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?
Options
Replies
-
The first time I saw anyone mention clean eating, I though I don't eat dirty food.. especially off the floor.
Now I a down with "if it tastes good spit it out" or "if you cannot pronounce it (or spell it) don't eat it". I guess the latter would mean all the things the OP mentioned.
BTW, I guess I still don't eat clean cause I rarely spit anything out unless it is a rutabaga which I could not spell that until this post which I still don't eat that.0 -
I would bank on those 2...Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »robertw486 wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »sunnybeaches105 wrote: »I still use the term when I diet, as in "I need to clean up my diet again." It's not the end-all be-all approach and there are way too many interpretations of it from people who use it as a way of showing their own self-righteousness, but salads, veggies and lean meats certainly make up the vast majority of my diet. The debates over what is and what isn't clean seem pretty silly, but I'm enjoying this thread . . .
Like I said upthread, I don't really like or use it in that sense either, but I understand what someone means when they say it -- I am trying to eat healthier than my prior diet, according to my own understanding of healthy -- and don't object to it at all or ever claim that usage is unclear.
I see that as different from saying smugly "I'm a clean eater!" and then when asked what that means getting mad and saying "you know!" or "NO processed food EVER" when the person eats as much processed food as I do. (And my main objection here is to the ignorant idea that process=not nutritious or bad for us, as I think much of the processed stuff I eat, like plain greek yogurt and smoked salmon, is plenty nutritious and would be dumb to cut out, others (like dried pasta) form the backbone for really nutritious meals or can be important time-saving staples (canned tomatoes and beans), and still others are just tasty and I see no reason it would be healthier to give them up entirely vs. eating them in moderation (ice cream).) None of that means I don't care about nutrition or my overall diet or health, which is what the next assertion about non clean eaters usually is.
I don't really eat stuff like fast food or convenience foods (frozen meals) or lots of packaged sweets, so I don't consider cutting these things out as a special diet, and I think people who enjoy them or benefit from them can include them in an overall healthy diet.
I also think whether a diet is healthy depends more on (1) appropriate calories/amounts; and (2) what IS in the diet (adequate protein and fiber and healthy fats, lots of vegetables), so approaching health or nutrition as about what one does not eat rather than about including the foods we need (ideally prepared so that they are super tasty) seems to me quite misguided. That doesn't mean I don't occasionally realize I'm overdoing some less nutritious food and having trouble meeting my overall goals as a result -- sure I do. IMO, that's about balance.
I also don't really like the underlying idea that foods being too enjoyable is bad (the processed foods have been made extra hard to resist thing). I don't believe at all that highly processed foods are tastier than homemade and I've always found that focusing on really tasty foods makes dieting easier. This is why I eat a roasted breast of chicken with skin and bones-in more often than I do boneless, skinless chicken breast, and why if I made the latter it will generally be part of some preparation (and I'm often going to prefer thighs for the preparation).
Yep. Big difference between, "I need to clean up my diet" and "I am a clean eater" or "I eat clean".
One is a figure of speech, the other is a proclamation of superiority, IMO...
I don't see why "I eat clean" would automatically be seen as a proclamation of superiority any more than "I eat a flexible diet" or "I eat vegetarian" or "I follow IF' would be. In all of these cases we are being informed how the user eats and it's logical to assume they think it's the best way to eat."
I think that even beyond the actual usage of the words and definitions, this is one of the problems with the terms people use in communication, and for whatever reason some of these words and terms seem to be almost like triggers here on MFP.
It's not the words or phrases themselves, it's the attachments people making as it being good, bad, judgmental, imposing, etc, etc. And it seems that often those attachments have to do with people using them as some sort of magic fix that one diet to superior to another. Which somewhat boggles me, as I see the vast majority of eating choices as personal preference, and accept that what works best for me might not be what works best for you. Since I don't cling to my way being the only way, it doesn't offend me that others eat differently, or use terms like clean eating.
I agree. I feel the same way. The phrase doesn't bother me at all, but honestly it wouldn't bother me even if the person using it did feel it was a superior diet. I know that someone thinking something doesn't make it true.
It doesn't bother me if someone wants to call their diet "clean" and considers mine "not clean." What concerns me is the people who are newer to this getting the idea that certain foods must be eliminated, adopting talismanic rules that are pretty meaningless ("nothing with a barcode," "nothing with ingredients you can't pronounce," "shop only in the outer aisles"), or thinking that "clean eating" will automatically result in weight loss.
Obesity is rough physically and emotionally. I hate to see people tricked or misled into putting in effort that isn't going to provide a very good return. The effort that is used to achieve "cleanness" in eating could be used instead to learn about the actual qualities and characteristics of food and choosing what to eat based on what's actually in a food and how it fits in the overall context of a person's diet and life.
Before joining this site I would have thought this was silly. I would have thought "Who would be ignorant enough to think that these rules were absolute and not just general 'rules of thumb'".
This place was an eye opener for me.
Well when a diet industry exists and profits off repeat customers by obscuring the root cause of weight, that's where you end up. People believe the rules of thumb work in and of themselves and that they failed in adherence somehow so that is why they seek advice. They wonder what food they thought was clean but isn't has prevented their weight loss.
And that line of thinking doesn't seem the least bit bizarre? It does to me. Honestly I can't remember a time when I didn't know that calories is what causes weight gain. I'm not sure who to thank for that. My mother, the time I was born, what?
Probably so. Though reading posts on this site would make me think my mother (and most other adults I knew as a child) did everything wrong by telling me if I eat too much I'd get fat. Apparently that causes obesity and eating disorders.0 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »
I would bank on those 2...Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »robertw486 wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »sunnybeaches105 wrote: »I still use the term when I diet, as in "I need to clean up my diet again." It's not the end-all be-all approach and there are way too many interpretations of it from people who use it as a way of showing their own self-righteousness, but salads, veggies and lean meats certainly make up the vast majority of my diet. The debates over what is and what isn't clean seem pretty silly, but I'm enjoying this thread . . .
Like I said upthread, I don't really like or use it in that sense either, but I understand what someone means when they say it -- I am trying to eat healthier than my prior diet, according to my own understanding of healthy -- and don't object to it at all or ever claim that usage is unclear.
I see that as different from saying smugly "I'm a clean eater!" and then when asked what that means getting mad and saying "you know!" or "NO processed food EVER" when the person eats as much processed food as I do. (And my main objection here is to the ignorant idea that process=not nutritious or bad for us, as I think much of the processed stuff I eat, like plain greek yogurt and smoked salmon, is plenty nutritious and would be dumb to cut out, others (like dried pasta) form the backbone for really nutritious meals or can be important time-saving staples (canned tomatoes and beans), and still others are just tasty and I see no reason it would be healthier to give them up entirely vs. eating them in moderation (ice cream).) None of that means I don't care about nutrition or my overall diet or health, which is what the next assertion about non clean eaters usually is.
I don't really eat stuff like fast food or convenience foods (frozen meals) or lots of packaged sweets, so I don't consider cutting these things out as a special diet, and I think people who enjoy them or benefit from them can include them in an overall healthy diet.
I also think whether a diet is healthy depends more on (1) appropriate calories/amounts; and (2) what IS in the diet (adequate protein and fiber and healthy fats, lots of vegetables), so approaching health or nutrition as about what one does not eat rather than about including the foods we need (ideally prepared so that they are super tasty) seems to me quite misguided. That doesn't mean I don't occasionally realize I'm overdoing some less nutritious food and having trouble meeting my overall goals as a result -- sure I do. IMO, that's about balance.
I also don't really like the underlying idea that foods being too enjoyable is bad (the processed foods have been made extra hard to resist thing). I don't believe at all that highly processed foods are tastier than homemade and I've always found that focusing on really tasty foods makes dieting easier. This is why I eat a roasted breast of chicken with skin and bones-in more often than I do boneless, skinless chicken breast, and why if I made the latter it will generally be part of some preparation (and I'm often going to prefer thighs for the preparation).
Yep. Big difference between, "I need to clean up my diet" and "I am a clean eater" or "I eat clean".
One is a figure of speech, the other is a proclamation of superiority, IMO...
I don't see why "I eat clean" would automatically be seen as a proclamation of superiority any more than "I eat a flexible diet" or "I eat vegetarian" or "I follow IF' would be. In all of these cases we are being informed how the user eats and it's logical to assume they think it's the best way to eat."
I think that even beyond the actual usage of the words and definitions, this is one of the problems with the terms people use in communication, and for whatever reason some of these words and terms seem to be almost like triggers here on MFP.
It's not the words or phrases themselves, it's the attachments people making as it being good, bad, judgmental, imposing, etc, etc. And it seems that often those attachments have to do with people using them as some sort of magic fix that one diet to superior to another. Which somewhat boggles me, as I see the vast majority of eating choices as personal preference, and accept that what works best for me might not be what works best for you. Since I don't cling to my way being the only way, it doesn't offend me that others eat differently, or use terms like clean eating.
I agree. I feel the same way. The phrase doesn't bother me at all, but honestly it wouldn't bother me even if the person using it did feel it was a superior diet. I know that someone thinking something doesn't make it true.
It doesn't bother me if someone wants to call their diet "clean" and considers mine "not clean." What concerns me is the people who are newer to this getting the idea that certain foods must be eliminated, adopting talismanic rules that are pretty meaningless ("nothing with a barcode," "nothing with ingredients you can't pronounce," "shop only in the outer aisles"), or thinking that "clean eating" will automatically result in weight loss.
Obesity is rough physically and emotionally. I hate to see people tricked or misled into putting in effort that isn't going to provide a very good return. The effort that is used to achieve "cleanness" in eating could be used instead to learn about the actual qualities and characteristics of food and choosing what to eat based on what's actually in a food and how it fits in the overall context of a person's diet and life.
Before joining this site I would have thought this was silly. I would have thought "Who would be ignorant enough to think that these rules were absolute and not just general 'rules of thumb'".
This place was an eye opener for me.
Well when a diet industry exists and profits off repeat customers by obscuring the root cause of weight, that's where you end up. People believe the rules of thumb work in and of themselves and that they failed in adherence somehow so that is why they seek advice. They wonder what food they thought was clean but isn't has prevented their weight loss.
And that line of thinking doesn't seem the least bit bizarre? It does to me. Honestly I can't remember a time when I didn't know that calories is what causes weight gain. I'm not sure who to thank for that. My mother, the time I was born, what?
Probably so. Though reading posts on this site would make me think my mother (and most other adults I knew as a child) did everything wrong by telling me if I eat too much I'd get fat. Apparently that causes obesity and eating disorders.
Who says that?
And yeah, MFP was eye opening to me too, in terms of odd things people actually believe.
That said, I know lots of otherwise smart people who may intellectually know that calories are what cause weight gain, but who have superstitious notions about food and how one gains/loses weight none-the-less (even if they could not logically defend them).0 -
I would imagine a good bedside manner is important with all life lessons...Need2Exerc1se wrote: »
I would bank on those 2...Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »robertw486 wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »sunnybeaches105 wrote: »I still use the term when I diet, as in "I need to clean up my diet again." It's not the end-all be-all approach and there are way too many interpretations of it from people who use it as a way of showing their own self-righteousness, but salads, veggies and lean meats certainly make up the vast majority of my diet. The debates over what is and what isn't clean seem pretty silly, but I'm enjoying this thread . . .
Like I said upthread, I don't really like or use it in that sense either, but I understand what someone means when they say it -- I am trying to eat healthier than my prior diet, according to my own understanding of healthy -- and don't object to it at all or ever claim that usage is unclear.
I see that as different from saying smugly "I'm a clean eater!" and then when asked what that means getting mad and saying "you know!" or "NO processed food EVER" when the person eats as much processed food as I do. (And my main objection here is to the ignorant idea that process=not nutritious or bad for us, as I think much of the processed stuff I eat, like plain greek yogurt and smoked salmon, is plenty nutritious and would be dumb to cut out, others (like dried pasta) form the backbone for really nutritious meals or can be important time-saving staples (canned tomatoes and beans), and still others are just tasty and I see no reason it would be healthier to give them up entirely vs. eating them in moderation (ice cream).) None of that means I don't care about nutrition or my overall diet or health, which is what the next assertion about non clean eaters usually is.
I don't really eat stuff like fast food or convenience foods (frozen meals) or lots of packaged sweets, so I don't consider cutting these things out as a special diet, and I think people who enjoy them or benefit from them can include them in an overall healthy diet.
I also think whether a diet is healthy depends more on (1) appropriate calories/amounts; and (2) what IS in the diet (adequate protein and fiber and healthy fats, lots of vegetables), so approaching health or nutrition as about what one does not eat rather than about including the foods we need (ideally prepared so that they are super tasty) seems to me quite misguided. That doesn't mean I don't occasionally realize I'm overdoing some less nutritious food and having trouble meeting my overall goals as a result -- sure I do. IMO, that's about balance.
I also don't really like the underlying idea that foods being too enjoyable is bad (the processed foods have been made extra hard to resist thing). I don't believe at all that highly processed foods are tastier than homemade and I've always found that focusing on really tasty foods makes dieting easier. This is why I eat a roasted breast of chicken with skin and bones-in more often than I do boneless, skinless chicken breast, and why if I made the latter it will generally be part of some preparation (and I'm often going to prefer thighs for the preparation).
Yep. Big difference between, "I need to clean up my diet" and "I am a clean eater" or "I eat clean".
One is a figure of speech, the other is a proclamation of superiority, IMO...
I don't see why "I eat clean" would automatically be seen as a proclamation of superiority any more than "I eat a flexible diet" or "I eat vegetarian" or "I follow IF' would be. In all of these cases we are being informed how the user eats and it's logical to assume they think it's the best way to eat."
I think that even beyond the actual usage of the words and definitions, this is one of the problems with the terms people use in communication, and for whatever reason some of these words and terms seem to be almost like triggers here on MFP.
It's not the words or phrases themselves, it's the attachments people making as it being good, bad, judgmental, imposing, etc, etc. And it seems that often those attachments have to do with people using them as some sort of magic fix that one diet to superior to another. Which somewhat boggles me, as I see the vast majority of eating choices as personal preference, and accept that what works best for me might not be what works best for you. Since I don't cling to my way being the only way, it doesn't offend me that others eat differently, or use terms like clean eating.
I agree. I feel the same way. The phrase doesn't bother me at all, but honestly it wouldn't bother me even if the person using it did feel it was a superior diet. I know that someone thinking something doesn't make it true.
It doesn't bother me if someone wants to call their diet "clean" and considers mine "not clean." What concerns me is the people who are newer to this getting the idea that certain foods must be eliminated, adopting talismanic rules that are pretty meaningless ("nothing with a barcode," "nothing with ingredients you can't pronounce," "shop only in the outer aisles"), or thinking that "clean eating" will automatically result in weight loss.
Obesity is rough physically and emotionally. I hate to see people tricked or misled into putting in effort that isn't going to provide a very good return. The effort that is used to achieve "cleanness" in eating could be used instead to learn about the actual qualities and characteristics of food and choosing what to eat based on what's actually in a food and how it fits in the overall context of a person's diet and life.
Before joining this site I would have thought this was silly. I would have thought "Who would be ignorant enough to think that these rules were absolute and not just general 'rules of thumb'".
This place was an eye opener for me.
Well when a diet industry exists and profits off repeat customers by obscuring the root cause of weight, that's where you end up. People believe the rules of thumb work in and of themselves and that they failed in adherence somehow so that is why they seek advice. They wonder what food they thought was clean but isn't has prevented their weight loss.
And that line of thinking doesn't seem the least bit bizarre? It does to me. Honestly I can't remember a time when I didn't know that calories is what causes weight gain. I'm not sure who to thank for that. My mother, the time I was born, what?
Probably so. Though reading posts on this site would make me think my mother (and most other adults I knew as a child) did everything wrong by telling me if I eat too much I'd get fat. Apparently that causes obesity and eating disorders.0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »
I would bank on those 2...Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »robertw486 wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »sunnybeaches105 wrote: »I still use the term when I diet, as in "I need to clean up my diet again." It's not the end-all be-all approach and there are way too many interpretations of it from people who use it as a way of showing their own self-righteousness, but salads, veggies and lean meats certainly make up the vast majority of my diet. The debates over what is and what isn't clean seem pretty silly, but I'm enjoying this thread . . .
Like I said upthread, I don't really like or use it in that sense either, but I understand what someone means when they say it -- I am trying to eat healthier than my prior diet, according to my own understanding of healthy -- and don't object to it at all or ever claim that usage is unclear.
I see that as different from saying smugly "I'm a clean eater!" and then when asked what that means getting mad and saying "you know!" or "NO processed food EVER" when the person eats as much processed food as I do. (And my main objection here is to the ignorant idea that process=not nutritious or bad for us, as I think much of the processed stuff I eat, like plain greek yogurt and smoked salmon, is plenty nutritious and would be dumb to cut out, others (like dried pasta) form the backbone for really nutritious meals or can be important time-saving staples (canned tomatoes and beans), and still others are just tasty and I see no reason it would be healthier to give them up entirely vs. eating them in moderation (ice cream).) None of that means I don't care about nutrition or my overall diet or health, which is what the next assertion about non clean eaters usually is.
I don't really eat stuff like fast food or convenience foods (frozen meals) or lots of packaged sweets, so I don't consider cutting these things out as a special diet, and I think people who enjoy them or benefit from them can include them in an overall healthy diet.
I also think whether a diet is healthy depends more on (1) appropriate calories/amounts; and (2) what IS in the diet (adequate protein and fiber and healthy fats, lots of vegetables), so approaching health or nutrition as about what one does not eat rather than about including the foods we need (ideally prepared so that they are super tasty) seems to me quite misguided. That doesn't mean I don't occasionally realize I'm overdoing some less nutritious food and having trouble meeting my overall goals as a result -- sure I do. IMO, that's about balance.
I also don't really like the underlying idea that foods being too enjoyable is bad (the processed foods have been made extra hard to resist thing). I don't believe at all that highly processed foods are tastier than homemade and I've always found that focusing on really tasty foods makes dieting easier. This is why I eat a roasted breast of chicken with skin and bones-in more often than I do boneless, skinless chicken breast, and why if I made the latter it will generally be part of some preparation (and I'm often going to prefer thighs for the preparation).
Yep. Big difference between, "I need to clean up my diet" and "I am a clean eater" or "I eat clean".
One is a figure of speech, the other is a proclamation of superiority, IMO...
I don't see why "I eat clean" would automatically be seen as a proclamation of superiority any more than "I eat a flexible diet" or "I eat vegetarian" or "I follow IF' would be. In all of these cases we are being informed how the user eats and it's logical to assume they think it's the best way to eat."
I think that even beyond the actual usage of the words and definitions, this is one of the problems with the terms people use in communication, and for whatever reason some of these words and terms seem to be almost like triggers here on MFP.
It's not the words or phrases themselves, it's the attachments people making as it being good, bad, judgmental, imposing, etc, etc. And it seems that often those attachments have to do with people using them as some sort of magic fix that one diet to superior to another. Which somewhat boggles me, as I see the vast majority of eating choices as personal preference, and accept that what works best for me might not be what works best for you. Since I don't cling to my way being the only way, it doesn't offend me that others eat differently, or use terms like clean eating.
I agree. I feel the same way. The phrase doesn't bother me at all, but honestly it wouldn't bother me even if the person using it did feel it was a superior diet. I know that someone thinking something doesn't make it true.
It doesn't bother me if someone wants to call their diet "clean" and considers mine "not clean." What concerns me is the people who are newer to this getting the idea that certain foods must be eliminated, adopting talismanic rules that are pretty meaningless ("nothing with a barcode," "nothing with ingredients you can't pronounce," "shop only in the outer aisles"), or thinking that "clean eating" will automatically result in weight loss.
Obesity is rough physically and emotionally. I hate to see people tricked or misled into putting in effort that isn't going to provide a very good return. The effort that is used to achieve "cleanness" in eating could be used instead to learn about the actual qualities and characteristics of food and choosing what to eat based on what's actually in a food and how it fits in the overall context of a person's diet and life.
Before joining this site I would have thought this was silly. I would have thought "Who would be ignorant enough to think that these rules were absolute and not just general 'rules of thumb'".
This place was an eye opener for me.
Well when a diet industry exists and profits off repeat customers by obscuring the root cause of weight, that's where you end up. People believe the rules of thumb work in and of themselves and that they failed in adherence somehow so that is why they seek advice. They wonder what food they thought was clean but isn't has prevented their weight loss.
And that line of thinking doesn't seem the least bit bizarre? It does to me. Honestly I can't remember a time when I didn't know that calories is what causes weight gain. I'm not sure who to thank for that. My mother, the time I was born, what?
Probably so. Though reading posts on this site would make me think my mother (and most other adults I knew as a child) did everything wrong by telling me if I eat too much I'd get fat. Apparently that causes obesity and eating disorders.
Who says that?
Oh my gosh I see it on here all the time. It's as if you should never utter the word "fat" in front of children.0 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »
I would bank on those 2...Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »robertw486 wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »sunnybeaches105 wrote: »I still use the term when I diet, as in "I need to clean up my diet again." It's not the end-all be-all approach and there are way too many interpretations of it from people who use it as a way of showing their own self-righteousness, but salads, veggies and lean meats certainly make up the vast majority of my diet. The debates over what is and what isn't clean seem pretty silly, but I'm enjoying this thread . . .
Like I said upthread, I don't really like or use it in that sense either, but I understand what someone means when they say it -- I am trying to eat healthier than my prior diet, according to my own understanding of healthy -- and don't object to it at all or ever claim that usage is unclear.
I see that as different from saying smugly "I'm a clean eater!" and then when asked what that means getting mad and saying "you know!" or "NO processed food EVER" when the person eats as much processed food as I do. (And my main objection here is to the ignorant idea that process=not nutritious or bad for us, as I think much of the processed stuff I eat, like plain greek yogurt and smoked salmon, is plenty nutritious and would be dumb to cut out, others (like dried pasta) form the backbone for really nutritious meals or can be important time-saving staples (canned tomatoes and beans), and still others are just tasty and I see no reason it would be healthier to give them up entirely vs. eating them in moderation (ice cream).) None of that means I don't care about nutrition or my overall diet or health, which is what the next assertion about non clean eaters usually is.
