Can Choice Language Improve Weight Loss? Food Psychology Explained

Can Removing “Unhealthy Food” Language and Using Choice Language Improve Weight Loss?

Introduction

Weight loss is often presented as a simple matter of knowing which foods to eat and which foods to avoid. In everyday conversations, foods are frequently divided into categories such as “healthy” and “unhealthy,” while individual eating decisions may be described as “good,” “bad,” “clean,” or even “cheating.” These expressions are common, but the language used around food can also influence how people think about eating, respond to cravings, and interpret setbacks during weight loss.

This raises an important question: Can removing judgment-based “unhealthy food” language and replacing it with more neutral, choice-based language actually improve weight loss?

Changing the words used to describe food does not directly increase metabolism or cause the body to burn more fat. Weight loss remains primarily determined by the relationship between energy intake and energy expenditure over time, together with factors such as physical activity, appetite regulation, body composition, sleep, genetics, medications, medical conditions, and long-term eating habits.

However, sustainable weight loss involves much more than calorie calculations. Eating behavior is influenced by emotions, habits, food availability, social situations, stress, sleep, expectations, and the way people think about their own choices. For some individuals, highly judgmental food language may contribute to guilt, rigid dietary rules, all-or-nothing thinking, or repeated cycles of restriction and overeating.

A choice-based approach takes a different perspective. Rather than describing food as morally good or bad, it focuses on what a food contains, how it fits into an individual's nutritional needs, how satisfying it is, and whether the person wants to include it within their overall eating pattern.

For example, instead of thinking, “I cannot eat this because it is unhealthy,” a person might think, “I can choose this food, but I can also decide how much I want and how it fits into my overall goals.”

The food itself has not changed. Its calorie content has not changed. Its nutritional value has not changed. What has changed is the way the person interprets the decision.

That distinction may be particularly relevant for people who have experienced repeated dieting, food guilt, emotional eating, cravings, or difficulty maintaining weight loss over time.

This article examines the relationship between food language and weight loss, explains how labels such as “good” and “bad” may influence eating behavior, explores the potential role of choice-based language, and discusses how to develop a healthier and more flexible approach to food without ignoring nutrition.

---

What Is Choice-Based Food Language?

Choice-based food language describes eating decisions in terms of options, preferences, nutritional characteristics, and personal goals rather than moral judgments.

Instead of simply saying that a food is “bad,” a person can describe what makes that food different from another option.

For example, a particular food may be:

• Higher in calories
• Lower in protein
• Higher in added sugar
• Higher in sodium
• Rich in dietary fiber
• Protein-rich
• Nutrient-dense
• Highly palatable
• More filling
• Less filling
• More convenient
• More calorie-dense

These descriptions provide information without suggesting that the person eating the food has done something morally wrong.

This distinction is important because food choices are not a reliable measure of someone's character. Eating a dessert does not make someone undisciplined, just as eating a salad does not automatically make someone healthy in every other aspect of life.

A person's health is influenced by an overall pattern of eating and behavior rather than one isolated food.

Choice-based language therefore attempts to separate the nutritional characteristics of food from judgments about the person consuming it.

---

Why Does Food Language Matter During Weight Loss?

The language people use around food can shape how they interpret their own eating behavior.

Consider two statements:

“I ate unhealthy food, so I ruined my diet.”

and:

“I ate a higher-calorie meal than I planned, but I can return to my usual eating pattern at my next meal.”

The underlying event may be very similar. The person ate more calories than they intended.

Yet the psychological interpretation is very different.

The first statement turns a food choice into a judgment about the person's diet. The second describes what happened without treating the event as a complete failure.

This distinction can matter during weight loss because people rarely follow their intended eating pattern perfectly every day.

Real life includes restaurant meals, family gatherings, birthdays, holidays, travel, work events, celebrations, cravings, stressful days, changes in routine, and unexpected opportunities to eat.

A weight-loss approach that requires perfect consistency may become difficult to maintain when real-life circumstances interfere.

A more flexible approach allows a person to acknowledge a different food choice without concluding that the entire weight-loss effort has failed.

---

Is Calling Food “Unhealthy” Always a Problem?

No.

There are genuine nutritional differences between foods, and those differences are important.

