Why do people seem to bash "healthy"eating?

Just this afternoon a newer member on a new thread asked about vegetables because she was going to eat clean. I think it only took 4 replies before she was grilled as to why she wanted to eat clean. Honestly, other members don't realize how they come across. One simple question regarding vegetables and already it becomes a defend why you want to eat clean? It is no one's business why she wants to eat clean! The question was about vegetables. Anyway, anyone who mentions anything about eating clean is immediately put on the hot seat. And to make matters worse, if the member who says they eat clean doesn't provide some type of justification, links to why eating clean is better and open their diary things get worse. Honestly, these folks putting those who eat anything other than the SAD need to get a grip!

Why the assumption that the people who were asking her why she eats clean all eat the SAD?

Dichotomous thinking is faulty logic and leads to long drawn-out threads like these.

Dichotomous thinking = putting people (or things) into one of two categories, generally two extremes... people in this debate get polarised into "IIFYM/junk food warriors/people who eat nothing but junk" and "clean eaters/healthy eaters/people who systematically avoid all junk food" - your assumption that anyone who's questioning someone who says they eats clean must be eating the standard American diet is the result of such dichotomous thinking. And it's bad logic.... just because someone advises people that they can enjoy some "junk" food so long as they stick to their macro and calorie goals, it does not mean they themselves eat huge amounts of junk food, or that they're advising others to eat huge amounts of junk food....just that they can eat it if it fits in their calorie/macro goals.

It's interesting that the clean eaters who exercise dichotomous thinking with regards to people who advise others they don't have to give up all "junk" food, also have dichotomous thinking about food, i.e. classifying food into "healthy" and "junk" and striving to get all their diet from the "healthy" category and abstain from the "junk" category............ but foods don't fit into two extremes like this...... food generally falls on a continuum from extremely nutritious to empty calories. And most of the food that's classified as "Junk" doesn't actually fall at the empty calories end of the scale either... burgers are very nutritious - they contain protein, fats, carbohydrates, vitamins and minerals. The problem is that they're easy to overeat on and they don't contain much fibre. A diet consisting of only burgers is going to be unbalanced, and therefore unhealthy. But if you're getting fibre from other sources and a wider range of vitamins and minerals from other sources, then including a burger in your diet, while also watching your calories, is not unhealthy. Even foods that are genuinely empty calories (meaning they give you calories and sugar but nothing else, e.g. boiled sweets, gummy bears) - nothing wrong with having a few every now and then if the rest of your diet includes all the nutrition your body needs and you log the calories.

People don't fit neatly into categories. The diet of someone who does IIFYM properly is probably no different than someone who eats 80/20 clean or even 90/10 clean. And re the assumption about the SAD - a lot of people on this site are not even American... I eat a combination of Arabic, British, American and Indian food... that might be considered to be typically British but it's not typically American. And my diet contains plenty of protein, moderate amounts of fat and carbs, plenty of vitamins and minerals (I try to get my 7 servings of fruit and veg a day - as advised by the British health authorities) and also plenty of fibre. And I drink lots of water. So if I'm going to go to KFC or Dairy Queen or get Lebanese or Iranian takeaway once a week or once a fortnight, then I'll see that as a boost to my protein intake and a reason to be careful with fats and carbs for the rest of the day. I call it IIFYM, someone else will call how I eat 80/20 clean. Point is I'm happy and healthy and my way of eating is sustainable. And I get to eat DQ chocolate chunk frozen yoghurt every couple of weeks or so. and also that people don't fit neatly into categories regarding how they eat.


Most of what is perceived by the OP and other people on this thread as "bashing healthy eating" is actually an attempt to counteract dichotomous thinking, i.e. getting people to realise that a healthy diet is about balance and that it's possible to be healthy and lose weight and eat foods classified as "junk" by some, and that there's no reason to deprive yourself as long as you're careful about fitting it into your macro and calorie goals.

You were doing so good, and then...

Choosing not to eat junk is now self-deprivation? Perhaps YOU have an unhealthy relationship with food*

* Absolutely hate that phrase, since it just screams Tumblr-esque stupidity.

