The Clean Eating Myth
ndj1979
Posts: 29,136 Member
I have been asked this a few times over the past days, or it has been posed in a general sense in some threads, so I am going to put it out here to discuss in this thread.
The question goes something like this. If you eat 1500 calories of clean food, and are in a calorie deficit, then you will lose more weight than the person that is eating 1500 calories of say a moderate diet that includes processed food, nutrient dense foods, and some ice cream and/or other treats, and is also in a calorie deficit < It is usually phrased as a question, but sometimes as a statement.
So anyway, the ridiculous premise is that if Person A (Lets says a 35 year old 200 pound 5'10 male) eats clean food and is in a calorie deficit; they will lose more than Person B (also a 35 year old 200 pound 5-10 male). For the purpose of this discussion Person A and B have no medical condition; both Person A & B engage in strength training four times a week for an hour a session; both person A & B are in a 500 calorie daily deficit.
Understanding that 100 calories of carrots = 100 calories of donuts from an energy perspective. However, they are not nutritionally the same. What matters is the context of ones diet and that you are hitting micros and macros.
so anyway, who will lose more weigh Person A, or Person B?
My answer is C they will both lose relatively the save weight within about +/- five pounds of one another.
discuss….
The question goes something like this. If you eat 1500 calories of clean food, and are in a calorie deficit, then you will lose more weight than the person that is eating 1500 calories of say a moderate diet that includes processed food, nutrient dense foods, and some ice cream and/or other treats, and is also in a calorie deficit < It is usually phrased as a question, but sometimes as a statement.
So anyway, the ridiculous premise is that if Person A (Lets says a 35 year old 200 pound 5'10 male) eats clean food and is in a calorie deficit; they will lose more than Person B (also a 35 year old 200 pound 5-10 male). For the purpose of this discussion Person A and B have no medical condition; both Person A & B engage in strength training four times a week for an hour a session; both person A & B are in a 500 calorie daily deficit.
Understanding that 100 calories of carrots = 100 calories of donuts from an energy perspective. However, they are not nutritionally the same. What matters is the context of ones diet and that you are hitting micros and macros.
so anyway, who will lose more weigh Person A, or Person B?
My answer is C they will both lose relatively the save weight within about +/- five pounds of one another.
discuss….
0
Replies
-
Person A will lose more, as person B will retain toxinz that make them fat.0
-
i dont see anything to discuss about for me...i believe they eat 1500 calories so lose the same ( if they are identical)
Fitness wise or health wise is a whole other discussion.0 -
But would the person eating all the processed foods need a cleanse/detox?0
-
In before the lock?
I agree with you. There might be differences due to TEF depending on food choice, but... meh.
This whole subject gets so fraught with "dem feels" and moving goal posts on what exactly processed and clean means that I just can't even.0 -
This myth was proven false by a professor of nutrition. His procedure is called "The Twinkie Diet". He ate nothing but twinkies and doritos and junk food and lost 27 pounds in two months.
http://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/11/08/twinkie.diet.professor/
There are certainly health benefits to eating a balanced diet and all the right vitamins and minerals. But if you are only talking about weight loss, then the only thing that matters is calories in vs. calories out. It doesn't matter what you eat. It matters how much of it you eat.
0 -
mamapeach910 wrote: »In before the lock?
I agree with you. There might be differences due to TEF depending on food choice, but... meh.
This whole subject gets so fraught with "dem feels" and moving goal posts on what exactly processed and clean means that I just can't even.
I was not about to define clean or processed….
Yes, TEF may account for some difference. I assume if they have the same macros that, that would not come into play …but I doubt two people are going to have the same exact macros...0 -
This myth was proven false by a professor of nutrition. His procedure is called "The Twinkie Diet". He ate nothing but twinkies and doritos and junk food and lost 27 pounds in two months.
http://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/11/08/twinkie.diet.professor/
There are certainly health benefits to eating a balanced diet and all the right vitamins and minerals. But if you are only talking about weight loss, then the only thing that matters is calories in vs. calories out. It doesn't matter what you eat. It matters how much of it you eat.
I believe he also ate some nutrient dense foods though, right? And also took multi vitamins..?
0 -
This myth was proven false by a professor of nutrition. His procedure is called "The Twinkie Diet". He ate nothing but twinies and doritos and junk food and lost 27 pounds in two months.
http://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/11/08/twinkie.diet.professor/
There are certainly health benefits to eating a balanced diet and all the right vitamins and minerals. But if you are only talking about weight loss, then the only thing that matters is calories in vs. calories out. It doesn't matter what you eat. It matters how much of it you eat.
Well, that doesn't really address the point ndj is making. The latest assertions making the rounds from the clean eating crew are that you will lose MORE and FASTER eating clean than processed. They aren't asserting that you won't lose at all.
To have a parallel disproof here, Haub would have needed to also done a trial diet of "clean" eating for the same time frame at the same calorie level.
0 -
TheOwlhouseDesigns wrote: »i dont see anything to discuss about for me...i believe they eat 1500 calories so lose the same ( if they are identical)
Fitness wise or health wise is a whole other discussion.
If Person B hits their micros, do you think they would be "healthy"?0 -
yes0
-
0
-
mamapeach910 wrote: »This myth was proven false by a professor of nutrition. His procedure is called "The Twinkie Diet". He ate nothing but twinies and doritos and junk food and lost 27 pounds in two months.
http://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/11/08/twinkie.diet.professor/
There are certainly health benefits to eating a balanced diet and all the right vitamins and minerals. But if you are only talking about weight loss, then the only thing that matters is calories in vs. calories out. It doesn't matter what you eat. It matters how much of it you eat.
Well, that doesn't really address the point ndj is making. The latest assertions making the rounds from the clean eating crew are that you will lose MORE and FASTER eating clean than processed. They aren't asserting that you won't lose at all.
To have a parallel disproof here, Haub would have needed to also done a trial diet of "clean" eating for the same time frame at the same calorie level.
yes, which of course then begs the question …what would be a "clean" diet to run parallel to the twinkie diet?0 -
But I can't even finish my 1200 calories a day.....unless it's in donut boxes .0
-
I agree, it doesn't matter as long as both people run a calorie deficit.0
-
I would tend to say that, generally speaking, 1500 calories is 1500 calories. (note "generally") The benefits of a clean diet far outweigh that of a diet consisting of processed foods and snacks. Creating a 3500 deficit will, in fact, result in a 1lb loss no matter how you arrive at the deficit.
0 -
I believe he also ate some nutrient dense foods though, right? And also took multi vitamins..?
Yes:
"Two-thirds of his total intake came from junk food. He also took a multivitamin pill and drank a protein shake daily. And he ate vegetables, typically a can of green beans or three to four celery stalks."
It still disproves the myth though. 2/3 of his calories from junk food. The bottom line is still that as long as you log every single thing you put in your mouth accurately and stay within your calorie budget, you will lose weight. There's no way he would have magically started gaining if he didn't eat his celery.
0 -
curlygirlkrissie wrote: »I would tend to say that, generally speaking, 1500 calories is 1500 calories. (note "generally") The benefits of a clean diet far outweigh that of a diet consisting of processed foods and snacks. Creating a 3500 deficit will, in fact, result in a 1lb loss no matter how you arrive at the deficit.
even if that diet of processed foods and snacks hits micros and macros?0 -
mamapeach910 wrote: »This myth was proven false by a professor of nutrition. His procedure is called "The Twinkie Diet". He ate nothing but twinies and doritos and junk food and lost 27 pounds in two months.
http://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/11/08/twinkie.diet.professor/
There are certainly health benefits to eating a balanced diet and all the right vitamins and minerals. But if you are only talking about weight loss, then the only thing that matters is calories in vs. calories out. It doesn't matter what you eat. It matters how much of it you eat.
Well, that doesn't really address the point ndj is making. The latest assertions making the rounds from the clean eating crew are that you will lose MORE and FASTER eating clean than processed. They aren't asserting that you won't lose at all.
To have a parallel disproof here, Haub would have needed to also done a trial diet of "clean" eating for the same time frame at the same calorie level.
yes, which of course then begs the question …what would be a "clean" diet to run parallel to the twinkie diet?
It's gotta be kale. The kale diet.
0 -
I eat whatever i want and when I log my food I lose weight. I am not interested in eating clean. I hate cooking and I try to make my foods as fast and easy as possible. I try not to eat processed food but I would never ban it out of my diet. I like that I can eat whatever I want and still lose weight thanks keeping a food diary.0
-
Agreed. A calorie is a calorie is a calorie in terms of weight loss.0
-
You don't say whether their strength training level is exactly the same. While they are both eating the same calories at a deficit and working out, could the more nutritional ("clean") diet result in a more intense level of strength training and, therefore, result in a greater weight loss over time?
I know I have a much better workout following a healthy breakfast, rather than eating donuts (for example) which may have the same number of calories.
Definitely would be an interesting clinical study.0 -
The man vs. woman thing is where I hang up. Men burn more calories than woman at the same weight. Otherwise, I agree.
0 -
even if that diet of processed foods and snacks hits micros and macros? [/quote]
ummmm.......idk. Is this some kind of trickery? lol. I don't know much about micros and macros.
0 -
We could do an ABAB single subject design to test this.0
-
This.forgtmenot wrote: »Agreed. A calorie is a calorie is a calorie in terms of weight loss.
0 -
RaeBeeBaby wrote: »You don't say whether their strength training level is exactly the same. While they are both eating the same calories at a deficit and working out, could the more nutritional ("clean") diet result in a more intense level of strength training and, therefore, result in a greater weight loss over time?
I know I have a much better workout following a healthy breakfast, rather than eating donuts (for example) which may have the same number of calories.
I spent some time within the bodybuilding community. The people I knew who were eating bodybuilding "clean"( lean protein, brown rice, green veggies, oatmeal, etc) and did the cheat day always experienced their best workouts the day after the "cheat" day.0 -
I came across this on here awhile ago and I think that it gives a great example that clean eating doesn't guarantee weight loss.
http://www.healthylivingheavylifting.com/how-clean-eating-made-me-fat-but-ice-cream-and-subway-got-me-lean/
Personally my biggest pet peeve with the whole clean eating vs. IIFYM is the common misconception that it's all or nothing. If you don't eat clean then you must be meeting your calorie goals eating nothing but "junk".0 -
I'm going with C, they will lose approximately the same amount.
Surprised?
0 -
I believe the only time it makes a difference is if you have health issues. If you have digestive issues or intolerance it can have a massive effect on your weight.0
This discussion has been closed.
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