Taken from The Guardian
‘I think we have an obsession with diets. With fad diets.” This was Ella Mills, the food writer behind Deliciously Ella and bestselling author of arguably the most successful fad diet cookbook series in recent years. Her eponymous first book was the UK’s fastest-selling debut cookbook ever, and she has since gone on to launch two central-London delis, create her own range of “energy balls” and even release a skincare range in collaboration with Neal’s Yard. Speaking on last Friday’s Today programme, the blogger was keen to distance herself from so-called “clean eating” and, cleverly, from the crescendo of criticism surrounding the trend.
“I’ve never described myself as ‘clean’,” said Mills, nimbly shadow-boxing with a litheness that probably shouldn’t surprise us, coming from a 25-year-old yogi. She described her frustration at being dubbed the “queen of clean”, and was quick to point out the moralistic overtones that language such as “clean eating” ascribes to food. It was a smart move, preempting the backlash that would come from that evening’s premiere of the BBC documentary Horizon: Clean Eating – The Dirty Truth.
I think that "ascribe to" is just another phrase for "due to". But here in the bold sentence, what does it mean? Mills was quick to point out the moralistic overtones that language such as "clean eating" due to food? I don't think I can grasp the meaning of it, could anybody help explain this to me? Thank you very much.