The bottom line is that creating a caloric deficit will cause you to lose weight, no matter what foods you eat. However, 300 calories of lean protein is going to satisfy you and keep you fuller a lot longer than 300 calories of french fries. So say what you will, but eating healthy most of the time (with treats here and there) is just smarter and sets you up for success.

You know what's likely even *more* satiating?

300 calories of not-lean protein.



(Sorry, but this whole "lean protein" phrase is one of my triggers.)

No one is bashing healthy eating. What's mainly being said is moderation, stay away from extremes. Processed foods are not what made us obese, overconsumption is. But it's when people are going to the extreme and saying don't eat anything that has more than 5 ingredients or comes in a box.... that sets people up for failure.

This.

I'd find 300 calories of lean meat over fatty meat more saiting, I'd say.

300 calories of lean cheap meat is around 300g.
300 calories of fatty meat can easily be 100g.

I am hoping to work more fatty meat into my diet - it's cheaper if nothing else - but trying to not go too high on my high calorie days still, which of course is the time it's easier.

I'd find 300 calories of lean meat over fatty meat more saiting, I'd say.

300 calories of lean cheap meat is around 300g.
300 calories of fatty meat can easily be 100g.

I am hoping to work more fatty meat into my diet - it's cheaper if nothing else - but trying to not go too high on my high calorie days still, which of course is the time it's easier.

Satiety <> food mass.

A high concentration of protein by itself will provide the same insulin spike that leads to hunger shortly after as a high carb meal. I believe that fat is more satiating for this very reason (and because it tempers this spike). Or at least I think that's how it works.

My biggest problem with the phrase "lean protein" is that I suspect most people say it out of habit without even realizing it because it has been ingrained into our thinking from the old "eating fat makes you fat" days.

Just this afternoon a newer member on a new thread asked about vegetables because she was going to eat clean. I think it only took 4 replies before she was grilled as to why she wanted to eat clean. Honestly, other members don't realize how they come across. One simple question regarding vegetables and already it becomes a defend why you want to eat clean? It is no one's business why she wants to eat clean! The question was about vegetables. Anyway, anyone who mentions anything about eating clean is immediately put on the hot seat. And to make matters worse, if the member who says they eat clean doesn't provide some type of justification, links to why eating clean is better and open their diary things get worse. Honestly, these folks putting those who eat anything other than the SAD need to get a grip!

Why the assumption that the people who were asking her why she eats clean all eat the SAD?

Dichotomous thinking is faulty logic and leads to long drawn-out threads like these.

Dichotomous thinking = putting people (or things) into one of two categories, generally two extremes... people in this debate get polarised into "IIFYM/junk food warriors/people who eat nothing but junk" and "clean eaters/healthy eaters/people who systematically avoid all junk food" - your assumption that anyone who's questioning someone who says they eats clean must be eating the standard American diet is the result of such dichotomous thinking. And it's bad logic.... just because someone advises people that they can enjoy some "junk" food so long as they stick to their macro and calorie goals, it does not mean they themselves eat huge amounts of junk food, or that they're advising others to eat huge amounts of junk food....just that they can eat it if it fits in their calorie/macro goals.

It's interesting that the clean eaters who exercise dichotomous thinking with regards to people who advise others they don't have to give up all "junk" food, also have dichotomous thinking about food, i.e. classifying food into "healthy" and "junk" and striving to get all their diet from the "healthy" category and abstain from the "junk" category............ but foods don't fit into two extremes like this...... food generally falls on a continuum from extremely nutritious to empty calories. And most of the food that's classified as "Junk" doesn't actually fall at the empty calories end of the scale either... burgers are very nutritious - they contain protein, fats, carbohydrates, vitamins and minerals. The problem is that they're easy to overeat on and they don't contain much fibre. A diet consisting of only burgers is going to be unbalanced, and therefore unhealthy. But if you're getting fibre from other sources and a wider range of vitamins and minerals from other sources, then including a burger in your diet, while also watching your calories, is not unhealthy. Even foods that are genuinely empty calories (meaning they give you calories and sugar but nothing else, e.g. boiled sweets, gummy bears) - nothing wrong with having a few every now and then if the rest of your diet includes all the nutrition your body needs and you log the calories.

