Eating Clean?!

[omgitstaylor]

What do all of you consider "eating clean"? Thanks!

[Miranda]

food as close as possible to its natural state is considered 'clean' by some people.

[erica514]

nothing processed...no white sugar, flour, rice...etc. Those are all processed. Brown rice, whole wheat flour or other whole-grain flours...these are considered clean. As well as all your vegetables, fruits, nuts, nut butters, lean meats, fish, eggs, etc.

Check out the Eat-Clean Diet by Tosca Reno. She explains it perfectly. It's a very informative book. I live by it, for the most part.

[ChickenTuna]

What do all of you consider "eating clean"? Thanks!

plain food,... with no extras like cheese on top, sour cream, mayo, ranch dressing, etc..

[MauiZos]

What do all of you consider "eating clean"? Thanks!

I think about it several ways:

1) no "white stuff" - ie no sugar, refined flour, white rice, dairy

2) Nothing that comes in a colorful package - ie no processed foods

3) Everything as close to its natural state as possible - fresh lean meats, veggies, grains, fruits, raw nuts, etc. Pretty much everything I eat gets prepared in my own kitchen

4) Nothing that contains high fructose corn syrup, hydrogenated oils, enriched flour, or sugar - again this rules out pretty much every processed/packaged food item

There was a great article in the NY Times a while back that talked about food versus 'food-like products'. The author was saying basically don't eat anything that your great-great-grandmother wouldn't recognize as food.

[omgitstaylor]

Thanks everyone! that was helpful!!!!

[iNatalia]

Thanks everyone! that was helpful!!!!

At the request of some bb.com members and their convenience I've been posting 'my clean eats' on my BodyBlog.

Check it out: http://blog.bodybuilding.com/iNatalia

[BuffedWildCat]

This is what I consider eating clean. Of course it can get much more strict than this but this is a good start for beginners:

NUTRITIONAL GUIDELINES 101 FOR REDUCING BODY FAT:

1. Eat every 2-3 hours, balanced meals of protein, carbohydrates, and fat. Exception: you don't necessarily have to eat carbohydrates with your last meal or two of the day, you CAN just eat protein and fat. Unless it's post workout (post strength training), then you NEED to eat some carbs.

2. Try to keep the protein intake in each of your meals consistent. If you are resistance/strength training (which you should be, heh), eat a minimum of your bodyweight in grams of protein, divided up equally into each of your meals.

3. Don't be afraid of fat, your body NEEDS fat, and it actually helps you to burn fat if you eat fat. You need to turn your body into a fat burning machine. In order to do this, decreasing the amount of carbohydrates you eat will really help since it?s the main reason people are overweight in the first place, too many carbs, specifically processed carbs, sugars, you get the picture. If you can keep your carb intake at around 30-40 grams per meal consider that very good (whole grain carbs, not processed, sugary type carbs). Don?t forget to have a moderate dose of fat. Generally, the lower your carbohydrate intake, the more fat you should be consuming.

4. Avoid sugars and over-processed foods like the plague. Read your labels, avoid food with sugar listed in the ingredients.

5. Avoid processed foods, like those in boxes/packages and also anything made with white flour. White flour is over-processed. Also anything that says, "enriched" avoid it as well, it basically means over-processed (over-processing strips the food of all its nutrients, so basically empty calories).

6. Eat as close to nature as you can. In other words, the closer the food is to how it occurs in nature, the better for you it is, and ESPECIALLY for fat burning.

7. Avoid starchy carbs like corn, bread (esp white bread), pasta (altho whole wheat pasta is okay).

8. For your last meal or two of the day, make an effort to consume only green veggies for your carbohydrates (altho you may not have to). Generally for your last meal you should consume less carbohydrates and more fat.

9. Last but not least, do NOT cut your calories too low. For starters I wouldn't even drop ANY calories. I would eat maintenance calories (eat normally) and just focus on cleaning up your diet by following these guidelines (get rid of drinking sodas, etc) and getting consistent with a good macronutrient ratio (protein, carbs, fat) or in other words, BALANCED MEALS. Some examples of good macronutrient ratios for burning fat (percentage of total calories) are: 40P/30C/30F, 40P/25C/35F, 40P/20C/40F, or 35P/35C/30F etc. But do realize you don?t have to get this meticulous or anal (if you want to call it that) about your diet especially in the beginning. The anal part comes in when you get your bodyfat down into the teens and you?re leaning towards getting in competition shape.

10. A good website (free) to help you keep track of your calories, protein, carbs, and fat is: www.fitday.com I use it religiously, heh.

Here are some good choices for foods to eat, conducive to burning fat and/or staying lean. If the food you are eating is not on this list, I would question it.

PROTEINS

Boneless, Skinless Chicken Breast
Tuna (water packed)
Fish (salmon, seabass, halibut)
Shrimp
Extra Lean Ground Beef or Ground Round (92-96%)
Venison
Buffalo
Ostrich
Protein Powder
Egg Whites or Whole Eggs
Ribeye Steaks or Roast
Top Round Steaks or Roast (aka Stew Meat, London Broil, Stir Fry)
Top Sirloin (aka Sirloin Top Butt)
Beef Tenderloin (aka Filet, Filet Mignon)
Top Loin (NY Strip Steak)
Flank Steak (Sir Fry, Fajita)
Eye of Round (Cube Meat, Stew Meat, Bottom Round , 96% LeandGround Round)
Ground turkey, Turkey Breast Slices or cutlets (fresh meat, not deli cuts)
Soy Burgers
Low-fat cottage cheese

SLOW BURNING/COMPLEX CARBS

Oatmeal (Old Fashioned or Quick Oats)
Sweet Potatoes (Yams)
Beans (pinto, black, kidney)
Oat Bran Cereal
Rye Cereal
Grape Nuts
Brown Rice
Farina (Cream of Wheat)
Multigrain Hot Cereal
Whole wheat or Spinach Pasta
100% Stoneground Whole Wheat Bread

FIBROUS CARBS

Green Leafy Lettuce (Green Leaf, Red, Leaf, Romaine)
Broccoli
Asparagus
String Beans
Okra
Spinach
Bell Peppers
Brussel Sprouts
Cauliflower
Cabbage
Celery
Cucumber
Eggplant
Green or Red Pepper
Onions
Pumpkin
Garlic
Tomatoes
Zucchini

FRUIT

Apples
Grapefruit
Peaches
Strawberries
Blueberries
Raspberries
Lemons or Limes

HEALTHY FATS

Natural Peanut Butter
Olive Oil or Safflower Oil
Nuts (peanuts, almonds)
Flaxseed Oil
Coconut Oil

BEVARAGES

Crystal Light
Green Tea
Other Tea (without sugar)
Coffee (without sugar)

CONDIMENTS

Mayonnaise
Reduced Sodium Soy Sauce
Reduced Sodium Teriyaki Sauce
Balsamic Vinegar
Salsa
Hot Peppers and Hot Sauce
Chili powder
Mrs. Dash
Steak Sauce
Sugar Free Maple Syrup
Chili Paste
Mustard
Extracts (vanilla, almond, etc )
Low Sodium beef or chicken broth
Plain or reduced sodium tomatoes sauce, puree, paste)
Stevia (natural sweetener)

Written by:
BuffedWildCat
ACE Certified Personal Trainer

[Miranda]

decreasing the amount of carbohydrates you eat will really help since it's the main reason people are overweight in the first place, too many carbs, specifically processed carbs, sugars, you get the picture.

not exactly.

Sugar and body weight ı2
James 0 Hill and Andrew M Prentice

ABSTRACT

The need to understand reasons for the high prevalence of obesity in developed countries has led to examination of dietary habits that may contribute to obesity. We consider whether consumption of high amounts of sugars presents a public health problem by contributing to the development of obesity. Metabolic studies show that diets high in fat are more likely to result in body fat accumulation than are diets high in carbohydrate. There is no indication that simple sugars differ from complex sugars in this regard. Epidemiologic data show a clear inverse relation between intake of sugar and fat. Further, although high intake of dietary fat is positively associated with indexes of obesity, high intake of sugar is negatively associated with indexes of obesity. There is ample reason to associate high-fat diets with obesity but, at present, no reason to associate high-sugar diets with obesity. Am J Clin Nutr
1995;62(suppl):264S-74S.

KEY WORDS Energy metabolism, obesity,

BODY WEIGHT REGULATION: A MATTER OF BALANCE

The maintenance of body weight requires a balance between total energy ingested and total energy expended. Increases in body weight and body fat content occur only when energy intake exceeds energy expenditure. The relative importance of a low rate of energy expenditure or a high energy intake in the development of obesity and the extent of individual differences in susceptibility to obesity are controversial. There is little support for the notion that an abnormally low rate of obligatory energy expenditure [resting metabolic rate (RMR) and thermic effect of food (TEF)] is a widespread cause of obesity (8-11). There is more support for the notion that low amounts of physical activity are a risk factor (i2). The question of whether obesity results from high energy intakes is also controversial. It is clear that the regulation of energy intake is a complex process in human subjects and that factors other than hunger contribute to determining consumption. Several epidemiologic studies have examined the relation between total self-reported energy intake and a measure of adiposity [usually body mass index (BMI)]. Many such studies fail to find the expected positive relation between total energy intake and BMI (13-16). In contrast, most studies in which energy expenditure is measured find that RMR (17-21) and total free-living energy expenditure (21, 22) are higher in obese than normal-weight subjects, making it likely that obese subjects consume higher total amounts of energy than do lean subjects. This discrepancy could be in part due to underreporting of food intake by obese subjects (21-23) on to a failure of epidemiologic studies to assess and classify physical activity adequately. These uncentainties and contradictions leave ample room for possible etiologic mechanisms based on differences in diet composition between individuals and populations.


PHYSIOLOGIC EFFECTS OF VARYING SUGARS AND CARBOHYDRATE INTAKE

Energy expenditure
Alterations in the fat-to-carbohydrate ratio have profound effects on the mixture of metabolic fuels oxidized but have only a small effect on energy expenditure if the manipulations are performed isoenergetically. RMR is altered by changes in the amount of energy consumed in relation to energy requirements (over- or underfeeding) (24, 25) and by the composition of the dietary deficit or excess (11) but does not appear to be significantly influenced by acute or chronic changes in the composition of the diet if the diet is fed at energy balance (26, 27).
Twenty-four-hour energy expenditure measured by wholebody calorimetry responds in similar ways. For instance, Horton et al (1 1) observed that 50% overfeeding of lean and obese men for 14 d increased daily energy expenditure by > 900 kJ/d (=200 kcal/d) when the excess was given as carbohydrate and by only ~400 kJ/d (~ 100 kcal/d) when given as fat. The minimal effect of isoenergetic substitution of fat for carbohydrate can be seen in a study by Shetty et al (28), who altered carbohydrate intake from 9% to 79% of energy (with total energy intake held constant) in lean men during 48-h wholebody calorimetry. Daily energy expenditure averaged I 1.05 - 0.37 MJ/d (2640 ~ 88 kcal/d) and 1 1.23 ~ 0.38 MJ/d (2684 ~ 91 kcal/d), respectively (not significant). Hill et al (26) performed longer but slightly less extreme manipulations (20% compared with 60% carbohydrate energy for 7 d) and also reported no significant effects on 24-h energy expenditure although there was a tendency for it to be slightly lower with the low-carbohydrate diet.
TEF is affected both by the amount of energy consumed (29) and by the composition of food eaten (30). TEF would be expected to be lower with consumption of a high-fat than with a low-fat diet but, as evidenced by the minimal effects of diet composition on total expenditure, this is of little quantitative significance for body weight regulation. Using minimal theoretical costs of metabolism for fat compared with carbohydrate (31), we can calculate that TEF may only differ by ~120 kJ/d (=30 kcal/d) between a 60%-fat diet and a 20%-fat diet in an individual eating 10 MJ/d (2400 kcal/d) (32).Although some have suggested that composition of the diet can affect physical activity, few data exist in support of this notion. Similarly, there is nothing to indicate that simple sugars will have any distinct effects on energy expenditure other than those described above for carbohydrates in general.

Substrate oxidation rates
It is clear from the above that any effects of diet composition on metabolic fuel selection must occur within the constraint of a relatively fixed total when the oxidation rates of all substrates are summed. This results in a reciprocity between the various energy-yielding fuels: an increase in carbohydrate oxidation will tend to suppress fat oxidation and so forth. These effects are determined by each substrate's reactivity, with alcohol at the top of the oxidative hierarchy (9), carbohydrate and protein next, and fat at the bottom. Thus ingestion of alcohol causes a temporary partial suppression of the oxidation of carbohydrate, protein, and fat (33), and ingestion of carbohydrate acts similarly on the oxidation of fat. Oxidation rates of alcohol, carbohydrate, and protein tend to vary in response to the recent intake of each fuel in an autoregulatory manner. Table 1 illustrates that these adjustments in carbohydrate oxidation tend to effectively maintain carbohydrate balance in the face of large changes in carbohydrate intake. It shows that over the
first 3 d of extreme dietary manipulation, a difference in carbohydrate intake of 1010 g resulted in an imbalance of body carbohydrate (glycogen) stores of only 137 g (28). Many other experiments confirm carbohydrate-driven autoregulation (26, 34-40).
In marked contrast, fat oxidation is hardly affected by fat intake when carbohydrate is held constant (11, 36, 39, 40). The primacy of carbohydrate over fat in determining substrate oxidation rates is shown in Women were studied in two 5-wk residential protocols in which they were fed to energy and macronutnient balance in weeks 1, 3, and 5. In weeks 2 and 4 their energy intake was respectively increased and decreased by 40%. During the first 5-wk protocol this was achieved by adding and removing carbohydrate and during the second protocol by adding and removing fat. The figure shows substrate balances measured on the final day of each treatment week compared with baseline. When carbohydrate was manipulated, the autoregulatory adjustments in carbohydrate oxidation almost offset the changes in intake. However, there was a minimal response to the energetically equivalent manipulation of fat intake.
The purpose of reviewing these effects is to emphasize how well human metabolism can adjust to differences in carbohydrate intake in a manner that tends automatically to neutralize the effects of any differences in dietary intake. The significance of these effects in terms of body weight regulation is that the composition of the diet seems to be of little consequence over quite a wide range of fat-carbohydrate ratios provided that the diet is consumed in line with energy requirements (41). However, if carbohydrate is consumed in excess it will lead to positive fat balance through its sparing effect on fat oxidation (11).

[Miranda]

...

Efficiency of storage under conditions of excess intake
A potentially important influence of diet composition on body weight regulation may be seen in experimental overfeeding studies. Overeating may occur in human subjects for a variety of reasons other than diet composition, including socialand cognitive factors and emotional cues (42-44). When human subjects overeat, most excess energy is stored in the body, not expended as heat (25, 45, 46). However,the metabolic fate of the excess energy can differ depending on whether the excess energy is carbohydrate or fat. Unlike fat energy, excess carbohydrate energy, as indicated above, produces rapid increases in carbohydrate oxidation and energy expenditure in a way not shown by fat.
Additionally, conversion of excess carbohydrate for storage as body fat is an energetically expensive process (31). This could result in greater body fat storage with fat overfeeding compared with the same amount of carbohydrate overfeeding. Horton et al (11) demonstrated, by overfeeding men for 14 d each with isoenergetic amounts of fat and carbohydrate, that fat storage is higher with fat (90-95%) than with carbohydrate (70-75%) overfeeding. This was because the excess dietary fat produced minimal increases in fat oxidation and energy expenditure whereas excess carbohydrate significantly increased carbohydrate oxidation and total energy expenditure.

De novo lipogenesis from carbohydrate
Many animals consume diets containing very little fat and synthesize significant amounts of lipid from carbohydrate. This is especially true of laboratory rodents and domesticated (particularly ruminant) species, a fact that contributed to early views about the adipogenic dangers of carbohydrate in man. Observations of net lipogenesis in nutritionally depleted, bed-bound patients fed large amounts of intravenous glucose tended to confirm these views (47), but in recent years the extent to which humans can synthesize lipid from carbohydrate has been reevaluated (48). Several lines of evidence provisionally suggest that the process may be of limited significance in determining overall energy and fat balance under most normal circumstances. It would be intuitively surprising if humans routinely undertook the biochemically expensive process of fat synthesis from carbohydrate when they have an abundance of preformed fatty acids available from their diet. This prediction is supported by the fact that the fatty acid profile of human adipose tissue is strongly influenced by the fatty acid composition of the diet (49). Exceptions to this might be expected to occur only in 4- situations such as the very low-fat, high-carbohydrate diets typical of populations in some developing countries (50) or when carbohydrate intake is so excessive as to exceed the capacity for oxidative disposal (51). Acheson et al (35) found no indication of significant lipogenesis in human subjects during 10 d of massive overfeeding of a high-carbohydrate (> 85%) diet. Indirect calorimetric measurements indicate that exceptionally high intakes of carbohydrate are required before the respiratory quotient exceeds 1.0 (a value indicative of net fat synthesis) (5 1-53).
4- Fat is not synthesized by human adipocytes very actively. Arteniovenous difference measurements, including carbon balance estimates, across a human adipose tissue depot indicate low rates of de novo synthesis under conditions studied so far (48). Although adipose tissue is a less important site for lipogenesis than the liver, even under conditions in which wholebody net lipogenesis occurs (54), this finding is important as a counterbalance to the overwhelming impression derived from in vitro studies of rat adipocytes that lipogenesis is a highly active process in fat cells (48). Specific measurements of fat synthesis made by using stable isotope procedures indicate very low levels of synthesis under the limited circumstances in which these measurements have been performed. Hachey et al (55) reported low levels of endogenous fatty acid synthesis in the human mammary gland; synthesis of medium-chain fatty acids increased when women were given a low-fat diet but was still low.


Effects of sugars on energy intake
There are many studies in rats in which glucose- and sucroseinduced overeating led to obesity (74-76). This may occur because sucrose stimulates the appetite and leads to excess consumption of dietary energy. Sucrose-induced overeating has not been demonstrated in human subjects. Schiffman et al (77) recently reviewed the data relating dietary sweetness to total food consumption and concluded that there is no indication in human subjects that sweet diets (containing either sugar or artificial sweeteners) lead to overconsumption of total energy.
Although the energy content of different types of carbohydrate is essentially the same, complex carbohydrate is obtained from foods that contain more fiber than is found in foods containing high concentrations of sugars. Further, Dnewnowski (78) studied human taste preferences and found that many human subjects prefer foods high in sugar and high in fat. We speculate that a high consumption of these foods could contribute to weight gain not because of the sugar consumption, but because of the high concentration of dietary fat accompanying the sugar. However, data are not available that would allow estimation of the intake of these foods. The question of whether consumption of sweet foods stimulates appetite and leads to overconsumption of total energy is covered in detail by Anderson (79).

Effects of sugars on energy expenditure
Theoretically, diets high in simple carbohydrates should not differ in effects on energy expenditure from diets high in complex carbohydrates. There is no reason to suspect that consumption of sugar or starch should directly affect RMR. Minor differences in TEF might exist between diets high in sugars and those high in starch (80) on between high- and low-GI foods. The differences would be smaller than those between high- and low-fat diets and would be expected to be in the metabolic fate of the carbohydrate (eg, oxidation or storage as glycogen). Such differences are not likely to be of great importance in body weight regulation. Data from human subjects that support this argument are provided by Roust et al (8i), who found that moderate isoenergetic shifts in fat and carbohydrate do not significantly affect energy metabolism. Storlien et al (82) provide data that further support this hypothesis.
In rodents they did not observe a significant difference in meal-stimulated energy expenditure between high-sucrose and high-starch diets after 4 wk of feeding each diet. Finally, there are no data available to suggest that the type of carbohydrate in the diet would affect the energy expended in physical activity.

[...]

SUMMARY

There is strong evidence that the ratio of fat to carbohydrate in the diet affects body-weight regulation and that under some conditions high-fat, high-energy (ie, low-carbohydrate) diets promote obesity. Although many factors other than high fat consumption probably contribute to the high prevalence of obesity in developed countries, a reduction in dietary fat consumption should reduce the prevalence of obesity. There is little evidence that sugars have direct effects on either total energy intake or total energy expenditure in human subjects; such effect would promote body fat accumulation. If making a judgment solely on the basis of obesity, we conclude that there is little substantive evidence to support the view that high consumption of dietary sugars represents a public health problem. However, a potential concern about chronic consumption of diets high in sugar is that a metabolic environment is created that increases the likelihood that other factors, particularly consumption of high amounts of dietary fat, could lead to obesity. For example, chronic consumption of sugar or other high-GI carbohydrates may lead to insulin resistance. This in turn may make overeating and consumption of high amounts of dietary fat more obesity producing than they would have been otherwise, perhaps through a further stimulation of appetite. Alternatively, there may be subtle temporal associations by which a high glycemic response may encourage excessive postmeal lipid storage after meals combining sugar and fat. The apparent lack of a reciprocal relation between fat and complex carbohydrate consumption represents a challenge for nutrition educators.
We find no reason at present to associate high consumption of sugar with obesity. Thus there is no basis to make necommendations about dietary intakes of sugars with regard to effects on body weight regulation and obesity development. The issue should be reexamined when additional experimental data are available. Because of the importance of the question, this should be a high research priority

[smdiskin]

Well for me eating clean is as most people above have said... eating unprocessed food, nothing prepackaged (with all the associated additives) and so eating foods where I have started out with the bare ingredients whole rice, fresh/frozen veg, fresh meat/fish etc..... and for me is a little of anything/everything.... everything in moderation and moderation in everything... only thing that I do have in this that is technically processed is tinned tuna (packed in water)
Not to be confused with cutting diets etc.... which will also have calorie restrictions etc and macro percentages to think about....
My own diet is generally clean and comparatively high in protein... so lots of chicken, tuna and eggs, and here in Botswana you got to have beef... so tasty... as well as odder things like ostrich, kudu or impala

[Wattsup]

I eat relatively clean...I noticed carrots are not on the list in an above post. I eat a TON of baby carrots a day...espcially when I am making lunches/dinner so I don't continuosly snack on other things. It works...
Also, I eat alot of activia yogurt and Instone high protein pudding. Would these items not be considered as part of a clean diet? Can artificial sugars be a bad thing?

Thanks!

[sherdi]

http://www.eufic.org/article/en/heal...rexia-nervosa/

This might be of interest to some people!!

While eating as close to natural is preferred as they provide many nutrients we need to survive and be healthy, eating "clean" is not something you need to do in order to be fit and healthy...I worry about people's idea of having to eat "clean" all the time....remember EVERYTHING in moderation is healthy!!!!

[Miranda]

http://www.eufic.org/article/en/heal...rexia-nervosa/

The Bratman Test for Orthorexia
- Do you spend more than 3 hours a day thinking about your diet?
- Do you plan your meals several days ahead?
- Is the nutritional value of your meal more important than the pleasure of eating it?
- Has the quality of your life decreased as the quality of your diet has increased?
- Have you become stricter with yourself lately?
- Does your self-esteem get a boost from eating healthily?
- Have you given up foods you used to enjoy in order to eat the ?right? foods
- Does your diet make it difficult for you to eat out, distancing you from family and friends?
- Do you feel guilty when you stray from your diet?
- Do you feel at peace with yourself and in total control when you eat healthily?

Yes to 4 or 5 of the above questions means it is time to relax more about food.
Yes to all of them means a full-blown obsession with eating
healthy food.

[twinnett]

http://www.eufic.org/article/en/heal...rexia-nervosa/

This might be of interest to some people!!

While eating as close to natural is preferred as they provide many nutrients we need to survive and be healthy, eating "clean" is not something you need to do in order to be fit and healthy...I worry about people's idea of having to eat "clean" all the time....remember EVERYTHING in moderation is healthy!!!!

Thank you Sherri!!! Eating "clean" and "perfectly" drove me to an eating disorder. Not that I'm saying that it will happen to everybody, but it can lead to an unhealthy relationship with food....esp. since the OP is very young and NOT overweight. I get concerned when I see girls that young so focused on weight

[urstrulyhb]

I eat relatively clean...I noticed carrots are not on the list in an above post. I eat a TON of baby carrots a day...espcially when I am making lunches/dinner so I don't continuosly snack on other things. It works...
Also, I eat alot of activia yogurt and Instone high protein pudding. Would these items not be considered as part of a clean diet? Can artificial sugars be a bad thing?

Thanks!

ive been told to stay away from carrots and corn bc of sugar... but if it makes you stay away from other crap, eat it. activia is fulll of sugar!!! beware. try dannon light and fit. im not a big fan of dairy but its a choose this or that type of thing. the instone pudding i remember being great in taste but i dont know the nutrition content on it

[urstrulyhb]

i suffer from Orthorexia ... to the max

[valby]

http://www.eufic.org/article/en/heal...rexia-nervosa/

This might be of interest to some people!!

While eating as close to natural is preferred as they provide many nutrients we need to survive and be healthy, eating "clean" is not something you need to do in order to be fit and healthy...I worry about people's idea of having to eat "clean" all the time....remember EVERYTHING in moderation is healthy!!!!

and ^ Miranda (didn't want to repost the article)-GREAT POSTS!!

I always think if i eat 'close to nature' I will feel better and get the best nuritional value out of my food but I am not gonna beat myself up about it and really the term 'cleanliness' has little meaning when it comes to food, its either in its natural state or has been processed in some way. Psychologically that's a better way for me to think about it too, cause 'clean', 'unclean', 'cheat' really messes up my attitude to food!!

[claycat]

What a bunch of great posts and reads!

I simply look at it as the more man has influenced or altered the food the worse it is for you. I also like the advice to shop only the perimeter of the stores, that is where all the fresh food is.

[darkangel]

i suffer from Orthorexia ... to the max

Same here. But I have ulcerative-colitis-induced orthorexia. Everytime I relax my guard and start eating stuff I know is detrimental for me personally, I begin to have problems again. It's kinda like being diabetic. You can control and/or eliminate your symptoms with proper diet. Is this obsessive? I hope not.

I once had a coworker say, "I don't know how you can eat like that." I asked her, "If your choice was eat like this or have your colon cut out, which would you choose?"

[BuffedWildCat]

not exactly.

Post as many studies as you wish, but you're wasting your time, I STAND BY WHAT I SAY AND WILL CONTINUE TO POST THE INFORMATION I DO.

As far as nutrition and metabolism go, I basically agree with Lyle McDonald and Dr. Mercola.

I highly recommend you go read Lyle McDonald's "The Ultimate Diet 2.0", that pretty much explains where I'm coming from on this subject. Better yet, if you're so bent on having a debate and trying to prove me wrong, go present your side of the argument over on Lyle's Body Recomposition forum, http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/forums/. I personally just don't have time for this crap.

[Miranda]

I STAND BY WHAT I SAY AND WILL CONTINUE TO POST THE INFORMATION I DO.

cool. wow.

did you read the article? read it again? understand what was said? capable of discussing it in a grown-up manner?

if you're so bent on having a debate and trying to prove me wrong

lol. from what i can remember i (and others) have proved you wrong a couple of times

apparently you aren't open for anything that might collide with your personal views. maybe you see it as a sign of, um, blind faith. or strength. but that's your problem.

[Emma-Leigh]

'Clean foods' is a term people use to refer to those that are 'not processed'... some people take it to the extreme and suggest that it means no dairy, and no foods that have 'sugar' as well [eg: they remove honey and most 'high sugar fruits' as well as things like corn]...

As for if this is 'correct'?? Well, you have to look at any diet in terms of two things:
1. if you are looking to reach a HEALTH goal
2. if you are looking to reach a PHYSIQUE goal...

because one is not necessarily the same as the other...

You can get ripped eating anything really... as long as you follow a few basic rules... and they are:
1. ensure you are eating at a calorie deficiency [cause this is what counts]
2. ensure you are getting enough protein [this helps you maintain muscle]
3. ensure you are getting enough healthy fats [so you don't get too sick... also, low fat diets are known to increase de-novo lipogenesis]
4. ensure you are training enough to maintain your muscle mass [2-3 x a week of weights]

Over and above that - you don't need to worry about the fluff and if eating a slice of 'unclean bread' or 'cake' each day keeps you sane and allows you to stick to your diet - then eat the damn bread or cake. Follow the above and you can't go wrong.

Only downfall is that eating a small slice cake may not be as satiating as, say, a mega bowl of vegetables with hard-boiled eggs and nuts.... but, well, as an individual you need to work out what is more important for you:
1. the cake and sanity that comes with it
2. feeling 'full enough' so you don't want to chow down on your hand


BUT.... If you are looking for HEALTH as well as physique? Well... then not only do you need to cover the above, but you also want to make sure you are getting all the other healthy things - vitamins, minerals, fiber etc.... And for this, well, we all know that naturally, 'natural foods' are going to be better for you - they are the things that and all the anti-oxidants and phytonutrients and other things in them. So you want to make sure you eat lots of goodies such as fruit, vegetables, legumes, nuts, seeds, and whole grains (eg: unprocessed such as whole barley, rye, quinoa, and, yes... even CORN) as well as your essentials like lean meats, eggs and dairy (lactose tolerance permitting).

And these should make up the majority of your diet... BUT - by no means does that mean one should 'ban' all 'unclean'/'unnatural' foods simply because they are 'processed'! Not only is that is near impossible in the modern world - but if it is done for the wrong reasons - such as a belief that eating 'unclean' foods some how makes them 'not good enough' / 'bad' / 'not of strong mind' or will lead them to think that they will somehow 'sprout a doughboy butt' because of a cookie every now and then... then it is not healthy either and, as Sherri said, it boarders on disordered eating patterns.

[in the above --> I DO understand some people have an ethical stand against 'industrialization and modern agriculture practices' and, as such, choose to eat a particular way.... and that is fine... but I am NOT discussing those people]...

I think that we all need to remember that moderation is the key to success... an extremism or an 'all or nothing' type view of ANYTHING should always be approached with a cautious mind....




Please note: I write this as I eat home-made banana bread, toasted so it is warm and gooey on the inside and crusty on the outside, and topped with a good serving of nutella... I also eat carbs and night and enjoy endulging in dairy foods (can't live without cottage cheese or natural yoghurt)..

[twinnett]

[SexyBack]

Nicely put Emma! I think I'll print off your post and keep it in my notebook!

mmm, banana bread!!!

[serinebean]

'Clean foods' is a term people use to refer to those that are 'not processed'... some people take it to the extreme and suggest that it means no dairy, and no foods that have 'sugar' as well [eg: they remove honey and most 'high sugar fruits' as well as things like corn]...

As for if this is 'correct'?? Well, you have to look at any diet in terms of two things:
1. if you are looking to reach a HEALTH goal
2. if you are looking to reach a PHYSIQUE goal...

because one is not necessarily the same as the other...

You can get ripped eating anything really... as long as you follow a few basic rules... and they are:
1. ensure you are eating at a calorie deficiency [cause this is what counts]
2. ensure you are getting enough protein [this helps you maintain muscle]
3. ensure you are getting enough healthy fats [so you don't get too sick... also, low fat diets are known to increase de-novo lipogenesis]
4. ensure you are training enough to maintain your muscle mass [2-3 x a week of weights]

Over and above that - you don't need to worry about the fluff and if eating a slice of 'unclean bread' or 'cake' each day keeps you sane and allows you to stick to your diet - then eat the damn bread or cake. Follow the above and you can't go wrong.

Only downfall is that eating a small slice cake may not be as satiating as, say, a mega bowl of vegetables with hard-boiled eggs and nuts.... but, well, as an individual you need to work out what is more important for you:
1. the cake and sanity that comes with it
2. feeling 'full enough' so you don't want to chow down on your hand


BUT.... If you are looking for HEALTH as well as physique? Well... then not only do you need to cover the above, but you also want to make sure you are getting all the other healthy things - vitamins, minerals, fiber etc.... And for this, well, we all know that naturally, 'natural foods' are going to be better for you - they are the things that and all the anti-oxidants and phytonutrients and other things in them. So you want to make sure you eat lots of goodies such as fruit, vegetables, legumes, nuts, seeds, and whole grains (eg: unprocessed such as whole barley, rye, quinoa, and, yes... even CORN) as well as your essentials like lean meats, eggs and dairy (lactose tolerance permitting).

And these should make up the majority of your diet... BUT - by no means does that mean one should 'ban' all 'unclean'/'unnatural' foods simply because they are 'processed'! Not only is that is near impossible in the modern world - but if it is done for the wrong reasons - such as a belief that eating 'unclean' foods some how makes them 'not good enough' / 'bad' / 'not of strong mind' or will lead them to think that they will somehow 'sprout a doughboy butt' because of a cookie every now and then... then it is not healthy either and, as Sherri said, it boarders on disordered eating patterns.

[in the above --> I DO understand some people have an ethical stand against 'industrialization and modern agriculture practices' and, as such, choose to eat a particular way.... and that is fine... but I am NOT discussing those people]...

I think that we all need to remember that moderation is the key to success... an extremism or an 'all or nothing' type view of ANYTHING should always be approached with a cautious mind....




Please note: I write this as I eat home-made banana bread, toasted so it is warm and gooey on the inside and crusty on the outside, and topped with a good serving of nutella... I also eat carbs and night and enjoy endulging in dairy foods (can't live without cottage cheese or natural yoghurt)..

Ok....
I hope I can get this one down....

So then why all the fuss over carbs? Whats the big deal then?

And why the fear of carbs at night?

Why? Who started it? Why is it followed so much??

*spins in circles*


Awesome posts in here ladies.......wow!

[MauiZos]

Ok....
I hope I can get this one down....

So then why all the fuss over carbs? Whats the big deal then?

And why the fear of carbs at night?

Why? Who started it? Why is it followed so much??

*spins in circles*


Awesome posts in here ladies.......wow!

Carbs are what your body prefers to burn for energy. It's difficult for your body to turn a protein into something it can burn for energy, although it can be done. One calorie is used up in the digestion process of breaking a gram of protein (which is 4 calories) down into its amino acid components to be used throughout the body. The idea behind carb depleting is that without any "energy" calories coming into your body, it will turn to your stored energy (your fat) and burn that instead.

The reason - I think - so many fad diets recommend cutting off all eating or at least your consumption of carbs at night is that this tends to be the most common time for snacking. For a person that consumes 50%, 60% or even 80% of their calories betweeen 7pm and 11pm, just getting them to eliminate this habit can make a HUGE difference. But this kind of advice, as you can guess, it targeted at the massively overweight majority of Americans who stuff themselves with salty, sugary treats and have the audacity to question why they're fat and can't lose weight.

The other part of the no-carbs-at-night-theory is that you don't need energy calories right before you will be at rest for 6-8 hours. Supposedly if you aren't going to put the carbs to use right away they will get stored as fat for later. What really matters though is calories in and calories out. It's perfectly fine to eat carbs at night as long as you're managing your macro needs throughout the day - bulking, cutting, or maintaining.

[BuffedWildCat]

I think there may be some confusion here. I think it comes down to exactly what the person asking the questions REALLY WANTS and sometimes she may not know exactly herself as she is still learning and formulating in her mind what exactly her fitness goals are.

So this is how I see it, for, I'd venture a guess of about 90% of the female population, if they are wanting just basically an average physique, not one that is overweight but simply "fit" and even "fit" is a very subjective term, that CONVENTIONAL diet type methods WILL work. More specifically, they will work in getting most women to about 20% body fat. But I sincerely believe and have experienced myself, that it takes a much stricter diet, stricter methods to get a female's body fat below about 20% and DEFINITELY below 18%. Now, I'm talking for about 90% of the female population. If a conventional diet method happens to work for someone NOT in that 90% then I'd venture to guess that A) said female's CLAIMED body fat vs actual body fat is simply INCORRECT or B) she does have a low body fat but ALSO has INSUFFICIENT muscle mass to show any real muscle definition.

THE NUTRITIONAL PRINCIPLES I ADVOCATE ARE BASICALLY FOR THOSE WANTING THEIR BODY FAT BELOW ABOUT 22% ALTHO THEY ARE GOOD PRINCIPLES NONETHELESS EVEN FOR THOSE WHO HAVE MUCH HIGHER BODY FAT, NECESSARY PRINCIPLES, MAYBE NOT, BUT CERTAINLY NOT PRINCIPLES THAT WOULD BE HARMFUL. MY PRINCIPLES ARE GEARED TOWARDS THOSE WOMEN WANTING A LOOK SIMILAR TO FIGURE AND BODYBUILDING COMPETITORS. IN OTHER WORDS, IF YOU WANT A PHYSIQUE SIMILAR TO MINE, I AM TELLING YOU THAT THIS IS WHAT HAS WORKED FOR ME AND I HAVE THE PHYSIQUE TO SHOW THAT. THAT IS NOT TO SAY, LIKE I SAID, THAT OTHER METHODS DON'T WORK, BUT WHY WOULD I ADVOCATE SOMETHING, LIKE WHAT MIRANDA ADVOCATES, WHEN IT NEVER WORKED FOR ME? I'VE BEEN DOING THIS LONG ENOUGH, HAVE DONE LOTS OF EXPERIMENTING WITH MY DIET, AND MY PHYSIQUE RESULTS HAVE TIME AND TIME AGAIN BEEN THE BEST USING THESE PRINCIPLES.

SO IN OTHER WORDS, IF YOU ARE NOT ALREADY AT ABOUT 20% BODY FAT OR YOU HAVE NO DESIRE FOR A PHYSIQUE SIMILAR TO MINE, THEN BY ALL MEANS, GO WITH LESS STRICT DIETING PRINCIPLES LIKE MIRANDA'S. THAT IS ALL.

(Perhaps I need to put a disclaimer on my nutritional guidelines from now on, yeesh).

[terracotta]

So BWC, how do you explain Emma-Leigh being 9.8% bodyfat whilst eating nutella?

That reminds me.. I have a fudgecicle waiting.

[BuffedWildCat]

So BWC, how do you explain Emma-Leigh being 9.8% bodyfat whilst eating nutella?

That reminds me.. I have a fudgecicle waiting.

Could be several things, I'm not there to see exactly how much of it she eats at a time and how often. Or she could be in the 10% of the female population who can get that lean and STILL eat that stuff, AGE has A LOT to do with it, for example. I know I couldn't, heck, I can't even seem to get under 17% body fat these days even on the strictly clean and calorie restricted diet I'm on. I still suspect that it's similarly as difficult as it is for me to get under 18% body fat as it is most of the female population especially without being on a very clean and calorie restricted diet. I personally have not found or run into any women with the amount of muscle definition that I like to have, who tell me their diet includes sugary items on a regular basis and I've had the pleasure of talking to a few face to face. Like I said, perhaps my dieting guidelines are TOO STRICT (altho I really don't think so) for those women who are just wanting to get to about 20% body fat. Those women who can get in the single digits in body fat by regularly eating sugary items, I personally have not found any. And I won't just believe any person off the internet, it takes time to build trust even if you know a person in person, let alone the internet. I don't know the details of Emma-Leigh's diet nor should I just be expected to believe it even if she spells it out for me. I suspect though that she doesn't eat a lot of that spread.

I have some chocolate and brownies waiting for me also, on Sunday.