Eating Clean - No Such Thing
Replies
-
These threads are always fun. Especially given the context of everyone's tickers. For the most part it is a bunch of fat clean eaters going at it with post goal IIFYMers.0
-
These threads are always fun. Especially given the context of everyone's tickers. For the most part it is a bunch of fat clean eaters going at it with post goal IIFYMers.
Spot on lol0 -
i know this. its harder to go over ur cals when eating clean foods. u dont need so much self control. but when eating bonbons and poptarts its hard to stop.when was the last anyone saw an obese person who eats clean?
Obese people are obese because they are eating above their daily calorie intake. Not because of what they eat. Seriously..... I give up.
I see we've never met. I was an overweight teen eating home cooked more or less clean foods. My mom made all of her good from scratch, starting with the most basic of ingredients.
And then I ate it all. And then I was 15 and 200+ pounds and had no idea how I got there, because I wasn't even really allowed to eat processed stuff, which is what I'd always heard made people get fat. Surly I didn't get fat eating carrot sticks and homemade chicken stew! ...except that is exactly what happened.
And then I started eating less, my mom loosened up and let me become a brownie a day eater, and I lost all kinds of weight. Then I got married and started eating like a man and put a bit back on, and now I'm losing again (While still being a brownie and ice cream everyday eater.)
This is me as well, except not the growing up part, I cooked all of my own food, kept minimal junk food in the house, and even when I had it didn't care to eat it much, but home cooked meals I ate a lot of, I made my mashed potatoes from scratch (no boxed kinds) ect, I cooked with real ingredients, but I realllllly enjoyed my cooking so I ate a lot of it lol you can definitley get overweight eating 'cleaner' foods. I eat more junk food now (some sort of treat almost every night) than I did before i started losing weight
0 -
These threads are always fun. Especially given the context of everyone's tickers. For the most part it is a bunch of fat clean eaters going at it with post goal IIFYMers.
There is a true cause of obesity in America due to the fact people tend to eat til satisfied. There is some truth behind true clean eating.
There is a mental aspect of hunger rather than complete energy. This is based due to satiation. There are some things to consider about why people tend to diet much easier on eating "clean foods"
People overeat calories due to the processed food not being truly satiating as unprocessed food. This is something to think about why paleo is very effective for those who dont even count calories.
Physical cause of weight cause is thermodynamics but calories alone does not signal your body to stop eating or when not to feel hungry. The easiest way to fight hunger at a high deficit is unprocessed foods. I dont care what anyone's opinion is, the hard evidence is that unprocessed foods in the satiety index study gives much more fullness than anything else. If we could truly run off of calories to control our hunger I dare you to eat poptarts 3x a day and 6 protein shakes the rest and let me know how much more satisfying 5 eggs 10 apples and 6 protein shakes would do against it.
Dont get me wrong. I ate chik fil a meal today and just finished a beer. May go for another one. I am just stating there is more to IIFYM than people want to hear. Atleast in terms of dieting.
There are other components of health rather than macronutrients alone and people should not forget that.0 -
There are other components of health rather than macronutrients alone and people should not forget that.
You have to eat downright idiotic to have problems with the other components. Something like one of the strawmen the clean eaters are always going to war with (subsisting for example entirely on Pop Tarts and protein powder).
Having good variety, which is also a trait of those with functioning taste buds that enjoy food, easily takes care of the other components thing. Trying to subsist on one of the strawmen diets would be downright nasty and disgusting within a day or two.0 -
I wasnt attacking you.There are other components of health rather than macronutrients alone and people should not forget that.
You have to eat downright idiotic to have problems with the other components. Something like one of the strawmen the clean eaters are always going to war with (subsisting for example entirely on Pop Tarts and protein powder).
Having good variety, which is also a trait of those with functioning taste buds that enjoy food, easily takes care of the other components thing. Trying to subsist on one of the strawmen diets would be downright nasty and disgusting within a day or two.
btw
It isnt a strawman arguement when I am talking about satiation. There is a comparison of fullness that is achieved via food. I simply talked about the mental aspect of hunger and why certain calories are much more filling. Satiation is something that not many people mention and is one of my signature things I consider when purchasing food.
What other components do you think there are?0 -
I am fed up of people saying there is no such thing as "clean" or "dirty" foods... there really is.. yes you can eat watever the fook u want and loose weight if it is within your caloric goals, yes you can gain muscles while bulking if you are within your caloric goals. But! you will not get the same results you would get if you ate "clean" (cutting out the processed crap)... I dont care who you are.. I have been on both sides of the fence, and I can tell you. You simply cannot get the same results while eating crap as you can while eating un processed healthy foods. Hence I do not hate the whole "clean" and "dirty" foods termanology (and that is all it is.. termanology) and the only people who do are the ones who want to justify their pizza, chips and tub of icecream a day diet.0
-
Food fads..............there will always be someone to tell you that you are eating the wrong foods. Remember when butter was bad and margarine was the answer ,now marge is bad and butter better. What is organic? Fertilizers are NPK all these occur naturally in the soil.if you add phosphate is that non organic. Was once told at a market that the dates were organic!!!! But didn't know how they were grown.
Try eating all your food with chopsticks, maybe the Chinese have the answer.0 -
Food fads..............there will always be someone to tell you that you are eating the wrong foods. Remember when butter was bad and margarine was the answer ,now marge is bad and butter better. What is organic? Fertilizers are NPK all these occur naturally in the soil.if you add phosphate is that non organic. Was once told at a market that the dates were organic!!!! But didn't know how they were grown.
Try eating all your food with chopsticks, maybe the Chinese have the answer.0 -
You need to do some homework before you spout nonsense not everyone wants chemicals dont gripe at others for eating how they want and do your own thing get off your high horse.0
-
But! you will not get the same results you would get if you ate "clean" (cutting out the processed crap)... I dont care who you are..
I'm not the only one who disproves your claim.0 -
I wish people would stop caring who calls what clean or unclean. Everyone has an opinion (yours is one as well) and it doesn't change anything.
THIS, so much0 -
You need to do some homework before you spout nonsense not everyone wants chemicals dont gripe at others for eating how they want and do your own thing get off your high horse.
Spouting nonsense? Pot meet kettle, unless you can provide a list of all these chemical free foods people are eating0 -
But! you will not get the same results you would get if you ate "clean" (cutting out the processed crap)... I dont care who you are..
*pics deleted for space*
I'm not the only one who disproves your claim.
Your pics don't technically disprove the claim. The post didn't say you couldn't get results. It said you will not get the same results. So, unless you returned to your original size / shape and ate clean, the claim can not be proven or disproven.0 -
But! you will not get the same results you would get if you ate "clean" (cutting out the processed crap)... I dont care who you are..
I'm not the only one who disproves your claim.
Congrats, guy, that's success!0 -
But! you will not get the same results you would get if you ate "clean" (cutting out the processed crap)... I dont care who you are..
*pics deleted for space*
I'm not the only one who disproves your claim.
Your pics don't technically disprove the claim. The post didn't say you couldn't get results. It said you will not get the same results. So, unless you returned to your original size / shape and ate clean, the claim can not be proven or disproven.
You can't possibly know that either. You can't prove his results would be any different without returning him to the same weight and having him eat "clean".0 -
That's funny, looking at the macros on a bag of Cheetos. I see carbs, protein, and fat.... no mention of clean or dirty
Cheetos are the devil. Especially those Natural Cheetos. They are tricksy. Don't believe the lies. Run away!0 -
But! you will not get the same results you would get if you ate "clean" (cutting out the processed crap)... I dont care who you are..
*pics deleted for space*
I'm not the only one who disproves your claim.
Your pics don't technically disprove the claim. The post didn't say you couldn't get results. It said you will not get the same results. So, unless you returned to your original size / shape and ate clean, the claim can not be proven or disproven.
Which results do you think would have been improved? The body composition, where I lost 12 lbs of fat while gaining 0.5 lb of lean mass? Or maybe the cholesterol, where every measure improved significantly, bringing everything from borderline to optimal? As far as I can tell, my results are about as good as could possibly be expected for a 32 year old male.0 -
But! you will not get the same results you would get if you ate "clean" (cutting out the processed crap)... I dont care who you are..
*pics deleted for space*
I'm not the only one who disproves your claim.
Your pics don't technically disprove the claim. The post didn't say you couldn't get results. It said you will not get the same results. So, unless you returned to your original size / shape and ate clean, the claim can not be proven or disproven.
You can't possibly know that either. You can't prove his results would be any different without returning him to the same weight and having him eat "clean".
Um, yeah. Isn't that what I just said?0 -
But! you will not get the same results you would get if you ate "clean" (cutting out the processed crap)... I dont care who you are..
*pics deleted for space*
I'm not the only one who disproves your claim.
Your pics don't technically disprove the claim. The post didn't say you couldn't get results. It said you will not get the same results. So, unless you returned to your original size / shape and ate clean, the claim can not be proven or disproven.
Which results do you think would have been improved? The body composition, where I lost 12 lbs of fat while gaining 0.5 lb of lean mass? Or maybe the cholesterol, where every measure improved significantly, bringing everything from borderline to optimal? As far as I can tell, my results are about as good as could possibly be expected for a 32 year old male.
