The All Junk Food Diet vs. Clean Eating (Lyle McDonald on "Excluding the Middle") | Ep 356
Get a FREE custom nutrition plan when you join Physique University to maximize both strength and muscle growth simultaneously at this link (special for podcast listeners): http://bit.ly/podcast-new-wwpu
Get 50% off Chef's Foundry P600 ceramic cookware (no PFAS, no Teflon, no microplastics) at witsandweights.com/chefsfoundry
--
Influencers claim you can get shredded eating nothing but junk food. At the same time, clean eating gurus demonize a single cookie (or even broccoli!) as though it's poison. Both miss the point entirely.
This false dichotomy creates an all-or-nothing mindset that undermines your success. When we operate at extremes, either "if it fits your macros" with zero regard for food quality or rigid clean eating that moralizes every bite, we set ourselves up for an unhealthy relationship with food.
The research consistently shows that the sustainable solution lives in the unsexy middle ground that nobody wants to talk about because it doesn't get views or sell weight loss programs.
Learn about Lyle McDonald's concept of "Excluding the Middle" and why the fitness industry's obsession with extremes traps you in cycles of all-or-nothing thinking that undermine long-term success.
Main Takeaways:
Why both "if it fits your macros" junk food diets and rigid clean eating miss the point
The research supporting the middle ground: 85% whole foods, 15% flexibility
How rigid dietary restraint increases binge eating risk while flexible restraint improves outcomes
The exact framework for implementing sustainable nutrition without moralizing food
Why planning for flexibility (not spontaneous perfection) is key to long-term success
Episode Resources:
Get 50% off Chef's Foundry P600 ceramic cookware (no PFAS, no Teflon, no microplastics)
Try MacroFactor for free with code WITSANDWEIGHTS
Episode: Why Macros Might Be All You Need to Streamline Your Nutrition
Timestamps:
0:01 - The false dichotomy of nutrition extremes
6:04 - All "junk food" diet
10:35 - 100% clean eating
15:28 - The middle ground
21:07 - 300 calories a day for enjoyment
22:27 - Flexible vs. rigid restraint (targets + guidelines)
24:19 - THIS is everything
25:30 - Planning for flexibility vs. spontaneous "perfect" choices
Stop Moralizing Food and Start Making Progress That Sticks
Can you eat Pop-Tarts and still lose fat? Sure. Can you get shredded eating nothing but chicken, broccoli, and sweet potatoes? Also yes. But if you're stuck swinging between those extremes—binging on processed food or obsessively avoiding it—you’re missing the point. And you’re probably missing your goals, too.
In this episode, I break down Lyle McDonald’s underrated concept of excluding the middle, and why most nutrition advice online is just a tug-of-war between extremes. From all-junk-food diets to moralized “clean eating,” both camps have it wrong—and both create more problems than they solve.
The Problem with Extremes
Social media thrives on black-and-white thinking. Either you’re eating ultra-processed junk and bragging about your Pop-Tart diet, or you’re posting meal prep containers of dry chicken breast and crying about seed oils. It’s no wonder people feel trapped.
But here’s the catch: neither extreme works long-term. They’re loud, but they’re not sustainable.
Let’s look at what each side gets right and wrong.
The All-Junk-Food Approach
Yes, energy balance determines fat loss. If you're in a calorie deficit, you'll lose weight—even if you’re eating mostly ultra-processed food. There are plenty of studies and n=1 examples of this working.
But…
You’ll lack essential micronutrients: vitamins, minerals, fiber, and phytonutrients your body needs to function.
You’ll struggle with satiety: processed food is engineered to be hyper-palatable and addictive.
You’ll likely derail your health markers: even if your weight improves, your insulin sensitivity, blood lipids, and overall function may not.
You’ll ignore the human side of eating: social, emotional, and cultural connections to food get left behind when you reduce everything to numbers.
This approach might “work” for body weight in the short term, but it misses the full picture of health, longevity, and adherence.
The Clean Eating Trap
If junk food is the Wild West, clean eating is the food police. This camp insists that “clean” foods are the only acceptable choices and labels anything outside the club as dirty, toxic, or immoral.
Sure, there’s value in eating mostly whole, minimally processed foods. That’s not controversial. But the clean eating crowd takes it too far:
They create moral categories that lead to guilt and shame.
They make the diet unsustainably rigid, especially in social settings.
They increase the risk of binge eating and disordered patterns through all-or-nothing rules.
People don’t fail clean eating because they lack willpower. They fail because it’s not built for real life. It's a rulebook that punishes you for being human.
Why the Middle Ground Works
You don’t have to pick a side. In fact, the answer is exactly where almost no one looks: the boring middle.
Research consistently shows that people who practice flexible dietary restraint (rather than rigid rules) are more likely to:
Maintain their weight long term
Reduce binge eating episodes
Have a better psychological relationship with food
This isn’t vague advice. The practical approach is:
80–90% of your calories from whole, nutrient-dense foods
10–20% from foods you enjoy, even if they’re processed or indulgent
So yes, you can lose fat while still eating ice cream. And you can get healthy without eliminating your favorite foods. But you need a framework.
How to Implement Flexible Restraint
Here’s how to make this work in real life:
1. Use the 85/15 Framework
Set a daily target for flexibility. For example:
2,000 calories per day = 300 flexible calories
1,500 calories per day = 225 flexible calories
That might be a chocolate bar, a cookie, or a glass of wine. The rest of your diet is made up of foods that keep you full, energized, and hitting your macro targets.
2. Combine Macro Tracking with Food Quality
Tracking macros teaches you how much you're eating. Focusing on food quality makes sure you’re getting nutrients and staying full.
It’s not either/or. It’s both:
Protein from chicken, eggs, Greek yogurt
Carbs from fruit, veggies, potatoes, and grains
Fats from olive oil, nuts, seeds
Add in protein bars or ice cream occasionally. Just make sure it fits.
3. Context Is Everything
A food’s “value” depends on the situation. Gatorade during a long workout is smart. Gatorade while sitting on the couch? Not so much.
One slice of pizza on a Friday night out with friends doesn’t undo a week of solid nutrition. But eating it daily because you didn’t plan ahead? That might need to be addressed.
Context helps you make choices without guilt.
4. Plan for Flexibility
Flexible doesn’t mean spontaneous. Planning is what makes flexibility sustainable.
Know when social meals are coming and plan lighter meals around them.
Track indulgent meals ahead of time, so you stay within your calorie goals.
Expect holidays, birthdays, and travel to happen—and don’t pretend you’ll be perfect.
You wouldn’t show up to a powerlifting meet without training. Don’t show up to your weekend without a food strategy.
Letting Go of Perfection
The minute you stop trying to eat perfectly, you start eating better.
When cookies aren't forbidden, you stop craving them all the time. When pizza is just a food—not a cheat—you start making better choices that fit your goals.
This is what we help clients build inside Physique University. Not a list of foods to avoid. Not a prescription to eat like a robot. But a real, livable system for eating that supports fat loss, muscle gain, and a long-term healthy relationship with food.
Because in today's extreme, performative nutrition culture, the most radical thing you can do is be boringly moderate.
Have you followed the podcast?
Get notified of new episodes. Listen on Apple, Spotify, or all other platforms.
Then hit “Follow” and you’re good to go!
Transcript
Philip Pape: 0:01
Yes, you can lose fat eating pop tarts and ice cream. You could also get ripped eating nothing but chicken, broccoli and sweet potatoes. Both statements are true and both approaches could derail your progress in ways most people don't think about. Today, we're exploring one of the most important concepts in modern nutrition science the false dichotomy, and why the fitness industry's obsession with extremes traps you in these cycles of all-or-nothing thinking that undermine your long-term success. You'll learn why the solution lies in the unsexy middle ground, how rigid dietary rules increase your risk of binge eating, and the exact framework to build a sustainable approach that delivers results without turning food into a moral battleground.
Philip Pape: 0:53
Welcome to Wits and Weights, the show that helps you build a strong, healthy physique using evidence, engineering and efficiency. I'm your host, certified nutrition coach Philip Pape, and today we're examining one of the most persistent problems in nutrition culture the false choice between eating like a garbage disposal or like a monk. If you've ever felt torn between influencers pushing if it fits your macros, all junk food diets and clean eating gurus demonizing everything a single cookie, a Pop-Tart you're experiencing exactly what researcher and author Lyle McDonald calls excluding the middle, and it's probably costing you results. By the end of this episode you're gonna understand why both extremes miss the point and how to build your sustainable approach to work in the real world. Now, if this all-or-nothing pattern sounds familiar, there's always a faster way forward with more support, wits and Weights. Physique University gives you a system to eat with confidence and deal with these issues while building the physique you want. And we are all about sustainability and we are all about meeting you in the middle and allowing you to enjoy your life and have fun and eat things you enjoy but still make progress on your goals. Physique University gets you that framework the community and, of course, a custom nutrition plan built by me, if you use the link in the show notes and that is specific to your goals Link in the show notes to check that out. I just wanted to mention that.
Philip Pape: 2:18
But now let's get into how we build a sustainable system for our nutrition. First, we're going to break down this concept that I've already alluded to. It came from an article I read by Lyle McDonald called Excluding the Middle, and why it is a very important idea when it comes to modern nutrition. Second, we're going to examine the two extremes the all junk food diet, the rigid clean eating. What they get right, what they get very wrong and why both can cause problems, and where the middle ground is. Third, we're going to explore what the research says about the middle ground and why it's not just more effective, but that is where sustainability happens. And then, of course, I'm going to give you some practical tips to implement this in your own life, complete with some real numbers and specific strategies. So definitely stick around for the whole episode to get the whole context and then the practical tips as well. So let me start by giving credit where it's due.
Philip Pape: 3:06
This entire discussion is built on an article by Lyle McDonald from bodyrecompositioncom. It's called Excluding the Middle. I heard him mention it on an episode recently with Brandon DeCruz and, of course, brandon DeCruz and I just did a back and forth Q&A episode on both of our shows. So kind of coming full circle here Now. Lyle's been researching body composition and nutrition for a long time, for decades. Some would argue he's one of the godfathers of flexible eating and this particular article it's a bit on the older side when he wrote it, but it still is highly relevant and it, you know, in his own style of cutting through the noise and calling people out, it's pretty clear.
Philip Pape: 3:42
The core idea is that in any debate, but particularly these nutrition debates, people are constantly framing issues in extreme black and white terms. They are ignoring the nuance, they're ignoring the middle ground, where the real solutions exist, and they use it as a straw man. They use it to suggest that, if you don't agree with their position, you must be talking about the opposite extreme, as opposed to something more nuanced. I just wanted you to think about it. When was the last time you saw a social media post on Instagram about eating mostly whole foods with some flexibility? Well, you probably see them if you follow the people I follow, but most people don't see these, so I'm not going to say that you never see them.
Philip Pape: 4:20
The more people you follow that do have that kind of nuance in their language, the more you'll see. But it doesn't get clicks, it doesn't get views, it doesn't get virality. What does is hey, I ate nothing but donuts for 30 days and look how he did it and how shredded I got, or you know, these toxic foods are destroying your metabolism and whatever it is, whatever the food of the day is it could be seed oils, it could be broccoli, doesn't matter and it's not just annoying. I mean, it's very annoying, but it is actively harmful, actively harmful. I want you guys to realize that, and that's why it's so important who we follow and who we trust, because when we exclude the middle, we're creating that false dichotomy, we're creating false choices that lead to the all or nothing thinking, to dietary extremism, to failing at what we're trying to do in the first place.
Philip Pape: 5:07
It's funny I just went to a book fair at our local library and I looked at all these old school books on dieting and weight loss and they've always had that same messaging it's this diet or that diet, and it's always an extreme. It's like here are the rules, here's how you cut things out, and it's based on psychology, because our brains love certainty. We want clear villains and heroes. We want clean versus dirty. In fact, one of my villains for the podcast is both the clean and the dirty camps. Right, that is my boogeyman, and it's a hard one to have because it's hard to be a hero of nuance. Let's just say but that's where we've got to be. So you've got healthy versus toxic, you've got good versus bad, and nutrition doesn't work that way. We can't force it into boxes, because what that does it ends up forcing what decisions we make and those decisions practically move us further from the goals. So what are those extremes? That's what I want to break down.
Philip Pape: 6:04
Next, and hence the title of this episode, let's talk about the all junk food extreme. This is the, I'll say, energy balance. Calories a calorie if it's a macros idea, but taken to the logical extreme. And this is where the straw man comes in, because it is true that a calorie is a calorie from an energy perspective, but it doesn't mean that that is the only variable at play when it comes to our nutrition. Right, it may be the only variable at play when it comes to strictly gaining or losing weight in a vacuum, but that's barely scratching the surface and the argument goes like this Since weight loss is about calorie balance, you can literally eat anything pop tarts, ice cream, fast food as long as you stay within your calorie targets. And they're not entirely wrong about the calorie part.
Philip Pape: 6:55
I saw an article in. Where was this? Oh yeah, our local newspaper has this wraparound to celebrate like 200 years of the paper or something, and there was something from the I want to say early 1900s, and it basically talked about, you know, eating less than you burn if you want to lose the weight that you added on Right, and so we've. We've known this for a long time. We have studies that show people losing weight on diets composed of just about anything, including all or mostly processed foods. You know the famous Twinkie diet professor Mark Mark, how, how, how? He lost 27 pounds eating mostly those Twinkie you know survive into the apocalypse snack cakes while staying in a calorie deficit. So we know that that part works. But what?
Philip Pape: 7:35
What it gets wrong and it gets a lot wrong is, first, micronutrients do matter. You know macros matter too, but micronutrients also matter. Your body needs vitamins, minerals, fiber, phytonutrients all of these things compounds from plants to function optimally. This is why I don't even like you know the carnivore diet, for example, that excludes so much of that from plants, because it's the same idea. It's like we're trying to get a result from looking at one variable excluding the rest, and good luck getting adequate nutrition from pop tarts, and you'll be deficient in dozens of essential nutrients if you do that.
Philip Pape: 8:08
Second, satiety being full is so crucial for adherence. It's probably the number one variable for adherence. Processed foods are engineered to be hyper palatable and very easy to overeat. That's what they're designed for. I'm not going to blame the companies for doing that. They make them that way on purpose. Good luck staying in a calorie deficit when you're fighting food addiction or binging or lack of satiety because you're eating mostly processed foods right, sure, we want to be in a calorie deficit to lose weight, lose fat, but it's very hard to do so when you're eating mostly processed foods.
Philip Pape: 8:46
Third, the health markers beyond weight. Right, weight, I guess, is a health marker, but there are so many health markers beyond weight that matter that we often ignore in these discussions. We're always talking about weight loss. Now I'll be the first to say that losing significant weight if you're unhealthy, in and of itself is probably the biggest factor toward lots of things improving from inflammation to gut health, to immunity, to even just it helps you lose body fat. But we also have to think about blood sugar control and cardiovascular health and muscle mass and function and all of those things that are influenced by how we move, how we train and how we eat right. And so just reducing it to if it fits your macros is not enough. It will get you to a certain extent and it will allow you to put some structure and control over your diet, but only to a point if you're not paying attention to all these other things. And control over your diet, but only to a point if you're not paying attention to all these other things.
Philip Pape: 9:40
And then the last thing about the all junk food approach is it ignores the psychological component. Food is more than fuel. Right, it should be fuel, but it also is tied to our emotions and our culture, our ethnicity, our social connections. And so this, even if it's not the all junk food, but if it's, if it's your fit, your macros, we're reducing it to pure mathematics. We tend to miss that human element, and I've gotten caught in that trap where I'm very focused on even even focused on hitting the numbers that I want to hit, and it causes me to make weird decisions in social situations that aren't always aligned with my bigger goal as being a human in society or with my family. Now, sometimes it is, sometimes that does come first, but when we reduce it to something like just calories or just macros, this can often happen. So that's the all junk food diet extreme, I'll say, where it doesn't matter, quote, unquote what you eat.
Philip Pape: 10:35
The other extreme, the other side, is clean eating, and I'm actually going to pound on these guys a lot more, because that's where I see a lot of the toxic behavior coming from, as well as the emotional issues around food that get developed. The obsessiveness around it tends to be more on this side. Yes, we have a little bit of obsessiveness on the other side, but when people have created moral categories around food right, chicken breast is good, cookies bad One cheat meal means you failed, need to start over tomorrow. I don't even use the term cheat meal, but you get the idea and I've heard on podcasts people trying to go the other direction and say, well, all these new diet people saying nutrition, people saying that there are no good versus bad foods Of course there's good versus bad, right, and you hear that false dichotomy come up over and over again and I probably said, hey, there's no good or bad, but we wanna add some context and nuance to that. So what does it get right? Well, whole foods are generally more nutrient-dense foods. They are more satiating per calorie. They support better health.
Philip Pape: 11:36
The food quality piece is extremely valid. It is. I don't want to deny that. That's the point. I don't want to deny that. That one piece of it is great. In fact, I will tell people hey, eat 80, 85% whole foods and you're golden as long as they meet your other goals, right, as long as they meet your calories and macros and the other things. It's kind of a blend of the two.
Philip Pape: 11:55
But where this whole clean eating philosophy goes way off track is the first thing is it moralizes the food in a way that is psychologically damaging. Period when you label foods as good or bad. This is the thing. When you do that, you are setting yourself up for guilt and for shame and for an unhealthy relationship with eating. I don't care if you think seed oils are harmful and processed foods harmful and therefore a Pop-Tart is quote-unquote bad, simply by labeling that, moralizing it instead of just saying it is a food that has these characteristics. Does that align with what I'm trying to do? That is what creates that unhealthy relationship. Secondly, it's just unnecessarily restrictive. There is no evidence that 100%, quote unquote clean eating is required for health or body composition goals, right, and in fact the stress of trying to eat perfectly is often more harmful mentally than the occasional treat, and we know that people inevitably will binge their foods again and again anyway when they try to keep them away 100% and try to abstain with everything. The third thing here is that restriction leads to binge episodes, which I just alluded to. So I kind of jumped the gun. Research is consistent in showing that rigid dietary constraint increases the likelihood of binge eating period.
Philip Pape: 13:11
Hey, this is Philip, and before we continue, I want to talk about cookware. We all love to make our own food. I love nonstick pans. The problem is I've avoided them for years because when they get scratched, when they get heated, they can release microplastics, pfas small particles that can accumulate over time in the body and some studies have shown them to be linked to health issues. If you're optimizing your nutrition and making lots of food for you and your family at home, it doesn't make sense to compromise that with questionable cookware. So that's why I was interested when Chef's Foundry, who is sponsoring this episode, showed me their ceramic cookware. It's called the P600 and uses Swiss engineered ceramic coating which has no Teflon, no PFAS, no plastic components. It is nonstick, it works on all stovetops, it goes straight into the oven All the things you need if you're trying to cook a lot of your meals at home. Right now you can get the P600 at 50% off by going to witsandweightscom slash chefsfoundry. You'll also get a bunch of accessories with that. There's a whole page that explains what you'll get for that discounted 50% off. Go to witsandweightscom, slash chefsfoundry or click the link in the show notes.
Philip Pape: 14:22
All right, let's get back to the show. Tell someone they can never have ice cream again, and what's the first thing that they're going to crave all the time? Ice cream. Of course we know this. This is pretty intuitive by now. And then, finally, the restrictive mindset here is socially isolating. When you can't eat at restaurants, you can't enjoy birthday cake, you can't participate in the party and eat what's provided or what your grandmother bakes for the holiday, you're just trading all of these moments of social connection for dietary purity right Now.
Philip Pape: 14:54
Again, I alluded to the fact before you don't have to be all or nothing here. There are cases where, if someone is pushing something on you over and over and over again, you have to create some balance and boundaries. That's fine. I'm talking about the idea that you can't ever a hundred percent, just because you feel like you have this false dichotomy in your head that you have to stick with. So if both extremes are problematic, what does the research actually support? And the answer is beautifully boring A diet primarily based on nutrient-dense whole foods with room for some discretionary calories from foods you enjoy.
Philip Pape: 15:28
That's it. I know it sounds simple. You probably hear it a lot. You hear 80-20, right, and it actually works. But it has to work for you in the way that you want to construct it. So if I give you some numbers, right, research says that getting 80% to 90% of your calories from minimally processed nutrient-dense foods provides most of the health and satiety benefits you're looking for. The remaining 10% to 20%, that is your flexibility buffer. That's like your buffer that solves all those other issues, including the psychological ones. And this is not just theory. There have been studies on this that look at flexible versus rigid dietary constraint and they're always showing better outcomes for the flexible approach. It just kind of makes sense, right? But I know we can't just rely on common sense and anecdote. It helps to have data as well. But people who allow themselves that little bit of wiggle room, some freedom in their diet, have better long-term maintenance of their weight. They have lower rates of binge eating. They have better psychological relationships with food. Right, and again, we're not talking about the extremes.
Philip Pape: 16:27
Don't take this to mean, oh, you can eat whatever you want. Of course not. I just set the whole context of why. That's not what I'm saying. We know that metabolic ward studies show us that, while calorie balance of course drives weight change it always does they naturally just eat more calories. When they eat more whole foods, they naturally eat fewer calories. In other words, the quality of your overall diet will affect the quality of your diet. Isn't that kind of interesting, right? And you know this. It's not that you're addicted. It's not that, oh, I just had some candy and all of a sudden I'm just going to go crazy on candy. It's more of your overall dietary pattern.
Philip Pape: 17:19
If you eat mostly whole foods, you know what you are going to crave mostly whole foods. You're not going to have as much of a sweet tooth. That's how I am today. I used to love candy. I used to love sweets. I almost had to force myself to just enjoy a couple gummy worms or something that my kids offer me. It's like, oh, that's okay, that tastes good, that's sweet, that's fine, and you know, whatever not like, it used to be right. You lose those inhibitions Now. That doesn't mean you're not going to have specific foods that you want to binge to the day you die. That that's definitely the case with some people, and there's tools that you can support that. We're also not saying you have to have all foods that are in the indulgent spectrum as part of your 10 or 20%. You can abstain from certain foods if that's helpful to you and allow in other foods that serve the same purpose for you, if that makes sense, whether it's a craving or an experience or what have you.
Philip Pape: 18:09
So this is a nuanced, evidence-based approach and that's exactly what this podcast is all about. That is what we teach inside the physique university. You know, we see people all the time that are tired. They're just exhausted of bouncing between this diet and that diet and, oh, now it's my hormones, and now I have this condition, and now it's my thyroid, and so now I have to be in this diet. This person on social media said this doesn't support my thyroid, this doesn't support this. What about when I'm trying to build muscle? What about when I'm trying to lose fat? Right, it's exhausting. And then none of those things ever stick because it feels like these very specific, highly restrictive solutions for specific problems rather than an overall sustainable system that just works no matter what you do long-term.
Philip Pape: 18:54
You can change the levers and dials. Right, you can change the calorie dial, but just start scaling things up and down. When I'm in a fat loss phase and I'm eating only, say, 1800 or 2000 calories, of course I'm going to eat a lot fewer just food and a lot less food in general, including processed food than when I'm eating 3,500 or 4,000 calories. Maybe the percentages are similar, maybe not. It depends on what I need to make me successful. But there's a lot of flex in there. So I'm just mentioning that that is so important and sometimes it helps to have people in your corner to support you. That's why we have Physique University it's just 27 a month free nutrition plan included, if you use my custom link in the show notes. And I want to continue here talking about behavioral psychology, because I think that is really crucial here and we have to talk about it.
Philip Pape: 19:39
Flexible dietary restraint, where you have guidelines but not rigid rules Okay, guidelines but not rigid rules is going to correlate with better long-term outcomes. Again, it's not eat whatever you want. It's not intuitive eating. It's guidelines instead of rules. Rigid restraint that is where foods are strictly forbidden. That correlates with higher rates of eating disorders and weight regain. So we want flexible restraint, not rigid restraint. Think about those terms. The word restraint is in both. There's guidelines in both, there are boundaries in both, but one is flexible, one is rigid, and this does make intuitive sense when you think about it.
Philip Pape: 20:22
If you tell yourself you can never have pizza again, what happens when you inevitably do have pizza? You feel like you've blown it. It often leads to well, I might as well keep going, I'll get back to it on Monday and then a full binge episode. But if pizza is just one food among many in your overall dietary pattern, having a slice or two, it's not a moral failing. It's just Tuesday Decided to have pizza on Tuesday, all right.
Philip Pape: 20:47
So now we get to the implementation. How do we implement this middle ground approach? I'm gonna give you a few guidelines as part of a framework. Okay, the first one is the 85-15 rule. Now, I mentioned we're not having rules, but rule here is, in the colloquial sense, as in a rule of thumb right, a thumb suck. You're going to go up and down depending on what you need.
Philip Pape: 21:07
Now I talk about 80-20 a lot, but I think 85% is a good place to aim for, especially when you are in a fat loss phase and when you look at the numbers. When you look at the numbers, okay, so if you get 85% of your calories from minimally processed, nutrient dense foods right, which gives you all the health and satiety benefits you want, leaves 15% for pure enjoyment foods. What does that look like? Well, if you're eating 2000 calories a day, that's 300 calories of flexibility. That could be a few cookies, a muffin, a big chunk of dark chocolate, like whatever you enjoy. 300 calories a day is actually a decent amount when you think about it, when you're planning it in and thinking in this flexible way, as opposed to just ad hoc, intuitively eating whatever you want and snacking right, snacking is a big challenge too for folks. Now, you could do 80-20, you could do 85-15, you could do 90-10. Even that is flexible, based on the number of calories. You have to work with what you like to eat. I have clients who just love whole foods, so almost all their foods are whole foods and then occasionally they have a really indulgent treat. So that's the first one. Just have a ratio for yourself in numbers, in other words, know what calories you're eating. If you're in a fat loss phase, eating, let's say, 1500 calories, then maybe 200, it's 200 calories of flexibility a day, all right.
Philip Pape: 22:27
The second principle here is having macro targets, yes, but with food quality guidelines. So, instead of just tracking macros or just focusing on food quality, do both right. Have your targets, use something like Macrofactor to track your food, and have targets for your body composition goals, right, and your calorie goals. So you've got your calories and, within that, your protein, fat, carb targets, but you're trying to hit those through whole food sources to focus on food quality. That's really all it is, and your protein might come from chicken, fish, eggs, greek yogurt most of the time, with the occasional protein bar when life gets busy. Your carbs are going to be mostly from fruits, vegetables, grains, starches, most of the time, with some room for ice cream on the weekend. And remember most of these indulgences pizza, ice cream, muffins are usually a combination of macros and not very much protein. Very often, right, even pizza, unless you get, like it, loaded with lean meats, which is a very rare thing, let's be honest. Usually it's sausage and pepperoni. You know, very fatty meats, a lot of fatty cheese. Right, it's going to have a lot of fats and carbs in there. So you're kind of covering both with that. But on the indulgent flexibility. So if you're really to sum this all up, I would say the vast majority of protein is going to come from whole foods. Some of your fats and carbs might be where the reserved calories come from. For the indulgences Maybe. Again, unless it's like a protein bar, then it's kind of a neat little hybrid. So that's.
Philip Pape: 23:52
The second one is macro targets with food quality guidelines. The next one is the principle of context. The same food can be appropriate or inappropriate depending on context, on the situation. This is why I don't like this rejection of no foods can't be good or bad. Yeah, foods can't be good or bad, which is what I generally say. And then people are like rejecting that, saying no, no, no, they absolutely can't. No, it's context.
Philip Pape: 24:19
A Gatorade during a two-hour training session where you didn't get your pre-workout and you're short on carbs, could be extremely helpful. But if you just get that as an indulgent drink while you're sitting on the couch watching Netflix, probably not. I mean, I shouldn't have to explain this, but I think it does help to understand that, that you shouldn't beat yourself up based on the context. I mean, don't beat yourself up at all, but understand this. You know, post-workout fast food because you're genuinely hungry and it's your only option might be okay in that context Now, maybe it's Chick-fil-A with grilled chicken, with some of the waffle fries or something I don't know versus something that is farther away from your macro goals.
Philip Pape: 25:02
But if you have that every single day because you don't plan for your food and because you get stressed, that's not optimal. There are differences here, and even the first example, where you're hungry and it's your only option, you probably could have planned better. But we always have our next best choice. That is my point, and that's context is everything. And so that segues into the last piece of practical implementation here, which is planning ahead. Like, planning ahead is the thing that glues everything together.
Philip Pape: 25:30
If you can plan for the flexibility and I know that sounds counterintuitive, but it's not, because, remember, we're talking about flexible restraint, not anarchy, not quote unquote intuitive eating anything goes and eat whatever you want. We're talking about planned in restrained flexibility, rather than trying to spontaneously make perfect choices. Do you see the difference? A lot of us, we think we have a plan in our head and then in the moment, we're going to make great choices. No, it doesn't work that way. We're human beings. We get stressed, we get distracted. Right, it doesn't work. That way we get fatigued. Plan for that flexibility.
Philip Pape: 26:05
If you know you're going out for pizza Friday night, work that in to your plan. Whether that's your calories, your macros, your micros, whatever you feel like it is or isn't going to serve, pizza is going to give you some of the things you want and need. It will, but not everything, and it might take away from others. So make make the indulgence part of your, say, 15%. Don't pretend that it's not going to happen when every single Friday night you know you end up going out, even when you don't think you're going to, and then feel guilty when it does happen. Right, it's like don't pretend that Christmas isn't going to happen and therefore you didn't save up to buy gifts, right, it always happens.
Philip Pape: 26:42
The stuff in your life happens, and this could mean a whole bunch of different things to plan around it. It could mean eating a bit lighter during the day, friday, and starting with your lean proteins and vegetables. It could be, you know, shifting your training day around or getting some extra walking in. I mean, I don't like to move the calories or to burn the calories through movement, right, but just thinking about how you're moving things around and accepting that one day of higher calories in the context of a week of appropriate eating is completely fine. And when we say 15% of your 100%, it doesn't have to be daily.
Philip Pape: 27:15
Some people have a very boring Monday through Friday with their planned out meals, and it's all whole foods, and then they quote unquote, save their indulgences all for the weekend. You can do whatever you want, absolutely enjoy it. That's the whole point Flexible restraint. Now, when you think about this middle ground, it's really a game changer. I mean this is the thing that changed my life when it comes to nutrition, because when you stop moralizing food, you start making better choices automatically. Again, it sounds counterintuitive, but I see it with clients all the time. Somebody finally gives themselves permission to have the ice cream and then they stop thinking about ice cream constantly.
Philip Pape: 27:54
When cookies are not forbidden, they become less interesting, right? I mean it's fascinating how that works. It's like that old saying the best way to get someone to do something is tell them they can't do it. Right? That's when we remove the forbidden fruit aspect from foods. That is where they lose their power over us. So instead of spending your mental energy fighting the cravings, feeling guilty about food choices, you can redirect that energy toward things that matter, like your training, like your sleep, like managing your stress, because the middle ground isn't just about these physical outcomes, which are definitely real. It's going to improve your physical outcome, but it's the food freedom. It's being able to go to a restaurant with friends without anxiety and say no, I can't have that, I can't have that, I can't have that. It's about enjoying birthday cake without guilt. It's about building a sustainable relationship with food that serves you for life and not just the next dieting phase, and that, more than any macro split or food rule, that's what separates the people who maintain the results long-term from those who end up yo-yo dieting forever. There you go.
Philip Pape: 28:55
All right, if you enjoyed this episode, I want you to check out episode 194, why macros might be all you need to streamline your nutrition. It's an interesting one. That sounds contradictory to what I talked about today, but it's actually a gateway into this idea of flexible restraint from both angles from the macros angle and from the food quality angle. So I think it's a good companion to the discussion today about finding that balance Link is going to be in the show notes to that, to episode 194. Until next time, keep using your wits lifting those weights, and remember the most radical thing you can do in today's extreme dieting culture is to be boringly moderate. I'll talk to you next time here on the Wits and Weights podcast.
