While more people are becoming aware and careful about what they are eating, taking “clean eating” to drastic levels and removing all “bad foods” from the diet will neither make you healthier nor leaner.
The main flaw of the theory of “clean eating” is that there is no exact and single definition of what clean eating means. For some people like vegans for example “clean eating” can mean taking all animal products out of their diet, while for others who are on a high protein diet or a low carb diet, meat and animal products would be considered “clean”. A prime example of how “clean eating” has been changing overtime, is the fact that from the 1970’s butter and other saturated fats were considered a definite “no-no”, and just recently the theory of butter being considered bad as opposed to margarine has been totally reversed by the latest scientific findings.
In any case, taking out one or more food products out of your diet completely is not scientifically proven to have a possitive effect on your health, and living under such limitations could in fact be considered irrational and unhealthy in the long run.
In fact, except for the cases when a medical condition requires that certain foods be limited or excluded from the diet, there are no universal “bad foods”. The actual problem with certain types of foods which some view as “bad” usually is overeating and an increase of the calorie intake. The opposite – malnutrition and deficiencies though can be caused by the lack of certain food groups in your diet and can be as equally unhealthy and dangerous for your health.
Naturally, if you eat more calories than you spend, you will eventually gain weight, but there are no foods which specifically cause this weight gain, much rather it is actually the excess consumption and not the food itself which causes the problems.
So remember – it is not the food that is fattening, it is the overconsumption of food which leads to gaining weight and related health problems.
Of course, if you suffer from celiac disease and gluten intolerance, you should avoid gluten, but for other people it has not been scientifically proven to be harmful in any way.
Also, it is common sense that if you are allergic to peanuts, you should stay away from peanuts, but this is normal and in many cases could be a life saving choice for removing certain foods from your diet entirely.
The different food associations and ranking systems of grading nutrition and foods have different views on which food is nutritious and which are not so much.
For example, there is no clear definition of what exactly a “processed” food is, and whether certain processed foods such as whey protein are not healthy and shouldn’t be avoided.
Also worth noting is the controversial subject of how harmful genetically modified organisms (GMO) are for humans and the fact that this has not been scientifically proven either.
True, certain foods are much more nutrient-dense than others, but once again it is the quantities consumed that can cause the damage to the health and hinder the functioning of the body.
So, in conclusion – the truth to a healthy diet is balanced and controlled eating of various foods which provide all the essential nutrients for the proper functioning of the body, and sufficient calories for the necessary energy to function properly.
More fitness enthusiasts are taking a stance against the idea of “clean eating”. One such example is this gentleman who claims that the idea of clean eating is simply a scam, which is promoted by doctors, nutritionists, coaches, etc. He even goes as far as calling it an eating disorder.
Once again, it is all about eating a balanced diet and in moderation.
I am sorry but this is the biggest load of crap I’ve ever heard and most of it is not even true. If clean eating was such a myth then how come thousands of people are doing and seeing great results in health and physical looks?
There is a tons of research to show otherwise that there is food that is bad for you. I know from experience what bad food has done to my body and my life.
I was a “clean eater” before reading this article and I will remain a “clean eater” after this article. My definition of “clean” is limiting/eliminating foods with the bad things like BPA, GMO’s, pesticides, artificial sweeteners, coloring, preservatives etc.
The issue here is that right now, evidence in the form of RCTs, meta-analyses and peer reviewed studies do NOT (I repeat do NOT) support the hypothesis that these chemicals/additives have negative effects on human beings. Claims that these things have been proven to cause cancer and other illnesses in humans are false. Full stop. Ask all of the “experts” in their various clean eating fields. Mark Sisson, Joseph Mercola, Tosca Reno- whoever. This author is correct.
Scientific proof does not take into account correlational data, individual case studies, stories of “My Uncle Bernie cured his cancer eating clean” and “my tummy hurts after sucralose” and there are very good reasons for that. Should a person then discount this anecdotal evidence? That is up to them but I choose not to.
