reason that, say, a chicken soft taco from Taco Bell is bad I'd love to hear it.
That's not really specific. Is it certain ingredients that are ****? Macro profiles? What?
Which part of the taco is ****? Is it the tortilla, the chicken, the lettuce, or the tomato?0 -
However, Sara, some DO advocate diets consisting primarily of "junk foods", and because you/magerum/etc align yourselves with them, it leads many to believe that you don't disagree with that.
I have not seen a single person who advocates a diet consisting primarily of junk food. You are setting up a straw man.
People like me do not advocate a diet consisting primarily of "junk food."
hey sara... this guy ^
and yeah jonny, ya do.
No, I absolutely do not, and in your zealous hatred of me you completely misunderstand everything I post and advocate.
I advocate a diet where the person sets appropriate macronutrient goals to achieve their desired results. How they get there really does not matter. I strongly encourage people to eat vegetables. I also encourage them to eat the foods they love, whatever those are, in ways that allow them to hit their macronutrient goals.
I also encourage people to eat fast food if they want. Fast food is not automatically junk. Grilled chicken sandwiches, tacos, broiled fish and shrimp, ice cream, and hamburgers are not junk food if they fit into your macronutrient profile, full stop. For some reason you think a grilled chicken sandwich from McD's is "junk food" but a grilled chicken sandwich you make at home is not, which makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.
You have decided to hate me and everything you understand or interpret about what I say is completely, 100% irrational.
I don't hate you. Don't overreact. I like you actually - I just disagree with your nutritional stances. Which... is fine.
the grilled chicken sandwich I make at home comes from free range, antibiotic free chicken. the bread I used when I ate bread, was as minimally processed as possible and did not contain all the crap that mcdonalds buns do. there is literally NO comparison between a homemade chicken sandwich with good ingredients and a fast food chicken sandwich.
but look at your ticker dude? you are really going to tell me you don't advocate people eat fast food and ice cream, and that you don't brag about doing so every day yourself?0 -
Its processed garbage I won't touch. You can however eat whatever you want. I do not eat fast food.
Taco bell is total ****. I don't eat taco bell or any of the things you have listed. Nor would I go home and make the same thing and call it healthy. I do not eat fast food. So you don't really want to talk to me.When I first came to this site, I saw some guy talking about how he had cupcakes that morning for breakfast. And another girl was talking about how she had cinnamon buns covered in frosting that morning. And now this guys health bar is all taco bell and junk? hahahahahah who can take it seriously
It's not a health bar. And if you could give one specific reason that, say, a chicken soft taco from Taco Bell is bad I'd love to hear it.
That's not really specific. Is it certain ingredients that are ****? Macro profiles? What?
Which part of the taco is ****? Is it the tortilla, the chicken, the lettuce, or the tomato?
Which part? The tortilla, the chicken, the lettuce, or the tomato?
"Processed" doesn't mean bad. Whole wheat bread is processed. Butter is processed.
So what, specifically, is bad?0 -
The fact that they even want to compare something you could make at home to fast food, shows us they don't know much about food. Obviously you can make it much healthier then mcdonalds, I mean that is common sense.However, Sara, some DO advocate diets consisting primarily of "junk foods", and because you/magerum/etc align yourselves with them, it leads many to believe that you don't disagree with that.
I have not seen a single person who advocates a diet consisting primarily of junk food. You are setting up a straw man.
People like me do not advocate a diet consisting primarily of "junk food."
hey sara... this guy ^
and yeah jonny, ya do.
No, I absolutely do not, and in your zealous hatred of me you completely misunderstand everything I post and advocate.
I advocate a diet where the person sets appropriate macronutrient goals to achieve their desired results. How they get there really does not matter. I strongly encourage people to eat vegetables. I also encourage them to eat the foods they love, whatever those are, in ways that allow them to hit their macronutrient goals.
I also encourage people to eat fast food if they want. Fast food is not automatically junk. Grilled chicken sandwiches, tacos, broiled fish and shrimp, ice cream, and hamburgers are not junk food if they fit into your macronutrient profile, full stop. For some reason you think a grilled chicken sandwich from McD's is "junk food" but a grilled chicken sandwich you make at home is not, which makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.
You have decided to hate me and everything you understand or interpret about what I say is completely, 100% irrational.
I don't hate you. Don't overreact. I like you actually - I just disagree with your nutritional stances. Which... is fine.
the grilled chicken sandwich I make at home comes from free range, antibiotic free chicken. the bread I used when I ate bread, was as minimally processed as possible and did not contain all the crap that mcdonalds buns do. there is literally NO comparison between a homemade chicken sandwich with good ingredients and a fast food chicken sandwich.
but look at your ticker dude? you are really going to tell me you don't advocate people eat fast food and ice cream, and that you don't brag about doing so every day yourself?0 -
Google taco bell meat. And have fun. Its pretty much known by now.
Its processed garbage I won't touch. You can however eat whatever you want. I do not eat fast food.
Taco bell is total ****. I don't eat taco bell or any of the things you have listed. Nor would I go home and make the same thing and call it healthy. I do not eat fast food. So you don't really want to talk to me.When I first came to this site, I saw some guy talking about how he had cupcakes that morning for breakfast. And another girl was talking about how she had cinnamon buns covered in frosting that morning. And now this guys health bar is all taco bell and junk? hahahahahah who can take it seriously
It's not a health bar. And if you could give one specific reason that, say, a chicken soft taco from Taco Bell is bad I'd love to hear it.
That's not really specific. Is it certain ingredients that are ****? Macro profiles? What?
Which part of the taco is ****? Is it the tortilla, the chicken, the lettuce, or the tomato?
Which part? The tortilla, the chicken, the lettuce, or the tomato?
"Processed" doesn't mean bad. Whole wheat bread is processed. Butter is processed.
So what, specifically, is bad?0 -
When I first came to this site, I saw some guy talking about how he had cupcakes that morning for breakfast. And another girl was talking about how she had cinnamon buns covered in frosting that morning. And now this guys health bar is all taco bell and junk? hahahahahah who can take it seriously
It's not a health bar. And if you could give one specific reason that, say, a chicken soft taco from Taco Bell is bad I'd love to hear it.
Actually, I have to agree that Breyers is not the best...Talenti, Haagen Dazs or Ben & Jerry's is much better,0 -
Suruprised someone knows about thisProtein is more important when cutting than when bulking. The body is more protein efficient when gaining (you aren't fighting the tendency of your body to eat your muscles when it needs calories). Either way, as a % of your diet, if you keep constant protein levels, the % of your diet that is protein is much lower when bulking.
Lol? what metabolic damage.."Clean" doesn't really mean anything.
Your body doesn't care whether a particular amino acid came from a Snickers bar, a cow, or a soybean.
What matters is nutrients. Fiber, protein, saturated fat, potassium, vitamin D; these are nutrients. They are what matter.
Get proper amounts of nutrients. Where they come from does not matter.
+1
No matter how processed a food is... all food has some quantifiable level of nutrition. There is no food that is completely devoid of nutrition.
Except for sugar (i.e. sucrose). When you discount the metabolic damage it does, the carbohydrate value might as well be tossed out the window. There are a lot of better, healthier ways to get carbohydrates. White flour is another item that is pretty light in the nutrition department. And both substances are addictive. Sugar is because of what obesity researchers call its "anti-satiety" effect and white flour because the gluten component contains a substance called, gliadin, which has been shown to be highly addictive in animal studies.
what does it do? I want to hear how it damages your metabolism
Some of the newest research suggests that it is the fructose component of sugar (i.e. sucrose--which is 50% fructose) that does the damage. High fructose consumption has been demonstrated to be linked to fatty liver, hypertension, Type II diabetes, gouty arthritis, renal disease and failure. It would be much healthier for someone to eat pure glucose (known in the industry as "dextrose") for their sweets. Glucose is taken directly into the cells from the gut, and utilized. Fructose metabolism is much more complex and occurs in the liver in much the same way that alcohol is metabolized. The small amount of fructose that we get in the eating of natural fruits is not a problem for a healthy individual. The massive amount that is eaten in the form of table sugar (i.e. sucrose) is contributing to the diseases mentioned above. There is an epidemic of renal failure among sugar cane workers in Central America. Researchers expect to find that the problem stems from their habit of drinking soda pop or sugar-sweetened fruit juice while working in the very hot fields. Fructose is one source of high blood levels of uric acid and the high levels of uric acid in their blood, combined with dehydration causes the uric acid to crystalize in their kidneys, creating profound damage and leading to renal failure. Sucrose damages the metabolism over time in more subtle ways, but the epidemic of hypertension is just one example of the damage it does. I used to have hypertension and after I went sucrose-free, my blood pressure dropped to normal even before I lost much weight. (And I had been on the maximum dose of two different b.p. meds).
cite your references please
This article is from the Journal of the American Society of Nephrology. It is entitled, "Uric Acid, the Metabolic Syndrome and Renal Disease" http://jasn.asnjournals.org/content/17/12_suppl_3/S165.full
From the article: "...Recently, uric acid also was found to have a causal role in the metabolic syndrome that was induced experimentally by fructose (38). Fructose rapidly raises uric acid as a consequence of activation of fructokinase with ATP consumption, intracellular phosphate depletion, and stimulation of AMP deaminase (39). Lowering uric acid in fructose-fed rats ameliorates much of the metabolic syndrome, including a reduction in BP, serum triglycerides, hyperinsulinemia, and weight gain (38). The rise in uric acid after fructose ingestion likely has a significant role in inducing insulin resistance via its effect to lower nitric oxide (35) and also possibly by a direct effect of uric acid on the adipocytes (Sautin et al., submitted).
In turn, fructose intake correlates well with the recent rise in the epidemic of metabolic syndrome, diabetes, hypertension, and kidney disease (40). Fructose constitutes 50% of table sugar and also is a major component in high-fructose corn syrup, which is used in the United States as a sweetener. Intake of fructose has increased markedly in the past few decades and correlates with the rising rates of metabolic syndrome...."
In a related area, here is a link to the proceedings of a "Food Addiction Summit" held several years ago. The list of presenters was pretty impressive. Sugar consumption was cited by a number of the researchers as a large part of the problem. http://www.foodaddictionsummit.org/index.htm0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.2K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 421 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions