Welcome to Debate Club! Please be aware that this is a space for respectful debate, and that your ideas will be challenged here. Please remember to critique the argument, not the author.
What is clean eating?
Replies
-
clean eating is a term used by certain people on pay roll lol.. example, after i became certified (long ago) in nutrition we where given a list of supplements to push and using certain words like "healthier" "substitute" "better"
clean eating (the phrase) is just a marketing ploy to get you to buy more of certain foods!! and we health lovers eat it up due to fear and give in. in "real life" clean foods are common sense!! loaded baked potatoe or just a baked potatoe? bag of cheetoes or bowl of grapenuts and milk.. thats all it really is.. this is my opinion of course and we all have one lol.
I'd think that somebody who's "certified in nutrition" (whatever that means) would have a grasp of context within the overall diet rather than demonizing individual foods/meals. Subsisting entirely on ice cream, pop tarts, cheetos and cookies would be a bad thing, but there's absolutely nothing detrimental about eating them in moderation on an occasional basis if one is staying within their calorie goals and meeting their macro/micronutrient requirements.2 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Another one that really gets me is the honey vs high fructose corn syrup debate ... one is awesome and clean and great for you, and the other is the processed scourge of the earth, killing us all.
But they're nearly the same thing. Their Glucose to Fructose ratios are quite similar and they act the same way in the body.
They're both made pretty much the same way too. Both start with sugar water from plants, add enzymes to convert about 45% of the sugar to fructose, evaporate until sticky.
Considering how honey is produced by bees, it's definitely not "clean" (unless eating bee puke is on the Okay to Eat list).
Raw honey is natural, HFCS is not. So one is clean and the other is not.
They're made the same way.
Um, no I don't think so. What kind of bees make HFCS?
oh. You care whether humans or bees made it.
Either way, it's sugar water + enzymes + time.
For the label of clean, yes. But in what universe does what a food contains = "made the same way"?0 -
clean eating is a term used by certain people on pay roll lol.. example, after i became certified (long ago) in nutrition we where given a list of supplements to push and using certain words like "healthier" "substitute" "better"
clean eating (the phrase) is just a marketing ploy to get you to buy more of certain foods!! and we health lovers eat it up due to fear and give in. in "real life" clean foods are common sense!! loaded baked potatoe or just a baked potatoe? bag of cheetoes or bowl of grapenuts and milk.. thats all it really is.. this is my opinion of course and we all have one lol.
Bag of cheetos EVERY TIME. As someone who suffers from hereditary hemochromatosis, the 122% of your daily iron that the grape nuts contains is potentially toxic to me. The cheetos are healthier.
And on the baked potato example - I know people who are WAY into the glycemic index thing, and adding the "loaded" to the potato significantly slows down the carb absorption and is therefore "healthier". In ISOLATION, the plain potato may sound "better" for .. reasons. But if I'm looking at my macros for the day, and I have a whole bunch of fat and carbs available, the loaded baked potato can be a heck of a healthy choice.
The simple fact of the matter is that humans can eat an enormous variety of things and remain healthy. To me, the "healthiest" diet has always been the one with the most variety, regardless of if an individual item can claim some arbitrary definition of its worthiness.
All answers are correct. Everyone gets a trophy.
U would be correct, variation of people and the variation of foods is vast.. know your body and base your decisions on those facts lol..0 -
clean eating is a term used by certain people on pay roll lol.. example, after i became certified (long ago) in nutrition we where given a list of supplements to push and using certain words like "healthier" "substitute" "better"
clean eating (the phrase) is just a marketing ploy to get you to buy more of certain foods!! and we health lovers eat it up due to fear and give in. in "real life" clean foods are common sense!! loaded baked potatoe or just a baked potatoe? bag of cheetoes or bowl of grapenuts and milk.. thats all it really is.. this is my opinion of course and we all have one lol.
Bag of cheetos EVERY TIME. As someone who suffers from hereditary hemochromatosis, the 122% of your daily iron that the grape nuts contains is potentially toxic to me. The cheetos are healthier.
And on the baked potato example - I know people who are WAY into the glycemic index thing, and adding the "loaded" to the potato significantly slows down the carb absorption and is therefore "healthier". In ISOLATION, the plain potato may sound "better" for .. reasons. But if I'm looking at my macros for the day, and I have a whole bunch of fat and carbs available, the loaded baked potato can be a heck of a healthy choice.
The simple fact of the matter is that humans can eat an enormous variety of things and remain healthy. To me, the "healthiest" diet has always been the one with the most variety, regardless of if an individual item can claim some arbitrary definition of its worthiness.
All answers are correct. Everyone gets a trophy.
Participation awards are for losers. It's actually our trivia team name.0 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Another one that really gets me is the honey vs high fructose corn syrup debate ... one is awesome and clean and great for you, and the other is the processed scourge of the earth, killing us all.
But they're nearly the same thing. Their Glucose to Fructose ratios are quite similar and they act the same way in the body.
They're both made pretty much the same way too. Both start with sugar water from plants, add enzymes to convert about 45% of the sugar to fructose, evaporate until sticky.
Considering how honey is produced by bees, it's definitely not "clean" (unless eating bee puke is on the Okay to Eat list).
Raw honey is natural, HFCS is not. So one is clean and the other is not.
They're made the same way.
Um, no I don't think so. What kind of bees make HFCS?
oh. You care whether humans or bees made it.
Either way, it's sugar water + enzymes + time.
Why is something natural when a bee makes it and unnatural when a human makes it?
I guess we can add "If it is made by an insect or animal, it's clean and if it is made by a human, it isn't" to the list of clean/not clean attributes.1 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Another one that really gets me is the honey vs high fructose corn syrup debate ... one is awesome and clean and great for you, and the other is the processed scourge of the earth, killing us all.
But they're nearly the same thing. Their Glucose to Fructose ratios are quite similar and they act the same way in the body.
They're both made pretty much the same way too. Both start with sugar water from plants, add enzymes to convert about 45% of the sugar to fructose, evaporate until sticky.
Considering how honey is produced by bees, it's definitely not "clean" (unless eating bee puke is on the Okay to Eat list).
Raw honey is natural, HFCS is not. So one is clean and the other is not.
They're made the same way.
Um, no I don't think so. What kind of bees make HFCS?
oh. You care whether humans or bees made it.
Either way, it's sugar water + enzymes + time.
For the label of clean, yes. But in what universe does what a food contains = "made the same way"?
OK.
They both contain about 20% water and 80% sugar
The sugar in both consists of about 40% Fructose 55% glucose, and 5% other sugars
Honey has some pollen in it. Maybe a leg or 2. And some wax.
So, as I said - they both are made via similar processes, and have similar contents.
1 -
janejellyroll wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Another one that really gets me is the honey vs high fructose corn syrup debate ... one is awesome and clean and great for you, and the other is the processed scourge of the earth, killing us all.
But they're nearly the same thing. Their Glucose to Fructose ratios are quite similar and they act the same way in the body.
They're both made pretty much the same way too. Both start with sugar water from plants, add enzymes to convert about 45% of the sugar to fructose, evaporate until sticky.
Considering how honey is produced by bees, it's definitely not "clean" (unless eating bee puke is on the Okay to Eat list).
Raw honey is natural, HFCS is not. So one is clean and the other is not.
They're made the same way.
Um, no I don't think so. What kind of bees make HFCS?
oh. You care whether humans or bees made it.
Either way, it's sugar water + enzymes + time.
Why is something natural when a bee makes it and unnatural when a human makes it?
I guess we can add "If it is made by an insect or animal, it's clean and if it is made by a human, it isn't" to the list of clean/not clean attributes.
There are quite a few things made by animals that I wouldn't eat... think fecal matter, owl pellets, etc. But I guess that's "clean"? I'm so confused now.
*ETA maybe I'll just be a Breatharian... but is that clean with air pollutants? I think I might die... nothing left to eat.
2 -
diannethegeek wrote: »Well, I might as well do something with this list and the new debate forums seems as good a place as any for it.
Once upon a time, I was under the belief that clean eating had a simple definition. It was cooking from scratch using as simple ingredients as possible.
MFP has disillusioned me of that idea.
Here on MFP I've seen clean eating defined in a few different ways. These are all answers given by users when asked what clean eating is. Some of them have been formatted to fit the list better, but many of them are copy/pasted directly from their original posts. Be sure to read to the end, where things really start to diverge.- Nothing but minimally processed foods.
- Absolutely no processed foods.
- Shop only the outside of the grocery store.
- Nothing out of a box, jar, or can.
- Only food that's not in a box or hermetically sealed bag, or from e.g. McDonald's.
- No take-out or junk food at all.
- Nothing at all with a barcode.
- Nothing with more than 5 ingredients.
- Nothing with more than 4 ingredients.
- Nothing with more than 3 ingredients.
- Nothing with more than 1 ingredient.
- No added preservatives.
- No added chemicals.
- No chemicals, preservatives, etc. at all.
- No ingredients that you can't pronounce.
- No ingredients that sound like they came out of a chemistry book.
- Nothing that is processed and comes in a package or wrapper, or has any ingredient that sounds scientific.
- Don't eat products that have a TV commercial.
- Don't eat foods that have a mascot.
- If it grows or had a mother, it is ok to eat it.
- Don't eat products that have a longer shelf life than you do.
- Eat "food" and not "food-like substances."
- No added sugar.
- No added refined sugar.
- Swap white sugar for brown.
- No "white" foods.
- Nothing but lean meats, fruits, and vegetables.
- Nothing but lean meats, fruits, vegetables, and beans.
- A plant-based whole food diet.
- Eat foods as close to their natural state as POSSIBLE, and little to no processed food.
- Only meat from grass-fed animals and free-range chickens.
- Only pesticide-free foods.
- Nothing that causes your body bloat or inflammation.
- No trigger foods, nothing from fast food chains, nothing in the junk food aisles, and no high gmo foods.
- No red meat, no sweets, no pasta, no alcohol, no bread, no soda, nothing but fresh fruits and vegetables, complex carbohydrates and lean proteins.
- Eat a plant based diet consisting of whole plant foods.
- No bad carbs and processed foods.
- Anything that makes a better choice.
- Not cheating on whatever diet you are on.
- Any food that doesn't make it difficult to hit your macro/micro targets.
- Clean eating means eating optimally.
I like to note that under some of those definitions, Fritos are a clean food (only 3 ingredients). Under some of them, eggs and pistachios are not.
So what is clean eating? And is it a useful descriptor at all?
Since there's been some confusion on other threads, I want to note that this is on the Nutrition Debate board. So it's going to be, you know, a debate. Bring your opinions. Bring your dictionaries. Bring your studies. But if you don't want people to respond to your posts with questions or rebuttals, this might not be the board for you.
I feel terrible about the poor, dirty, 2 ingredient foods based on this list. They must feel so left out knowing that foods with 1, 3, 4 and 5 ingredients are all considered clean but they are not. I guess that means Nice Cream with bananas and PB2 aren't clean after all. DARN IT!1 -
janejellyroll wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »Now here's a question. I like fries.
I buy frozen, noname brand, packaged fries in a bag with barcode and everything. -> Definitely processed food, no doubt about it.
They only have 2 ingredients though: potatoes and sunflower oil. -> Nothing you can't pronounce and not exceeding the magical 4 ingredients.
Clean or not?
I'd bet you a tenner if we asked 100 clean eaters without each knowing what the others said, the answers would be split almost 50/50.
I go with a similar example on Cape Cod potato chips and Fritos. Each is as close to nature as possible (washed, sliced/ground and cooked), has only 3 ingredients which can be pronounced (chips: Potatoes, sunflower oil, salt; Fritos: Corn, corn oil, salt)
They both meet nearly every definition proposed above (can't meet them all because some are contradictory)
Sure they both have an added chemical preservative (salt). But it seems like the clean eating people are cool with that one chemical preservative.
Fritos are pretty far from the natural state of corn.
Because they're ground?
Does that mean that corn tortillas aren't "clean"? What about polenta?
Or is it something else?
Yes, because they are ground. Technically, shucked, decobbed (or whatever you call removing the kernels from the cob) and ground. I don't see how tortillas any different, polenta maybe a little cleaner as a single food.
Would all ground foods be unclean or is this specific to corn?
Whelp .. that knocks coffee and tea off the list of clean foods.
It would also remove nut butters, which I think are generally considered okay for clean eaters (but I'm not sure). Also ground meats and everyone I know personally who eats clean will eat ground meats.
And flour, but I suppose that's no surprise.0 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Another one that really gets me is the honey vs high fructose corn syrup debate ... one is awesome and clean and great for you, and the other is the processed scourge of the earth, killing us all.
But they're nearly the same thing. Their Glucose to Fructose ratios are quite similar and they act the same way in the body.
They're both made pretty much the same way too. Both start with sugar water from plants, add enzymes to convert about 45% of the sugar to fructose, evaporate until sticky.
Considering how honey is produced by bees, it's definitely not "clean" (unless eating bee puke is on the Okay to Eat list).
Raw honey is natural, HFCS is not. So one is clean and the other is not.
They're made the same way.
Um, no I don't think so. What kind of bees make HFCS?
oh. You care whether humans or bees made it.
Either way, it's sugar water + enzymes + time.
For the label of clean, yes. But in what universe does what a food contains = "made the same way"?
OK.
They both contain about 20% water and 80% sugar
The sugar in both consists of about 40% Fructose 55% glucose, and 5% other sugars
Honey has some pollen in it. Maybe a leg or 2. And some wax.
So, as I said - they both are made via similar processes, and have similar contents.
Nothing in your statement or in reality backs up the bolded part. The rest may be true. I don't know really but it's irrelevant. Clean = natural. Honey = natural. HFCS = not natural. So, honey = clean and HFCS =/= clean.0 -
janejellyroll wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »Now here's a question. I like fries.
I buy frozen, noname brand, packaged fries in a bag with barcode and everything. -> Definitely processed food, no doubt about it.
They only have 2 ingredients though: potatoes and sunflower oil. -> Nothing you can't pronounce and not exceeding the magical 4 ingredients.
Clean or not?
I'd bet you a tenner if we asked 100 clean eaters without each knowing what the others said, the answers would be split almost 50/50.
I go with a similar example on Cape Cod potato chips and Fritos. Each is as close to nature as possible (washed, sliced/ground and cooked), has only 3 ingredients which can be pronounced (chips: Potatoes, sunflower oil, salt; Fritos: Corn, corn oil, salt)
They both meet nearly every definition proposed above (can't meet them all because some are contradictory)
Sure they both have an added chemical preservative (salt). But it seems like the clean eating people are cool with that one chemical preservative.
Fritos are pretty far from the natural state of corn.
Because they're ground?
Does that mean that corn tortillas aren't "clean"? What about polenta?
Or is it something else?
Yes, because they are ground. Technically, shucked, decobbed (or whatever you call removing the kernels from the cob) and ground. I don't see how tortillas any different, polenta maybe a little cleaner as a single food.
Would all ground foods be unclean or is this specific to corn?
I'm not overly comfortable with the term 'unclean' when it comes to food. I'm old school and never heard it described as anything other clean in varying degrees (clean, sort of clean, not clean, stuff like that). And there is plenty of room for argument even amongst those that share my definition as it's not a black and white type definition. Lots of gray.
But to me, no. Ground foods would not be clean. Those ground with the bran and germ included would cleaner than those with it removed. Those with it removed that are then bleached (e.g. white flour) are not clean.
I understand you're not comfortable with it, but if certain foods are clean, what would you call the rest? "Not clean" doesn't seem that different from "unclean."
But I don't want to get on a tangent with the "unclean" thing.
You would consider almond butter, ground beef (let's say it's grass-fed for good measure), coffee, pepper, and oat milk (made from ground oats) to be "not clean" foods?
What if you grind the beef yourself?0 -
-
Clean eating is washing your food!1
-
Akimajuktuq wrote: »There's no debate. It means whatever it means to the individual. Who cares what other people are doing or what they call their WOE? Maybe focus on what you are doing instead.
It's normal for humans to come up with descriptors of things and it's normal that different people will see it differently. Who cares?
What I don't understand at all here on MFP is how so many people will bash/ridicule others who choose less processed foods, and more whole foods. Somehow people who think the what they eat matters must be a threat to the "eat all the things, quality doesn't matter, it's only calories in and out" crowd.
Also, it goes the other way, if people are eating processed foods and reaching their goals, terrific, not my business. I don't think anyone should assume that one WOE or lifestyle works for all, no matter what works for you personally.
Usual no one cares until someone pops into a thread and says someone needs to do x, y, or z for weight loss or to break their stall. It's even more entertaining when that advice is to "eat clean" because as you just pointed out, it's a highly individualized definition.
^^Yep, this. I don't normally care what anyone eats or what anyone calls their food. But "eat clean" pops up as advice in about 52%* of posts around here. Weight loss stalled? Eat clean. Can't quit snacking? Eat clean. Just getting started? Eat clean. Wanna gain weight? Eat clean. I think that makes the question of what is clean fair game.
*All statistics in this post are made up. There may be some confirmation or regional bias involved.0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »Now here's a question. I like fries.
I buy frozen, noname brand, packaged fries in a bag with barcode and everything. -> Definitely processed food, no doubt about it.
They only have 2 ingredients though: potatoes and sunflower oil. -> Nothing you can't pronounce and not exceeding the magical 4 ingredients.
Clean or not?
I'd bet you a tenner if we asked 100 clean eaters without each knowing what the others said, the answers would be split almost 50/50.
I go with a similar example on Cape Cod potato chips and Fritos. Each is as close to nature as possible (washed, sliced/ground and cooked), has only 3 ingredients which can be pronounced (chips: Potatoes, sunflower oil, salt; Fritos: Corn, corn oil, salt)
They both meet nearly every definition proposed above (can't meet them all because some are contradictory)
Sure they both have an added chemical preservative (salt). But it seems like the clean eating people are cool with that one chemical preservative.
Fritos are pretty far from the natural state of corn.
Because they're ground?
Does that mean that corn tortillas aren't "clean"? What about polenta?
Or is it something else?
Yes, because they are ground. Technically, shucked, decobbed (or whatever you call removing the kernels from the cob) and ground. I don't see how tortillas any different, polenta maybe a little cleaner as a single food.
Would all ground foods be unclean or is this specific to corn?
I'm not overly comfortable with the term 'unclean' when it comes to food. I'm old school and never heard it described as anything other clean in varying degrees (clean, sort of clean, not clean, stuff like that). And there is plenty of room for argument even amongst those that share my definition as it's not a black and white type definition. Lots of gray.
But to me, no. Ground foods would not be clean. Those ground with the bran and germ included would cleaner than those with it removed. Those with it removed that are then bleached (e.g. white flour) are not clean.
I understand you're not comfortable with it, but if certain foods are clean, what would you call the rest? "Not clean" doesn't seem that different from "unclean."
But I don't want to get on a tangent with the "unclean" thing.
You would consider almond butter, ground beef (let's say it's grass-fed for good measure), coffee, pepper, and oat milk (made from ground oats) to be "not clean" foods?
What if you grind the beef yourself?
I don't see how that would change anything.0 -
WinoGelato wrote: »diannethegeek wrote: »Well, I might as well do something with this list and the new debate forums seems as good a place as any for it.
Once upon a time, I was under the belief that clean eating had a simple definition. It was cooking from scratch using as simple ingredients as possible.
MFP has disillusioned me of that idea.
Here on MFP I've seen clean eating defined in a few different ways. These are all answers given by users when asked what clean eating is. Some of them have been formatted to fit the list better, but many of them are copy/pasted directly from their original posts. Be sure to read to the end, where things really start to diverge.- Nothing but minimally processed foods.
- Absolutely no processed foods.
- Shop only the outside of the grocery store.
- Nothing out of a box, jar, or can.
- Only food that's not in a box or hermetically sealed bag, or from e.g. McDonald's.
- No take-out or junk food at all.
- Nothing at all with a barcode.
- Nothing with more than 5 ingredients.
- Nothing with more than 4 ingredients.
- Nothing with more than 3 ingredients.
- Nothing with more than 1 ingredient.
- No added preservatives.
- No added chemicals.
- No chemicals, preservatives, etc. at all.
- No ingredients that you can't pronounce.
- No ingredients that sound like they came out of a chemistry book.
- Nothing that is processed and comes in a package or wrapper, or has any ingredient that sounds scientific.
- Don't eat products that have a TV commercial.
- Don't eat foods that have a mascot.
- If it grows or had a mother, it is ok to eat it.
- Don't eat products that have a longer shelf life than you do.
- Eat "food" and not "food-like substances."
- No added sugar.
- No added refined sugar.
- Swap white sugar for brown.
- No "white" foods.
- Nothing but lean meats, fruits, and vegetables.
- Nothing but lean meats, fruits, vegetables, and beans.
- A plant-based whole food diet.
- Eat foods as close to their natural state as POSSIBLE, and little to no processed food.
- Only meat from grass-fed animals and free-range chickens.
- Only pesticide-free foods.
- Nothing that causes your body bloat or inflammation.
- No trigger foods, nothing from fast food chains, nothing in the junk food aisles, and no high gmo foods.
- No red meat, no sweets, no pasta, no alcohol, no bread, no soda, nothing but fresh fruits and vegetables, complex carbohydrates and lean proteins.
- Eat a plant based diet consisting of whole plant foods.
- No bad carbs and processed foods.
- Anything that makes a better choice.
- Not cheating on whatever diet you are on.
- Any food that doesn't make it difficult to hit your macro/micro targets.
- Clean eating means eating optimally.
I like to note that under some of those definitions, Fritos are a clean food (only 3 ingredients). Under some of them, eggs and pistachios are not.
So what is clean eating? And is it a useful descriptor at all?
Since there's been some confusion on other threads, I want to note that this is on the Nutrition Debate board. So it's going to be, you know, a debate. Bring your opinions. Bring your dictionaries. Bring your studies. But if you don't want people to respond to your posts with questions or rebuttals, this might not be the board for you.
I feel terrible about the poor, dirty, 2 ingredient foods based on this list. They must feel so left out knowing that foods with 1, 3, 4 and 5 ingredients are all considered clean but they are not. I guess that means Nice Cream with bananas and PB2 aren't clean after all. DARN IT!
I don't remember when I started this list, but I've been waiting for ages for someone to fill in the 2 ingredients gap. It took a while for 3 ingredients to appear, as well.0 -
-
diannethegeek wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »diannethegeek wrote: »Well, I might as well do something with this list and the new debate forums seems as good a place as any for it.
Once upon a time, I was under the belief that clean eating had a simple definition. It was cooking from scratch using as simple ingredients as possible.
MFP has disillusioned me of that idea.
Here on MFP I've seen clean eating defined in a few different ways. These are all answers given by users when asked what clean eating is. Some of them have been formatted to fit the list better, but many of them are copy/pasted directly from their original posts. Be sure to read to the end, where things really start to diverge.- Nothing but minimally processed foods.
- Absolutely no processed foods.
- Shop only the outside of the grocery store.
- Nothing out of a box, jar, or can.
- Only food that's not in a box or hermetically sealed bag, or from e.g. McDonald's.
- No take-out or junk food at all.
- Nothing at all with a barcode.
- Nothing with more than 5 ingredients.
- Nothing with more than 4 ingredients.
- Nothing with more than 3 ingredients.
- Nothing with more than 1 ingredient.
- No added preservatives.
- No added chemicals.
- No chemicals, preservatives, etc. at all.
- No ingredients that you can't pronounce.
- No ingredients that sound like they came out of a chemistry book.
- Nothing that is processed and comes in a package or wrapper, or has any ingredient that sounds scientific.
- Don't eat products that have a TV commercial.
- Don't eat foods that have a mascot.
- If it grows or had a mother, it is ok to eat it.
- Don't eat products that have a longer shelf life than you do.
- Eat "food" and not "food-like substances."
- No added sugar.
- No added refined sugar.
- Swap white sugar for brown.
- No "white" foods.
- Nothing but lean meats, fruits, and vegetables.
- Nothing but lean meats, fruits, vegetables, and beans.
- A plant-based whole food diet.
- Eat foods as close to their natural state as POSSIBLE, and little to no processed food.
- Only meat from grass-fed animals and free-range chickens.
- Only pesticide-free foods.
- Nothing that causes your body bloat or inflammation.
- No trigger foods, nothing from fast food chains, nothing in the junk food aisles, and no high gmo foods.
- No red meat, no sweets, no pasta, no alcohol, no bread, no soda, nothing but fresh fruits and vegetables, complex carbohydrates and lean proteins.
- Eat a plant based diet consisting of whole plant foods.
- No bad carbs and processed foods.
- Anything that makes a better choice.
- Not cheating on whatever diet you are on.
- Any food that doesn't make it difficult to hit your macro/micro targets.
- Clean eating means eating optimally.
I like to note that under some of those definitions, Fritos are a clean food (only 3 ingredients). Under some of them, eggs and pistachios are not.
So what is clean eating? And is it a useful descriptor at all?
Since there's been some confusion on other threads, I want to note that this is on the Nutrition Debate board. So it's going to be, you know, a debate. Bring your opinions. Bring your dictionaries. Bring your studies. But if you don't want people to respond to your posts with questions or rebuttals, this might not be the board for you.
I feel terrible about the poor, dirty, 2 ingredient foods based on this list. They must feel so left out knowing that foods with 1, 3, 4 and 5 ingredients are all considered clean but they are not. I guess that means Nice Cream with bananas and PB2 aren't clean after all. DARN IT!
I don't remember when I started this list, but I've been waiting for ages for someone to fill in the 2 ingredients gap. It took a while for 3 ingredients to appear, as well.
So what are the criteria for submitting a definition to this list? Do I have to actually believe in "clean eating" and follow whatever the rule is that I put forth? I also don't see the "eat only the things our ancestors ate" rule either.0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »Now here's a question. I like fries.
I buy frozen, noname brand, packaged fries in a bag with barcode and everything. -> Definitely processed food, no doubt about it.
They only have 2 ingredients though: potatoes and sunflower oil. -> Nothing you can't pronounce and not exceeding the magical 4 ingredients.
Clean or not?
I'd bet you a tenner if we asked 100 clean eaters without each knowing what the others said, the answers would be split almost 50/50.
I go with a similar example on Cape Cod potato chips and Fritos. Each is as close to nature as possible (washed, sliced/ground and cooked), has only 3 ingredients which can be pronounced (chips: Potatoes, sunflower oil, salt; Fritos: Corn, corn oil, salt)
They both meet nearly every definition proposed above (can't meet them all because some are contradictory)
Sure they both have an added chemical preservative (salt). But it seems like the clean eating people are cool with that one chemical preservative.
Fritos are pretty far from the natural state of corn.
Because they're ground?
Does that mean that corn tortillas aren't "clean"? What about polenta?
Or is it something else?
Yes, because they are ground. Technically, shucked, decobbed (or whatever you call removing the kernels from the cob) and ground. I don't see how tortillas any different, polenta maybe a little cleaner as a single food.
Would all ground foods be unclean or is this specific to corn?
I'm not overly comfortable with the term 'unclean' when it comes to food. I'm old school and never heard it described as anything other clean in varying degrees (clean, sort of clean, not clean, stuff like that). And there is plenty of room for argument even amongst those that share my definition as it's not a black and white type definition. Lots of gray.
But to me, no. Ground foods would not be clean. Those ground with the bran and germ included would cleaner than those with it removed. Those with it removed that are then bleached (e.g. white flour) are not clean.
I understand you're not comfortable with it, but if certain foods are clean, what would you call the rest? "Not clean" doesn't seem that different from "unclean."
But I don't want to get on a tangent with the "unclean" thing.
You would consider almond butter, ground beef (let's say it's grass-fed for good measure), coffee, pepper, and oat milk (made from ground oats) to be "not clean" foods?
What if you grind the beef yourself?
What if bees grind it?3 -
diannethegeek wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »diannethegeek wrote: »Well, I might as well do something with this list and the new debate forums seems as good a place as any for it.
Once upon a time, I was under the belief that clean eating had a simple definition. It was cooking from scratch using as simple ingredients as possible.
MFP has disillusioned me of that idea.
Here on MFP I've seen clean eating defined in a few different ways. These are all answers given by users when asked what clean eating is. Some of them have been formatted to fit the list better, but many of them are copy/pasted directly from their original posts. Be sure to read to the end, where things really start to diverge.- Nothing but minimally processed foods.
- Absolutely no processed foods.
- Shop only the outside of the grocery store.
- Nothing out of a box, jar, or can.
- Only food that's not in a box or hermetically sealed bag, or from e.g. McDonald's.
- No take-out or junk food at all.
- Nothing at all with a barcode.
- Nothing with more than 5 ingredients.
- Nothing with more than 4 ingredients.
- Nothing with more than 3 ingredients.
- Nothing with more than 1 ingredient.
- No added preservatives.
- No added chemicals.
- No chemicals, preservatives, etc. at all.
- No ingredients that you can't pronounce.
- No ingredients that sound like they came out of a chemistry book.
- Nothing that is processed and comes in a package or wrapper, or has any ingredient that sounds scientific.
- Don't eat products that have a TV commercial.
- Don't eat foods that have a mascot.
- If it grows or had a mother, it is ok to eat it.
- Don't eat products that have a longer shelf life than you do.
- Eat "food" and not "food-like substances."
- No added sugar.
- No added refined sugar.
- Swap white sugar for brown.
- No "white" foods.
- Nothing but lean meats, fruits, and vegetables.
- Nothing but lean meats, fruits, vegetables, and beans.
- A plant-based whole food diet.
- Eat foods as close to their natural state as POSSIBLE, and little to no processed food.
- Only meat from grass-fed animals and free-range chickens.
- Only pesticide-free foods.
- Nothing that causes your body bloat or inflammation.
- No trigger foods, nothing from fast food chains, nothing in the junk food aisles, and no high gmo foods.
- No red meat, no sweets, no pasta, no alcohol, no bread, no soda, nothing but fresh fruits and vegetables, complex carbohydrates and lean proteins.
- Eat a plant based diet consisting of whole plant foods.
- No bad carbs and processed foods.
- Anything that makes a better choice.
- Not cheating on whatever diet you are on.
- Any food that doesn't make it difficult to hit your macro/micro targets.
- Clean eating means eating optimally.
I like to note that under some of those definitions, Fritos are a clean food (only 3 ingredients). Under some of them, eggs and pistachios are not.
So what is clean eating? And is it a useful descriptor at all?
Since there's been some confusion on other threads, I want to note that this is on the Nutrition Debate board. So it's going to be, you know, a debate. Bring your opinions. Bring your dictionaries. Bring your studies. But if you don't want people to respond to your posts with questions or rebuttals, this might not be the board for you.
I feel terrible about the poor, dirty, 2 ingredient foods based on this list. They must feel so left out knowing that foods with 1, 3, 4 and 5 ingredients are all considered clean but they are not. I guess that means Nice Cream with bananas and PB2 aren't clean after all. DARN IT!
I don't remember when I started this list, but I've been waiting for ages for someone to fill in the 2 ingredients gap. It took a while for 3 ingredients to appear, as well.
According to the google, this is a "Clean" 2 Ingredient recipe for Banana Pancakes.
http://www.thegraciouspantry.com/clean-eating-2-ingredient-baked-pancake/
Ironically though, the list of ingredients is 6 lines long...
CLEAN EATING 2 INGREDIENT BAKED PANCAKE
(Makes 1 servings)
Note: You can make this with 4 egg whites and omit the whole egg to get the cholesterol down, but the sodium content will go up.
INGREDIENTS:
1 whole egg
2 egg whites
1 medium banana
1/8 teaspoon ground cinnamon (optional)
1/2 teaspoon pure vanilla extract (optional)
1/4 cup walnuts (optional)
DIRECTIONS:
Place all ingredients in a mixing bowl (or blender) and mix with a hand blender until smooth.
Pour into a parchment lined baking dish, pie pan or cake pan. Whatever shape you want it is fine so long as it’s lined with parchment.
Bake at 350 F. for 25-30 minutes.
Serve topped with walnuts if you wish. They are so sweet that there is really no need for syrup. But some fruit would be yummy as a topping!
0 -
BecomingBane wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Another one that really gets me is the honey vs high fructose corn syrup debate ... one is awesome and clean and great for you, and the other is the processed scourge of the earth, killing us all.
But they're nearly the same thing. Their Glucose to Fructose ratios are quite similar and they act the same way in the body.
They're both made pretty much the same way too. Both start with sugar water from plants, add enzymes to convert about 45% of the sugar to fructose, evaporate until sticky.
Considering how honey is produced by bees, it's definitely not "clean" (unless eating bee puke is on the Okay to Eat list).
Raw honey is natural, HFCS is not. So one is clean and the other is not.
They're made the same way.
Um, no I don't think so. What kind of bees make HFCS?
oh. You care whether humans or bees made it.
Either way, it's sugar water + enzymes + time.
Why is something natural when a bee makes it and unnatural when a human makes it?
I guess we can add "If it is made by an insect or animal, it's clean and if it is made by a human, it isn't" to the list of clean/not clean attributes.
There are quite a few things made by animals that I wouldn't eat... think fecal matter, owl pellets, etc. But I guess that's "clean"? I'm so confused now.
*ETA maybe I'll just be a Breatharian... but is that clean with air pollutants? I think I might die... nothing left to eat.
Just make sure you're consuming organic air and you'll be fine. Otherwise, all the death.1 -
Akimajuktuq wrote: »There's no debate. It means whatever it means to the individual. Who cares what other people are doing or what they call their WOE? Maybe focus on what you are doing instead.
It comes up when people ask "does anyone else clean eat?" or "is X clean?" or things like that. We can't answer unless we know what clean means to that person, and people have their own self-serving definitions.
For example, I would assume that canned foods and protein bars and deli meats and store-bought bread and yogurt are all "not clean" as the term is usually defined, and yet people who assert that they are "clean eaters" and explain how "processed food" is terrible for us will quite frequently include such foods in their diet, apparently unaware of the irony.What I don't understand at all here on MFP is how so many people will bash/ridicule others who choose less processed foods, and more whole foods. Somehow people who think the what they eat matters must be a threat to the "eat all the things, quality doesn't matter, it's only calories in and out" crowd.
I don't think that's so at all. I tend to choose less processed foods, for the most part (did before I lost weight too, much more than now at times), and I've never been ridiculed. I'm into buying local when I can and knowing the source of my foods when possible, and again, no one cares. I do question people who claim that we (note, a prescription aimed at others, not a personal one) should cut out "processed foods" because it's all full of sugar or some nonsense, as I do choose to eat some processed foods (most foods are, in fact, processed) because I think they contribute to the healthfulness of my diet and typically are not full of sugar or the like. So I ask what's wrong with Fage plain greek yogurt or cottage cheese or smoked salmon, so on.
I don't care if someone wants to live by specific dietary rules. So do I, to some extent. But if someone asserts that a particular way of eating (I will never use the silly term WOE) is "healthier" than other ways, then I will disagree, if I think that claim is false.
IMO, what's important is trying to eat a healthy diet, not whether something is "clean" or not, which people are going to disagree about anyway.
I appreciate that you say how others eat are none of your business, but if you make a point of claiming that they are eating in an "unclean" or "not clean" manner, that certainly sounds like a judgment. IMO, most of this could be avoided if people didn't feel compelled to use such a moralistic or purity-related term.1 -
WinoGelato wrote: »diannethegeek wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »diannethegeek wrote: »Well, I might as well do something with this list and the new debate forums seems as good a place as any for it.
Once upon a time, I was under the belief that clean eating had a simple definition. It was cooking from scratch using as simple ingredients as possible.
MFP has disillusioned me of that idea.
Here on MFP I've seen clean eating defined in a few different ways. These are all answers given by users when asked what clean eating is. Some of them have been formatted to fit the list better, but many of them are copy/pasted directly from their original posts. Be sure to read to the end, where things really start to diverge.- Nothing but minimally processed foods.
- Absolutely no processed foods.
- Shop only the outside of the grocery store.
- Nothing out of a box, jar, or can.
- Only food that's not in a box or hermetically sealed bag, or from e.g. McDonald's.
- No take-out or junk food at all.
- Nothing at all with a barcode.
- Nothing with more than 5 ingredients.
- Nothing with more than 4 ingredients.
- Nothing with more than 3 ingredients.
- Nothing with more than 1 ingredient.
- No added preservatives.
- No added chemicals.
- No chemicals, preservatives, etc. at all.
- No ingredients that you can't pronounce.
- No ingredients that sound like they came out of a chemistry book.
- Nothing that is processed and comes in a package or wrapper, or has any ingredient that sounds scientific.
- Don't eat products that have a TV commercial.
- Don't eat foods that have a mascot.
- If it grows or had a mother, it is ok to eat it.
- Don't eat products that have a longer shelf life than you do.
- Eat "food" and not "food-like substances."
- No added sugar.
- No added refined sugar.
- Swap white sugar for brown.
- No "white" foods.
- Nothing but lean meats, fruits, and vegetables.
- Nothing but lean meats, fruits, vegetables, and beans.
- A plant-based whole food diet.
- Eat foods as close to their natural state as POSSIBLE, and little to no processed food.
- Only meat from grass-fed animals and free-range chickens.
- Only pesticide-free foods.
- Nothing that causes your body bloat or inflammation.
- No trigger foods, nothing from fast food chains, nothing in the junk food aisles, and no high gmo foods.
- No red meat, no sweets, no pasta, no alcohol, no bread, no soda, nothing but fresh fruits and vegetables, complex carbohydrates and lean proteins.
- Eat a plant based diet consisting of whole plant foods.
- No bad carbs and processed foods.
- Anything that makes a better choice.
- Not cheating on whatever diet you are on.
- Any food that doesn't make it difficult to hit your macro/micro targets.
- Clean eating means eating optimally.
I like to note that under some of those definitions, Fritos are a clean food (only 3 ingredients). Under some of them, eggs and pistachios are not.
So what is clean eating? And is it a useful descriptor at all?
Since there's been some confusion on other threads, I want to note that this is on the Nutrition Debate board. So it's going to be, you know, a debate. Bring your opinions. Bring your dictionaries. Bring your studies. But if you don't want people to respond to your posts with questions or rebuttals, this might not be the board for you.
I feel terrible about the poor, dirty, 2 ingredient foods based on this list. They must feel so left out knowing that foods with 1, 3, 4 and 5 ingredients are all considered clean but they are not. I guess that means Nice Cream with bananas and PB2 aren't clean after all. DARN IT!
I don't remember when I started this list, but I've been waiting for ages for someone to fill in the 2 ingredients gap. It took a while for 3 ingredients to appear, as well.
So what are the criteria for submitting a definition to this list? Do I have to actually believe in "clean eating" and follow whatever the rule is that I put forth? I also don't see the "eat only the things our ancestors ate" rule either.
I've always tried to keep it just to people who identify as clean eaters (though I'm sure it's gotten fuzzy and there are some that are defending clean eating while not following it in there) and I try to keep things that appear to be partial definitions off the list (so "clean = natural" from above wouldn't make the list since including it would strip the context of the post). But again, everything's gotten a little fuzzy.
You know, I'm not sure if I've never seen "eat only things our ancestors would recognize" specifically equated with clean eating or if I just assumed it was up there and never added it. I'm going to have to ponder that (and maybe do a little searching).0 -
tincanonastring wrote: »BecomingBane wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Another one that really gets me is the honey vs high fructose corn syrup debate ... one is awesome and clean and great for you, and the other is the processed scourge of the earth, killing us all.
But they're nearly the same thing. Their Glucose to Fructose ratios are quite similar and they act the same way in the body.
They're both made pretty much the same way too. Both start with sugar water from plants, add enzymes to convert about 45% of the sugar to fructose, evaporate until sticky.
Considering how honey is produced by bees, it's definitely not "clean" (unless eating bee puke is on the Okay to Eat list).
Raw honey is natural, HFCS is not. So one is clean and the other is not.
They're made the same way.
Um, no I don't think so. What kind of bees make HFCS?
oh. You care whether humans or bees made it.
Either way, it's sugar water + enzymes + time.
Why is something natural when a bee makes it and unnatural when a human makes it?
I guess we can add "If it is made by an insect or animal, it's clean and if it is made by a human, it isn't" to the list of clean/not clean attributes.
There are quite a few things made by animals that I wouldn't eat... think fecal matter, owl pellets, etc. But I guess that's "clean"? I'm so confused now.
*ETA maybe I'll just be a Breatharian... but is that clean with air pollutants? I think I might die... nothing left to eat.
Just make sure you're consuming organic air and you'll be fine. Otherwise, all the death.
I was thinking that @AnvilHead's post was about all that was left, but then I thought about water comtaminants. I mean... there's birth control in the water!
I'm going to go quietly over here to slowly starve since no clean food or water.
0 -
I'd define "clean eating" as a shibboleth for its particular branch of dietary tribalism. This is why the phrase is frequently capitalised by its core proponents.
thanks for this^ I found this insightful.0 -
diannethegeek wrote: »I've always tried to keep it just to people who identify as clean eaters (though I'm sure it's gotten fuzzy and there are some that are defending clean eating while not following it in there) and I try to keep things that appear to be partial definitions off the list (so "clean = natural" from above wouldn't make the list since including it would strip the context of the post). But again, everything's gotten a little fuzzy.
You know, I'm not sure if I've never seen "eat only things our ancestors would recognize" specifically equated with clean eating or if I just assumed it was up there and never added it. I'm going to have to ponder that (and maybe do a little searching).
It's one of the principles (and the biggest pseudoscientific fallacy) of Paleo/ancestral diets.0 -
janejellyroll wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Another one that really gets me is the honey vs high fructose corn syrup debate ... one is awesome and clean and great for you, and the other is the processed scourge of the earth, killing us all.
But they're nearly the same thing. Their Glucose to Fructose ratios are quite similar and they act the same way in the body.
They're both made pretty much the same way too. Both start with sugar water from plants, add enzymes to convert about 45% of the sugar to fructose, evaporate until sticky.
Considering how honey is produced by bees, it's definitely not "clean" (unless eating bee puke is on the Okay to Eat list).
Raw honey is natural, HFCS is not. So one is clean and the other is not.
They're made the same way.
Um, no I don't think so. What kind of bees make HFCS?
oh. You care whether humans or bees made it.
Either way, it's sugar water + enzymes + time.
Why is something natural when a bee makes it and unnatural when a human makes it?
I guess we can add "If it is made by an insect or animal, it's clean and if it is made by a human, it isn't" to the list of clean/not clean attributes.
Unless the human is you and you make it at home, maybe? Or you watch someone else make it?1 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Another one that really gets me is the honey vs high fructose corn syrup debate ... one is awesome and clean and great for you, and the other is the processed scourge of the earth, killing us all.
But they're nearly the same thing. Their Glucose to Fructose ratios are quite similar and they act the same way in the body.
They're both made pretty much the same way too. Both start with sugar water from plants, add enzymes to convert about 45% of the sugar to fructose, evaporate until sticky.
Considering how honey is produced by bees, it's definitely not "clean" (unless eating bee puke is on the Okay to Eat list).
Raw honey is natural, HFCS is not. So one is clean and the other is not.
They're made the same way.
Um, no I don't think so. What kind of bees make HFCS?
oh. You care whether humans or bees made it.
Either way, it's sugar water + enzymes + time.
Why is something natural when a bee makes it and unnatural when a human makes it?
I guess we can add "If it is made by an insect or animal, it's clean and if it is made by a human, it isn't" to the list of clean/not clean attributes.
Unless the human is you and you make it at home, maybe? Or you watch someone else make it?
So maybe if one was to grow and grind their own corn at home and make Fritos out of it, Fritos would be "clean". But not if another human or <gasp, heaven forbid> humans who work at a company made them!
Seems legit.1 -
erialcelyob wrote: »I use it as a personal term to gauge whether I believe I'm eating well, for me it is when I have healthy whole, home cooked foods, minimal out wrappers and not junk
But I can eat that way -- often do, in fact (and never eat fast food or any packaged sweets besides ice cream, since I don't like them) -- and yet eat plenty of processed foods like dried pasta, steel cut oats, smoked salmon, plain greek yogurt, coffee, etc. For me it would feel dishonest to claim I "eat clean" when eating these sorts of foods, since my understanding is that it usually means non-processed.
I also would feel weird using it when getting my meat from the supermarket (I usually don't, though), but I again see lots of people use it despite not only doing that but eating deli meat and highly-processed bacon.0 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »Now here's a question. I like fries.
I buy frozen, noname brand, packaged fries in a bag with barcode and everything. -> Definitely processed food, no doubt about it.
They only have 2 ingredients though: potatoes and sunflower oil. -> Nothing you can't pronounce and not exceeding the magical 4 ingredients.
Clean or not?
I'd bet you a tenner if we asked 100 clean eaters without each knowing what the others said, the answers would be split almost 50/50.
I go with a similar example on Cape Cod potato chips and Fritos. Each is as close to nature as possible (washed, sliced/ground and cooked), has only 3 ingredients which can be pronounced (chips: Potatoes, sunflower oil, salt; Fritos: Corn, corn oil, salt)
They both meet nearly every definition proposed above (can't meet them all because some are contradictory)
Sure they both have an added chemical preservative (salt). But it seems like the clean eating people are cool with that one chemical preservative.
Fritos are pretty far from the natural state of corn.
Because they're ground?
Does that mean that corn tortillas aren't "clean"? What about polenta?
Or is it something else?
Yes, because they are ground. Technically, shucked, decobbed (or whatever you call removing the kernels from the cob) and ground. I don't see how tortillas any different, polenta maybe a little cleaner as a single food.
Would all ground foods be unclean or is this specific to corn?
I'm not overly comfortable with the term 'unclean' when it comes to food. I'm old school and never heard it described as anything other clean in varying degrees (clean, sort of clean, not clean, stuff like that). And there is plenty of room for argument even amongst those that share my definition as it's not a black and white type definition. Lots of gray.
But to me, no. Ground foods would not be clean. Those ground with the bran and germ included would cleaner than those with it removed. Those with it removed that are then bleached (e.g. white flour) are not clean.
I understand you're not comfortable with it, but if certain foods are clean, what would you call the rest? "Not clean" doesn't seem that different from "unclean."
But I don't want to get on a tangent with the "unclean" thing.
You would consider almond butter, ground beef (let's say it's grass-fed for good measure), coffee, pepper, and oat milk (made from ground oats) to be "not clean" foods?
What if you grind the beef yourself?
I don't see how that would change anything.
So beef is clean (let's say grass-fed, from a local farm, processing passes muster), but if you have a grinder at home and grind it it becomes not clean? I really don't get that.
This is why the term drives me batty. It's applying a label that sounds extremely judgmental to foods that are no worse in any way.1
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
- 427 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