Clean Eating Bashing?

Nobody's bashing clean eating. People are bashing people who put themselves on a pedestal for "eating clean" 365 days out of the year and think they have the right to tell people like me that they can't have a snack wrap at McDonald's a couple times every month. People will be on your butt the second you act superior about ANYTHING. Eliminating processed foods from your diet entirely does not make you a better person and most people know this, but there's always someone in every group ready to act like their way of eating makes them top-notch. Great, you can afford organic, fresh, unprocessed everything all of time. I can't. So what?

I won't tell you to start eating McDonald's a couple times a month and you don't tell me to stop. It's simple. I'm working on my weight and I have really cleaned up my diet, but it's not 100% clean and I'm sick of hearing that it's not enough from people who can live out of their own personal garden every day of the year and get everything else at these super-awesome health foods stores right down the street. I live in Wisconsin and I rent an apartment, so it's always cold, I don't own the land, and the best grocery store I have is Copps or Walmart.

What it boils down to is both sides (and everyone in between) saying "mind your own business" and everyone keeps yapping. Me included now, I guess. Oh well, just my two cents. I'll leave it at that.

(Edited to fix a grammatical error)

Wow, just skimming through these posts, I see that even those who choose to 'eat clean' all have different definitions of what that entails.

To say you 'eat clean' is meaningless because of this. There is no ultimate definition of what is 'clean eating'.

No one knowingly ingests pesticides, parasites or those ever ethereal 'toxins'. No one.

/thread.

Did we ever figure out how much money the clean eaters where going to save in obamacare money?

Since most diet related diseases take many years to develop, and so many other factors such as lifestyle, family history, and chance probabilities would come into play, that would be a very difficult amount to figure.

Implying that people who don't "eat clean" will develop diet-related diseases.

How else would one save money on healthcare except to avoid disease? And how else would clean eating affect disease, other than diet related disease?

It looks like you're treating "clean eating leads to fewer diseases" as a postulate instead of a hypothesis.

It "looks like" what you choose to see, and I can't control what you choose to infer from a simple post.

A poster asked if we had figured their healthcare savings from clean eating. I postulated nothing other than it would be hard to figure. The rest was all you.

But you're assuming it would be something other than zero

Reading minds now, are we?

If that's how you refer to reading...

Still you reading and you infering. I never said any of the things you suggest.

I inferred it because you implied it.

You assumed there is a difference in disease between clean and not clean. It is an implicit assumption to your whole post.

Nope, still just you projecting. That could, I suppose, be true of the poster who asked about the savings (I took her post as a sarcastic inference to a previous post, but that could just be me projecting). I only said that it would be hard to calculate, no reference to outcome was made or implied.

Dizzying...

Wow what a nice pattern of quadrilaterals! LOL

Yeah - kind of have to agree. Lots of things are toxic at high doses and are just fine, or even beneficial, at lower doses. I knowingly eat those things. I also knowingly eat potentially dangerous bacteria (some of which produce toxins) and viruses.

Hey, I'm a microbiologist by training. I'm not going to subject my food to the procedures you'd need to guarantee I never eat any dangerous microbes.

this place definitely ain't named "MyScienceBasedFactsPal" either

Hahahaha TRUTH!

I eat clean[er] because most of my "healthy/fit" family members came down with and/or have died from cancer, so I have a conspiracy theory that all the fake stuff they put in "food" gets stuck and is unable to be processed through our bodies, and that contributes to cancer.

maybe it's because I don't have children/no one would mourn me/I haven't passed "my legacy" onto anyone, but I don't want to be 60 and using my retirement funds to pay for chemo and radiation.

I want to live!

...so I eat real food as much as possible.

People have been dying of cancer for tens of thousands of years, at least. The ancient Egyptian Empire and the Ancient Greeks both wrote about them. Hippocrates actually named it 3000 years ago.

It's got nothing to do with the food, as they certainly didn't have "all that fake stuff" (whatever that even means) back then.

Actually people have been adulterating food forever too.

I agree! This is myFITNESSpal, not myWEIGHTLOSSpal. Eating clean contributes to fitness in more ways than eating twinkies at a deficit does.

Why does eating twinkies mean you aren't fit?

If you can leave a twinky on a shelf for 10 years and still eat it... that isn't food, it's a chemical **** storm. Eating clean(er) has benefits to the body far beyond the waist line! Do your research mate and see the benefits!

I agree! This is myFITNESSpal, not myWEIGHTLOSSpal. Eating clean contributes to fitness in more ways than eating twinkies at a deficit does.

Why does eating twinkies mean you aren't fit?

If you can leave a twinky on a shelf for 10 years and still eat it... that isn't food, it's a chemical **** storm. Eating clean(er) has benefits to the body far beyond the waist line! Do your research mate and see the benefits!

I've had some dried beans in a canning jar for quite some time. They still look fresh.

I see some people on here that survive exclusively on fast food and I really don't want to pay for your Obamacare for you.

Winner

Did we ever figure out how much money the clean eaters where going to save in obamacare money?

Since most diet related diseases take many years to develop, and so many other factors such as lifestyle, family history, and chance probabilities would come into play, that would be a very difficult amount to figure.

Implying that people who don't "eat clean" will develop diet-related diseases.

How else would one save money on healthcare except to avoid disease? And how else would clean eating affect disease, other than diet related disease?

It looks like you're treating "clean eating leads to fewer diseases" as a postulate instead of a hypothesis.

It "looks like" what you choose to see, and I can't control what you choose to infer from a simple post.

A poster asked if we had figured their healthcare savings from clean eating. I postulated nothing other than it would be hard to figure. The rest was all you.

But you're assuming it would be something other than zero

Reading minds now, are we?

If that's how you refer to reading...

Still you reading and you infering. I never said any of the things you suggest.

I inferred it because you implied it.

You assumed there is a difference in disease between clean and not clean. It is an implicit assumption to your whole post.

Nope, still just you projecting. That could, I suppose, be true of the poster who asked about the savings (I took her post as a sarcastic inference to a previous post, but that could just be me projecting). I only said that it would be hard to calculate, no reference to outcome was made or implied.

Dizzying...

Wow what a nice pattern of quadrilaterals! LOL

they are pretty squares...I was referring to the OP who stated she didnt want to pay the Obamacare for the junk food eaters. It caused me to laugh, and so I wanted to know if anyone figured out the hard numbers yet. Have to be a few bean counters in the bunch.