Processed "Gunk" vs "Clean" Eating
Replies
-
-
nutmegoreo wrote: »nutmegoreo wrote: »
What if the dough is dirty? I mean have you seen some of those kitchens?
I always presumed the debris were spices
Didn't you ever hear the weight-loss rule that you never mix crushed roach with carbs?
I am beginning to fear my mom didn't teach me nearly enough about cooking...4 -
LowCarb4Me2016 wrote: »LowCarb4Me2016 wrote: »LowCarb4Me2016 wrote: »Chef_Barbell wrote: »Not to derail this thread too much, though that's probably inevitable, but...
I understand why people balk at terms like clean or junk when talking about foods. But in most cases, it's not hard to understand what someone is trying to get at when asking these types of questions.
There will always be people trying to be funny or snarky or whatever else and posts unhelpful things in response to these types of threads... but for those of us who are trying to be helpful, is there a better way to talk about these types of foods? Better terms to use? These types of threads aren't going away, and I do think they merit conversation for many people.
Regarding "clean" foods... is it better to say something like whole foods?
What about junk food... is there a better term?
I just call it food. *shrug* Everything else is just extra to me.
Yes.
Perhaps if we get away from the 'good food/bad food' concept, we can focus on the real issue which is the overall diet.
Did the food prevent me meeting my dietary requirements/goals?
No? Then it was a good choice.
Yes? Then I could have (and should have if this is a frequent issue) made a better choice.
Isn't that what a lot of them are trying to do, though? They've realized that certain foods cause more problems than they alleviate and they're looking for a different way of eating. Its the language used that seems to cause controversy.
You mean the people wanting to eat 'clean' or not eat 'junk'?
I presume they want to eat better, whatever that means to them.
Some just want to lose weight and think cutting out that stuff is the fastest or only way to do it.
Others think that if they eat that stuff it means they can't have a good diet.
I don't notice that many who want to change their diets in this way seem to know what exactly their diets are lacking (save appropriate calorie limits if they want to lose or gain weight). I don't notice posts about how they're not meeting macro and micro goals and that's why they want to cut out processed foods and junk. In fact, the one or two threads I remember where OP wanted to eat 'clean' and mentioned macros or micros were about whether it was OK to include protein powder because they weren't meeting protein goals while eating 'clean'.
I do notice posts where people are concerned about not getting enough of a specific macro or micro, but I don't recall one where OP wanted to change their whole diet because of it. They ask 'what foods are good sources of X', and presumably alter their diet to fit more of those things.
Obviously, trigger foods and food sensitivities should be at the least reduced and preferably eliminated. But these wouldn't encompass the entire group of processed foods or the entire group of 'junk' foods - the groups are too broad.
I agree that people are in different places educationally speaking. I think if someone eats a lot of Doritos and mac n cheese and decides to start eating more fresh made salads and grilled chicken, they are in fact attempting to change their macros even if they don't use the proper MFP lingo. Maybe they'll do well and maybe they won't but they are at least attempting to better their health. Eventually they'll come around to discussing adding back in Doritos if they find they still need them and are serious about continuing on. There are people who eliminate certain foods they used to love and find they just don't need it in their lives. To me its just as harmful to tell someone wanting to eat "clean" that they're wrong as it for the "clean" eater to tell others not to eat processed food. Neither are opening the lines of communication, which brings me back to the point I was originally addressing regarding language.
Which to me would be opened up if we got away from terms without a standard definition like 'clean' and 'junk'.
Ask someone what they mean by 'clean' or 'junk' and the next thing you know there's a full-on debate and/or OP gets offended, assuming you are pretending ignorance.
On the other hand, if the topic is 'I want to eat better, help', I can respond with 'what does your diet look like now?', 'Are there specific things you want to improve?' and not be taken for a jerk by OP or spark a bunch of back and forth on the definition of vague
I agree with what you're saying, I do. I just don't think it's reasonable to expect a newbie to use the same terminology as the veteran MFP'ers. And if the veterans have an idea of what the person is asking, why bog the discussion down with a dozen pages of semantics? I'm not trying to be accusatory, I'm just trying to figure out a way to help those just getting started.
No, can't expect hardly any noobs to know when the boards are littered with that terminology. And any noob that doesn't lurk and take the temperature of the boards before posting wouldn't know even if that weren't the case. A sticky would help a small fraction of noobs, but most don't read them.
Really, the problem is that there is no way to avoid asking what 'clean' or 'junk' means to the OP in order to provide helpful advice. Otherwise, all of the answers are just spit-balling (i.e. contributing to pages of semantics).
ETA: quote tags are wonky, added an extra /quote just so my reply would be separate from the quote0 -
LowCarb4Me2016 wrote: »This article is questionable as it references Katy Perry in the first paragraph but it sums up what I think when someone mentions clean eating.
"At its simplest, clean eating is about eating whole foods, or "real" foods — those that are un- or minimally processed, refined, and handled, making them as close to their natural form as possible. "
http://www.fitnessmagazine.com/weight-loss/plans/diets/clean-eating/?page=0
Not saying I think it's better than any other eating plan.
What does that even mean? Minimally processed vs somewhat processed?
Look, there are no bad foods just bad diets ...4 -
LowCarb4Me2016 wrote: »This article is questionable as it references Katy Perry in the first paragraph but it sums up what I think when someone mentions clean eating.
"At its simplest, clean eating is about eating whole foods, or "real" foods — those that are un- or minimally processed, refined, and handled, making them as close to their natural form as possible. "
But most people translate this as "it's not eating ANY processed foods." Also, for the obsessives like me (and although I didn't call it "clean eating," when I was into something similar of my own making, I was obsessive), as close to nature form as possible isn't much of an out. Is cheese (good artisan cheese) as close to its natural form as possible? Obviously not, as you could drink raw milk or something. Is cheese therefore not clean? Some clean eaters think so, some do not, but to the extent it's about avoiding processed as much as possible it's obviously not, IMO.
Flour -- as minimally processed as possible or not? What if I got a handmill like someone in a book I've read did? What if I knew the mill owner and it was some craft thing -- and one issue with all this junk is that it very quickly becomes a hobby for those with money to spend and who want to feel better about themselves for buying things that most of the country cannot afford. But if we accept that flour and cane sugar is as minimally processed as possible (for what they are) or, heck, used honey instead of sugar, you can make pretty much any high cal thing out there (I am assuming butter is okay under the same principle).
And the nutritional benefit is not from avoiding flavored greek yogurt but only eating homemade yogurt from raw milk. It's from having a diet that's rich in nutrient dense foods and balanced, which you don't have to eschew processed foods (however illogically defined) to do it.
And I totally know you are not arguing in favor of clean eating here.
One thing that just always gets me is to be lectured about how clean eating is important and the rest of us eat poorly from someone who claims to eat NO processed foods but has Panera and protein powder and a ton of other things more processed than my average meal in her diary. The irony chokes me.
But of course that has not (thank goodness!) happened in this thread yet.
I do think it's important to get at what the person is really after and to help them out, as I said before, but to me part of that is educating on what "processing" really means and because it's such a ridiculous buzz word these days and some seem to really think it means "unhealthy" or "bad," explaining that it's a HUGE category of foods.
I also like to get into how processing and some of the other departures from what is strictly natural allow us today to have access to a much more nutritious diet than we might otherwise. For example, in Chicago there's a huge part of the year when I wouldn't have much fruit or veg or many types of fish, etc., without things like processing and it's close ally, the food industry (that freezes fish and brings it far from home to sell, that carts in produce from warmer climates. Not that this is unalloyed good in every way, but it's certainly not as inherently bad as some seem to think.
Curious if you really think this kind of educating is bad. I do think the meaning of words really does matter, although I don't think I ever jump on newbies to MFP for using words I think are not really what they mean or being misled by the clean eating trend into thinking things that aren't true.0 -
I appreciate all of the responses, there are several I would like to quote but that would take a long time. The only reason I used the word gunk is because I wasn't sure how else to phrase it. Also I would like to make it clear that I don't blame processes foods for my weight gain, I was over eating far to much on a daily basis and my activity level dropped a lot as well. I am now trying to re lose this weight and this post was just to see the differences eating more fresh food that doesn't come from a can or box could make on my weight loss.1
-
If your goal is straight weight loss all that matters is the calorie deficit ...however, one should always strive to get adequate nutritionI appreciate all of the responses, there are several I would like to quote but that would take a long time. The only reason I used the word gunk is because I wasn't sure how else to phrase it. Also I would like to make it clear that I don't blame processes foods for my weight gain, I was over eating far to much on a daily basis and my activity level dropped a lot as well. I am now trying to re lose this weight and this post was just to see the differences eating more fresh food that doesn't come from a can or box could make on my weight loss.
5 -
I would also like to make it clear that I was in no way saying I wanted to cut out all processes foods, I was just wondering if the increas in the amount of processed food compared to foods like fresh fruits and vegetables, was a reason my cravings are worse this time around and why I am more hungry. I suppose I should have been more clear1
-
I would also like to make it clear that I was in no way saying I wanted to cut out all processes foods, I was just wondering if the increas in the amount of processed food compared to foods like fresh fruits and vegetables, was a reason my cravings are worse this time around and why I am more hungry. I suppose I should have been more clear
I find when I significantly up my vegetable intake I'm more satisfied, but that's generally because I get more bang for my calorie buck.0 -
Not going to weigh in on "clean" eating, but I know there's a book about eating healthy while living in a dorm that might be helpful. I believe it's called The Dorm Room Diet. It might have ideas to cope with some of the challenges of eating healthy while not having a kitchen to prepare a lot of things from scratch.
I'll definitely look into this book. Thanks!0 -
Typical convenient foods I have now.
Granola bars that are peanut butter kinds, seems to fill me better, I love Luna.
Precooked udon noodles for spaghetti or stir fry.
Uncle Ben's ready rice.
Spaghetti or light Alfredo sauces, or Kikkomans sauce. I always add a serving of vegetable and low fat meat to a sauce and noodle/rice. I usually try to only use half the sauce due to sodium levels.
Light string cheese
Fruit, any kind.
I eat a lot of processed things but by adding quality meat, vegetable and fruit throughout the day I feel I am getting in good nutrients as well.
I am a working mother of 2 kids juggling job, homework, bath/bed routines, and working out 6 days a week. I only cook usually on the weekend and one or two nights during the week.0 -
I would also like to make it clear that I was in no way saying I wanted to cut out all processes foods, I was just wondering if the increas in the amount of processed food compared to foods like fresh fruits and vegetables, was a reason my cravings are worse this time around and why I am more hungry. I suppose I should have been more clear
I do find that when I cook from scratch, using whole foods as much as is practicable, I usually end up with tastier food that often is less calorie dense, hence I get to consume a greater volume of tastier food, compared to what I would get if I opened a can or a box or a frozen package of what is essentially a fully prepared convenience meal.
I don't think the convenience foods (or processed foods, if you prefer) cause cravings for me. I just think that, on average, they are less likely to satisfy my cravings and sate my hunger. But that doesn't mean there's no place for them in my diet/WOE/life at all.2 -
I am also mindful that you are in college. You can't make fancy meals and you don't want food to go bad before you eat it. Fruit preserves pretty well. Lettuce not so much. Carrots and cabbage keep well and are inexpensive. Keep your blessed soup. It's got veggies in it too.0
-
Typical convenient foods I have now.
Granola bars that are peanut butter kinds, seems to fill me better, I love Luna.
Precooked udon noodles for spaghetti or stir fry.
Uncle Ben's ready rice.
Spaghetti or light Alfredo sauces, or Kikkomans sauce. I always add a serving of vegetable and low fat meat to a sauce and noodle/rice. I usually try to only use half the sauce due to sodium levels.
Light string cheese
Fruit, any kind.
I eat a lot of processed things but by adding quality meat, vegetable and fruit throughout the day I feel I am getting in good nutrients as well.
I am a working mother of 2 kids juggling job, homework, bath/bed routines, and working out 6 days a week. I only cook usually on the weekend and one or two nights during the week.
This sounds a lot like me. I love to cook, but as a busy working mom of two, I rely on a lot of convenience things to help me get dinner on the table. That doesn't mean they are inherently unhealthy or I'm eating nothing but Doritos and Doughnits. But a skillet meal to which I add extra chicken and vegetables, or a jarred stir fry sauce, or even the dreaded Hamburger Helper is something that I think can be incorporated into an overall balanced diet and isn't taking away from my health and nutrition simply because it's processed or comes in a box.0 -
I'm a horrible cook, and I mean really bad, but seriously, it takes 20 minutes and not a whole lot of money to sautee some chicken and veggies. And that's not 20 minutes of standing there. It's prepping, putting it on and coming back to stir a few times.
I'm sure cooking simple things, for me, takes up WAY less time than driving to some take-out place, sitting in the long drive-thru line with all the other "I don't have the time to cook" customers, placing my order, driving to the window, waiting for them to "make (microwave and slap together) it for me fresh!!", then driving home.
With that said, I'll do those things for dinner, leaving room for my Milky Way, which takes two seconds to unwrap and fits into my calorie goals. It's so dirty it's actually brown! I looooooooooooove it. (Second runner-up: Three Musketeers.)
Weirdly, I'm losing weight this way. A lot of it.
0 -
LowCarb4Me2016 wrote: »LowCarb4Me2016 wrote: »LowCarb4Me2016 wrote: »Chef_Barbell wrote: »Not to derail this thread too much, though that's probably inevitable, but...
I understand why people balk at terms like clean or junk when talking about foods. But in most cases, it's not hard to understand what someone is trying to get at when asking these types of questions.
There will always be people trying to be funny or snarky or whatever else and posts unhelpful things in response to these types of threads... but for those of us who are trying to be helpful, is there a better way to talk about these types of foods? Better terms to use? These types of threads aren't going away, and I do think they merit conversation for many people.
Regarding "clean" foods... is it better to say something like whole foods?
What about junk food... is there a better term?
I just call it food. *shrug* Everything else is just extra to me.
Yes.
Perhaps if we get away from the 'good food/bad food' concept, we can focus on the real issue which is the overall diet.
Did the food prevent me meeting my dietary requirements/goals?
No? Then it was a good choice.
Yes? Then I could have (and should have if this is a frequent issue) made a better choice.
Isn't that what a lot of them are trying to do, though? They've realized that certain foods cause more problems than they alleviate and they're looking for a different way of eating. Its the language used that seems to cause controversy.
You mean the people wanting to eat 'clean' or not eat 'junk'?
I presume they want to eat better, whatever that means to them.
Some just want to lose weight and think cutting out that stuff is the fastest or only way to do it.
Others think that if they eat that stuff it means they can't have a good diet.
I don't notice that many who want to change their diets in this way seem to know what exactly their diets are lacking (save appropriate calorie limits if they want to lose or gain weight). I don't notice posts about how they're not meeting macro and micro goals and that's why they want to cut out processed foods and junk. In fact, the one or two threads I remember where OP wanted to eat 'clean' and mentioned macros or micros were about whether it was OK to include protein powder because they weren't meeting protein goals while eating 'clean'.
I do notice posts where people are concerned about not getting enough of a specific macro or micro, but I don't recall one where OP wanted to change their whole diet because of it. They ask 'what foods are good sources of X', and presumably alter their diet to fit more of those things.
Obviously, trigger foods and food sensitivities should be at the least reduced and preferably eliminated. But these wouldn't encompass the entire group of processed foods or the entire group of 'junk' foods - the groups are too broad.
I agree that people are in different places educationally speaking. I think if someone eats a lot of Doritos and mac n cheese and decides to start eating more fresh made salads and grilled chicken, they are in fact attempting to change their macros even if they don't use the proper MFP lingo. Maybe they'll do well and maybe they won't but they are at least attempting to better their health. Eventually they'll come around to discussing adding back in Doritos if they find they still need them and are serious about continuing on. There are people who eliminate certain foods they used to love and find they just don't need it in their lives. To me its just as harmful to tell someone wanting to eat "clean" that they're wrong as it for the "clean" eater to tell others not to eat processed food. Neither are opening the lines of communication, which brings me back to the point I was originally addressing regarding language.
Which to me would be opened up if we got away from terms without a standard definition like 'clean' and 'junk'.
Ask someone what they mean by 'clean' or 'junk' and the next thing you know there's a full-on debate and/or OP gets offended, assuming you are pretending ignorance.
On the other hand, if the topic is 'I want to eat better, help', I can respond with 'what does your diet look like now?', 'Are there specific things you want to improve?' and not be taken for a jerk by OP or spark a bunch of back and forth on the definition of vague
I agree with what you're saying, I do. I just don't think it's reasonable to expect a newbie to use the same terminology as the veteran MFP'ers. And if the veterans have an idea of what the person is asking, why bog the discussion down with a dozen pages of semantics? I'm not trying to be accusatory, I'm just trying to figure out a way to help those just getting started.
No, can't expect hardly any noobs to know when the boards are littered with that terminology. And any noob that doesn't lurk and take the temperature of the boards before posting wouldn't know even if that weren't the case. A sticky would help a small fraction of noobs, but most don't read them.
Really, the problem is that there is no way to avoid asking what 'clean' or 'junk' means to the OP in order to provide helpful advice. Otherwise, all of the answers are just spit-balling (i.e. contributing to pages of semantics).
ETA: quote tags are wonky, added an extra /quote just so my reply would be separate from the quote
You're right, I know. We just seem to go round and round on these subjects.0 -
LowCarb4Me2016 wrote: »LowCarb4Me2016 wrote: »LowCarb4Me2016 wrote: »LowCarb4Me2016 wrote: »Chef_Barbell wrote: »Not to derail this thread too much, though that's probably inevitable, but...
I understand why people balk at terms like clean or junk when talking about foods. But in most cases, it's not hard to understand what someone is trying to get at when asking these types of questions.
There will always be people trying to be funny or snarky or whatever else and posts unhelpful things in response to these types of threads... but for those of us who are trying to be helpful, is there a better way to talk about these types of foods? Better terms to use? These types of threads aren't going away, and I do think they merit conversation for many people.
Regarding "clean" foods... is it better to say something like whole foods?
What about junk food... is there a better term?
I just call it food. *shrug* Everything else is just extra to me.
Yes.
Perhaps if we get away from the 'good food/bad food' concept, we can focus on the real issue which is the overall diet.
Did the food prevent me meeting my dietary requirements/goals?
No? Then it was a good choice.
Yes? Then I could have (and should have if this is a frequent issue) made a better choice.
Isn't that what a lot of them are trying to do, though? They've realized that certain foods cause more problems than they alleviate and they're looking for a different way of eating. Its the language used that seems to cause controversy.
You mean the people wanting to eat 'clean' or not eat 'junk'?
I presume they want to eat better, whatever that means to them.
