Clean Eating: The Joy of Paying $14 for a Sad Salad

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

In closing: the fourteen-dollar sad salad is not without merit. It contains kale, which is genuinely nutritious. It contains avocado, which provides monounsaturated fats with good evidence for cardiovascular health. The cherry tomatoes are lycopene sources. Even the microgreens — overpriced, yes, but real plants — contain meaningful micronutrients. The impulse that produced the choice is good: eating more vegetables, choosing whole food over ultra-processed options, paying attention to what you consume. These are all correct directions. The problem is not the salad. The problem is the $14, the activated charcoal, the JoyFree™ designation, and the suppressed thought bubble about the cheeseburger. The salad is fine. The ideology that made it expensive and joyless is the thing to question. Eat the salad. Also eat the burger sometimes. Your liver is handling the detox. You don’t need to help it.

Currently staring at a $14 sad salad? The kale is fine. The charcoal dressing is decorative. The burger thought is valid and you are allowed to act on it occasionally. Browse the Fitness and Health archive for more, including our piece on running from your problems — which covers the adjacent activity that the clean eating industry suggests you should do after the sad salad.

The practical upshot of the evidence is more liberating than the clean eating framework suggests, and considerably less expensive. The dietary pattern associated with the best long-term health outcomes — the Mediterranean diet, the DASH diet, the various whole-food plant-forward approaches that consistently appear in the evidence — shares common features that are available at any supermarket without a specialty ingredient: abundant vegetables, legumes, whole grains, moderate protein from diverse sources, olive oil, and fruit. The occasional burger does not undo any of this. The occasional dessert does not undo any of this. What undoes it is a sustained pattern of predominantly ultra-processed food — which the $14 salad, to be fair, does not represent.

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

The nutritional evidence — from large-scale epidemiological studies, from meta-analyses, from the longest-running dietary research — converges on a surprisingly simple and significantly less expensive set of recommendations that are not compatible with a $14 bowl but are compatible with most cooking at home:

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

The Weekly Grocery Cost Comparison™ — clean eating influencer list: $299/week (~$15,500/year). Evidence-based healthy eating: $100/week (~$5,200/year). Difference: $10,300/year. The activated charcoal: $22, evidence value $0. The adaptogenic mushroom powder: $36, evidence value: emerging at best. The vegetables: $22, evidence value: substantial.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

Coeliac disease affects approximately one percent of the population, for whom gluten-free is a genuine medical necessity. Non-coeliac gluten sensitivity is a real but considerably rarer condition than the gluten-free market would suggest. For people with neither condition, avoiding gluten produces no measurable health benefit and, if the gluten-containing foods eliminated are whole grains, may reduce fibre and B vitamin intake. The gluten-free label on a processed food product does not make it healthier than its gluten-containing equivalent. It frequently makes it more expensive and, in the case of many gluten-free baked goods, slightly sadder than the original.

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

The gut microbiome is a genuinely important area of emerging research with real implications for health outcomes. The microbiome marketing built on this research — the $40 probiotic supplements, the fermented everything, the specific claims about specific strains — vastly outpaces the evidence. The most consistently evidence-supported way to support a healthy gut microbiome is to eat a wide variety of plant foods, which is available for approximately twelve dollars a week at most supermarkets without the supplements. The research on specific commercial probiotic products and specific health outcomes is significantly more modest than the products’ labels suggest.

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

Activated charcoal is a legitimate medical substance used in emergency medicine to prevent absorption of certain poisons and drug overdoses. In that context, administered by healthcare professionals in specific doses, it works. In a lemon vinaigrette, it does not selectively bind to anything your body does not want. It turns the dressing black, which is a visual distinction rather than a functional one. The charcoal salad dressing is not a medical intervention. It is a colour.

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

The body detoxifies continuously through the liver and kidneys, which are organs that evolved specifically for this purpose and perform it without the assistance of a three-day juice cleanse or activated charcoal supplement. The word “detox” in a food product context is unregulated and means nothing clinical. No peer-reviewed evidence supports the claim that commercial cleanses or detox products remove toxins at a rate exceeding normal hepatic and renal function. The three-day juice cleanse may produce a feeling of lightness and discipline, which is real and may have some psychological value. It does not do what it says it does to your liver. Your liver is fine. It is doing the thing right now.

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

Clean eating culture has generated a specific set of health claims that circulate with the confidence of established science and the evidence base of wellness marketing. Here is a brief, honest accounting.

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

The problem with the clean/dirty food binary is not merely philosophical. It is clinical. Research on orthorexia nervosa — a disordered eating pattern characterised by an obsessive focus on food purity and quality — finds that it is more common in populations that engage heavily with “healthy eating” content and communities. The rigid categorisation of foods as clean or not-clean, and the anxiety, guilt, and shame that accompany eating something from the not-clean category, produces a relationship with food that is damaging to psychological wellbeing and, in its more extreme forms, to physical health. The person who ate the sad salad and then felt guilty about thinking about the burger has internalised a food moral framework that the nutritional evidence does not warrant and the psychological evidence suggests is harmful.

None of this means that dietary choices do not matter — they manifestly do. It means that the framing of those choices in terms of moral purity versus contamination is an overlay that produces anxiety without producing health, and that the clean eating industry profits from that anxiety in the same way that the diet industry more broadly has always profited from it. For the companion piece on an adjacent health optimisation practice and its honest evidence base, see our piece on the gym membership and what it actually produces.

The Clean Eating Cost-Benefit Reality™ — seven categories compared. Nutritional outcomes: roughly equivalent. Cost: significantly not equivalent. Food relationship: the clean eating version tends toward anxiety and moral weight; the evidence-based version allows for flexibility. Joy: the $14 sad salad versus occasional cheeseburger included. The activated charcoal was never peer-reviewed.

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

The word “clean” in clean eating is doing significant moral work that it is not nutritionally licensed to do. Food is not clean or dirty. Nutritionally, food contains macro and micronutrients in various quantities and combinations, and the relationship between dietary patterns and health outcomes is studied across populations over long periods. The clean/dirty binary — which positions kale as morally elevated and a burger as morally compromised — is a cultural construction that scientific nutrition does not support and registered dietitians have spent considerable effort debunking.

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

Clean eating is not a diet. It is a philosophy, an aesthetic, a marketing category, and an identity, all of which have been bundled together and sold back to you at a significant markup from the price of food. The concept emerged in the early 2000s from the fitness and bodybuilding world — where “eating clean” meant avoiding processed foods, refined sugars, and alcohol — and was subsequently adopted, expanded, rebranded, and eventually became a lifestyle content category generating billions in revenue across cookbooks, meal kits, supplements, restaurants, apps, and influencer partnerships.

The central idea — eat whole, minimally processed foods rather than highly processed ones — is nutritionally sound and supported by consistent evidence. The implementation — the activated charcoal, the functional mushroom lattes, the grain-free tortilla wraps at $8 for four, the spiralised courgette that is doing an impression of pasta without the structural integrity or the emotional satisfaction — is a separate phenomenon that has attached itself to the evidence like a very expensive barnacle. The evidence says: eat more vegetables, less ultra-processed food. The clean eating industry says: yes, and also these adaptogenic supplements, this $60 spiraliser, this subscription meal kit, and this bamboo bowl.

What “Clean” Actually Means (And Why It’s a Complicated Word)

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

What “Clean” Actually Means (And Why It’s a Complicated Word)

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

What “Clean” Actually Means (And Why It’s a Complicated Word)

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

What “Clean” Actually Means (And Why It’s a Complicated Word)

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

Illustrated: The Humble Harvest Bowl — activated charcoal lemon vinaigrette, ancient kale, microgreens, 2 cherry tomatoes, hemp seeds, avocado sliver (+$3 to add), hope. GF · GrainFree · JoyFree™. Price: $14. Beside it: a politely committed person saying “So nourished right now!” while their thought bubble contains a golden cheeseburger labelled ✦ the dream ✦.

You have decided to clean up your diet. This is a reasonable decision made by a reasonable person. The unreasonable part begins approximately forty-eight hours later when you are standing in a restaurant that serves exclusively bowls, paying fourteen dollars for a container holding three leaves of kale, some microgreens that cost more per gram than silver, two cherry tomatoes that are doing their best, and a sliver of avocado that you paid an additional three dollars to add. The menu describes this as the Humble Harvest Bowl with an activated charcoal lemon vinaigrette. You describe it as lunch. Your body, which runs on approximately two thousand calories per day and is currently looking at four hundred of them arranged artfully in a biodegradable vessel, is describing it as a gesture. This is clean eating: morally coherent, nutritionally endorsed, aesthetically aspirational, and deeply, persistently, joylessly expensive.

The Clean Eating Industrial Complex

What “Clean” Actually Means (And Why It’s a Complicated Word)

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

The Clean Eating Industrial Complex

What “Clean” Actually Means (And Why It’s a Complicated Word)

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

The Clean Eating Industrial Complex

What “Clean” Actually Means (And Why It’s a Complicated Word)

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

The Clean Eating Industrial Complex

What “Clean” Actually Means (And Why It’s a Complicated Word)

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

The Clean Eating Industrial Complex

What “Clean” Actually Means (And Why It’s a Complicated Word)

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

The Clean Eating Industrial Complex

What “Clean” Actually Means (And Why It’s a Complicated Word)

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

The Clean Eating Industrial Complex

What “Clean” Actually Means (And Why It’s a Complicated Word)

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

The Clean Eating Industrial Complex

What “Clean” Actually Means (And Why It’s a Complicated Word)

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

The Clean Eating Industrial Complex

What “Clean” Actually Means (And Why It’s a Complicated Word)

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

The Clean Eating Industrial Complex

What “Clean” Actually Means (And Why It’s a Complicated Word)

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

What “Clean” Actually Means (And Why It’s a Complicated Word)

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

The Clean Eating Industrial Complex

What “Clean” Actually Means (And Why It’s a Complicated Word)

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

What “Clean” Actually Means (And Why It’s a Complicated Word)

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

The Clean Eating Industrial Complex

What “Clean” Actually Means (And Why It’s a Complicated Word)

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

What “Clean” Actually Means (And Why It’s a Complicated Word)

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

The Clean Eating Industrial Complex

What “Clean” Actually Means (And Why It’s a Complicated Word)

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

What “Clean” Actually Means (And Why It’s a Complicated Word)

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

The Clean Eating Industrial Complex

What “Clean” Actually Means (And Why It’s a Complicated Word)

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

What “Clean” Actually Means (And Why It’s a Complicated Word)

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

The Clean Eating Industrial Complex

What “Clean” Actually Means (And Why It’s a Complicated Word)

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

What “Clean” Actually Means (And Why It’s a Complicated Word)

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

The Clean Eating Industrial Complex

What “Clean” Actually Means (And Why It’s a Complicated Word)

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

What “Clean” Actually Means (And Why It’s a Complicated Word)

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

The Clean Eating Industrial Complex

What “Clean” Actually Means (And Why It’s a Complicated Word)

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

What “Clean” Actually Means (And Why It’s a Complicated Word)

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

The Clean Eating Industrial Complex

What “Clean” Actually Means (And Why It’s a Complicated Word)

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

What “Clean” Actually Means (And Why It’s a Complicated Word)

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

The Clean Eating Industrial Complex

What “Clean” Actually Means (And Why It’s a Complicated Word)

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

What “Clean” Actually Means (And Why It’s a Complicated Word)

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

The Clean Eating Industrial Complex

What “Clean” Actually Means (And Why It’s a Complicated Word)

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

What “Clean” Actually Means (And Why It’s a Complicated Word)

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

The Clean Eating Industrial Complex

What “Clean” Actually Means (And Why It’s a Complicated Word)

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

What “Clean” Actually Means (And Why It’s a Complicated Word)

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

The Clean Eating Industrial Complex

What “Clean” Actually Means (And Why It’s a Complicated Word)

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

What “Clean” Actually Means (And Why It’s a Complicated Word)

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

What “Clean” Actually Means (And Why It’s a Complicated Word)

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

The Clean Eating Industrial Complex

What “Clean” Actually Means (And Why It’s a Complicated Word)

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

What “Clean” Actually Means (And Why It’s a Complicated Word)

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

What “Clean” Actually Means (And Why It’s a Complicated Word)

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

The Clean Eating Industrial Complex

What “Clean” Actually Means (And Why It’s a Complicated Word)

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

What “Clean” Actually Means (And Why It’s a Complicated Word)

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

What “Clean” Actually Means (And Why It’s a Complicated Word)

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

The Clean Eating Industrial Complex

What “Clean” Actually Means (And Why It’s a Complicated Word)

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

What “Clean” Actually Means (And Why It’s a Complicated Word)

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

What “Clean” Actually Means (And Why It’s a Complicated Word)

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

The Clean Eating Industrial Complex

What “Clean” Actually Means (And Why It’s a Complicated Word)

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

What “Clean” Actually Means (And Why It’s a Complicated Word)

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

What “Clean” Actually Means (And Why It’s a Complicated Word)

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

The Clean Eating Industrial Complex

What “Clean” Actually Means (And Why It’s a Complicated Word)

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

What “Clean” Actually Means (And Why It’s a Complicated Word)

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

What “Clean” Actually Means (And Why It’s a Complicated Word)

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

The Clean Eating Industrial Complex

What “Clean” Actually Means (And Why It’s a Complicated Word)

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

What “Clean” Actually Means (And Why It’s a Complicated Word)

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

What “Clean” Actually Means (And Why It’s a Complicated Word)

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

The Clean Eating Industrial Complex

What “Clean” Actually Means (And Why It’s a Complicated Word)

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

What “Clean” Actually Means (And Why It’s a Complicated Word)

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

What “Clean” Actually Means (And Why It’s a Complicated Word)

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

The Clean Eating Industrial Complex

What “Clean” Actually Means (And Why It’s a Complicated Word)

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

What “Clean” Actually Means (And Why It’s a Complicated Word)

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

What “Clean” Actually Means (And Why It’s a Complicated Word)

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

The Clean Eating Industrial Complex

What “Clean” Actually Means (And Why It’s a Complicated Word)

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

What “Clean” Actually Means (And Why It’s a Complicated Word)

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

What “Clean” Actually Means (And Why It’s a Complicated Word)

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

The Clean Eating Industrial Complex

What “Clean” Actually Means (And Why It’s a Complicated Word)

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

What “Clean” Actually Means (And Why It’s a Complicated Word)

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

What “Clean” Actually Means (And Why It’s a Complicated Word)

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

The Clean Eating Industrial Complex

What “Clean” Actually Means (And Why It’s a Complicated Word)

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

What “Clean” Actually Means (And Why It’s a Complicated Word)

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

What “Clean” Actually Means (And Why It’s a Complicated Word)

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

The Clean Eating Industrial Complex

What “Clean” Actually Means (And Why It’s a Complicated Word)

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

What “Clean” Actually Means (And Why It’s a Complicated Word)

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

What “Clean” Actually Means (And Why It’s a Complicated Word)

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

The Clean Eating Industrial Complex

What “Clean” Actually Means (And Why It’s a Complicated Word)

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

What “Clean” Actually Means (And Why It’s a Complicated Word)

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

What “Clean” Actually Means (And Why It’s a Complicated Word)

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

The Clean Eating Industrial Complex

What “Clean” Actually Means (And Why It’s a Complicated Word)

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

What “Clean” Actually Means (And Why It’s a Complicated Word)

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

What “Clean” Actually Means (And Why It’s a Complicated Word)

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

The Clean Eating Industrial Complex

What “Clean” Actually Means (And Why It’s a Complicated Word)

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

What “Clean” Actually Means (And Why It’s a Complicated Word)

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

What “Clean” Actually Means (And Why It’s a Complicated Word)

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

The Clean Eating Industrial Complex

What “Clean” Actually Means (And Why It’s a Complicated Word)

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

What “Clean” Actually Means (And Why It’s a Complicated Word)

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

What “Clean” Actually Means (And Why It’s a Complicated Word)

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

The Clean Eating Industrial Complex

What “Clean” Actually Means (And Why It’s a Complicated Word)

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

What “Clean” Actually Means (And Why It’s a Complicated Word)

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

What “Clean” Actually Means (And Why It’s a Complicated Word)

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

The Clean Eating Industrial Complex

What “Clean” Actually Means (And Why It’s a Complicated Word)

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

What “Clean” Actually Means (And Why It’s a Complicated Word)

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

What “Clean” Actually Means (And Why It’s a Complicated Word)

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

The Clean Eating Industrial Complex

What “Clean” Actually Means (And Why It’s a Complicated Word)

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

What “Clean” Actually Means (And Why It’s a Complicated Word)

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

What “Clean” Actually Means (And Why It’s a Complicated Word)

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

The Clean Eating Industrial Complex

What “Clean” Actually Means (And Why It’s a Complicated Word)

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.

The Honest Defence of the Sad Salad

The Specific Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Detoxing / Cleanses

Activated Charcoal

Gut Health / Microbiome

Gluten-Free (For People Without Coeliac Disease)

What the Evidence Actually Recommends

Eat a wide variety of plants. The most consistent finding across nutritional research is that dietary diversity — specifically plant diversity — is associated with better health outcomes across almost every measure studied. Not superfoods specifically. Not activated anything. Variety. Fifty different plants per week is a target associated with significantly better microbiome health than ten. The cheapest path to this is a mixed vegetable habit, not a specialty supplement.
Minimise ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food — defined by the NOVA classification as industrial formulations with five or more ingredients, including additives not found in domestic kitchens — is the dietary category with the strongest evidence for adverse health outcomes. This is different from “processed food” generically: a tin of tomatoes is processed. A protein bar with twenty-seven ingredients including seventeen forms of sweetener is ultra-processed. The distinction matters. Avoiding ultra-processing is evidence-based. Avoiding all processing is not.
Eat food you enjoy in amounts that keep you well. The psychological dimension of eating — enjoyment, satisfaction, the social ritual of sharing food — is a genuine component of wellbeing that is systematically undervalued by dietary frameworks that treat food as pure fuel. The evidence on meal satisfaction and dietary adherence consistently finds that people maintain better dietary patterns over time when those patterns include foods they actually want to eat. The fourteen-dollar joyless salad, eaten with the grim discipline of someone choosing health over pleasure, is less likely to be part of a sustainable dietary pattern than a meal that is both nutritious and enjoyable. The cheeseburger, eaten occasionally as part of an otherwise vegetable-rich diet, is not a dietary failure. It is lunch.

How to Eat Well Without Becoming Insufferable About It

The most practical changes, with the best evidence and the lowest cost:

Add, don’t subtract. The research on dietary change consistently finds that additive approaches — adding more vegetables, more fibre, more variety — produce better adherence than subtractive ones that begin by eliminating entire categories. Eating more of what is good is more sustainable than eating less of what is enjoyable. Start with the addition.
Cook at home most of the time. The single most effective dietary change for most people is not a specific food switch but the shift from predominantly eating out (where ultra-processing and caloric density are hard to control) to predominantly cooking at home (where the ingredients and their quality are within your control). The $14 sad salad, made at home, costs approximately $3 and contains more of the actual food than the restaurant version.
Ignore most supplement marketing. The supplement industry is loosely regulated, aggressively marketed, and systematically funded to produce research showing its products work. With the exception of specific documented deficiencies (vitamin D in low-sunlight climates, B12 for vegans, iron if anaemic) — addressed with appropriate professional guidance — the supplement marketing is optimised for your spending rather than your health. Your liver does not require charcoal assistance.
Eat the burger sometimes. The evidence for occasional enjoyable eating as part of an otherwise varied whole-food diet is not a caveat to good nutrition. It is a component of it. The research on dietary restriction and food preoccupation finds that rigid exclusion of desired foods produces higher calorie consumption in the moments when restriction fails than flexible moderation would have produced across the whole period. The person who eats the $14 sad salad with the suppressed burger thought is not healthier than the person who eats the salad four times and the burger once. They might be less happy, which is a health variable the wellness industry prefers not to quantify. For more on fitness and health at realistic costs, see our companion piece on the gym membership coat rack.