You, as a reader, eater and free thinker now have to decide if the CURRENT scientific data on these chemicals is enough for you to feel safe ingesting them. My personal opinion, which I will re-iterate is NOT scientifically backed is that you are best eating from the Earth and that just because these substances haven’t been proved to be harmful at the present time does NOT mean that they will not one day. My opinion is that current scientific data on the THOUSANDS of chemicals we now ingest daily in processed food is not nearly extensive enough and we will not see or feel the full effects of all our man-made food for many decades to come. By that point I personally believe there will be ample scientific evidence to back every claim you are making but in the meantime you and I are actually not supported by science.
Just sounds like a lot of people here who want to eat cupcakes and drink soda and have someone tell them they’re okay.
Certain foods are bad for you. Eating only burger king for 30 days would leave you in much worse condition than eating only fruits and vegetables for 30 days. Cheese burgers are bad for you, vegetables are good for you. Yes, you can eat ‘bad’ foods in moderation based on your activity level and stay healthy, I don’t think any health experts are disputing that. I don’t think it’s a good idea to promote the notion that no foods are bad for you. There’s an obesity epidemic going on here.
Clean eating = eating what nature intended you to eat, as opposed to aspartame laced things and additives cooked up in the lab.
Its really not that difficult.
Why has there been such an increase of diabetes, cancer and numerous other diseases since processed food has become what everyone is eating in the last 50 years? I’ll stick with my whole foods, and leave the additives, dyes and artificial flavors behind any day, along with modern disease.
What you say is in some ways correct. But there is a CLEAN way of eating for people that want to look healthy and feel great and some times it is not JUST about calories in/out and burned.
Sometimes where those calories comes from is VERY important to the kind of stable or unstable energy it will give. This is even more so for food sensitive people.
Clean eating can be defined.
Clean = untouched, natural foods. Unclean = processed foods.
Its very simple.
Clean foods include:
Basically anything that the earth provides naturally.
All of the above foods are clean as long as you do not add anything processed into the mix.
Grilled chicken with steamed vegetables and the juice of a lemon for a dressing is a clean meal.
A chicken parmigiana with fries is obviously not a clean meal because the chicken has been coated with breadcrumbs (processed grain) and cheese (processed dairy), sauce (processed tomato sauce) and chips (processed potato) which makes it an unclean meal.
A fruit salad is an example of a clean dessert. But if you add ice-cream, even if low fat, it makes it unclean. Why? Because ice-cream is a processed food with many things added to it that aren’t clean.
CLEAN = UNTOUCHED and as close to its natural form as possible.
I actually thought that “unclean” eating was the money spinner. Foods that come in wrappers, packages, and boxes are all from a brand and company that make money. Also dairy and grain industries are huge industries that most governments support and earn money from. Most packaged foods are laden with sugar and processed carbs. If clean means whole foods, then this is not supporting a particular brand, corporation, or massive industry.
If you are an athlete training heavily and trying to have healthy weight and body fat, you may try and cut out “unhealthy” food but it is very important you get enough “healthy” food.
If you didn’t eat enough “healthy” food, you could lose too much weight and be low on energy/performance. This may leave you feeling that clean eating is a myth. Who exactly is advising to train and eat like this?
Surely, the advise would be to eat clean with a strong emphasis on getting the quantity of what you need. If you can’t get enough food this way, then you just need to eat something (eg: white bread).
So, for example, your coach might want you to eat clean (eg: whole foods), so after training ideally you may need to eat 3 bananas. However, you only have 1 banana and 2 pieces of white bread. What do you do? Eat the banana and throw the bread away? No, you eat them all because you have been training regularly and already have leaned out.
If you are not training, the 1 banana may be all you need. What coaches, dietitians, fitness experts are telling athletes to cut out “unclean” foods and not replacing them with enough quantities of other foods? Who is saying this?
To think that all foods are ok is a big statement because they aren’t. If your all for Monsanto then to each it’s own. But I think making an opinion like this is very narrow minded.
As a bikini athlete, quality of food is way more important than calories per say. While I do agree you can fit certain foods in your “macros”, a cinnabon thats 1800 cal and has over 40 g of fat is not the same as 3-4 meals worth of chicken, fish, vegetables, etc. Its not as simple as calories in, calories out.
There IS a difference between 2000 cal of whole foods vs 2000 cal of one fast food meal, especially for an athlete such as myself. I can not perform or build lean muscle if I eat French fries or a milkshake as long as it “fits my macros”. Some people may take this article and run with it, and that’s the problem.
And with a masters degree in clinical exercise physiology, I have a couple of issues with some of your points.
First, when you say saturated fat found in red meat and fast foods doesn’t cause disease. Of course you can’t say “cause”, but there is a strong correlation. Only research that has really “proven” causation is link between smoking and cancer, and thats because they have spent millions of dollars and decades upon decades on this research.
You can’t tell me there isn’t an association between eating fatty burgers and greasy fries with increased risk of heart disease, diabetes, cancer, or that it doesn’t matter if you eat healthy whole foods regarding disease risk. There are hundreds upon hundreds of studies that show the link, not to mention there are SUPER FOODS that show decreased risk of cancer. I don’t know if you know how to read or write or interpret research, but it seems to me that you aren’t skilled in this area. I would be curious to see what type of studies you chose to include to back up your claims.
This article seems a little biased to me, and it looks like you pick and chose what points you wanted to make and clearly disregarded the other side. That’s what good researchers do, explain why the other side may not be accurate, not just pick what you think is right and ignore all other possibilities.
Most Americans OVER eat so of course its easy to get enough micro-nutrients if you are overindulging on calories. Over 2/3 of Americans are overweight, and 1/3 is obese, and it isn’t because they’re overeating spinach. It’s due to fast foods and processed Foods among other things.
I could go on and on. Overall, you made some good points but in my opinion it was biased and the direction of the points are misleading. I feel like there should be a good balance between eating wholesome foods and IIFYM as well. I think you should enjoy food yes and indulge every once in a while. But it shouldn’t be eat whatever you want as long as IIFYM, especially when it comes to the health implications this could have. I’m afraid lay people will take this article the wrong way.
Gluten-free diets are superior to gluten containing diets, irrespective of celiac disease.
This researcher indicates that approximately 29% of people show a fecal-antibody response to gluten (fecal tests being superior to blood serum tests), which suggests that almost 1/3 of people are “gluten sensitive” if defined by an immune response.
https://www.enterolab.com/staticpages/earlydiagnosis.aspx
Furthermore, here are a few studies related to gluten, GI, and Neuropathy:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21224837
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20837968
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19748229
As should be clear from the first study, sometimes gluten sensitivity can manifest without anti-gliadin antibodies, which may indicate increased prevalence of gluten sensitivity than even the 29% mentioned before (though in all fairness, it was one study, so perhaps an ultimate estimate of 10-50% of all humans is an acceptable range of its prevalence). The close connection of gluten and schizophrenia, gluten ataxia, MS, and so on is a disturbing trend that I think warrants a closer look than a one-off article can provide.
Overall, I agree that quantity matters, but so does overall quality (a point I believe you have made). The recent bodybuilding trend of IIFYM (if it fits your macros) follows this, but of course the majority of food must be high in quality to produce quality health.
For example, I think you realize this, but the 20% sugar diet of an elite athlete is by no means healthy for their liver, as that would certainly cross the "beneficial in moderation" threshold and run into "non-alcoholic fatty liver disease" territory. But athletes don't do it for health, and you're right that rarely would a human eat anything approaching 20% sugar in their diet.
I'll leave it at that for now, but I really do appreciate the injection of sanity into the food discussion with regards to red meat, cholesterol, and so on and so forth.
In the effort of full disclosure, I personally follow a paleo-type diet, however one that only eschews grains/vegetable oils/processed foods and includes dairy, legumes, and oats (yes that's a grain – sue me). As always, have nice day.
It is a very dangerous and slippery slope to write an article the way you did. As has been pointed out, a person with an eating problem or disorder will read that it’s ok to go ahead and eat the things they are hooked on in moderation. That will put them right back where they started. Eating the addictive junk food that caused them to become obese, diabetic, insulin resistant, etc. For these people there is no moderation. They are the same as a smoker who just quit cigarettes. No one tells an ex smoker to go ahead and light up in moderation. Just because an elite athlete can eat an entire pie in a sitting with little noticeable effect doesn’t mean it’s a smart thing to do.
That it’s ok to indulge on occasion if you are already careful of your food choices 80 plus percent of the time. That’s true. Our bodies are remarkable machines that are capable of extraordinary things. Like repairing the damage from bad food choices, drug addictions, or years or mistreatment from hard labor or sports. As long as it’s rare enough or you correct the behavior before it’s too late.
The thing is though, there is a big difference to being able to indulge occasionally and needing to. I hate to break it to you but nothing good comes from eating crap food like your red velvet cake. It is nutritionally dead food that serves no good purpose for your body. If you never had another can of coke, slice of cake, or bag of Cheetos it wouldn’t matter. You would be better off for it.
There is nothing in the junk food indulgences that we crave that the body needs and cannot be gotten in a much better form. The chemicals, additives, preservatives, ect are toxic and cause bad reactions in the body. That is simple common sense and deductive reasoning. If the majority of health ailments are relatively new and coincide with the rapid explosion and availability of the processed junk in the past few years.
I’m good with going with the theory that the simplest explanation to a problem is usually the correct one. I have read plenty of real world studies and testimonials to know the general best direction to take for diet. No processed carbs or sugar, and eating whole foods in their best available form. It isn’t rocket science.
You’re also quite foolish to dismiss every contrary argument to your idiocy because they didn’t follow up with your biased references dug up from the far corners of the internet. Common sense doesn’t require references. A simple Google search tells you that processed carbohydrates, excess sugar, and meat from sick poorly treated animals who have been pumped up with growth hormones, antibiotics, and fed a inappropriate diet are bad for your body.
I am not a nutritionist. So you can cover your ears and tell yourself that without references I can’t prove what I say. That’s fine. But you can’t prove conclusively any of your retarded points either. So where does that leave us? Back to that little thing called common sense. Obviously it’s isn’t very common anymore.
I’d like to start off with the fact that this article is very demeaning. I know a couple of people that responded mentioned that this article is condescending to those who may practice clean eating, or health conscious individuals.
Second, this article can be interpreted about as many ways as “clean eating” itself. Personally, after reading this article, I feel like stuffing my face with a Big Mac 3x a day is perfectly fine! As long as I am operating in a caloric deficit.
Third, I’d like to thank you. Because of articles like these I have an even deeper passion for discovering how the body works. I’ve “heard” that certain foods are bad for you but I want to know WHY. I want to know HOW the body processes things differently. This article has encouraged me to pursue a major in physiology and psychology with a minor in food nutrition. I find this all extremely interesting and I’d like to know which side (clean eaters vs. the majority of America) actually has specific scientific backing.
I might agree that a lot of the research done on Clean Eating is subjective, diets all have subjective experiments results. Why? Because everyone’s body is different. Everyone metabolizes food at different paces, people’s bodies vary as greatly as the individual. Specific, objective evidence is hard to obtain. People “cheat” on diets, people have varying amounts of willpower and people interpret diets in different ways.
I am a believer in quality AND quantity of food. I believe that eating healthy and eating foods closer to the source is better for the way your body PROCESSES the food, not just the way you look after. I also believe that occasionally eating a processed food isn’t going to kill anyone but that everything should be done in moderation.
While you may not agree with clean eating and its varied interpretations, there are some solid guidelines that should be emphasized FOR a BALANCED diet.
Clean eating suggests:
Eat fruits and veggies – nothing wrong with that, kids today don’t eat enough of them anyway; you should see the kids I babysit.
Eat whole grains – ok. So, no one said you had to get rid of your pasta, but wouldn’t you rather get more nutrients from your food?
No processed foods – I COMPLETELY understand that this is difficult for a number of individuals and that it can be pricey. I am myself a college student, and on a BUDGET. HOWEVER, there are ways to read nutrition labels to make sure that you are getting something that does not have a bunch of additives – while you say processed foods are ok, many should note that the ingredients that make up preservatives and artificial flavors are harmful in general – not just when we eat them.
Lean meats – fat on meats comprise excess calories that most individuals do not know they are consuming. One might assume that if its on the meat than it must be healthy. Most individuals don’t take into consideration what they are actually eating.
Small, frequent meals. Good! Everyone should be happy that they get to eat more. Some research supports this as to keep your metabolism running so that you burn more throughout the day. Some research supports that this can be negative. However, in my experience, this keeps me full and focused. I don’t feel hungry and I don’t overeat.
Portion control – something that everyone should do and few people practice. While you may be correct that someone can consume a slice of cake and not gain weight it is by far HOW MUCH they are consuming. Also mentioned in a comment, most people don’t have the self control to eat just a few bites. Clean eating emphasizes the importance of eating enough to be satisfied but not overeating – hence the small, more frequent meals.
More than anything what I have taken away from clean eating is:
I have learned how to eat foods that are healthy and whole. I have a variety of foods to choose from and there are THOUSANDS of recipes that people can use to make a healthy change to their “diet”.
Lastly, I do not view clean eating as a DIET, clean eating is a LIFESTYLE.
If more people could eat more nutrient rich foods, fewer Big Macs, and drink a little, ok, a LOT, more water people would see a difference in their physique. QUALITY DOES matter. People tend to lean away from clean eating because it is inconvenient, as are a lot of positive things; like studying for a biology exam when your friends all want to go out.
The fundamentals of clean eating can provide individuals with a healthier body. But more than anything I think more people need to UNDERSTAND and PRACTICE portion control and moderation – something that our society does not preach very often.
Clean eating is NOT a crazy diet! Your body gets finally everything he needs. You do not cut back on carbs, protein or fat, you simply choose whole, natural foods and seek to eliminate or minimize processed foods.
This article is just as extreme, arrogant, nonsensical and as crazy making as what the author is criticizing. I have extremely severe autoimmune issues and multiple chronic infections and if I had followed this article’s advice, I’d still be sick in bed and disabled. But, following a generally “clean eating” approach to eating, without making any other changes, has given me my health and life back.
There are MANY science based articles proving that GMO’s harm humans. The fact that GMO foods have a protein that can slip into your own cells and basically JACK YOU UP, makes me sick to my stomach that he would encourage consuming GMO’s.
I love fruit! When I first went Paleo, it was before everybody and their uncle came out with a book and a blog about it, so I was sticking with the typical USDA macros of lots of carbs, moderate protein, and low fat, but replaced almost all my carbs with fruit and some vegetables, and I got really lean.
Then came all the information about eating more fat, and Good Carbs Bad Carbs, and carb cycling, and I tried all of it. Then I joined the military and went to boot camp and tried to maintain a Paleo diet, but the amount of meat we got at each meal was next to nothing.
Sometimes, if the meat was breaded and fried, I just didn’t eat meat at that meal, but I realized that the situation was too stressful for me to really worry about everything I was eating, so I ate what comforted me. We are talking one to two bananas at every single meal, sometimes an apple with that, and if the morning dessert cart came around with orange slices, I had that, too.
I got so skinny, actually bad skinny (we’ll chalk that up to stress, also), but my skin was ridiculously clear and I just considered myself eating to support all the working out I was doing, which ended up feeling like less than I did at home but more intense and focused. Cue graduation, moving back to the real world, reading blogs again, overanalyzing, and going so far as to try extreme things like all-meat or meat-and-fermented-dairy.
Then it was like one day I got fed up, said to myself, “I like bananas, darn it!” and pretty much found food nirvana once I allowed fruit back into my life again. So basically, while I don’t disagree with everything here (I can pound down way too many grapes, so I do have to consciously limit my access to those), I don’t think fruit is the enemy that so many Paleos have made it out to be. I just include it as part of my meals instead of freely snacking on it, and that seems to invoke the “moderation” you refer to.