Some just want to lose weight and think cutting out that stuff is the fastest or only way to do it.
Others think that if they eat that stuff it means they can't have a good diet.
I don't notice that many who want to change their diets in this way seem to know what exactly their diets are lacking (save appropriate calorie limits if they want to lose or gain weight). I don't notice posts about how they're not meeting macro and micro goals and that's why they want to cut out processed foods and junk. In fact, the one or two threads I remember where OP wanted to eat 'clean' and mentioned macros or micros were about whether it was OK to include protein powder because they weren't meeting protein goals while eating 'clean'.
I do notice posts where people are concerned about not getting enough of a specific macro or micro, but I don't recall one where OP wanted to change their whole diet because of it. They ask 'what foods are good sources of X', and presumably alter their diet to fit more of those things.
Obviously, trigger foods and food sensitivities should be at the least reduced and preferably eliminated. But these wouldn't encompass the entire group of processed foods or the entire group of 'junk' foods - the groups are too broad.
I agree that people are in different places educationally speaking. I think if someone eats a lot of Doritos and mac n cheese and decides to start eating more fresh made salads and grilled chicken, they are in fact attempting to change their macros even if they don't use the proper MFP lingo. Maybe they'll do well and maybe they won't but they are at least attempting to better their health. Eventually they'll come around to discussing adding back in Doritos if they find they still need them and are serious about continuing on. There are people who eliminate certain foods they used to love and find they just don't need it in their lives. To me its just as harmful to tell someone wanting to eat "clean" that they're wrong as it for the "clean" eater to tell others not to eat processed food. Neither are opening the lines of communication, which brings me back to the point I was originally addressing regarding language.
Which to me would be opened up if we got away from terms without a standard definition like 'clean' and 'junk'.
Ask someone what they mean by 'clean' or 'junk' and the next thing you know there's a full-on debate and/or OP gets offended, assuming you are pretending ignorance.
On the other hand, if the topic is 'I want to eat better, help', I can respond with 'what does your diet look like now?', 'Are there specific things you want to improve?' and not be taken for a jerk by OP or spark a bunch of back and forth on the definition of vague
I agree with what you're saying, I do. I just don't think it's reasonable to expect a newbie to use the same terminology as the veteran MFP'ers. And if the veterans have an idea of what the person is asking, why bog the discussion down with a dozen pages of semantics? I'm not trying to be accusatory, I'm just trying to figure out a way to help those just getting started.
No, can't expect hardly any noobs to know when the boards are littered with that terminology. And any noob that doesn't lurk and take the temperature of the boards before posting wouldn't know even if that weren't the case. A sticky would help a small fraction of noobs, but most don't read them.
Really, the problem is that there is no way to avoid asking what 'clean' or 'junk' means to the OP in order to provide helpful advice. Otherwise, all of the answers are just spit-balling (i.e. contributing to pages of semantics).
ETA: quote tags are wonky, added an extra /quote just so my reply would be separate from the quote
You're right, I know. We just seem to go round and round on these subjects.
Well, because it's true that it's an impossible thing to pinpoint. Some people have said there's a lot of semantics going on but really, no semantics are needed even if one wants to be a smart-A. There just literally is not an actual definition of "clean eating." It's an impossible question, and initially worded in a sort of a jeering/judgmental way at that (calling what other people on here eat "gunk"). (P.s. I call it "food.") Meanwhile, it's already a judgment to stand superior and announce one's intention to eat "clean" food. What's the obvious extension of this? That whomever isn't eating that same way is eating "dirty" food. Well...LOL. Come on...
All well and good to want to eat less-processed food than YOU were eating before. There is not UNILATERAL less processed or minimally processed food. Again...NO need for semantics, that's just true, making the whole "clean eating" thing even more confusing, and impossible to really, helpfully answer.
Given these things plus the fact that you can indeed eat what you want, in a calorie deficit, and lose weight and that there is NO magic (weight-wise) in eating an apple v. "gunk," you're right - we can only go around in circles on this. If the OP wants to eat apples instead of Doritos, she can and should. It will NOT increase her weight loss to do so unless she is eating fewer calories of the apple than she is of the Doritos. I don't know what more can be said.
1 -
WinoGelato wrote: »Typical convenient foods I have now.
Granola bars that are peanut butter kinds, seems to fill me better, I love Luna.
Precooked udon noodles for spaghetti or stir fry.
Uncle Ben's ready rice.
Spaghetti or light Alfredo sauces, or Kikkomans sauce. I always add a serving of vegetable and low fat meat to a sauce and noodle/rice. I usually try to only use half the sauce due to sodium levels.
Light string cheese
Fruit, any kind.
I eat a lot of processed things but by adding quality meat, vegetable and fruit throughout the day I feel I am getting in good nutrients as well.
I am a working mother of 2 kids juggling job, homework, bath/bed routines, and working out 6 days a week. I only cook usually on the weekend and one or two nights during the week.
This sounds a lot like me. I love to cook, but as a busy working mom of two, I rely on a lot of convenience things to help me get dinner on the table. That doesn't mean they are inherently unhealthy or I'm eating nothing but Doritos and Doughnits. But a skillet meal to which I add extra chicken and vegetables, or a jarred stir fry sauce, or even the dreaded Hamburger Helper is something that I think can be incorporated into an overall balanced diet and isn't taking away from my health and nutrition simply because it's processed or comes in a box.
Do you ever use Sandra Lee recipes? I like her, she has great shortcut recipe ideas for busy people.
http://www.foodnetwork.com/recipes/sandra-lee/cool-couscous-salad-recipe0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »LowCarb4Me2016 wrote: »This article is questionable as it references Katy Perry in the first paragraph but it sums up what I think when someone mentions clean eating.
"At its simplest, clean eating is about eating whole foods, or "real" foods — those that are un- or minimally processed, refined, and handled, making them as close to their natural form as possible. "
But most people translate this as "it's not eating ANY processed foods." Also, for the obsessives like me (and although I didn't call it "clean eating," when I was into something similar of my own making, I was obsessive), as close to nature form as possible isn't much of an out. Is cheese (good artisan cheese) as close to its natural form as possible? Obviously not, as you could drink raw milk or something. Is cheese therefore not clean? Some clean eaters think so, some do not, but to the extent it's about avoiding processed as much as possible it's obviously not, IMO.
Flour -- as minimally processed as possible or not? What if I got a handmill like someone in a book I've read did? What if I knew the mill owner and it was some craft thing -- and one issue with all this junk is that it very quickly becomes a hobby for those with money to spend and who want to feel better about themselves for buying things that most of the country cannot afford. But if we accept that flour and cane sugar is as minimally processed as possible (for what they are) or, heck, used honey instead of sugar, you can make pretty much any high cal thing out there (I am assuming butter is okay under the same principle).
And the nutritional benefit is not from avoiding flavored greek yogurt but only eating homemade yogurt from raw milk. It's from having a diet that's rich in nutrient dense foods and balanced, which you don't have to eschew processed foods (however illogically defined) to do it.
And I totally know you are not arguing in favor of clean eating here.
One thing that just always gets me is to be lectured about how clean eating is important and the rest of us eat poorly from someone who claims to eat NO processed foods but has Panera and protein powder and a ton of other things more processed than my average meal in her diary. The irony chokes me.
But of course that has not (thank goodness!) happened in this thread yet.
I do think it's important to get at what the person is really after and to help them out, as I said before, but to me part of that is educating on what "processing" really means and because it's such a ridiculous buzz word these days and some seem to really think it means "unhealthy" or "bad," explaining that it's a HUGE category of foods.
I also like to get into how processing and some of the other departures from what is strictly natural allow us today to have access to a much more nutritious diet than we might otherwise. For example, in Chicago there's a huge part of the year when I wouldn't have much fruit or veg or many types of fish, etc., without things like processing and it's close ally, the food industry (that freezes fish and brings it far from home to sell, that carts in produce from warmer climates. Not that this is unalloyed good in every way, but it's certainly not as inherently bad as some seem to think.
Curious if you really think this kind of educating is bad. I do think the meaning of words really does matter, although I don't think I ever jump on newbies to MFP for using words I think are not really what they mean or being misled by the clean eating trend into thinking things that aren't true.
I think people just starting any new process should not be trying to educate others unless it's to point them to a book or website. That's true, for me, whether we're talking about diet, religion, computer programming, or most other things. It does help when newbies come asking rather than telling. I've come across people in places not MFP who say they eat 3 bananas a day and swear they're keto. You're right in that processed means different things to different people. I'm not sure what the answer is other than coming to an agreed upon definition of specific diet plans.0 -
I would also like to make it clear that I was in no way saying I wanted to cut out all processes foods, I was just wondering if the increas in the amount of processed food compared to foods like fresh fruits and vegetables, was a reason my cravings are worse this time around and why I am more hungry. I suppose I should have been more clear
No worries and thanks for clarifying. If by processed you mean things like boxed Mac n cheese or Rice a Roni, it's possible sodium could be causing some gain. I've also found portion control more difficult with those types of foods but that may not be the issue for you. If you can live without them maybe try cutting them and see if that makes a difference. If not, or you find you miss them, you can always add them back.0 -
LowCarb4Me2016 wrote: »I would also like to make it clear that I was in no way saying I wanted to cut out all processes foods, I was just wondering if the increas in the amount of processed food compared to foods like fresh fruits and vegetables, was a reason my cravings are worse this time around and why I am more hungry. I suppose I should have been more clear
No worries and thanks for clarifying. If by processed you mean things like boxed Mac n cheese or Rice a Roni, it's possible sodium could be causing some gain. I've also found portion control more difficult with those types of foods but that may not be the issue for you. If you can live without them maybe try cutting them and see if that makes a difference. If not, or you find you miss them, you can always add them back.
Okay, bear with me because I can only hope I'm going to express myself correctly here, LOL. But I have thought of this as well, being a "retainer," and this is what I've come up with.
If one consistently eats a lot of sodium, then that person will still ultimately show weight loss as the fat will be dropping (if the person is in a calorie deficit). The sodium may make the retention continue but it's not like she will exponentially be retaining more and more (again, I hope this makes sense). Say I eat loads of MSG (I react badly to this, just a personal thing) and I retain 4 lbs. of water. Well, two months from now, I'm still eating the MSG and still retaining around 4 lbs. (give or take) of water at any time but my fat has gone down from being in a calorie deficit. So with the fat gone, I will still show the weight loss.
I know when I was a salt junkie, I was really, really, really thin. I used to eat Cup O'Noodles every day, no exceptions, and I would salt it heavily (no joke), and that was only one meal, I won't frighten you with the others, LOL. At that period in my life (as an adult, in my 20s) I never weighed more than 109 lbs.
Now OTOH, I don't like the look or feel of water retention. I remember even then, at that low weight, always feeling oddly "puffy." So the OP can cut down on the sodium if she feels it's affecting her that way. If she does it's possible she'll initially show a couple/few pounds of loss even though those aren't fat. But after that, this type of loss will stop and she will need to be losing fat anyway. If those first few pounds provide her with a psych boost then it might be worth it to her, though. Bottom line, it's worth a try but sodium itself doesn't, AFAIK, cause a lack of *fat* loss.1 -
LowCarb4Me2016 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »LowCarb4Me2016 wrote: »This article is questionable as it references Katy Perry in the first paragraph but it sums up what I think when someone mentions clean eating.
"At its simplest, clean eating is about eating whole foods, or "real" foods — those that are un- or minimally processed, refined, and handled, making them as close to their natural form as possible. "
But most people translate this as "it's not eating ANY processed foods." Also, for the obsessives like me (and although I didn't call it "clean eating," when I was into something similar of my own making, I was obsessive), as close to nature form as possible isn't much of an out. Is cheese (good artisan cheese) as close to its natural form as possible? Obviously not, as you could drink raw milk or something. Is cheese therefore not clean? Some clean eaters think so, some do not, but to the extent it's about avoiding processed as much as possible it's obviously not, IMO.
Flour -- as minimally processed as possible or not? What if I got a handmill like someone in a book I've read did? What if I knew the mill owner and it was some craft thing -- and one issue with all this junk is that it very quickly becomes a hobby for those with money to spend and who want to feel better about themselves for buying things that most of the country cannot afford. But if we accept that flour and cane sugar is as minimally processed as possible (for what they are) or, heck, used honey instead of sugar, you can make pretty much any high cal thing out there (I am assuming butter is okay under the same principle).
And the nutritional benefit is not from avoiding flavored greek yogurt but only eating homemade yogurt from raw milk. It's from having a diet that's rich in nutrient dense foods and balanced, which you don't have to eschew processed foods (however illogically defined) to do it.
And I totally know you are not arguing in favor of clean eating here.
One thing that just always gets me is to be lectured about how clean eating is important and the rest of us eat poorly from someone who claims to eat NO processed foods but has Panera and protein powder and a ton of other things more processed than my average meal in her diary. The irony chokes me.
But of course that has not (thank goodness!) happened in this thread yet.
I do think it's important to get at what the person is really after and to help them out, as I said before, but to me part of that is educating on what "processing" really means and because it's such a ridiculous buzz word these days and some seem to really think it means "unhealthy" or "bad," explaining that it's a HUGE category of foods.
I also like to get into how processing and some of the other departures from what is strictly natural allow us today to have access to a much more nutritious diet than we might otherwise. For example, in Chicago there's a huge part of the year when I wouldn't have much fruit or veg or many types of fish, etc., without things like processing and it's close ally, the food industry (that freezes fish and brings it far from home to sell, that carts in produce from warmer climates. Not that this is unalloyed good in every way, but it's certainly not as inherently bad as some seem to think.
Curious if you really think this kind of educating is bad. I do think the meaning of words really does matter, although I don't think I ever jump on newbies to MFP for using words I think are not really what they mean or being misled by the clean eating trend into thinking things that aren't true.
I think people just starting any new process should not be trying to educate others unless it's to point them to a book or website. That's true, for me, whether we're talking about diet, religion, computer programming, or most other things. It does help when newbies come asking rather than telling. I've come across people in places not MFP who say they eat 3 bananas a day and swear they're keto. You're right in that processed means different things to different people. I'm not sure what the answer is other than coming to an agreed upon definition of specific diet plans.
But most people just eat food. There's keto, LCHF, paleo etc but there's actually not many eating that specifically. So it's just the "see food" diet.
As I stated, I can buy quinoa salads in packets in the rice aisle with minimal ingredients. Add in some veg and protein (which could also come from a packet with literally just cooked chicken) and boom, quick dinner. Where is that different from someone making the quinoa themselves?
It seems when people talk about scratch cooking, clean eating etc it's more a moral judgement than the reality of comparable nutrition to someone who bought the same meal ready made. And as someone who lives alone, I just don't want to make whole lasagnes, meat sauces, chili etc and either eat them for several days or freeze. Because my freezer is like the rest of my flat, borderline hoarder! So it's wasteful. A single great quality microwave meal from the fridge? Totally makes sense. Same goes for soups, which I happen to not buy or eat much but I have no issue with tinned soups.
And then there's those who seem to be totally fine with tinned tuna, chicken, salmon etc and then lose their minds over say a tuna meal from the same shelf.
And I am actually on holiday in the US right now and was in Target tonight. Had a look at the freezer meals quickly and I would have no issue at all eating them regularly, they're very similar to what I can get from the fridge in the UK.
Convenient and processed, for the hundred millionth time does not mean not made from whole foods and nutrient deficient.2 -
LowCarb4Me2016 wrote: »I would also like to make it clear that I was in no way saying I wanted to cut out all processes foods, I was just wondering if the increas in the amount of processed food compared to foods like fresh fruits and vegetables, was a reason my cravings are worse this time around and why I am more hungry. I suppose I should have been more clear
No worries and thanks for clarifying. If by processed you mean things like boxed Mac n cheese or Rice a Roni, it's possible sodium could be causing some gain. I've also found portion control more difficult with those types of foods but that may not be the issue for you. If you can live without them maybe try cutting them and see if that makes a difference. If not, or you find you miss them, you can always add them back.
Okay, bear with me because I can only hope I'm going to express myself correctly here, LOL. But I have thought of this as well, being a "retainer," and this is what I've come up with.
If one consistently eats a lot of sodium, then that person will still ultimately show weight loss as the fat will be dropping (if the person is in a calorie deficit). The sodium may make the retention continue but it's not like she will exponentially be retaining more and more (again, I hope this makes sense). Say I eat loads of MSG (I react badly to this, just a personal thing) and I retain 4 lbs. of water. Well, two months from now, I'm still eating the MSG and still retaining around 4 lbs. (give or take) of water at any time but my fat has gone down from being in a calorie deficit. So with the fat gone, I will still show the weight loss.
I know when I was a salt junkie, I was really, really, really thin. I used to eat Cup O'Noodles every day, no exceptions, and I would salt it heavily (no joke), and that was only one meal, I won't frighten you with the others, LOL. At that period in my life (as an adult, in my 20s) I never weighed more than 109 lbs.
And this. If you have no medical issues that mean you should restrict salt and it's a natural thing to eat higher salt than someone eating more home cooked meals then it's not going to cause retention issues long term.2 -
I'm in college too so I know the struggle to get 'real' food... I keep a lot of eggs and pita breads around.
Sounds like you have the right snacks around. I suggest hummus or salsa to dip veggies or tortilla chips in too!
The bottom line from my experience is that weight loss/maintenence will happen at about the same rate either way, but you'll feel better physically and mentally while doing it if you incorporate a good balance of 'clean' foods (70-80%) and your favorite not so clean foods (20-30%) rather than all of one or the other. Whatever works for you and keeps you well nourished and feeling good.0 -
I lost most of my weight eating a good amount of processed food. No issues there. But I found that for ME, cutting out a large portion of the sugar lessened the food cravings. The most important thing is to find a way of eating that you enjoy, can stick to long term, and that gives you the energy you need. If clean eating as you define it does that for you, then dive in!1
-
VintageFeline wrote: »LowCarb4Me2016 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »LowCarb4Me2016 wrote: »This article is questionable as it references Katy Perry in the first paragraph but it sums up what I think when someone mentions clean eating.
"At its simplest, clean eating is about eating whole foods, or "real" foods — those that are un- or minimally processed, refined, and handled, making them as close to their natural form as possible. "
But most people translate this as "it's not eating ANY processed foods." Also, for the obsessives like me (and although I didn't call it "clean eating," when I was into something similar of my own making, I was obsessive), as close to nature form as possible isn't much of an out. Is cheese (good artisan cheese) as close to its natural form as possible? Obviously not, as you could drink raw milk or something. Is cheese therefore not clean? Some clean eaters think so, some do not, but to the extent it's about avoiding processed as much as possible it's obviously not, IMO.
Flour -- as minimally processed as possible or not? What if I got a handmill like someone in a book I've read did? What if I knew the mill owner and it was some craft thing -- and one issue with all this junk is that it very quickly becomes a hobby for those with money to spend and who want to feel better about themselves for buying things that most of the country cannot afford. But if we accept that flour and cane sugar is as minimally processed as possible (for what they are) or, heck, used honey instead of sugar, you can make pretty much any high cal thing out there (I am assuming butter is okay under the same principle).
And the nutritional benefit is not from avoiding flavored greek yogurt but only eating homemade yogurt from raw milk. It's from having a diet that's rich in nutrient dense foods and balanced, which you don't have to eschew processed foods (however illogically defined) to do it.
And I totally know you are not arguing in favor of clean eating here.
One thing that just always gets me is to be lectured about how clean eating is important and the rest of us eat poorly from someone who claims to eat NO processed foods but has Panera and protein powder and a ton of other things more processed than my average meal in her diary. The irony chokes me.
But of course that has not (thank goodness!) happened in this thread yet.
I do think it's important to get at what the person is really after and to help them out, as I said before, but to me part of that is educating on what "processing" really means and because it's such a ridiculous buzz word these days and some seem to really think it means "unhealthy" or "bad," explaining that it's a HUGE category of foods.
I also like to get into how processing and some of the other departures from what is strictly natural allow us today to have access to a much more nutritious diet than we might otherwise. For example, in Chicago there's a huge part of the year when I wouldn't have much fruit or veg or many types of fish, etc., without things like processing and it's close ally, the food industry (that freezes fish and brings it far from home to sell, that carts in produce from warmer climates. Not that this is unalloyed good in every way, but it's certainly not as inherently bad as some seem to think.
Curious if you really think this kind of educating is bad. I do think the meaning of words really does matter, although I don't think I ever jump on newbies to MFP for using words I think are not really what they mean or being misled by the clean eating trend into thinking things that aren't true.
I think people just starting any new process should not be trying to educate others unless it's to point them to a book or website. That's true, for me, whether we're talking about diet, religion, computer programming, or most other things. It does help when newbies come asking rather than telling. I've come across people in places not MFP who say they eat 3 bananas a day and swear they're keto. You're right in that processed means different things to different people. I'm not sure what the answer is other than coming to an agreed upon definition of specific diet plans.
But most people just eat food. There's keto, LCHF, paleo etc but there's actually not many eating that specifically. So it's just the "see food" diet.
As I stated, I can buy quinoa salads in packets in the rice aisle with minimal ingredients. Add in some veg and protein (which could also come from a packet with literally just cooked chicken) and boom, quick dinner. Where is that different from someone making the quinoa themselves?
It seems when people talk about scratch cooking, clean eating etc it's more a moral judgement than the reality of comparable nutrition to someone who bought the same meal ready made. And as someone who lives alone, I just don't want to make whole lasagnes, meat sauces, chili etc and either eat them for several days or freeze. Because my freezer is like the rest of my flat, borderline hoarder! So it's wasteful. A single great quality microwave meal from the fridge? Totally makes sense. Same goes for soups, which I happen to not buy or eat much but I have no issue with tinned soups.
And then there's those who seem to be totally fine with tinned tuna, chicken, salmon etc and then lose their minds over say a tuna meal from the same shelf.
And I am actually on holiday in the US right now and was in Target tonight. Had a look at the freezer meals quickly and I would have no issue at all eating them regularly, they're very similar to what I can get from the fridge in the UK.
Convenient and processed, for the hundred millionth time does not mean not made from whole foods and nutrient deficient.
Who are most people? There are lots here at MFP that eat in specific ways, they just don't all post on the main boards. I see new posts daily on clean eating, whole foods, low carb/keto, paleo, vegan, and so on. I originally began by responding to someone asking for clearer language so as not to cause confusion. Clean eating is a specific plan according to what I was able to Google. It's not one I follow or feel the need to know in and out but I can have an understanding of where they're coming from. In any case, this OP has clarified what she was asking. As for the hundredth millionth time comment, I've made myself pretty clear that I fully understand the issue with the word processed and have offered up meals I've made that would definitely fall under that term.0 -
LowCarb4Me2016 wrote: »I would also like to make it clear that I was in no way saying I wanted to cut out all processes foods, I was just wondering if the increas in the amount of processed food compared to foods like fresh fruits and vegetables, was a reason my cravings are worse this time around and why I am more hungry. I suppose I should have been more clear
No worries and thanks for clarifying. If by processed you mean things like boxed Mac n cheese or Rice a Roni, it's possible sodium could be causing some gain. I've also found portion control more difficult with those types of foods but that may not be the issue for you. If you can live without them maybe try cutting them and see if that makes a difference. If not, or you find you miss them, you can always add them back.
Okay, bear with me because I can only hope I'm going to express myself correctly here, LOL. But I have thought of this as well, being a "retainer," and this is what I've come up with.
If one consistently eats a lot of sodium, then that person will still ultimately show weight loss as the fat will be dropping (if the person is in a calorie deficit). The sodium may make the retention continue but it's not like she will exponentially be retaining more and more (again, I hope this makes sense). Say I eat loads of MSG (I react badly to this, just a personal thing) and I retain 4 lbs. of water. Well, two months from now, I'm still eating the MSG and still retaining around 4 lbs. (give or take) of water at any time but my fat has gone down from being in a calorie deficit. So with the fat gone, I will still show the weight loss.
I know when I was a salt junkie, I was really, really, really thin. I used to eat Cup O'Noodles every day, no exceptions, and I would salt it heavily (no joke), and that was only one meal, I won't frighten you with the others, LOL. At that period in my life (as an adult, in my 20s) I never weighed more than 109 lbs.
Now OTOH, I don't like the look or feel of water retention. I remember even then, at that low weight, always feeling oddly "puffy." So the OP can cut down on the sodium if she feels it's affecting her that way. If she does it's possible she'll initially show a couple/few pounds of loss even though those aren't fat. But after that, this type of loss will stop and she will need to be losing fat anyway. If those first few pounds provide her with a psych boost then it might be worth it to her, though. Bottom line, it's worth a try but sodium itself doesn't, AFAIK, cause a lack of *fat* loss.
It was just a suggestion about the sodium, something she can at least keep an eye on. I can eat more salt on keto but when I ate high carb the two made me swell up like a balloon. May not be the case for the OP, though, you're right. I also mentioned portion control.0 -
There are too many replies for me to go through, but I know for me cutting out processed foods helped tremendously. I have intracranial hypertension and one thing that "triggers" an increase in pressure is sodium-which is obviously a big part of processed foods. I recently left a job that made me kind of rely on processed food/would binge at night after working 10+ hours without a break, and I felt AWFUL.
I thrive on low carb, low sodium, "80/20 clean". Individual results may vary though.0 -
LowCarb4Me2016 wrote: »VintageFeline wrote: »LowCarb4Me2016 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »LowCarb4Me2016 wrote: »This article is questionable as it references Katy Perry in the first paragraph but it sums up what I think when someone mentions clean eating.
"At its simplest, clean eating is about eating whole foods, or "real" foods — those that are un- or minimally processed, refined, and handled, making them as close to their natural form as possible. "
But most people translate this as "it's not eating ANY processed foods." Also, for the obsessives like me (and although I didn't call it "clean eating," when I was into something similar of my own making, I was obsessive), as close to nature form as possible isn't much of an out. Is cheese (good artisan cheese) as close to its natural form as possible? Obviously not, as you could drink raw milk or something. Is cheese therefore not clean? Some clean eaters think so, some do not, but to the extent it's about avoiding processed as much as possible it's obviously not, IMO.
Flour -- as minimally processed as possible or not? What if I got a handmill like someone in a book I've read did? What if I knew the mill owner and it was some craft thing -- and one issue with all this junk is that it very quickly becomes a hobby for those with money to spend and who want to feel better about themselves for buying things that most of the country cannot afford. But if we accept that flour and cane sugar is as minimally processed as possible (for what they are) or, heck, used honey instead of sugar, you can make pretty much any high cal thing out there (I am assuming butter is okay under the same principle).
And the nutritional benefit is not from avoiding flavored greek yogurt but only eating homemade yogurt from raw milk. It's from having a diet that's rich in nutrient dense foods and balanced, which you don't have to eschew processed foods (however illogically defined) to do it.
And I totally know you are not arguing in favor of clean eating here.
One thing that just always gets me is to be lectured about how clean eating is important and the rest of us eat poorly from someone who claims to eat NO processed foods but has Panera and protein powder and a ton of other things more processed than my average meal in her diary. The irony chokes me.
But of course that has not (thank goodness!) happened in this thread yet.
I do think it's important to get at what the person is really after and to help them out, as I said before, but to me part of that is educating on what "processing" really means and because it's such a ridiculous buzz word these days and some seem to really think it means "unhealthy" or "bad," explaining that it's a HUGE category of foods.
I also like to get into how processing and some of the other departures from what is strictly natural allow us today to have access to a much more nutritious diet than we might otherwise. For example, in Chicago there's a huge part of the year when I wouldn't have much fruit or veg or many types of fish, etc., without things like processing and it's close ally, the food industry (that freezes fish and brings it far from home to sell, that carts in produce from warmer climates. Not that this is unalloyed good in every way, but it's certainly not as inherently bad as some seem to think.
Curious if you really think this kind of educating is bad. I do think the meaning of words really does matter, although I don't think I ever jump on newbies to MFP for using words I think are not really what they mean or being misled by the clean eating trend into thinking things that aren't true.
I think people just starting any new process should not be trying to educate others unless it's to point them to a book or website. That's true, for me, whether we're talking about diet, religion, computer programming, or most other things. It does help when newbies come asking rather than telling. I've come across people in places not MFP who say they eat 3 bananas a day and swear they're keto. You're right in that processed means different things to different people. I'm not sure what the answer is other than coming to an agreed upon definition of specific diet plans.
But most people just eat food. There's keto, LCHF, paleo etc but there's actually not many eating that specifically. So it's just the "see food" diet.
As I stated, I can buy quinoa salads in packets in the rice aisle with minimal ingredients. Add in some veg and protein (which could also come from a packet with literally just cooked chicken) and boom, quick dinner. Where is that different from someone making the quinoa themselves?
It seems when people talk about scratch cooking, clean eating etc it's more a moral judgement than the reality of comparable nutrition to someone who bought the same meal ready made. And as someone who lives alone, I just don't want to make whole lasagnes, meat sauces, chili etc and either eat them for several days or freeze. Because my freezer is like the rest of my flat, borderline hoarder! So it's wasteful. A single great quality microwave meal from the fridge? Totally makes sense. Same goes for soups, which I happen to not buy or eat much but I have no issue with tinned soups.
And then there's those who seem to be totally fine with tinned tuna, chicken, salmon etc and then lose their minds over say a tuna meal from the same shelf.
And I am actually on holiday in the US right now and was in Target tonight. Had a look at the freezer meals quickly and I would have no issue at all eating them regularly, they're very similar to what I can get from the fridge in the UK.
Convenient and processed, for the hundred millionth time does not mean not made from whole foods and nutrient deficient.
Who are most people? There are lots here at MFP that eat in specific ways, they just don't all post on the main boards. I see new posts daily on clean eating, whole foods, low carb/keto, paleo, vegan, and so on. I originally began by responding to someone asking for clearer language so as not to cause confusion. Clean eating is a specific plan according to what I was able to Google. It's not one I follow or feel the need to know in and out but I can have an understanding of where they're coming from. In any case, this OP has clarified what she was asking. As for the hundredth millionth time comment, I've made myself pretty clear that I fully understand the issue with the word processed and have offered up meals I've made that would definitely fall under that term.
Exactly as I say, most people just eat food. MFP forums are not representative of the general population and lots of those posts, that yes we get multiple times a day, are from people new to that way of eating and excited. Or looking for more information, or other people eating that way. And I would make a good guess by looking at how active my friends list is that a good proportion of those people won't sustain that way of eating.
So yes, most people just eat food. I advocate for wide and varied, start and end. If paleo, keto or whatever works for you then fine but it's still not a large proportion of the population and for that, no definition is needed. Named diets are largely arbitrary. I'd make exceptions for keto, LCHF, vegan and vegetarian. Everything else really comes down to personal interpretation and as represented in this thread, not everyone saying they eat a certain way actually have a consensus. So it's pointless having labels.1 -
Chef_Barbell wrote: »
I don't know if it is clean or not, I'm guessing it isn't since I was reported, warned and it was removed. Now to be on topic, I think the term clean eating is meaningless.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 176K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions