Eating Clean?

eating clean means different things to different people and you'll get a thousand different answers,

for me, it means no artificial sugar other than what is in fruits, or stevia.

no soda, no junk food , or processed foods ie. 100 calorie snack things. if it has more than 4 ingredients, i dont eat it. (with the exception of my protein powder, and protein bars).

I cook all of my food so I know what went into it and how many calories are in it.

I stay away from white pasta, white rice (thats just my personal preference) and am trying to eat gluten free (no wheat products bc I bloat).

the times I break all of these rules are when I have a cheat meal.

Clean eating or any kind of eating however, wont help your weightloss if youre eating at a surplus or at maintenance.

On the bright side, cookies and cake appear clean ..

Butter
Sugar (real)
Eggs
Flour

So is ice cream.

So that chipwich is clean. nice.

eating clean means different things to different people and you'll get a thousand different answers,

for me, it means no artificial sugar other than what is in fruits, or stevia.

no soda, no junk food , or processed foods ie. 100 calorie snack things. if it has more than 4 ingredients, i dont eat it. (with the exception of my protein powder, and protein bars).

I cook all of my food so I know what went into it and how many calories are in it.

I stay away from white pasta, white rice (thats just my personal preference) and am trying to eat gluten free (no wheat products bc I bloat).

the times I break all of these rules are when I have a cheat meal.

Clean eating or any kind of eating however, wont help your weightloss if youre eating at a surplus or at maintenance.

On the bright side, cookies and cake appear clean ..

Butter
Sugar (real)
Eggs
Flour

Wrong, butter and flour are def processed, therefore unclean

But .. But .. I can pronounce them.

I took it to mean unnecessary processing.

There is no such thing as unprocessed butter or unprocessed flour. I agree.

But then this makes yogurt unclean too .. and cheese. I guess scrambled eggs are unclean too. (sure sure cooking's a process, but nobody's arguing for 100% raw here are they?)

I've always done well in chemistry. I can pronounce lots of really long ingredients.

I was, however, pronouncing quinoa wrong for years. Still haven't touched the stuff. :laugh:

Don't get me wrong - I eat my share of processed crap, but calling not eating it an eating disorder? Dumb....

I just tried quinoa recently for the first time. Not bad - not amazing.... I'd rather eat rice...

He lost fat and some muscle. He is now low weight. Not muscular, not low bf. His approach is a good approach for general weight loss, as it includes a moderate calorie deficit and decent macros, plus increased activity level. He sometimes eats small amounts of low impact fast food and a cup or less of ice cream - so compared to a problem "American" diet, he eats relatively very "clean". He might be able to achieve low bf, but he hasn't. Maybe his diet is holding him back, maybe his lack of lifting, maybe a combination. Maybe he'll eventually get ripped. Who knows.

And maybe getting ripped isn't his goal. Hard to believe, I know, but some people might not want to be ripped.

Low body fat and being ripped isn't my goal. When it starts to get too low, I start eating more. I admire the physiques of fitness models, but I don't like it on myself.

My friends I am all up for learning. So lets have a legit dialogue. I think the disconnect lies in who the subject of the conversation regarding intake is.

Are you hitting the gym and ramming the intensity through the roof, are you crossfitting, are you doing the traditional bodybuilding style types of workouts, running marathons, triathlons basically is this person exercising with a high intensity? Or is this the typical person not doing anything or doing some very low impact, low intensity exercising.

If you are going to the gym and pounding the steel. Then yes a carb loading philosophy filled with high glycemic intake will reap benefits. Especially when timed properly and when dialed in, in terms of amounts. I have seen folks reap the benefits of eating "dirty" and consuming pastries, pizza, white rice, etc. because their muscles needed it after depleting their glycogen stores.

If you are someone that participates in long distance, place whatever exercise you want here, then your intake should definitely have more carbs than the average bear. And yes I agree these folks can stray away from nutrient dense with no ill effects and some positive ones.

But if you're the average person. Who's hitting the Zumba classes or Strength and Core hour at the local Golds, are you suggesting that a diet filled with those same high sugar, highly refined insulin spiking carbs will help them in their effort to drop fat. If their muscles are not needing the glycogen, because the stores are not depleted what happens to the influx of glucose. There's no immediate need to burn it, the muscles don't need it, so that leaves only one place for it to go. At least that's my understanding. If I'm wrong then lets chat, like I said only a fool doesn't want to learn.

I agree caloric monitoring plays a huge factor in weight loss, achieving a physique and body that is healthy and performs at an optimal level. My argument is that if you are not active or not exercising with a high intensity then consuming a caloric deficit of junk will not provide the results you want. Consuming at a deficit with clean food will.

And I'm not saying its a nonstop 24x7 thing. Who the hell doesn't like cookies and pizza. I'm saying keep it in check.

Forgive any spelling or cut up sentences this was done on my iPhone.

My friends I am all up for learning. So lets have a legit dialogue. I think the disconnect lies in who the subject of the conversation regarding intake is.

Are you hitting the gym and ramming the intensity through the roof, are you crossfitting, are you doing the traditional bodybuilding style types of workouts, running marathons, triathlons basically is this person exercising with a high intensity? Or is this the typical person not doing anything or doing some very low impact, low intensity exercising.

If you are going to the gym and pounding the steel. Then yes a carb loading philosophy filled with high glycemic intake will reap benefits. Especially when timed properly and when dialed in, in terms of amounts. I have seen folks reap the benefits of eating "dirty" and consuming pastries, pizza, white rice, etc. because their muscles needed it after depleting their glycogen stores.

If you are someone that participates in long distance, place whatever exercise you want here, then your intake should definitely have more carbs than the average bear. And yes I agree these folks can stray away from nutrient dense with no ill effects and some positive ones.

But if you're the average person. Who's hitting the Zumba classes or Strength and Core hour at the local Golds, are you suggesting that a diet filled with those same high sugar, highly refined insulin spiking carbs will help them in their effort to drop fat. If their muscles are not needing the glycogen, because the stores are not depleted what happens to the influx of glucose. There's no immediate need to burn it, the muscles don't need it, so that leaves only one place for it to go. At least that's my understanding. If I'm wrong then lets chat, like I said only a fool doesn't want to learn.

I agree caloric monitoring plays a huge factor in weight loss, achieving a physique and body that is healthy and performs at an optimal level. My argument is that if you are not active or not exercising with a high intensity then consuming a caloric deficit of junk will not provide the results you want. Consuming at a deficit with clean food will.

And I'm not saying its a nonstop 24x7 thing. Who the hell doesn't like cookies and pizza. I'm saying keep it in check.

Forgive any spelling or cut up sentences this was done on my iPhone.

the problem with these arguments is that the clean eaters ALWAYS resort to strawman arguments. either intentionally or purposefully. i have bolded that strawman sentence that you used above.

to the clean eaters, anybody NOT eating clean must be sitting around all day stuffing nothing but bon-bons in their face. this is not at all the case. people who follow IIFYM don't worry about individual foods, just their daily nutrient needs. if those are met, then the foods eaten to meet them are irrelevant. in practice, this means IIFYM'ers eat largely the same type of foods that clean eaters do. however IIFYM'ers have room for the occasional pop tart or bowl of ice cream or cheeseburger. they feel no shame or guilt for indulging once in a while (or in small amounts daily). to the IIFYM'er, it's all about giving your body what it needs, not about what foods you eat. to a clean eater, it's the opposite. what one eats is all important to them. eating something "dirty" is not only forbidden, but also bad. i just think that's a sad way to think and live.

give me IIFYM any day. i will never, ever adhere to any notion called clean eating, even though i may well routinely eat foods that clean eaters consider clean.

i think that, in a nutshell, is the issue. the 2 philosophies are fundamentally at odds, although in practice there is plenty of overlap in implementation.

You can absolutely lose weight (and yes, get ripped too) by focusing solely on a calorie deficit. There are countless examples, here on MFP, of people who eat "dirty" and got shredded.

It's pretty silly when approached as a binary scenario - as in, a bite of ice cream changes "clean" to "dirty".

The folks with open diaries and low body fat I've seen on MFP tend to eat relatively clean, from my perspective.

I've also personally eaten 5k+/day of whatever trash was available and maintained low body fat. But that was exercising at an unsustainable level for a responsible adult. Would be irresponsible to provide a 10-cheeseburger lunch diet as an option here.

Outside of MFP, there is a general approach to attaining very low body fat. Most bodybuilders do not even attempt to get shredded with a random crap diet. Maybe they're all wrong. Maybe it doesn't matter, and all they need is a deficit.

So...through the nature of my food I have far exceeded my nutritional needs by the time I've finished dinner. I have, typically, consumed 1.5 lbs of chicken breast, & 2 lbs of veggies consisting of mixed vegetables, spinach, brocolli, cauliflower, white potato, with some almonds, cottage cheese & a protein shake by this time. Coming in around 1700 calories and several hundred percent of my micro & macro needs.

That leaves me with energy needs, aka caloires, in the range of 1300 - 2400 additional calories. Depending if I'm cutting, maintaining or slow bulking will dictate how much more. You don't get extra credit for more nutrients, how is it bad then if I get my purely energy needs from ice cream, pop tarts, cereal, cookies, and corn bread? ( I can, and will, argue that these items have nutritional value but that's a different topic.)

Gee....walk away for a few hours and come back to all the fun that has broken out.

The ultimate point is that you match your caloric needs to what it is that you are trying to accomplish, hit your macros and carry on. Your body does not care if your calories come from hand massaged, spoon-fed, Wagyu beef carpaccio harvested by Taoist monks under a full moon or a smokey from your BBQ. The laws of Thermodynamics do not automatically change the way they work based on what you eat.

My body might not, but my mind does! Gimme the KOBE!!

My friends I am all up for learning. So lets have a legit dialogue. I think the disconnect lies in who the subject of the conversation regarding intake is.

Are you hitting the gym and ramming the intensity through the roof, are you crossfitting, are you doing the traditional bodybuilding style types of workouts, running marathons, triathlons basically is this person exercising with a high intensity? Or is this the typical person not doing anything or doing some very low impact, low intensity exercising.

If you are going to the gym and pounding the steel. Then yes a carb loading philosophy filled with high glycemic intake will reap benefits. Especially when timed properly and when dialed in, in terms of amounts. I have seen folks reap the benefits of eating "dirty" and consuming pastries, pizza, white rice, etc. because their muscles needed it after depleting their glycogen stores.

If you are someone that participates in long distance, place whatever exercise you want here, then your intake should definitely have more carbs than the average bear. And yes I agree these folks can stray away from nutrient dense with no ill effects and some positive ones.

But if you're the average person. Who's hitting the Zumba classes or Strength and Core hour at the local Golds, are you suggesting that a diet filled with those same high sugar, highly refined insulin spiking carbs will help them in their effort to drop fat. If their muscles are not needing the glycogen, because the stores are not depleted what happens to the influx of glucose. There's no immediate need to burn it, the muscles don't need it, so that leaves only one place for it to go. At least that's my understanding. If I'm wrong then lets chat, like I said only a fool doesn't want to learn.

I agree caloric monitoring plays a huge factor in weight loss, achieving a physique and body that is healthy and performs at an optimal level. My argument is that if you are not active or not exercising with a high intensity then consuming a caloric deficit of junk will not provide the results you want. Consuming at a deficit with clean food will.

And I'm not saying its a nonstop 24x7 thing. Who the hell doesn't like cookies and pizza. I'm saying keep it in check.

Forgive any spelling or cut up sentences this was done on my iPhone.

the problem with these arguments is that the clean eaters ALWAYS resort to strawman arguments. either intentionally or purposefully. i have bolded that strawman sentence that you used above.

to the clean eaters, anybody NOT eating clean must be sitting around all day stuffing nothing but bon-bons in their face. this is not at all the case. people who follow IIFYM don't worry about individual foods, just their daily nutrient needs. if those are met, then the foods eaten to meet them are irrelevant. in practice, this means IIFYM'ers eat largely the same type of foods that clean eaters do. however IIFYM'ers have room for the occasional pop tart or bowl of ice cream or cheeseburger. they feel no shame or guilt for indulging once in a while (or in small amounts daily). to the IIFYM'er, it's all about giving your body what it needs, not about what foods you eat. to a clean eater, it's the opposite. what one eats is all important to them. eating something "dirty" is not only forbidden, but also bad. i just think that's a sad way to think and live.

give me IIFYM any day. i will never, ever adhere to any notion called clean eating, even though i may well routinely eat foods that clean eaters consider clean.

i think that, in a nutshell, is the issue. the 2 philosophies are fundamentally at odds, although in practice there is plenty of overlap in implementation.

Please don't lump me in with any group of crazies that think 100% adherence is the only way.

I think we are arguing the same point. If you are following IIFYM or any other similar protocal in order to hit your micros and get the necessary vitamins and minerals then you are going to eat a lot of whole "clean" food, as you said above. And as I've said before have a cookie, eat some cake, grab a slice of Grimaldis you'll be okay. I just don't believe all of your carbs should come from these foods. The bulk should come from vegetables and fruits with some wild rice, oatmeal throw in on occasion.

Using the IIFYM for myslef to attain fat loss I need to be around 1900 calories a day with a 40%P-40%F-20%C breakdown while hitting the gym 4 times a week. This leaves me with 100G of carbs to consume daily if I want to lose fat. If I can get in the appropriate amount of fiber and other micros and still have left over calories to consume a donut then why the hell not. Especially in the hours following my workout when my muscles are craving glucose.

But my question is how many people, not you, but people in general eat just one donut or have just .5 cup of ice cream? And yes unfortunately there are too many people who sit around and eat nothing but potato chips, cookies, donuts, fast food and anything else as a staple of their nutritional intake and not as an occasional addition.

@AcG67.... Yes, I realize protein will raise insulin levels. But are you suggesting that the resulting insulin levels raised from eating a 16 oz Wagyu or Kobe (yes I love that stuff too) steak are the same as those raised from eating 16oz of white bread?

The bottom line is we can both show studies that prove or disprove this theory or that theory. What I have found through trial and error is do what works for you. I believe there are general principals that apply accross the board. But, during that dialing in phase that last bit that helps you go from looking good in clothes to looking good naked or from being kinda strong to that mofo is crazy is strong.....it's in that phase where personalization comes into play.

I'm glad I found this message board, I enjoy these types of discussions.