"Clean" vs. "unclean" eating studies?

Most of my family is in the medical field. I was a medical assistant and did nutritional counseling in the past. Here's my study. I've got FOUR years of logs, diaries, graph charts, and data to support my claim.
I started off counted calories but didn't work. Why didn't 3-2=1 anymore?
Following medical plan and more exercise (lots more) didn't help either.
Doctors kept giving me same advice and said I SHOULD be losing weight IF I was really following their advice.
I joined famous groups and lost nothing (they assumed I was cheating too. I wasn't).
Medical tests I've had done came back normal.
I began to pull apart and tweak plan after plan--and tracked carbs, proteins, variations, exercises, etc.
I needed answers because nothing was working for me anymore when same methods worked for other people.
Turning point: daughter diag with diabetes and PCOS.
Began following low glycemic index with unprocessed foods.
(wasn't big changes for me, for instance no more instant oatmeal only steel cut and honey vs nutraweet in my tea)
BINGO.I am FINALLY losing weight again.
I SUSPECT that some of us must have some kind of issues with glucose spikes - even though we're not diabetic - since calories get stored like crazy if you spike. Let's start our own study. Try the low glycemic approach with nothing processed for a month and see if the results are as dramatic as mine. I felt better and started losing right away and the ONLY thing I've done differently is go clean. I'm actually having trouble now eating enough calories.
Oh, and my grand daughter aged 9 has also lost 4 pounds in the past two weeks since we've gone clean.
A study is only as good as its data and results, don't you think?

Agreed. There should be specifics. Clean = unprocessed

unprocessed as much as humanly possibly considering what we get from the grocery stores.
Organic if available.
what else???

Yes! Are you volunteering to set up the test groups? LET"S DO OUR OWN STUDY!

Most of my family is in the medical field. I was a medical assistant and did nutritional counseling in the past. Here's my study. I've got FOUR years of logs, diaries, graph charts, and data to support my claim.
I started off counted calories but didn't work. Why didn't 3-2=1 anymore?
Following medical plan and more exercise (lots more) didn't help either.
Doctors kept giving me same advice and said I SHOULD be losing weight IF I was really following their advice.
I joined famous groups and lost nothing (they assumed I was cheating too. I wasn't).
Medical tests I've had done came back normal.
I began to pull apart and tweak plan after plan--and tracked carbs, proteins, variations, exercises, etc.
I needed answers because nothing was working for me anymore when same methods worked for other people.
Turning point: daughter diag with diabetes and PCOS.
Began following low glycemic index with unprocessed foods.
(wasn't big changes for me, for instance no more instant oatmeal only steel cut and honey vs nutraweet in my tea)
BINGO.I am FINALLY losing weight again.
I SUSPECT that some of us must have some kind of issues with glucose spikes - even though we're not diabetic - since calories get stored like crazy if you spike. Let's start our own study. Try the low glycemic approach with nothing processed for a month and see if the results are as dramatic as mine. I felt better and started losing right away and the ONLY thing I've done differently is go clean. I'm actually having trouble now eating enough calories.
Oh, and my grand daughter aged 9 has also lost 4 pounds in the past two weeks since we've gone clean.
A study is only as good as its data and results, don't you think?

A study is only as good as the design, a repeatable methodology and controls put in place. What you did isn't a study but a personal experience of n=1. Glad it worked for you, but that isn't how science works.

"...raw sugarcane is brimming with enzymes and nutrients. By contrast, refined sugar is devoid of these nutrients and the built-in enzyme systems that exist in raw sugarcane (and other naturally sweet foods, such as fruit). So when you eat a cookie made with refined sugar, your body freaks out. It knows that to properly digest the sugar, it needs these missing nutrients and the corresponding enzymes. Therefore, your body is forced to adapt by pulling stored nutrients (especially calcium) from your bones, tissues, and teeth, just to digest the sugar in the cookie you just ate. This is called leaching."

Unfortunately she does not cite a source for this info, which is why I am bringing it up. I have read and heard that certain vitamins etc don't work as well as when you get them through food. Since nutritional science is still so new, they don't really know conclusively why this is. It may be that the vitamin works most effectively in combination with something else that is present in the whole food. (ie the way calcium and vitamin d work together) This could be a potential argument for how some types of processing can have negative health consequences.

Leaching happens to some degree when other nutrients are devoid in many many applications not just refined sugar but the key to good health is to have a diverse diet that helps maintain as many nutrients as possible to minimize leaching for all those possibilities. It's a good argument though when someone is trying to promote a bias against one nutrient from the hundreds available. I would imagine if someone consumed mostly table sugar they would be in trouble.

A cookie leeches nutrients from teeth for digestion?
Do you really believe that?

I don't know what I believe. I am not a nutritionist or a scientist. That's why I brought it up for discussion. There are many things that I don't understand, and many things that haven't even been studied in depth. Quite frankly, it wouldn't really surprise me if there was some truth to this. I googled it and also found medical articles saying that meat can do the same thing. So I guess this is not always a result of the processing.

Do I think my teeth are all going to fall out and I am going to have osteoporosis from an occasional cookie? No. However, the topic of this thread was whether or not clean food has any health advantages over conventional (as some are referring to it "unclean" whatever that means...) and therefor I thought this might be relevant to discuss.

"Clean" is a marketing term.

I just came in to compliment OP, and many others in here, because for 8 pages, this has stayed relatively on topic, there seems to be a decent amount of friendly debate going on with some minds open to considering alternate view points, and most have tried to stay focused on science and less on anecdotal evidence. So far, this is one of the most neutral discussions I have ever seen on this much lauded topic - from both sides.

I hope I did not just jinx this thread.

Thanks! We've been very fortunate that some genuinely curious people without an agenda have posted. And there has been a wealth of good information...unfortunately, very little of it actually addresses the original question regarding "clean" eating studies. I think they don't exist.

I think they don't exist for the reasons that have been pointed out throughout this thread. In order to conduct a true scientific study, there needs to be test groups and control groups and the parameters guiding each of those groups need to be clear and consistent. From these 8 pages of relatively logical debate, we still have yet to find a consistent definition of "clean" and "unclean" and therefore, it will be impossible to truly measure the impacts of either style of eating in a scientific experiment.

True, but there are many different definitions and guidelines out there, and it just seems that by now someone would have come along and said "Ok, we're going to use this definition, and these parameters, and test this theory."

I was just reading up on one site's idea of clean food, and it talks about being minimally processed, as close to nature as possible. I had oatmeal for breakfast. It seems to me that oatmeal would not be clean by that definition.

If you drink milk directly from the cow it's pretty much unprocessed.
If you drink pasteurized milk (low fat, etc...) it's processed.

Is yogurt processed? And if so, it's bad? Cheese? Water?
My baby carrots come washed and are packed in citric acid - should I be worried?

"processed" is almost as random as "clean" in today's world.

Agreed. There should be specifics. Clean = unprocessed

unprocessed as much as humanly possibly considering what we get from the grocery stores.
Organic if available.
what else???

So, cooking is processing. Why are there clean recipes? Wouldn't you just eat everything raw? That's as minimally processed as it gets, right?

I guess my confusion stems mostly from the fact that we've already had the whole foods trend, which guides us to purchase fresh produce, whole grains, organic everything, minimally processed, etc. Clean is supposed to be new and different from the whole foods idea. I'm just failing to grasp how so.

Maybe clean = whole foods + organic? I don't think whole foods necessarily means organic. I think it means, rather than buying strawberry yogurt, get actual strawberries and put them on your yogurt with no extra ingredients. Basically eat food as close to it's natural state as possible- whole apples, actual chicken instead of nuggets, actual cooked grains instead of premade crackers cereal or bread...

I really don't know the paleo take on "clean food" though so I can't speak to that.

Depending on transportation and storage - "fresh" strawberries actually have a higher risk of mold and fungus than frozen ones. Oh and those "organic" strawberries? Ah, suggest you look up methyl bromide, it is still used on organic and regular strawberries in the US. Only in the US btw.

Depending on transportation and storage - "fresh" strawberries actually have a higher risk of mold and fungus than frozen ones. Oh and those "organic" strawberries? Ah, suggest you look up methyl bromide, it is still used on organic and regular strawberries in the US. Only in the US btw.

Ok, sorry my hypothetical example wasn't perfect. Hopefully you were able to understand my point though, of a pre-made food vs. using the actual whole food ingredient.

If you drink milk directly from the cow it's pretty much unprocessed.
If you drink pasteurized milk (low fat, etc...) it's processed.

Is yogurt processed? And if so, it's bad? Cheese? Water?
My baby carrots come washed and are packed in citric acid - should I be worried?

"processed" is almost as random as "clean" in today's world.

Good point, not all processing is created equal.

And btw- baby carrots are sometimes treated with chlorine. But don't worry, it's a safe amount approved by the FDA and they rinse it afterwards. No thanks. I'll take my carrots whole.

Chlorine is a necessary molecule for life. I have absolutely zero concern for residue on my carrots. Rather that than the E. coli risk I'll take that mild Milton solution wash. It's pretty much standard and absolutely safe. it's a good thing.