People don't fit neatly into categories. The diet of someone who does IIFYM properly is probably no different than someone who eats 80/20 clean or even 90/10 clean. And re the assumption about the SAD - a lot of people on this site are not even American... I eat a combination of Arabic, British, American and Indian food... that might be considered to be typically British but it's not typically American. And my diet contains plenty of protein, moderate amounts of fat and carbs, plenty of vitamins and minerals (I try to get my 7 servings of fruit and veg a day - as advised by the British health authorities) and also plenty of fibre. And I drink lots of water. So if I'm going to go to KFC or Dairy Queen or get Lebanese or Iranian takeaway once a week or once a fortnight, then I'll see that as a boost to my protein intake and a reason to be careful with fats and carbs for the rest of the day. I call it IIFYM, someone else will call how I eat 80/20 clean. Point is I'm happy and healthy and my way of eating is sustainable. And I get to eat DQ chocolate chunk frozen yoghurt every couple of weeks or so. and also that people don't fit neatly into categories regarding how they eat.


Most of what is perceived by the OP and other people on this thread as "bashing healthy eating" is actually an attempt to counteract dichotomous thinking, i.e. getting people to realise that a healthy diet is about balance and that it's possible to be healthy and lose weight and eat foods classified as "junk" by some, and that there's no reason to deprive yourself as long as you're careful about fitting it into your macro and calorie goals.

You were doing so good, and then...

Choosing not to eat junk is now self-deprivation? Perhaps YOU have an unhealthy relationship with food*

* Absolutely hate that phrase, since it just screams Tumblr-esque stupidity.

Where did I say that choosing not to eat "junk" food is self-deprivation? Nowhere. I said it's *possible* to eat these foods that some people (not me) classify as "junk".... not *mandatory* LOL.... and what foods do I consider junk food? None of them, I avoid using that term (and put it in "s when I have to use it such as in debates about "junk" food). How can I consider it mandatory for people to consume a category of food when I don't even consider the categorsation valid to begin with?

if there are foods that you really want to eat but you deny yourself those foods out of the mistaken belief that you can't be healthy or lose fat if you eat them, then yes that's self-deprivation. This only applies to food that you *actually really want* to eat. It doesn't apply to food that you don't want to eat. Very obvious statement is very obvious... but this is MFP so I guess having to state the obvious is necessary sometimes....

I really want to eat Reece's Peanut Butter cups but I won't do it because I know I will end up binging on the whole bag! So instead I make my own version with extra dark chocolate, coconut oil and peanut butter. Does that mean I am depriving myself because im not eating the actual 'Reece's' and instead opting to make my own with half the calories? I try to avoid processed where I can.

Edit to say I actually like mine a lot better {not to toot my own horn}, and am totally content with eating just one.

clean foods would be better for your body instead of processed crap.
i am working with my treatment team to break labels off good and bad food. as someone recovering from an eating disorder, i have to look at it as food is good in moderation, and to not be scared of "bad" foods. of course this doesn't apply to me, and if i could do it without issues i would prefer to live off of fruits veg beans and whole grains. but for me that is not possible, and it is better off to not have good or bad labels.
but generally, it is good to put healthy clean foods in your body.

I think people read judgment in the word "clean". "Clean" is simply a term for chosing minimally processed, high nutrient foods.

There is a "Clean Eating Group" on MFP if you want more support.

Best of success in your weight loss journey.

People don't bash eating in a way that is actually healthy. They bash the assertions that only a very narrow type of eating is "healthy."

clean foods would be better for your body instead of processed crap.
i am working with my treatment team to break labels off good and bad food. as someone recovering from an eating disorder, i have to look at it as food is good in moderation, and to not be scared of "bad" foods. of course this doesn't apply to me, and if i could do it without issues i would prefer to live off of fruits veg beans and whole grains. but for me that is not possible, and it is better off to not have good or bad labels.
but generally, it is good to put healthy clean foods in your body.