I don't really eat stuff like fast food or convenience foods (frozen meals) or lots of packaged sweets, so I don't consider cutting these things out as a special diet, and I think people who enjoy them or benefit from them can include them in an overall healthy diet.
I also think whether a diet is healthy depends more on (1) appropriate calories/amounts; and (2) what IS in the diet (adequate protein and fiber and healthy fats, lots of vegetables), so approaching health or nutrition as about what one does not eat rather than about including the foods we need (ideally prepared so that they are super tasty) seems to me quite misguided. That doesn't mean I don't occasionally realize I'm overdoing some less nutritious food and having trouble meeting my overall goals as a result -- sure I do. IMO, that's about balance.
I also don't really like the underlying idea that foods being too enjoyable is bad (the processed foods have been made extra hard to resist thing). I don't believe at all that highly processed foods are tastier than homemade and I've always found that focusing on really tasty foods makes dieting easier. This is why I eat a roasted breast of chicken with skin and bones-in more often than I do boneless, skinless chicken breast, and why if I made the latter it will generally be part of some preparation (and I'm often going to prefer thighs for the preparation).
Yep. Big difference between, "I need to clean up my diet" and "I am a clean eater" or "I eat clean".
One is a figure of speech, the other is a proclamation of superiority, IMO...
I don't see why "I eat clean" would automatically be seen as a proclamation of superiority any more than "I eat a flexible diet" or "I eat vegetarian" or "I follow IF' would be. In all of these cases we are being informed how the user eats and it's logical to assume they think it's the best way to eat."
I think that even beyond the actual usage of the words and definitions, this is one of the problems with the terms people use in communication, and for whatever reason some of these words and terms seem to be almost like triggers here on MFP.
It's not the words or phrases themselves, it's the attachments people making as it being good, bad, judgmental, imposing, etc, etc. And it seems that often those attachments have to do with people using them as some sort of magic fix that one diet to superior to another. Which somewhat boggles me, as I see the vast majority of eating choices as personal preference, and accept that what works best for me might not be what works best for you. Since I don't cling to my way being the only way, it doesn't offend me that others eat differently, or use terms like clean eating.
I agree. I feel the same way. The phrase doesn't bother me at all, but honestly it wouldn't bother me even if the person using it did feel it was a superior diet. I know that someone thinking something doesn't make it true.
It doesn't bother me if someone wants to call their diet "clean" and considers mine "not clean." What concerns me is the people who are newer to this getting the idea that certain foods must be eliminated, adopting talismanic rules that are pretty meaningless ("nothing with a barcode," "nothing with ingredients you can't pronounce," "shop only in the outer aisles"), or thinking that "clean eating" will automatically result in weight loss.
Obesity is rough physically and emotionally. I hate to see people tricked or misled into putting in effort that isn't going to provide a very good return. The effort that is used to achieve "cleanness" in eating could be used instead to learn about the actual qualities and characteristics of food and choosing what to eat based on what's actually in a food and how it fits in the overall context of a person's diet and life.
Before joining this site I would have thought this was silly. I would have thought "Who would be ignorant enough to think that these rules were absolute and not just general 'rules of thumb'".
This place was an eye opener for me.
Well when a diet industry exists and profits off repeat customers by obscuring the root cause of weight, that's where you end up. People believe the rules of thumb work in and of themselves and that they failed in adherence somehow so that is why they seek advice. They wonder what food they thought was clean but isn't has prevented their weight loss.
And that line of thinking doesn't seem the least bit bizarre? It does to me. Honestly I can't remember a time when I didn't know that calories is what causes weight gain. I'm not sure who to thank for that. My mother, the time I was born, what?
Probably so. Though reading posts on this site would make me think my mother (and most other adults I knew as a child) did everything wrong by telling me if I eat too much I'd get fat. Apparently that causes obesity and eating disorders.
Who says that?
Oh my gosh I see it on here all the time. It's as if you should never utter the word "fat" in front of children.
You should see the pushback on a parenting board when you say you don't feed your kids sugary treats every day....0 -
clean eating is when you wash all your food with soap and water before eating it. Super clean!0
-
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »
I would bank on those 2...Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »robertw486 wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »sunnybeaches105 wrote: »I still use the term when I diet, as in "I need to clean up my diet again." It's not the end-all be-all approach and there are way too many interpretations of it from people who use it as a way of showing their own self-righteousness, but salads, veggies and lean meats certainly make up the vast majority of my diet. The debates over what is and what isn't clean seem pretty silly, but I'm enjoying this thread . . .
Like I said upthread, I don't really like or use it in that sense either, but I understand what someone means when they say it -- I am trying to eat healthier than my prior diet, according to my own understanding of healthy -- and don't object to it at all or ever claim that usage is unclear.
I see that as different from saying smugly "I'm a clean eater!" and then when asked what that means getting mad and saying "you know!" or "NO processed food EVER" when the person eats as much processed food as I do. (And my main objection here is to the ignorant idea that process=not nutritious or bad for us, as I think much of the processed stuff I eat, like plain greek yogurt and smoked salmon, is plenty nutritious and would be dumb to cut out, others (like dried pasta) form the backbone for really nutritious meals or can be important time-saving staples (canned tomatoes and beans), and still others are just tasty and I see no reason it would be healthier to give them up entirely vs. eating them in moderation (ice cream).) None of that means I don't care about nutrition or my overall diet or health, which is what the next assertion about non clean eaters usually is.
I don't really eat stuff like fast food or convenience foods (frozen meals) or lots of packaged sweets, so I don't consider cutting these things out as a special diet, and I think people who enjoy them or benefit from them can include them in an overall healthy diet.
I also think whether a diet is healthy depends more on (1) appropriate calories/amounts; and (2) what IS in the diet (adequate protein and fiber and healthy fats, lots of vegetables), so approaching health or nutrition as about what one does not eat rather than about including the foods we need (ideally prepared so that they are super tasty) seems to me quite misguided. That doesn't mean I don't occasionally realize I'm overdoing some less nutritious food and having trouble meeting my overall goals as a result -- sure I do. IMO, that's about balance.
I also don't really like the underlying idea that foods being too enjoyable is bad (the processed foods have been made extra hard to resist thing). I don't believe at all that highly processed foods are tastier than homemade and I've always found that focusing on really tasty foods makes dieting easier. This is why I eat a roasted breast of chicken with skin and bones-in more often than I do boneless, skinless chicken breast, and why if I made the latter it will generally be part of some preparation (and I'm often going to prefer thighs for the preparation).
Yep. Big difference between, "I need to clean up my diet" and "I am a clean eater" or "I eat clean".
One is a figure of speech, the other is a proclamation of superiority, IMO...
I don't see why "I eat clean" would automatically be seen as a proclamation of superiority any more than "I eat a flexible diet" or "I eat vegetarian" or "I follow IF' would be. In all of these cases we are being informed how the user eats and it's logical to assume they think it's the best way to eat."
I think that even beyond the actual usage of the words and definitions, this is one of the problems with the terms people use in communication, and for whatever reason some of these words and terms seem to be almost like triggers here on MFP.
It's not the words or phrases themselves, it's the attachments people making as it being good, bad, judgmental, imposing, etc, etc. And it seems that often those attachments have to do with people using them as some sort of magic fix that one diet to superior to another. Which somewhat boggles me, as I see the vast majority of eating choices as personal preference, and accept that what works best for me might not be what works best for you. Since I don't cling to my way being the only way, it doesn't offend me that others eat differently, or use terms like clean eating.
I agree. I feel the same way. The phrase doesn't bother me at all, but honestly it wouldn't bother me even if the person using it did feel it was a superior diet. I know that someone thinking something doesn't make it true.
It doesn't bother me if someone wants to call their diet "clean" and considers mine "not clean." What concerns me is the people who are newer to this getting the idea that certain foods must be eliminated, adopting talismanic rules that are pretty meaningless ("nothing with a barcode," "nothing with ingredients you can't pronounce," "shop only in the outer aisles"), or thinking that "clean eating" will automatically result in weight loss.
Obesity is rough physically and emotionally. I hate to see people tricked or misled into putting in effort that isn't going to provide a very good return. The effort that is used to achieve "cleanness" in eating could be used instead to learn about the actual qualities and characteristics of food and choosing what to eat based on what's actually in a food and how it fits in the overall context of a person's diet and life.
Before joining this site I would have thought this was silly. I would have thought "Who would be ignorant enough to think that these rules were absolute and not just general 'rules of thumb'".
This place was an eye opener for me.
Well when a diet industry exists and profits off repeat customers by obscuring the root cause of weight, that's where you end up. People believe the rules of thumb work in and of themselves and that they failed in adherence somehow so that is why they seek advice. They wonder what food they thought was clean but isn't has prevented their weight loss.
And that line of thinking doesn't seem the least bit bizarre? It does to me. Honestly I can't remember a time when I didn't know that calories is what causes weight gain. I'm not sure who to thank for that. My mother, the time I was born, what?
Probably so. Though reading posts on this site would make me think my mother (and most other adults I knew as a child) did everything wrong by telling me if I eat too much I'd get fat. Apparently that causes obesity and eating disorders.
Who says that?
Oh my gosh I see it on here all the time. It's as if you should never utter the word "fat" in front of children.
I'd think the general consensus is you shouldn't call a child fat or make them feel bad if they were to gain weight.
Then again I talk about it differently to my children than a lot of MFP would from what I see. I readily tell my children I'm overweight, that I was obese, and that while fat would be one way to describe me that I'm okay with them using to describe me, I don't feel they should refer to another person as any of those 3 terms.0 -
ClosetBayesian wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »
I would bank on those 2...Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »robertw486 wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »sunnybeaches105 wrote: »I still use the term when I diet, as in "I need to clean up my diet again." It's not the end-all be-all approach and there are way too many interpretations of it from people who use it as a way of showing their own self-righteousness, but salads, veggies and lean meats certainly make up the vast majority of my diet. The debates over what is and what isn't clean seem pretty silly, but I'm enjoying this thread . . .
Like I said upthread, I don't really like or use it in that sense either, but I understand what someone means when they say it -- I am trying to eat healthier than my prior diet, according to my own understanding of healthy -- and don't object to it at all or ever claim that usage is unclear.
I see that as different from saying smugly "I'm a clean eater!" and then when asked what that means getting mad and saying "you know!" or "NO processed food EVER" when the person eats as much processed food as I do. (And my main objection here is to the ignorant idea that process=not nutritious or bad for us, as I think much of the processed stuff I eat, like plain greek yogurt and smoked salmon, is plenty nutritious and would be dumb to cut out, others (like dried pasta) form the backbone for really nutritious meals or can be important time-saving staples (canned tomatoes and beans), and still others are just tasty and I see no reason it would be healthier to give them up entirely vs. eating them in moderation (ice cream).) None of that means I don't care about nutrition or my overall diet or health, which is what the next assertion about non clean eaters usually is.
I don't really eat stuff like fast food or convenience foods (frozen meals) or lots of packaged sweets, so I don't consider cutting these things out as a special diet, and I think people who enjoy them or benefit from them can include them in an overall healthy diet.
I also think whether a diet is healthy depends more on (1) appropriate calories/amounts; and (2) what IS in the diet (adequate protein and fiber and healthy fats, lots of vegetables), so approaching health or nutrition as about what one does not eat rather than about including the foods we need (ideally prepared so that they are super tasty) seems to me quite misguided. That doesn't mean I don't occasionally realize I'm overdoing some less nutritious food and having trouble meeting my overall goals as a result -- sure I do. IMO, that's about balance.
I also don't really like the underlying idea that foods being too enjoyable is bad (the processed foods have been made extra hard to resist thing). I don't believe at all that highly processed foods are tastier than homemade and I've always found that focusing on really tasty foods makes dieting easier. This is why I eat a roasted breast of chicken with skin and bones-in more often than I do boneless, skinless chicken breast, and why if I made the latter it will generally be part of some preparation (and I'm often going to prefer thighs for the preparation).
Yep. Big difference between, "I need to clean up my diet" and "I am a clean eater" or "I eat clean".
One is a figure of speech, the other is a proclamation of superiority, IMO...
I don't see why "I eat clean" would automatically be seen as a proclamation of superiority any more than "I eat a flexible diet" or "I eat vegetarian" or "I follow IF' would be. In all of these cases we are being informed how the user eats and it's logical to assume they think it's the best way to eat."
I think that even beyond the actual usage of the words and definitions, this is one of the problems with the terms people use in communication, and for whatever reason some of these words and terms seem to be almost like triggers here on MFP.
It's not the words or phrases themselves, it's the attachments people making as it being good, bad, judgmental, imposing, etc, etc. And it seems that often those attachments have to do with people using them as some sort of magic fix that one diet to superior to another. Which somewhat boggles me, as I see the vast majority of eating choices as personal preference, and accept that what works best for me might not be what works best for you. Since I don't cling to my way being the only way, it doesn't offend me that others eat differently, or use terms like clean eating.
I agree. I feel the same way. The phrase doesn't bother me at all, but honestly it wouldn't bother me even if the person using it did feel it was a superior diet. I know that someone thinking something doesn't make it true.
It doesn't bother me if someone wants to call their diet "clean" and considers mine "not clean." What concerns me is the people who are newer to this getting the idea that certain foods must be eliminated, adopting talismanic rules that are pretty meaningless ("nothing with a barcode," "nothing with ingredients you can't pronounce," "shop only in the outer aisles"), or thinking that "clean eating" will automatically result in weight loss.
Obesity is rough physically and emotionally. I hate to see people tricked or misled into putting in effort that isn't going to provide a very good return. The effort that is used to achieve "cleanness" in eating could be used instead to learn about the actual qualities and characteristics of food and choosing what to eat based on what's actually in a food and how it fits in the overall context of a person's diet and life.
Before joining this site I would have thought this was silly. I would have thought "Who would be ignorant enough to think that these rules were absolute and not just general 'rules of thumb'".
This place was an eye opener for me.
Well when a diet industry exists and profits off repeat customers by obscuring the root cause of weight, that's where you end up. People believe the rules of thumb work in and of themselves and that they failed in adherence somehow so that is why they seek advice. They wonder what food they thought was clean but isn't has prevented their weight loss.
And that line of thinking doesn't seem the least bit bizarre? It does to me. Honestly I can't remember a time when I didn't know that calories is what causes weight gain. I'm not sure who to thank for that. My mother, the time I was born, what?
Probably so. Though reading posts on this site would make me think my mother (and most other adults I knew as a child) did everything wrong by telling me if I eat too much I'd get fat. Apparently that causes obesity and eating disorders.
Who says that?
Oh my gosh I see it on here all the time. It's as if you should never utter the word "fat" in front of children.
You should see the pushback on a parenting board when you say you don't feed your kids sugary treats every day....
My children are grown and off on their own now. But they didn't get dessert if they didn't eat dinner, so not every day.0 -
DancingDarl wrote: »Why do people even do Paleo? It looks ridiculous
Some would also say drinking ACV daily looks ridiculous, yet we've had two threads about that recently.0 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »
I would bank on those 2...Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »robertw486 wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »sunnybeaches105 wrote: »I still use the term when I diet, as in "I need to clean up my diet again." It's not the end-all be-all approach and there are way too many interpretations of it from people who use it as a way of showing their own self-righteousness, but salads, veggies and lean meats certainly make up the vast majority of my diet. The debates over what is and what isn't clean seem pretty silly, but I'm enjoying this thread . . .
Like I said upthread, I don't really like or use it in that sense either, but I understand what someone means when they say it -- I am trying to eat healthier than my prior diet, according to my own understanding of healthy -- and don't object to it at all or ever claim that usage is unclear.
I see that as different from saying smugly "I'm a clean eater!" and then when asked what that means getting mad and saying "you know!" or "NO processed food EVER" when the person eats as much processed food as I do. (And my main objection here is to the ignorant idea that process=not nutritious or bad for us, as I think much of the processed stuff I eat, like plain greek yogurt and smoked salmon, is plenty nutritious and would be dumb to cut out, others (like dried pasta) form the backbone for really nutritious meals or can be important time-saving staples (canned tomatoes and beans), and still others are just tasty and I see no reason it would be healthier to give them up entirely vs. eating them in moderation (ice cream).) None of that means I don't care about nutrition or my overall diet or health, which is what the next assertion about non clean eaters usually is.
I don't really eat stuff like fast food or convenience foods (frozen meals) or lots of packaged sweets, so I don't consider cutting these things out as a special diet, and I think people who enjoy them or benefit from them can include them in an overall healthy diet.
I also think whether a diet is healthy depends more on (1) appropriate calories/amounts; and (2) what IS in the diet (adequate protein and fiber and healthy fats, lots of vegetables), so approaching health or nutrition as about what one does not eat rather than about including the foods we need (ideally prepared so that they are super tasty) seems to me quite misguided. That doesn't mean I don't occasionally realize I'm overdoing some less nutritious food and having trouble meeting my overall goals as a result -- sure I do. IMO, that's about balance.
I also don't really like the underlying idea that foods being too enjoyable is bad (the processed foods have been made extra hard to resist thing). I don't believe at all that highly processed foods are tastier than homemade and I've always found that focusing on really tasty foods makes dieting easier. This is why I eat a roasted breast of chicken with skin and bones-in more often than I do boneless, skinless chicken breast, and why if I made the latter it will generally be part of some preparation (and I'm often going to prefer thighs for the preparation).
Yep. Big difference between, "I need to clean up my diet" and "I am a clean eater" or "I eat clean".
One is a figure of speech, the other is a proclamation of superiority, IMO...
I don't see why "I eat clean" would automatically be seen as a proclamation of superiority any more than "I eat a flexible diet" or "I eat vegetarian" or "I follow IF' would be. In all of these cases we are being informed how the user eats and it's logical to assume they think it's the best way to eat."
I think that even beyond the actual usage of the words and definitions, this is one of the problems with the terms people use in communication, and for whatever reason some of these words and terms seem to be almost like triggers here on MFP.
It's not the words or phrases themselves, it's the attachments people making as it being good, bad, judgmental, imposing, etc, etc. And it seems that often those attachments have to do with people using them as some sort of magic fix that one diet to superior to another. Which somewhat boggles me, as I see the vast majority of eating choices as personal preference, and accept that what works best for me might not be what works best for you. Since I don't cling to my way being the only way, it doesn't offend me that others eat differently, or use terms like clean eating.
I agree. I feel the same way. The phrase doesn't bother me at all, but honestly it wouldn't bother me even if the person using it did feel it was a superior diet. I know that someone thinking something doesn't make it true.
It doesn't bother me if someone wants to call their diet "clean" and considers mine "not clean." What concerns me is the people who are newer to this getting the idea that certain foods must be eliminated, adopting talismanic rules that are pretty meaningless ("nothing with a barcode," "nothing with ingredients you can't pronounce," "shop only in the outer aisles"), or thinking that "clean eating" will automatically result in weight loss.
Obesity is rough physically and emotionally. I hate to see people tricked or misled into putting in effort that isn't going to provide a very good return. The effort that is used to achieve "cleanness" in eating could be used instead to learn about the actual qualities and characteristics of food and choosing what to eat based on what's actually in a food and how it fits in the overall context of a person's diet and life.
Before joining this site I would have thought this was silly. I would have thought "Who would be ignorant enough to think that these rules were absolute and not just general 'rules of thumb'".
This place was an eye opener for me.
Well when a diet industry exists and profits off repeat customers by obscuring the root cause of weight, that's where you end up. People believe the rules of thumb work in and of themselves and that they failed in adherence somehow so that is why they seek advice. They wonder what food they thought was clean but isn't has prevented their weight loss.
And that line of thinking doesn't seem the least bit bizarre? It does to me. Honestly I can't remember a time when I didn't know that calories is what causes weight gain. I'm not sure who to thank for that. My mother, the time I was born, what?
Probably so. Though reading posts on this site would make me think my mother (and most other adults I knew as a child) did everything wrong by telling me if I eat too much I'd get fat. Apparently that causes obesity and eating disorders.
Who says that?
Oh my gosh I see it on here all the time. It's as if you should never utter the word "fat" in front of children.
Hmm, I must ignore those threads.
I don't think you should call children fat, of course, but that's hardly the same thing.0 -
"If it grows or had a mother, it is ok to eat it."
I like that one.
0 -
lisawinning4losing wrote: »"If it grows or had a mother, it is ok to eat it."
I like that one.
Please, eat this it grows so it is ok:
1 -
lisawinning4losing wrote: »"If it grows or had a mother, it is ok to eat it."
I like that one.
hmmmm humans have mothers, so I guess those are OK to eat too...1 -
The cannibals think so...lisawinning4losing wrote: »"If it grows or had a mother, it is ok to eat it."
I like that one.
hmmmm humans have mothers, so I guess those are OK to eat too...
1 -
lisawinning4losing wrote: »"If it grows or had a mother, it is ok to eat it."
I like that one.
Please, eat this it grows so it is ok:
Will this make me bigger?1 -
lisawinning4losing wrote: »"If it grows or had a mother, it is ok to eat it."
I like that one.
hmmmm humans have mothers, so I guess those are OK to eat too...
I'll take statements that mean something else when said in chit-chat for $500 Alex.0 -
threads like this just make me laugh and bring out how ridiculous the concept of clean eating truly is...
I can never understand why someone would want to box in their dietary choices with arbitrary definitions of what is clean or unclean, and or bad and good ....0 -
threads like this just make me laugh and bring out how ridiculous the concept of clean eating truly is...
I can never understand why someone would want to box in their dietary choices with arbitrary definitions of what is clean or unclean, and or bad and good ....
The two don't necessarily go together though. I have a definition for clean eating. I don't always eat clean.0 -
There is a magazine called Clean Eating that is a pretty good publication. Google it. There you will find all you every wanted to know about this topic. Good luck.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 392.1K Introduce Yourself
- 43.6K Getting Started
- 259.9K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.7K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.4K Fitness and Exercise
- 403 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.8K Motivation and Support
- 7.9K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.4K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 999 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.4K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions