Lifestyle | Wellness
Is clean eating making dining less healthy?
By Kristine FonacierJul 31, 2026
CoverThe idea of clean eating is built on a sound, scientifically backed foundation, but there is a point where the concept can become counterproductive (Photo: Getty Images)
When does ‘clean eating’ stop being about nutrition and start being about control? The term can flatten food into a set of pass-or-fail rules, narrowing what’s on the plate and making little room for pleasure, spontaneity or the shared rituals of a meal
Sometimes a meal can feel like a negotiation. Is there sugar in the sauce? Was the fish cooked in the right oil? Can we do without rice? Is the tofu organic, the chicken free-range and the dressing served separately? None of these questions is inherently unreasonable, especially if one is managing allergies, diabetes, cardiovascular risk, digestive conditions or acting on doctor’s advice
But there is another version of the conversation, driven less by medical need than by a desire to eat perfectly. Foods are divided into clean and dirty, permitted and forbidden, virtuous and indulgent. Every meal, every ingredient needs to pass increasingly elaborate tests
Don’t miss: A look at Novak Djokovic’s investments: biotech, sports clubs and clean eating brands
This is where clean eating begins to undermine its own purpose. Its basic premise can be useful: eat more vegetables, fruit, legumes, whole grains and minimally processed food. Its weakness is that ‘clean’ has no agreed nutritional definition. To some it can mean cooking at home and eating more plants; to others it can mean removing gluten, dairy, carbohydrates, sugar, cooked food, packaged food and entire categories of ingredients without a diagnosed condition or clear evidence
Has the pursuit of health become a pursuit of purity? And if so, are we giving up community, flexibility and pleasure for all the right reasons?
Clean vs healthy eating
The World Health Organisation (WHO) does not define a healthy diet by how pristine, natural-looking or minimally complicated it appears. Its four central principles are adequacy, balance, moderation and diversity. Healthy diets can take many forms, and their precise composition varies with individual needs, locally available foods, cultural context and dietary customs
‘Clean eating’, by contrast, is elastic enough to mean almost anything. In one study of 148 American undergraduates, participants interpreted it in markedly different ways. Some associated it with a balanced diet and whole foods; others understood it through exclusion and restriction. Significantly, participants continued to view several clean-eating scenarios favourably even when the diets caused emotional distress or mild interference with social and everyday functioning
The study was small and US-based, so it should not be treated as a description of Asian diners. It does, however, expose the term’s central problem: a diet may retain its healthy reputation even after the behaviour around it has stopped being perceived as healthy
The wording itself contributes to the confusion. Calling food ‘clean’ does not merely describe its nutrient content. It gives it a moral quality. Experimental research has found that people implicitly associate natural foods with moral purity and processed foods with impurity. Once food becomes a test of character, eating the ‘wrong’ thing can feel like a personal failure rather than one choice within a wider dietary pattern
The underlying premise is legitimate
Clean eating is a response to genuine concerns about modern diets, including greater reliance on convenience foods, changing eating habits and rising metabolic disease. The difficulty begins when an effort to improve dietary quality turns into blanket suspicion of anything processed, unfamiliar or imperfect
Across Southeast Asia, diets are shifting towards more highly processed and out-of-home foods and away from unrefined grains, legumes, fruit and vegetables. The WHO links this transition towards diets higher in refined carbohydrates, sugars and fats with weight gain, unfavourable metabolic profiles and greater risk of chronic disease
Research also gives people good reason to limit at least some ultra-processed foods. In a tightly controlled but small US National Institutes of Health trial, 20 adults were offered either an ultra-processed or minimally processed diet for two weeks before switching to the other. Although the meals presented were matched for calories, sugar, fibre, fat and carbohydrates, participants ate about 500 more calories a day on the ultra-processed diet and gained an average of 0.9 kilograms; they lost approximately the same amount on the minimally processed diet.
The experiment did not establish that every industrially produced food has the same effect, and researchers noted that less-processed diets can require more time and money. It nevertheless shows that the degree and form of processing can matter
It’s important to think of processing as a spectrum, not a verdict. Tofu, yoghurt, canned fish, frozen vegetables and fermented foods are all processed in some way, so are confectionery and sugary drinks . But the former group is not nutritionally interchangeable with the latter or foods formulated primarily from refined ingredients and industrial additives
A sensible response is to examine the overall pattern: how much fibre, protein, fruit, vegetables, legumes and other nutrient-dense food it contains; how often it relies on products high in sodium, free sugars or unhealthy fats; and whether it provides enough energy and nutrients. A purity system asks a much cruder question: has this food been processed at all?
Orthorexia: when attention turns into rigidity
Researchers use the term orthorexic behaviour to describe a preoccupation with eating foods perceived as healthy or pure that becomes restrictive and causes distress or impairment. For now, the concept is still under study—while experts have proposed clinical standards to describe orthorexia, measurement tools and prevalence estimates are inconsistent. But the term should not be used casually to diagnose someone who reads labels, avoids certain ingredients or prefers brown rice
Concern becomes more troubling when a person’s rigidity around eating begins to impact his life: the rules keep multiplying; foods or entire food groups are removed without suitable replacements; deviations produce guilt, fear or shame; substantial time is spent planning and checking meals; or eating in restaurants, travelling and joining social occasions become increasingly difficult. Under those conditions, a routine intended to support wellbeing may reduce dietary variety, compromise nutrition and erode quality of life.
Clean eating can make this difficult to recognise because the restriction is conducted in the language of health. A person who avoids dinner because nothing on the menu meets an exacting standard may be praised for discipline. Someone who fears a birthday cake may appear more health-conscious than someone who eats a slice and moves on
Think of clean eating as a spectrum, where attention and structure are at the useful end; at the other, rigidity and impairment are red flags
Is Asian food healthy?
AboveThe way Asian food is prepared and eaten resists easy answers about its place in clean eating (Photo: Getty Images)
The way Asian food is prepared and eaten resists easy answers about its place in clean eating. Much contemporary clean-eating content is built around an individualised plate: a measured portion of protein, a plainly cooked vegetable and an approved carbohydrate. Most Asian meals do not work that way. They are communal and family-style eating is the norm around Asia. Food may arrive as several dishes placed in the centre of the table, and a diner may take some fish, tofu, vegetables, broth, rice and sauce, often without knowing the exact quantity of every ingredient.
Curries, stews, soups, noodle dishes, dumplings, hotpot and side dishes also can’t be easily deconstructed. Flavour is often developed through marinades, stocks, condiments and methods that cannot be captured neatly in a list of macronutrients. Local food doesn’t automatically wear a halo—some dishes and diets are high in sodium, free sugars, saturated fat or refined carbohydrates. At the same time, however, the complexity of a meal is not evidence of nutritional failure.
Clean-eating culture can create a visual hierarchy in which salads, smoothies, imported berries and packaged protein products are immediately seen as healthy, while rice meals, curries, noodle soups and mixed dishes must defend themselves. The result can be a subtle form of culinary displacement: local food becomes the indulgence or ‘cheat’, while a global wellness aesthetic becomes the default expression of discipline
One way to approach make local favourites ‘clean’ is to apply sound nutritional principles to the food we actually eat. That might mean adding vegetables and legumes, choosing a more suitable portion, moderating rich sauces, balancing a meal across the day or eating certain dishes less frequently. It does not require stripping a cuisine of everything that makes it recognisable
Food has more than one job
Besides providing nutrition, food is also a way of maintaining relationships, expressing care, marking celebrations and participating in culture
Research into Singapore’s foodscape illustrates this broader role. A 2023 ethnographic study of working young adults in Singapore found that hawker centres and similar establishments offered more than affordable and accessible food—they were also valued as places for exploration, shared experiences and maintaining relationships, while the researchers linked the wider foodscape to belonging and cultural identity. The researchers noted that these food environments could help support mental wellbeing through the maintenance of relationships, even though the food available did not always encourage nutritionally ideal choices.
This doesn’t mean that social value cancels out excess sodium. But overall health can’t be judged through nutrient composition alone. Cross-sectional analyses of South Korea’s Korea National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (KNHANES) have found associations between eating alone and metabolic syndrome. Research among older adults in Japan has likewise found that those dining with two or more companions consumed more energy and several nutrients than those eating alone—a potentially useful finding in a population at risk of undernutrition.
Health therefore cannot be reduced to producing the cleanest possible diet. A nutritionally calculated meal eaten with anxiety and in isolation is not automatically healthier than a varied dinner shared with others, even when that dinner contains white rice, sauce or dessert
Clean eating can also become performative
AboveA 2022 study of students in Singapore found that food trends promoted through social media often carried over into real-life social activities (Photo: Unsplash)
In affluent Asian cities, dietary discipline is increasingly visible. It can be displayed through supplements, bespoke meal plans, premium ingredients, continuous glucose monitors, restaurant requests and lists of excluded foods
Some of this may reflect informed self-care, and some may be medically appropriate. But clean eating also offers a reassuring social identity: the person who researches everything, exercises restraint and appears to have mastered the unruly business of appetite
Social media strengthens this effect by turning private food choices into public spectacle. A 2022 study of students in Singapore found that food trends promoted through social media often carried over into real-life social activities. Participants did not encounter wellness trends in isolation; online content, peers and social norms reinforced one another
This can result in a mindset where appearances can substitute for evidence. People may forget that a picture-perfect smoothie may contain more sugar than it looks. #Glutenfree might help the algo, but gluten-free food is not necessarily more nutritious for someone without a medical reason to avoid gluten. An expensive bowl may be low in energy, fibre or protein. Health performed convincingly is not always health achieved
So, is clean eating worth doing?
Yes, as a loose direction. No, if it’s a purity code
Eating more vegetables, fruit, legumes, whole grains and minimally processed foods is well supported for better overall health. Moderating foods high in sodium, free sugars and unhealthy fats is sensible. Planning meals and reading labels can be useful
But ‘clean’ is too vague and morally loaded to serve as a reliable measure of dietary quality. It becomes counterproductive when it narrows variety, removes foods without good reason, causes distress, turns social meals into ordeals or treats local cuisine as something to escape
A healthier diet should be able to function outside a controlled kitchen. It should survive work, travel, restaurants, family celebrations and the occasional meal whose ingredients cannot be entered perfectly into an app
Before adopting a clean-eating rule, ask:
- What is being added? A healthier pattern should not consist only of exclusions. Look for greater variety, fibre, useful nutrients and adequate energy.
- What is the evidence for the rule? A diagnosed allergy, medical condition or clinician’s advice is different from a restriction learnt through an influencer or wellness menu.
- Can it accommodate ordinary life? A sustainable approach should leave room for dining out, travel, family food and shared occasions.
- Does it improve the overall pattern? One meal does not make a diet healthy or unhealthy. Frequency, proportion and the pattern over time matter more.
- What does it do to your state of mind? A food choice that repeatedly produces fear, guilt, preoccupation or social withdrawal deserves attention, however virtuous the diet may appear.
The cleanest way to eat may be to retire the phrase ‘clean eating’ altogether. Health is better served by adequacy, balance, moderation and diversity—and by remembering that a meal is not merely fuel, but part of a life
NOW READ
How Asia is changing the meaning of longevity
BTS V’s workout routine: the plan behind Kim Taehyung’s latest fitness era
Retreat, resort, clinic or medical wellness programme? How to choose what you actually need
Topics
WellnessWellbeingHealthDietsAsian foodFood cultureNutrition
Kristine Fonacier is a widely published journalist and author, covering lifestyle, business, politics and travel. She was the editor in chief at the Philippine editions of Esquire and Entrepreneur, and the founding editor of Grid magazine. At Tatler, she was previously the regional editor for T-Labs, Power & Purpose and Asia’s Most Influential