A dietary pattern that regularly emphasizes vegetables, fruits, legumes, whole grains, nuts, seeds, adequate protein, and other nutrient-dense foods is different from a dietary pattern dominated by highly processed foods, added sugars, excessive sodium, and calorie-dense foods with relatively low nutritional value.

The problem is not necessarily the word “unhealthy.”

The problem can arise when nutritional language becomes moral language.

Compare these two statements:

“This food is high in added sugar and relatively low in fiber.”

with:

“This is a bad food.”

The first statement communicates useful nutritional information.

The second statement does not explain what makes the food different or how much of it may be appropriate. It also introduces a judgment that can easily be transferred from the food to the person eating it.

Professional nutrition communication is generally more useful when it focuses on what a food provides, what it lacks, how calorie-dense it is, and how it fits into an overall dietary pattern.

---

Food Is Not a Measure of Personal Worth

One of the most important distinctions in a healthy relationship with food is that eating behavior does not determine personal value.

Yet dieting language can sometimes blur this distinction.

People may say:

“I was good today.”

or:

“I was bad today.”

when they are actually describing what they ate.

This may seem like harmless language, but it can turn eating into a moral evaluation.

If someone eats vegetables, lean protein, and whole grains, they may feel that they have been “good.”

If they later eat dessert, fast food, or another calorie-dense food, they may feel that they have been “bad.”

This can create unnecessary emotional pressure around ordinary eating decisions.

A more neutral statement might be:

“I ate differently from my usual pattern today.”

That statement does not deny the behavior. It simply separates the behavior from the person's identity.

---

Can Food Guilt Make Weight Loss More Difficult?

Food guilt does not automatically lead to weight gain, and people respond differently to dietary language.

However, persistent guilt surrounding eating can become part of an unhelpful cycle for some individuals.

A person may follow a strict diet for several days and feel successful. Then they eat something they had intended to avoid.

Instead of treating the meal as one eating event, they interpret it as evidence that they have failed.

The resulting thought might be:

“I already ruined my diet, so it does not matter what I eat now.”

This can lead to additional eating.

The person may then feel even more guilty and respond by restricting food the following day.

Over time, this can create a repeating pattern:

Restriction → unplanned eating → guilt → overeating → renewed restriction

The issue is not that one particular food inevitably causes overeating.

Rather, the emotional meaning attached to the food may contribute to what happens afterward.

---

Understanding the “I Ruined My Diet” Effect

All-or-nothing thinking is a common feature of rigid dieting.

Instead of seeing eating behavior as a continuum, a person may view it in absolute terms.

They are either:

• On the diet or off the diet
• Eating perfectly or failing
• Being disciplined or undisciplined
• Eating healthy or eating unhealthy
• In control or out of control

This way of thinking leaves little room for ordinary variation.

Suppose someone plans to eat a balanced dinner but later orders pizza with friends. A rigid interpretation might be:

“My diet is ruined.”

A more flexible interpretation might be:

“This meal was higher in calories than my usual dinner. I enjoyed it, and I can return to my normal eating pattern afterward.”

The second response does not pretend that the meal was low in calories.

It simply prevents one meal from becoming a reason to abandon the larger goal.

---

What Is All-or-Nothing Thinking Around Food?

All-or-nothing thinking occurs when food decisions are interpreted in extremes rather than as part of a broader pattern.

Examples include:

“If I cannot follow my diet perfectly, there is no point continuing.”

“I ate dessert, so today is already ruined.”

“I missed my workout, so I might as well stop exercising this week.”

“I ate one fast-food meal, so I have failed at weight loss.”

These conclusions are usually much broader than the event that triggered them.

One meal does not determine a person's entire dietary pattern.

One missed workout does not determine their activity level for the month.

One day of higher calorie intake does not automatically determine whether someone will gain significant body fat.

Weight management is influenced by patterns over time.

---

Choice Language Versus Restrictive Food Rules

Many people trying to lose weight develop rules around food.

Some rules can be useful.

For example, someone may decide to limit sugary beverages because they are easy to consume in large quantities and can add substantial calories without producing the same level of fullness as a balanced meal.

The problem arises when dietary rules become excessively rigid.

Examples include:

• “I can never eat dessert.”
• “I cannot eat after 7 p.m.”
• “I must never eat bread.”
• “Carbohydrates are forbidden.”
• “Restaurant food is off-limits.”
• “If I eat this, I have failed.”
• “I must compensate for any higher-calorie meal.”

A choice-based approach does not necessarily eliminate structure.

Instead, it changes the relationship with the structure.

A person might say:

“I usually limit this food because it is calorie-dense, but I can choose to have it occasionally.”

This maintains a nutritional boundary without creating an absolute prohibition.

---

Why Forbidden Foods Can Become Psychologically Important

When people are told that they cannot have something, the food may become more noticeable.

This is particularly relevant when the restriction is very strong.

Someone who tells themselves:

“I will never eat chocolate again.”

may find themselves thinking about chocolate more often.

This does not mean that every food restriction causes cravings or overeating. Many people successfully follow dietary restrictions for personal, cultural, ethical, or medical reasons.

However, when a person repeatedly experiences intense cravings followed by episodes of overeating, it may be useful to examine whether rigid food rules are contributing to the pattern.

Choice-based language provides a way to maintain nutritional awareness without necessarily creating a forbidden-food mindset.

---

Can Choice Language Reduce Food Cravings?

There is no evidence that simply replacing the phrase “unhealthy food” with “choice” will eliminate cravings.

Cravings are influenced by many factors, including:

• Hunger
• Food cues
• Habit
• Sleep
• Stress
• Emotional state
• Restrictive dieting
• Reward learning
• Food availability
• Environmental cues
• Previous experiences with food

Changing language is therefore only one potential part of a broader strategy.

However, if a person constantly thinks about a food because they have labeled it forbidden, reducing the emotional intensity around that food may help create a more neutral response.

The goal is not to make the food irresistible or to pretend it has no nutritional consequences.

The goal is to make the decision less emotionally charged.

---

Choice Language Does Not Mean Ignoring Nutrition

This is one of the most important points.

A choice-based approach should never be interpreted as:

“All foods are equally nutritious.”

They are not.

Foods differ substantially in nutritional composition.

A bowl of vegetables and a sugary dessert may both be foods that someone can choose to eat, but they do not provide the same combination of fiber, vitamins, minerals, protein, energy, and other nutrients.

Neutral language does not require nutritional neutrality.

Instead, it means that nutritional information is presented without unnecessary moral judgment.

For example:

“This dessert contains more calories and added sugar than the fruit-based option.”

That is useful information.

It allows the person to make a decision.

---

What Does an Informed Food Choice Look Like?

An informed choice considers several factors at the same time.

A person might ask:

• How hungry am I?
• What would satisfy me?
• What nutrients do I need?
• How calorie-dense is this meal?
• How much protein and fiber does it contain?
• How large is the portion?
• How does this fit into my overall calorie intake?
• Am I eating because I am hungry or because I am stressed?
• Will I enjoy this food?
• Is this a special occasion?
• What choice fits my longer-term goals?

This is very different from simply asking:

“Is this food good or bad?”

The first set of questions encourages informed decision-making.

The second encourages categorization.

---

Can Choice-Based Language Improve Weight-Loss Adherence?

Adherence is one of the central challenges of weight loss.

A diet may be nutritionally sound and theoretically effective but still fail to produce lasting results if a person cannot follow it consistently.

Long-term adherence is affected by:

• Food preferences
• Hunger
• Lifestyle
• Schedule
• Social environment
• Cost
• Cooking skills
• Culture
• Stress
• Sleep
• Access to food
• Psychological well-being

Language can influence how people respond when the plan becomes difficult.

If a person believes that one deviation means they have failed, adherence may become fragile.

If they view deviations as manageable events within a larger pattern, returning to the plan may feel more achievable.

---

The Role of Autonomy in Weight Loss

Autonomy refers to having a sense of ownership over one's decisions.

This can be important in long-term behavior change.

Compare:

“I have to eat this because my diet says so.”

with:

“I am choosing this meal because it supports my goals and keeps me satisfied.”

The second statement emphasizes understanding and personal decision-making.

This does not mean that people should ignore professional nutrition advice.

Rather, it encourages people to understand why they are making particular choices.

A person who understands why protein helps with satiety, why fiber supports digestive health, or why calorie-dense foods require greater portion awareness may be better equipped to make decisions when their normal routine changes.

---

Food Language and Emotional Eating

Emotional eating can complicate weight loss.

People may eat in response to:

• Stress
• Boredom
• Loneliness
• Frustration
• Sadness
• Anxiety
• Fatigue
• Reward-seeking

When emotional eating is followed by harsh self-criticism, another emotional trigger can be created.

For example:

Stress → eating → guilt → additional stress → more eating

Changing food language cannot eliminate emotional eating, but reducing judgment may prevent the guilt component from becoming another source of distress.

Instead of:

“I have no self-control.”

a person might ask:

“What was happening emotionally before I started eating?”

That question is more likely to reveal a useful pattern.

---

Why Understanding the Trigger Matters More Than Blaming the Food

Suppose someone repeatedly overeats sweets at night.

Simply labeling sweets as “bad” does not explain why the behavior occurs.

Possible factors might include:

• Eating too little during the day
• Skipping meals
• Poor sleep
• Stress
• Habit
• Boredom
• Emotional distress
• Easy access to food
• Long periods without eating
• Excessive dietary restriction

Understanding the underlying trigger may make it possible to address the behavior more effectively.

This is one reason professional weight management often considers both nutrition and behavior.

---

Food Language and Self-Compassion

Self-compassion does not mean ignoring behavior or abandoning goals.

It means responding to setbacks without excessive self-criticism.

During weight loss, this can be particularly important because setbacks are normal.

A person may overeat at a celebration.

Another person may gain weight temporarily because of fluid retention.

Someone else may miss several workouts because of illness.

A harsh response might be:

“I always fail.”

A more constructive response might be:

“Something disrupted my routine. I can identify what happened and decide what to do next.”

This approach keeps the focus on behavior rather than identity.

---

Why One Meal Does Not Determine Weight Loss

Body weight is influenced by changes in:

• Body fat
• Water
• Glycogen
• Digestive contents
• Lean tissue

It can fluctuate considerably from day to day even when a person's underlying fat mass is changing slowly.

Likewise, one higher-calorie meal does not automatically result in a meaningful increase in body fat.

Weight loss is determined by the overall energy balance across time.

This is another reason why language such as “I ruined everything” can be misleading.

The body does not interpret one meal as a permanent failure.

---

Replacing “Cheat Meal” With More Neutral Language

The term “cheat meal” is particularly common in weight-loss culture.

However, the word “cheat” suggests that eating a certain food represents breaking a rule.

A more neutral description could be:

• Higher-calorie meal
• Restaurant meal
• Celebration meal
• Flexible meal
• Meal outside my usual routine

These phrases do not imply that the meal was necessarily nutritious.

They simply describe it without moral judgment.

That distinction may help people return to their normal routine rather than feeling that they need to compensate for the meal.

---

Should You Stop Using the Word “Healthy”?

Not necessarily.

The word “healthy” can be useful when it is used to describe nutritional characteristics or overall dietary patterns.

For example, a diet that provides sufficient protein, fiber, micronutrients, and a variety of minimally processed foods can reasonably be described as supportive of health.

The issue arises when “healthy” becomes an identity or moral category.

A person should not feel that eating one dessert transforms them from a “healthy person” into an “unhealthy person.”

Health is determined by a broad range of factors over time.

---

A Better Vocabulary for Weight Loss

Instead of describing foods simply as “good” or “bad,” consider more specific language.

Instead of “good food”

Try:

• Nutrient-dense food
• High-fiber food
• Protein-rich food
• Minimally processed food
• Lower-calorie option
• More filling option

Instead of “bad food”

Try:

• Higher-calorie food
• Higher-sodium option
• Food higher in added sugar
• Calorie-dense food
• Lower-fiber option
• Occasional choice
• Highly palatable food

Specific language gives people information they can actually use.

---

Choice Language and Portion Control

Choice-based thinking may also support portion awareness.

Instead of thinking:

“I cannot eat dessert.”

a person might ask:

“How much dessert would I actually enjoy?”

This creates room for moderation.

Someone may decide that a smaller portion provides enough satisfaction.

Another person may decide that they would rather skip dessert and have something else later.

The important point is that the decision is deliberate rather than driven entirely by an absolute rule.

---

Choice Language and Mindful Eating

Mindful eating involves paying attention to the experience of eating rather than consuming food automatically.

It may involve noticing:

• Hunger
• Fullness
• Taste
• Texture
• Satisfaction
• Eating speed
• Distractions
• Emotional state

Choice-based language fits naturally with this approach.

Instead of immediately labeling a food as unacceptable, a person can pause and consider what they actually want and need.

This creates an opportunity for more deliberate eating.

---

Can Choice Language Help With Nighttime Eating?

Nighttime eating can have many causes.

Someone may be genuinely hungry because they ate too little during the day.

Another person may associate television with snacking.

Someone else may use food as a way to relax after a stressful day.

A rigid approach might label nighttime eating as “bad.”

A more useful approach is to ask why the eating occurs.

If hunger is the problem, the solution may involve improving meal composition or meal timing.

If stress is the trigger, stress-management strategies may be more appropriate.

If habit is the issue, changing the environment may help.

The language is only one part of the solution, but neutral language can make it easier to investigate the behavior without immediately assigning blame.

---

Choice Language and Sustainable Weight Maintenance

The challenge of weight management does not end when someone reaches a target weight.

Maintaining weight requires continued behavioral consistency.

Life continues to involve:

• Holidays
• Restaurants
• Travel
• Social gatherings
• Work stress
• Family responsibilities
• Changes in schedule
• Celebrations

A rigid food system may become increasingly difficult to maintain under these conditions.

A flexible approach can allow people to adjust without feeling that every deviation represents failure.

This may be particularly valuable for long-term weight maintenance.

---

A Practical Five-Step Choice-Based Approach

Step 1: Describe the Food Objectively

Instead of immediately labeling a food unhealthy, identify its nutritional characteristics.

Ask:

• How many calories does it contain?
• How much protein?
• How much fiber?
• How much added sugar?
• How much sodium?
• How filling is it likely to be?

Step 2: Consider Your Current Needs

Ask:

“What do I need from this meal?”

Perhaps you need protein.

Perhaps you are extremely hungry.

Perhaps you are attending a celebration.

Perhaps you simply want to enjoy something.

Step 3: Consider Your Overall Goal

If your goal is weight loss, consider how the choice fits into your overall calorie intake and dietary pattern.

Step 4: Make the Choice Deliberately

Choose the food and portion that make sense for your circumstances.

Step 5: Move Forward

Once the meal is over, avoid turning it into a reason for extreme restriction or additional overeating.

Return to your normal routine.

---

Examples of Choice-Based Thinking in Everyday Situations

At a Restaurant

Instead of:

“Everything here is unhealthy.”

Consider:

“I can choose a meal that provides protein and vegetables, and I can decide whether I want an appetizer or dessert based on my appetite and goals.”

At a Birthday Party

Instead of:

“Cake is forbidden.”

Consider:

“I can choose a portion of cake if I want it and continue with my normal eating pattern afterward.”

After Overeating

Instead of:

“I have failed again.”

Consider:

“I ate more than I intended. I can think about what contributed to that and return to my usual meals.”

During a Craving

Instead of:

“I cannot have this food.”

Consider:

“I am craving this food. I can decide whether to eat it, have a portion, or choose something else.”

---

Can Choice Language Make Weight Loss Easier?

For some individuals, it may make the psychological process of weight loss more manageable.

The potential benefit is not that certain words burn fat.

Instead, neutral language may help reduce the cycle of:

Restriction → guilt → overeating → compensation → renewed restriction.

It may also support a more realistic understanding of weight loss as a long-term process.

However, the effect is likely to vary considerably between individuals.

Someone who does not experience food guilt may notice little difference from changing their vocabulary.

Someone who constantly struggles with rigid rules and guilt may find the change much more meaningful.

---

What Choice Language Cannot Do

Choice-based language has limitations.

It cannot:

• Create a calorie deficit by itself
• Increase metabolism substantially
• Eliminate hunger
• Prevent all cravings
• Replace physical activity
• Correct a nutrient deficiency
• Treat an eating disorder
• Treat an underlying medical condition
• Guarantee weight loss

It should therefore be viewed as one potential behavioral tool within a broader weight-management strategy.

---

The Importance of Nutritional Quality

Removing moral judgment from food should never mean abandoning nutritional quality.

A sustainable weight-loss diet should still provide adequate nutrition.

Depending on individual needs, this may include sufficient:

• Protein
• Fiber
• Fruits
• Vegetables
• Whole grains
• Legumes
• Healthy fats
• Vitamins
• Minerals
• Fluids

Higher-calorie foods can sometimes fit into this pattern, but they should not necessarily displace foods that provide essential nutrients.

Choice-based eating works best when it is combined with nutritional awareness.

---

When Professional Support May Be Helpful

If food language is associated with intense guilt, anxiety, fear, or loss of control, professional support may be appropriate.

A registered dietitian can help develop an eating pattern that supports weight management while taking into account nutritional needs, food preferences, medical conditions, and lifestyle.

A mental health professional may be particularly helpful when eating behavior involves:

• Recurrent binge eating
• Severe dietary restriction
• Compensatory fasting
• Excessive exercise to compensate for eating
• Purging
• Intense fear surrounding food
• Persistent body-image distress

Changing food language can be useful, but it should not be considered a substitute for appropriate treatment when an eating disorder or significant psychological distress is present.

---

Frequently Asked Questions

Can changing the way I talk about food help with weight loss?

It may help some people by reducing rigid thinking, food guilt, and all-or-nothing responses. However, language changes alone do not directly cause fat loss. They are better understood as a potential behavioral tool that may support adherence to a sustainable eating pattern.

Should I stop calling foods unhealthy?

Not necessarily. Nutritional differences between foods are real and worth understanding. The more important distinction is between describing nutritional characteristics and judging the person who eats the food.

Does calling food “bad” cause overeating?

Not in everyone. However, highly restrictive or moralized food rules may contribute to preoccupation, guilt, or rebound eating in some individuals. Personal responses vary.

Is flexible eating compatible with weight loss?

Yes. A flexible eating pattern can include higher-calorie foods while still supporting weight loss when overall calorie intake remains appropriate and the broader diet provides adequate nutrition.

Does choice language mean I can eat anything I want?

Choice language emphasizes autonomy, but it does not eliminate consequences. People can make informed choices while considering calorie intake, nutrition, hunger, health conditions, and personal goals.

Can I eat dessert while trying to lose weight?

Dessert can fit into many weight-loss eating patterns. The relevant factors include portion size, total calorie intake, dietary quality, and how frequently higher-calorie foods are consumed.

What should I say instead of “I cheated on my diet”?

You could say, “I had a higher-calorie meal,” “I ate outside my usual plan,” or “I had a celebration meal.” These descriptions provide context without suggesting that you have violated your worth or failed completely.

Can choice language help emotional eating?

It may reduce guilt after emotional eating, but it does not address every underlying cause. Identifying emotional triggers and developing healthier coping strategies are also important.

Is “healthy food” a bad phrase?

No. “Healthy” can be useful when describing nutritional qualities or overall dietary patterns. The concern is using it as a moral label that determines whether someone is a good or bad person.

---

Conclusion: A Healthier Way to Talk About Food During Weight Loss

Changing the language used around food will not independently increase fat burning or guarantee weight loss. Body weight remains influenced by energy balance, physical activity, appetite, body composition, sleep, genetics, medications, medical conditions, and numerous other biological and behavioral factors.

However, the psychological environment surrounding food deserves attention.

For some people, repeatedly describing foods as “bad,” “forbidden,” or “cheating” can make eating unnecessarily emotional. A higher-calorie meal may become a perceived failure, which can lead to guilt, all-or-nothing thinking, and abandonment of the person's broader weight-loss plan.

Choice-based language offers a different framework.

Instead of asking whether a food is morally good or bad, a person can ask what the food provides, how calorie-dense it is, how filling it may be, how much they want, and how it fits into their overall nutritional and weight-management goals.

This does not mean treating all foods as nutritionally equal.

It means separating nutritional information from moral judgment.

A person can recognize that a dessert is high in calories while still choosing to enjoy it. They can acknowledge that they ate more than planned without deciding that the entire day is ruined. They can return to their normal eating pattern at the next meal rather than compensating with extreme restriction.

For people who struggle with food guilt or rigid dieting, this shift may create a more sustainable relationship with eating.

Ultimately, successful weight loss is not about making every food choice perfect. It is about developing a dietary pattern that is nutritionally adequate, realistic, sustainable, and compatible with everyday life.

Instead of asking:

“Was I good or bad today?”

a more useful question may be:

“What did I choose, why did I choose it, and what choice would support my health and weight-loss goals next?”

That change in perspective does not replace nutrition science. It can simply make it easier to apply nutrition science in a realistic and sustainable way.