I didn't say I thought anything would have improved. What I or anyone else thinks would also not prove or disprove the statement.0 -
But! you will not get the same results you would get if you ate "clean" (cutting out the processed crap)... I dont care who you are..
*pics deleted for space*
I'm not the only one who disproves your claim.
Your pics don't technically disprove the claim. The post didn't say you couldn't get results. It said you will not get the same results. So, unless you returned to your original size / shape and ate clean, the claim can not be proven or disproven.
You can't possibly know that either. You can't prove his results would be any different without returning him to the same weight and having him eat "clean".
Um, yeah. Isn't that what I just said?
Sorry, skimmed. So because it can't be proven or disproven that you can't get better results one way or another why wouldn't anyone want to choose the one where they are more likely to succeed long term? *shrugs*0 -
But! you will not get the same results you would get if you ate "clean" (cutting out the processed crap)... I dont care who you are..
*pics deleted for space*
I'm not the only one who disproves your claim.
Your pics don't technically disprove the claim. The post didn't say you couldn't get results. It said you will not get the same results. So, unless you returned to your original size / shape and ate clean, the claim can not be proven or disproven.
Which results do you think would have been improved? The body composition, where I lost 12 lbs of fat while gaining 0.5 lb of lean mass? Or maybe the cholesterol, where every measure improved significantly, bringing everything from borderline to optimal? As far as I can tell, my results are about as good as could possibly be expected for a 32 year old male.
I didn't say I thought anything would have improved. What I or anyone else thinks would also not prove or disprove the statement.
Right. Sure.
The images and data posted prove pretty conclusively that the quoted poster's claim is bunk. To anyone who doesn't just really WANT them to be false, at any rate.0 -
But! you will not get the same results you would get if you ate "clean" (cutting out the processed crap)... I dont care who you are..
*pics deleted for space*
I'm not the only one who disproves your claim.
Your pics don't technically disprove the claim. The post didn't say you couldn't get results. It said you will not get the same results. So, unless you returned to your original size / shape and ate clean, the claim can not be proven or disproven.
Which results do you think would have been improved? The body composition, where I lost 12 lbs of fat while gaining 0.5 lb of lean mass? Or maybe the cholesterol, where every measure improved significantly, bringing everything from borderline to optimal? As far as I can tell, my results are about as good as could possibly be expected for a 32 year old male.
I didn't say I thought anything would have improved. What I or anyone else thinks would also not prove or disprove the statement.
Right. Sure.
The images and data posted prove pretty conclusively that the quoted poster's claim is bunk. To anyone who doesn't just really WANT them to be false, at any rate.
Can you explain how you proved that your results would the same had you eaten clean?0 -
You can't possibly know that either. You can't prove his results would be any different without returning him to the same weight and having him eat "clean".
For that you would need something like, a control, perhaps?
That kind of thinking will never catch on....
His results are very good though, without doubt.0 -
If you dropped your hotdog in the sand at the beach, would it not be dirty?
But of course, but I would still call the 5 second rule!! Little dirt never killed anybody.... :drinker:
My momma always told me, "we all gonna eat 5 lbs of dirt before we die. Might as well enjoy it! :drinker:0 -
I don't understand the OP at all. What does food making you fat have to do with clean eating?
Hah!0 -
All I know is, after reading these myriad threads on the clean-eating wars, that MFP is not a place where you will be supported in doing what works for you. If I am eating in a way that is different from you, I suppose I should keep that to myself before I am attacked for being ignorant and told that I should do it a different way. Better I close my diary before someone discovers that I lean towards clean eating or that I eat too dirty. Why is this a "debate"? Why does OP even care? Is he (or any of you) a doctor or scientist that has stumbled upon some universal truth that applies to all of us? Regardless of your side, believing your answer is the one that is invariably "right" for the rest of the 7 billion people on the planet is arrogant. Support one another is whatever he/she discovers works and is doable.0
-
His results are very good though, without doubt.
Agree 100% Very impressive.0 -
Um ya it's even more critical that farmers are
Genetically modifying organisms for produce to allure CLEAN EATERS. Silk soy beans organic goods cheap foods breast milk. This organism causes long time defects. Cancer diabetes infertility & so much more. Check out The Non-GMO Project...0 -
All I know is, after reading these myriad threads on the clean-eating wars, that MFP is not a place where you will be supported in doing what works for you. If I am eating in a way that is different from you, I suppose I should keep that to myself before I am attacked for being ignorant and told that I should do it a different way. Better I close my diary before someone discovers that I lean towards clean eating or that I eat too dirty. Why is this a "debate"?
^^^ This.
(And as far as I can tell, it would be a mistake to call this a 'debate.' It seems like bunch of very, very determined people talking at or passed one another with the belief that if they repeat something just one more time they'll 'win.')0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K 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
- 426 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
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions