Sugar - possibly the easiest thing to cut back on for weight loss!
Replies
-
None of the foods people binge on in this thread (that have been mentioned) get all (or even most) of their calories from sugar. Therefore, your entire premise is a strawman.Sabine_Stroehm wrote: »tigersword wrote: »Sabine_Stroehm wrote: »
I thought her reference to fructose made perfect sense. It has everything to do with every thread on limiting added sugars.DeirdreWoodwardSanders wrote: »You do realize as I and Tigers pointed out sucrose is found in fruits? There is no excessive fixation on fructose. I do agree the issue is hyperpalatable foods, but as you already saw from one astute poster they laid blame totally on added sugars as what caused their binges
The OP has no point, as sugar has many uses then just a "quick energy fix", and many "sugar" laden foods are highly nutritious and packed with micros.
Yes, I do realize that you and Tigers have pointed out that sucrose is found in fruit.
I have no idea why the two of you are fixated on that point, but clearly you need closure, so here it is -- I saw that you wrote that and I believe you.
You are absolutely right -- many people are blaming added sugars in their food as what causes their binges.
Because in their perception, sugar does cause their binges. They eat a sweet food and before you know it, they are eating the entire house. They don't feel this way about lettuce, so it must be the sugar!
So what does cause their binges? Well who the hell knows -- we never get to the point of discussing that because we get caught up immediately in the fructose loop. heh heh fruit loops I made a joke right there!
The end result is that we get no where. The OP doesn't get help and the issue of binging isn't discussed in any complex or intelligent way.
The next time someone says they are addicted to sugar, just please don't start the tired old fructose subthread.
And don't just blame people for being lazy or weak-willed -- that's simplistic obstructionism. Human beings have a powerful built-in response to food -- it's called instinct! -- and for many people, that response is abnormal and needs some tweeking. For some people, the tweeking is as simple as understanding CICO, and for others, the tweeking needs to be medical intervention.
They may not be lazy or weak willed but certainly you could call them ignorant. If someone says they are addicted to sugar, they should know what sugar actually is, right? Again you're bringing up fructose when that never has anything to do with any of the "sugar addict" threads, why?
How? Point to one thread where anyone brought up fructose as a counter to someone claiming sugar addiction. They don't exist.
Every thread on sugar addiction eventually falls back to "if it's sugar, why don't you binge on apples".
Apples contain fructose, glucose and sucrose. so again that's why her continual mention of fructose is silly
Apples also contain fiber and protein, slowing the glucose spike and making them more satisfying than something that is all sugar, and thus a binge is less likely. The apple is metabolized more slowly than something that has all its calories from sugar (sucrose, HFCS). Apples come naturally portion controlled (unlike a box of cookies), which makes it easier to realize when a serving has been eaten. Also, an apple has less sugar (10 grams only a couple of which are sucrose) than, say, a can of soda (41 grams for 340 ml of Pepsi, pretty much all sucrose), so there is less of a glucose spike and "sugar high". Apples have pectin that appears to help lower LDL cholesterol. Apples have vitamin C and polyphenolic compounts that fight free radicals (protect from cancer), trace minerals like magnesium, potassium and calcium, that are good for the body's aches and pains (among other things), and a host of B vitamins, which are neccessary for maintaining red blood cells and the nervous system. Apples are in no way an equivalent match to soda, or most sugary junk food when making a comparison as far as sucrose impact. Apples (and other fruits and vegetables) are a straw-man argument in this debate.0 -
DeirdreWoodwardSanders wrote: »I agree -- the lack of specific definitions for "moderation," "willpower", and "binge" are causing serious difficulties.
Excellent!
A couple thoughts/questions:Overeater -- people who go back for seconds or thirds, people who eat until they are stuffed. Maybe normal weight or overweight.
Hmm. I think there are lots of reasons people overeat (without binging). One is simply taste--they eat not because of hunger, but because the food is tasty and it's not unpleasant to eat it, even if you aren't actually hungry. Another is a confusion of hunger or wanting to eat for something else--for example, I used to use eating as an excuse to take a break from something I didn't want to do, and in those circumstances there'd be a temptation to extend the eating (so add dessert) and there's also a lingering connection in my mind--if I'm stressed or wanting to procrastinate, I'll start thinking about wanting to eat, but it's not that conscious--I'll think I really want the food unless I force myself to analyze the feeling. Lots of people do bored eating and the like which are similar.Binger -- people who eat until they are comatose, whose binges have nothing to do with normal hunger, who don't experience a feeling of stuffedness even after eating massive quantities. In these people (and I am one of them), I think something gets shut off in the brain. I HAVE NO SCIENCE TO BACK THAT UP SO DON'T ASK IT'S JUST A GUESS
I think it's interesting that you mention a lack of stuffedness, because I wouldn't have thought that was part of it (not saying it isn't). I don't think most people rely on feeling stuffed to stop eating; it wouldn't be a particularly effective strategy. I'm wondering now if there could be a confusion of signals of a sort, that you think you need to eat until that feeling, that people get?
What I think of when I think of binging is eating for reasons other than the pleasure of the food, that you aren't even really enjoying it after a while. Is that different than what you are talking about?0 -
tigersword wrote: »None of the foods people binge on in this thread (that have been mentioned) get all (or even most) of their calories from sugar.
Maybe we missed a few: Custard stuffed eclairs, Peanut M&Ms, blueberry pie with whipped cream, Pizza with pepperoni, sausage, meatballs onions and peppers, linguine with clams, butter toffee with cashews, mint chocolate chip ice cream, Brigham's hot fudge, vanilla layer cake with lemon cream frosting, Godiva, Chinese pork fried rice, buttered toast with cinnamon, Twinkies, Ding Dongs, Hohos, Suzy Qs, Duck Rillette on French bread, crème caramel, kielbasa stuffed potato rolls, ravioli, Italian Chicken sandwich from Burger King, crispy onion rings, Gorton's breaded fish sticks, OreIda Crispers, etc.
Okay okay it's not sugar that makes every one of these divine foods worthy of a glutton party. There's plenty 'o wheat flour here. Plenty indeed. But don't they both break down as sugar? I mean, scientifically that is. Sorry, I can't find my peer reviewed citations.
I don't give myself a half a cup of M&Ms and say deal with it Newmeadow. Not interested. If I'm not eating a gallon sized plastic Halloween pumpkin tote full of candy and falling blissfully into a lovely sugar induced euphoric semi comatose state, I DON'T WANT IT.
It's all or NOTHING.
that sounds like a personal issue…
funny you don't get the same high from say fruit, that has as much sugar, if not more, than some of the things listed…
then again, I am not sure if this is even serious…
0 -
Are you trying to be helpful?tigersword wrote: »None of the foods people binge on in this thread (that have been mentioned) get all (or even most) of their calories from sugar.
Maybe we missed a few: Custard stuffed eclairs, Peanut M&Ms, blueberry pie with whipped cream, Pizza with pepperoni, sausage, meatballs onions and peppers, linguine with clams, butter toffee with cashews, mint chocolate chip ice cream, Brigham's hot fudge, vanilla layer cake with lemon cream frosting, Godiva, Chinese pork fried rice, buttered toast with cinnamon, Twinkies, Ding Dongs, Hohos, Suzy Qs, Duck Rillette on French bread, crème caramel, kielbasa stuffed potato rolls, ravioli, Italian Chicken sandwich from Burger King, crispy onion rings, Gorton's breaded fish sticks, OreIda Crispers, etc.
Okay okay it's not sugar that makes every one of these divine foods worthy of a glutton party. There's plenty 'o wheat flour here. Plenty indeed. But don't they both break down as sugar? I mean, scientifically that is. Sorry, I can't find my peer reviewed citations.
I don't give myself a half a cup of M&Ms and say deal with it Newmeadow. Not interested. If I'm not eating a gallon sized plastic Halloween pumpkin tote full of candy and falling blissfully into a lovely sugar induced euphoric semi comatose state, I DON'T WANT IT.
It's all or NOTHING.
that sounds like a personal issue…
funny you don't get the same high from say fruit, that has as much sugar, if not more, than some of the things listed…
then again, I am not sure if this is even serious…
If you're just trying to fight, then okay, you're fighting,
But if you're trying to be helpful, maybe they could use a good explanation of how to cease the binging without eliminating anything. Is it a personal problem? You bet it is!
How is it to be stopped? How does that work?
-2 -
Dierdre isn't debating. She's not making an argument. She's not trying to fight.
I think she's trying very hard to get to the bottom of exactly what people are saying.
They make broad statements, which is fine. The "Nothing should be eliminated from the diet" is a broad statement. When these people are asked exactly how that is supposed to work, people assume it's some kind of debate or argument. It's not.
I was recently told that those who seem to be on MFP just to be nasty are really not nasty. They're trying to help when they make what appear to be very rude comments.
So, here they are, being offered the opportunity to help.
People are asking how to do the things they say people should do. If "moderation" doesn't mean "a moderate amount", how much is "moderate"? If things are not to be eliminated, how do we work them all in and still meet calorie goals as well as macros and micros?
It's not a debate or an argument. It's a question. Tell me how.
Explaining CICO totally might help someone who hasn't heard it. But once they've heard it and say, "I understand that. I still binge. How do I stop binging?"...now comes the opportunity to help.
The answer was "Practice it." Practice what? How is it done? Explain how to do it.
If people really are trying to help others when they tell them what to do, then explain to them how they are supposed to do these things. That's what we all need to know. How does it work? How do I do it?
How?
It varies by person. I overate and binged.
So here's the first step:
You get an overwhelming urge to eat yourself to death or to get a third helping, try to catch yourself and pause. Ask "why?" Why am I doing this? Am I hungry? If no, what thoughts preceded the urge (or situation or actions)? Are you bored, sad, angry, lonely? Take note of the causes and see if there is any particular food that you go to in these situations. Figure out the why. Figure out the tool you reach for as a response.
Next, figure out the HOW. How am I going to get a grip on this? Changes must be deliberate and consistent. Every time stop yourself. Tell yourself, "I don't need this. I need..." and then figure out coping strategies. Bored? Sad? Mad? Lonely? Go distract, or cut off, that thought with an action you find interesting, absorbing, or fun. Do something productive, workout, text a friend, read, watch a movie. Something that will lift you up and get you out of the kitchen. Over time, you will retrain yourself in how you respond to the stimulus that requires you to reach out for too much. But you must be vigilant and consistent.
Something else that helps people is to not have trigger foods in the house. Others to have them in pre-portioned snack sizes, or even to have "dessert days." There's always trigger foods in my face. Once I divorced myself from the "why," and employed my "how" which was choosing a portion-restricting food plan (keto), which is the dreaded elimination (and I don't even miss it. Pfft. I do what I WANT!), I just looked at the trigger food and said, "I want that. But it doesn't fit my macros. Is it worth it? Nope. Eyes on tha prize" and walked on by. I make cookies and cakes for the kids on their dessert day and made them chocolate chip pancakes this morning. Watched them eating it. I'm not even mad. No longer phases me.
The more you resist, when eating the food is contrary, at that time, to your limits and/or macros/calories, and the more you employ your strategies, the stronger you will become at resisting. You fail and give in? Get right back up? The next meal.
You only really fail if you give up. So don't give up. Couple your discovery of "why" and "how" with your fierce grit. With time, this will get you where you need to be. Is this easy, because reading it may sound simple? For some, no. Now I can say it's super easy. I don't even want that stuff most of the time. That took strategy and determination. That took consistent, deliberate choices. Every meal of every day.
0 -
-
tigersword wrote: »None of the foods people binge on in this thread (that have been mentioned) get all (or even most) of their calories from sugar.
Maybe we missed a few: Custard stuffed eclairs, Peanut M&Ms, blueberry pie with whipped cream, Pizza with pepperoni, sausage, meatballs onions and peppers, linguine with clams, butter toffee with cashews, mint chocolate chip ice cream, Brigham's hot fudge, vanilla layer cake with lemon cream frosting, Godiva, Chinese pork fried rice, buttered toast with cinnamon, Twinkies, Ding Dongs, Hohos, Suzy Qs, Duck Rillette on French bread, crème caramel, kielbasa stuffed potato rolls, ravioli, Italian Chicken sandwich from Burger King, crispy onion rings, Gorton's breaded fish sticks, OreIda Crispers, etc.
Okay okay it's not sugar that makes every one of these divine foods worthy of a glutton party. There's plenty 'o wheat flour here. Plenty indeed. But don't they both break down as sugar. I mean, scientifically that is. Sorry, I can't find my peer reviewed citations.
I don't give myself a half a cup of M&Ms and say deal with it Newmeadow. Not interested. If I'm not eating a gallon sized plastic Halloween pumpkin tote full of candy and falling blissfully into a lovely sugar induced euphoric semi comatose state, I DON'T WANT IT.
It's all or NOTHING.
I suspect the point was that there's fat plus sugar or fat plus salt in the usual suspects.
Like I've pointed out, the main source of calories in a typical cookie (at least based on my recipe) is butter. The flour is second, yet people who usually go on about sugar being addictive frequently don't claim to binge on plain bread (although obviously some people do).
Your list tends to me to support this point.
It's often sometimes claimed by low carb advocates that people binge only on carbs, not fat or protein--the argument is made that one won't overeat if one sticks to low carb. I think this might be true for some people and that low carb can be a good strategy. It's absolutely not true for me. I might accidently overeat pasta because I misjudge portion size or get a restaurant meal and think it's super tasty (invariably mostly because of the sauce), but I was kind of surprised when I first heard people say they would "binge on" plain bread or cereal or pasta (I always assumed people overate bread because you get it in situations that make portion control difficult, like when hungry before a meal). On the other hand, I won't eat 'til I'm stuffed on anything really (seems unpleasant), but I can most certainly overconsume calories very easily with meat and I used to do it all the time with cheese.
I find lowering carbs to be a good strategy for me because it makes me more mindful and fits with how I prefer to eat, but not because it prevents overeating. (I think it may do that for some people who overeat due to perceived hunger or cravings.)
0 -
0
-
tigersword wrote: »None of the foods people binge on in this thread (that have been mentioned) get all (or even most) of their calories from sugar.
Maybe we missed a few: Custard stuffed eclairs, Peanut M&Ms, blueberry pie with whipped cream, Pizza with pepperoni, sausage, meatballs onions and peppers, linguine with clams, butter toffee with cashews, mint chocolate chip ice cream, Brigham's hot fudge, vanilla layer cake with lemon cream frosting, Godiva, Chinese pork fried rice, buttered toast with cinnamon, Twinkies, Ding Dongs, Hohos, Suzy Qs, Duck Rillette on French bread, crème caramel, kielbasa stuffed potato rolls, ravioli, Italian Chicken sandwich from Burger King, crispy onion rings, Gorton's breaded fish sticks, OreIda Crispers, etc.
Okay okay it's not sugar that makes every one of these divine foods worthy of a glutton party. There's plenty 'o wheat flour here. Plenty indeed. But don't they both break down as sugar? I mean, scientifically that is. Sorry, I can't find my peer reviewed citations.
I don't give myself a half a cup of M&Ms and say deal with it Newmeadow. Not interested. If I'm not eating a gallon sized plastic Halloween pumpkin tote full of candy and falling blissfully into a lovely sugar induced euphoric semi comatose state, I DON'T WANT IT.
It's all or NOTHING.
that sounds like a personal issue…
funny you don't get the same high from say fruit, that has as much sugar, if not more, than some of the things listed…
then again, I am not sure if this is even serious…
I wasn't sure if you were serious when you talked about praying on people. Were you?
ummm I think you have me confused with someone else...0 -
sigh...0
-
Are you trying to be helpful?tigersword wrote: »None of the foods people binge on in this thread (that have been mentioned) get all (or even most) of their calories from sugar.
Maybe we missed a few: Custard stuffed eclairs, Peanut M&Ms, blueberry pie with whipped cream, Pizza with pepperoni, sausage, meatballs onions and peppers, linguine with clams, butter toffee with cashews, mint chocolate chip ice cream, Brigham's hot fudge, vanilla layer cake with lemon cream frosting, Godiva, Chinese pork fried rice, buttered toast with cinnamon, Twinkies, Ding Dongs, Hohos, Suzy Qs, Duck Rillette on French bread, crème caramel, kielbasa stuffed potato rolls, ravioli, Italian Chicken sandwich from Burger King, crispy onion rings, Gorton's breaded fish sticks, OreIda Crispers, etc.
Okay okay it's not sugar that makes every one of these divine foods worthy of a glutton party. There's plenty 'o wheat flour here. Plenty indeed. But don't they both break down as sugar? I mean, scientifically that is. Sorry, I can't find my peer reviewed citations.
I don't give myself a half a cup of M&Ms and say deal with it Newmeadow. Not interested. If I'm not eating a gallon sized plastic Halloween pumpkin tote full of candy and falling blissfully into a lovely sugar induced euphoric semi comatose state, I DON'T WANT IT.
It's all or NOTHING.
that sounds like a personal issue…
funny you don't get the same high from say fruit, that has as much sugar, if not more, than some of the things listed…
then again, I am not sure if this is even serious…
If you're just trying to fight, then okay, you're fighting,
But if you're trying to be helpful, maybe they could use a good explanation of how to cease the binging without eliminating anything. Is it a personal problem? You bet it is!
How is it to be stopped? How does that work?
not trying to fight, I said I don't understand if this is even a serious post…
are you trying to fight?
the person said they want to be in sugar induced coma, if serious, I said it sounds like a personal problem and they probably need to reexamine their relationship with food and seek professional help.
0 -
Yup, it isn't the sugar specifically that people think is addictive, it's the hedonistic mouth feel and taste of deliciously formulated refined carb treats....and yes, most people have no defense mechanism for this.......they turn into zombies, and saying that sugar is addictive, just to through off the pack hoping to get more treats.lemurcat12 wrote: »tigersword wrote: »None of the foods people binge on in this thread (that have been mentioned) get all (or even most) of their calories from sugar.
Maybe we missed a few: Custard stuffed eclairs, Peanut M&Ms, blueberry pie with whipped cream, Pizza with pepperoni, sausage, meatballs onions and peppers, linguine with clams, butter toffee with cashews, mint chocolate chip ice cream, Brigham's hot fudge, vanilla layer cake with lemon cream frosting, Godiva, Chinese pork fried rice, buttered toast with cinnamon, Twinkies, Ding Dongs, Hohos, Suzy Qs, Duck Rillette on French bread, crème caramel, kielbasa stuffed potato rolls, ravioli, Italian Chicken sandwich from Burger King, crispy onion rings, Gorton's breaded fish sticks, OreIda Crispers, etc.
Okay okay it's not sugar that makes every one of these divine foods worthy of a glutton party. There's plenty 'o wheat flour here. Plenty indeed. But don't they both break down as sugar. I mean, scientifically that is. Sorry, I can't find my peer reviewed citations.
I don't give myself a half a cup of M&Ms and say deal with it Newmeadow. Not interested. If I'm not eating a gallon sized plastic Halloween pumpkin tote full of candy and falling blissfully into a lovely sugar induced euphoric semi comatose state, I DON'T WANT IT.
It's all or NOTHING.
I suspect the point was that there's fat plus sugar or fat plus salt in the usual suspects.
Like I've pointed out, the main source of calories in a typical cookie (at least based on my recipe) is butter. The flour is second, yet people who usually go on about sugar being addictive frequently don't claim to binge on plain bread (although obviously some people do).
Your list tends to me to support this point.
It's often sometimes claimed by low carb advocates that people binge only on carbs, not fat or protein--the argument is made that one won't overeat if one sticks to low carb. I think this might be true for some people and that low carb can be a good strategy. It's absolutely not true for me. I might accidently overeat pasta because I misjudge portion size or get a restaurant meal and think it's super tasty (invariably mostly because of the sauce), but I was kind of surprised when I first heard people say they would "binge on" plain bread or cereal or pasta (I always assumed people overate bread because you get it in situations that make portion control difficult, like when hungry before a meal). On the other hand, I won't eat 'til I'm stuffed on anything really (seems unpleasant), but I can most certainly overconsume calories very easily with meat and I used to do it all the time with cheese.
I find lowering carbs to be a good strategy for me because it makes me more mindful and fits with how I prefer to eat, but not because it prevents overeating. (I think it may do that for some people who overeat due to perceived hunger or cravings.)
0 -
neanderthin wrote: »
Yup, it isn't the sugar specifically that people think is addictive, it's the hedonistic mouth feel and taste of deliciously formulated refined carb treats....and yes, most people have no defense mechanism for this.......they turn into zombies, and saying that sugar is addictive, just to through off the pack hoping to get more treats.lemurcat12 wrote: »tigersword wrote: »None of the foods people binge on in this thread (that have been mentioned) get all (or even most) of their calories from sugar.
Maybe we missed a few: Custard stuffed eclairs, Peanut M&Ms, blueberry pie with whipped cream, Pizza with pepperoni, sausage, meatballs onions and peppers, linguine with clams, butter toffee with cashews, mint chocolate chip ice cream, Brigham's hot fudge, vanilla layer cake with lemon cream frosting, Godiva, Chinese pork fried rice, buttered toast with cinnamon, Twinkies, Ding Dongs, Hohos, Suzy Qs, Duck Rillette on French bread, crème caramel, kielbasa stuffed potato rolls, ravioli, Italian Chicken sandwich from Burger King, crispy onion rings, Gorton's breaded fish sticks, OreIda Crispers, etc.
Okay okay it's not sugar that makes every one of these divine foods worthy of a glutton party. There's plenty 'o wheat flour here. Plenty indeed. But don't they both break down as sugar. I mean, scientifically that is. Sorry, I can't find my peer reviewed citations.
I don't give myself a half a cup of M&Ms and say deal with it Newmeadow. Not interested. If I'm not eating a gallon sized plastic Halloween pumpkin tote full of candy and falling blissfully into a lovely sugar induced euphoric semi comatose state, I DON'T WANT IT.
It's all or NOTHING.
I suspect the point was that there's fat plus sugar or fat plus salt in the usual suspects.
Like I've pointed out, the main source of calories in a typical cookie (at least based on my recipe) is butter. The flour is second, yet people who usually go on about sugar being addictive frequently don't claim to binge on plain bread (although obviously some people do).
Your list tends to me to support this point.
It's often sometimes claimed by low carb advocates that people binge only on carbs, not fat or protein--the argument is made that one won't overeat if one sticks to low carb. I think this might be true for some people and that low carb can be a good strategy. It's absolutely not true for me. I might accidently overeat pasta because I misjudge portion size or get a restaurant meal and think it's super tasty (invariably mostly because of the sauce), but I was kind of surprised when I first heard people say they would "binge on" plain bread or cereal or pasta (I always assumed people overate bread because you get it in situations that make portion control difficult, like when hungry before a meal). On the other hand, I won't eat 'til I'm stuffed on anything really (seems unpleasant), but I can most certainly overconsume calories very easily with meat and I used to do it all the time with cheese.
I find lowering carbs to be a good strategy for me because it makes me more mindful and fits with how I prefer to eat, but not because it prevents overeating. (I think it may do that for some people who overeat due to perceived hunger or cravings.)
so sugar will be the cause of the zombie apocalypse…? LOL0 -
tigersword wrote: »None of the foods people binge on in this thread (that have been mentioned) get all (or even most) of their calories from sugar.
Maybe we missed a few: Custard stuffed eclairs, Peanut M&Ms, blueberry pie with whipped cream, Pizza with pepperoni, sausage, meatballs onions and peppers, linguine with clams, butter toffee with cashews, mint chocolate chip ice cream, Brigham's hot fudge, vanilla layer cake with lemon cream frosting, Godiva, Chinese pork fried rice, buttered toast with cinnamon, Twinkies, Ding Dongs, Hohos, Suzy Qs, Duck Rillette on French bread, crème caramel, kielbasa stuffed potato rolls, ravioli, Italian Chicken sandwich from Burger King, crispy onion rings, Gorton's breaded fish sticks, OreIda Crispers, etc.
Okay okay it's not sugar that makes every one of these divine foods worthy of a glutton party. There's plenty 'o wheat flour here. Plenty indeed. But don't they both break down as sugar? I mean, scientifically that is. Sorry, I can't find my peer reviewed citations.
I don't give myself a half a cup of M&Ms and say deal with it Newmeadow. Not interested. If I'm not eating a gallon sized plastic Halloween pumpkin tote full of candy and falling blissfully into a lovely sugar induced euphoric semi comatose state, I DON'T WANT IT.
It's all or NOTHING.
that sounds like a personal issue…
funny you don't get the same high from say fruit, that has as much sugar, if not more, than some of the things listed…
then again, I am not sure if this is even serious…
I wasn't sure if you were serious when you talked about praying on people. Were you?
ummm I think you have me confused with someone else...sadly most people just want a scapegoat and then other people pray on them with books about no carbs after 6pm, sugar makes you fat, how to detox to jumpstart metabolism, bla bla ...
Oh okay. As long as it's not you doing the praying.
LOL - so you are saying that the so called "fitness industry" does not publish books, magazines etc on detoxes, no carbs after 6pm, and a whole bunch of other pseudo science to pray on people and make money? Really?0 -
tigersword wrote: »None of the foods people binge on in this thread (that have been mentioned) get all (or even most) of their calories from sugar.
Maybe we missed a few: Custard stuffed eclairs, Peanut M&Ms, blueberry pie with whipped cream, Pizza with pepperoni, sausage, meatballs onions and peppers, linguine with clams, butter toffee with cashews, mint chocolate chip ice cream, Brigham's hot fudge, vanilla layer cake with lemon cream frosting, Godiva, Chinese pork fried rice, buttered toast with cinnamon, Twinkies, Ding Dongs, Hohos, Suzy Qs, Duck Rillette on French bread, crème caramel, kielbasa stuffed potato rolls, ravioli, Italian Chicken sandwich from Burger King, crispy onion rings, Gorton's breaded fish sticks, OreIda Crispers, etc.
Okay okay it's not sugar that makes every one of these divine foods worthy of a glutton party. There's plenty 'o wheat flour here. Plenty indeed. But don't they both break down as sugar? I mean, scientifically that is. Sorry, I can't find my peer reviewed citations.
I don't give myself a half a cup of M&Ms and say deal with it Newmeadow. Not interested. If I'm not eating a gallon sized plastic Halloween pumpkin tote full of candy and falling blissfully into a lovely sugar induced euphoric semi comatose state, I DON'T WANT IT.
It's all or NOTHING.
that sounds like a personal issue…
funny you don't get the same high from say fruit, that has as much sugar, if not more, than some of the things listed…
then again, I am not sure if this is even serious…
I wasn't sure if you were serious when you talked about praying on people. Were you?
ummm I think you have me confused with someone else...sadly most people just want a scapegoat and then other people pray on them with books about no carbs after 6pm, sugar makes you fat, how to detox to jumpstart metabolism, bla bla ...
Oh okay. As long as it's not you doing the praying.
LOL - so you are saying that the so called "fitness industry" does not publish books, magazines etc on detoxes, no carbs after 6pm, and a whole bunch of other pseudo science to pray on people and make money? Really?
No, no, no handsome. What I meant was, I was greatly relieved to know you don't pray on people. It would seriously discourage people from praying. It would give prayer a bad name.
ok sugar, enjoy the sugar comas….
just don't get in too deep …you might sell your house to satisfy your sugar urges and end up homeless on the streets...0 -
I didn't say NO willpower. I said limited. Here's an experiment.
Put a big bowl of your favorite binge snack in a prominent place that you will pass often during the day. Say NO every time you pass. Muscle that willpower! You may be able to successfully pass that bowl every single time, but your willpower will be depleted. You might snap at a co-worker, for instance, in a momentary loss of control.
Now package up that favorite binge snack in individual portions and hide the rest away. This is strategic and requires only a little willpower. You now have self-control in reserve to be nice to your annoying co-worker.
There's good science behind this, too:
http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2012/04/the-chocolate-and-radish-experiment-that-birthed-the-modern-conception-of-willpower/255544/
However, there is a confound in that study, in that they later found that glucose can temporarily increase the willpower or ego. Thus it is hard to say in the study if it was the restraint that was practiced that caused the effect, or if it was eating the cookies and subsequently glucose that caused the effect.0 -
If you serve eclairs, beignets, brioche, et all, oh and twinkies you want to lock your doors...... but it's safe to leave sugar bowls around, zombies seem to think the taste is too one dimensional in their demented world of mow.neanderthin wrote: »
Yup, it isn't the sugar specifically that people think is addictive, it's the hedonistic mouth feel and taste of deliciously formulated refined carb treats....and yes, most people have no defense mechanism for this.......they turn into zombies, and saying that sugar is addictive, just to through off the pack hoping to get more treats.lemurcat12 wrote: »tigersword wrote: »None of the foods people binge on in this thread (that have been mentioned) get all (or even most) of their calories from sugar.
Maybe we missed a few: Custard stuffed eclairs, Peanut M&Ms, blueberry pie with whipped cream, Pizza with pepperoni, sausage, meatballs onions and peppers, linguine with clams, butter toffee with cashews, mint chocolate chip ice cream, Brigham's hot fudge, vanilla layer cake with lemon cream frosting, Godiva, Chinese pork fried rice, buttered toast with cinnamon, Twinkies, Ding Dongs, Hohos, Suzy Qs, Duck Rillette on French bread, crème caramel, kielbasa stuffed potato rolls, ravioli, Italian Chicken sandwich from Burger King, crispy onion rings, Gorton's breaded fish sticks, OreIda Crispers, etc.
Okay okay it's not sugar that makes every one of these divine foods worthy of a glutton party. There's plenty 'o wheat flour here. Plenty indeed. But don't they both break down as sugar. I mean, scientifically that is. Sorry, I can't find my peer reviewed citations.
I don't give myself a half a cup of M&Ms and say deal with it Newmeadow. Not interested. If I'm not eating a gallon sized plastic Halloween pumpkin tote full of candy and falling blissfully into a lovely sugar induced euphoric semi comatose state, I DON'T WANT IT.
It's all or NOTHING.
I suspect the point was that there's fat plus sugar or fat plus salt in the usual suspects.
Like I've pointed out, the main source of calories in a typical cookie (at least based on my recipe) is butter. The flour is second, yet people who usually go on about sugar being addictive frequently don't claim to binge on plain bread (although obviously some people do).
Your list tends to me to support this point.
It's often sometimes claimed by low carb advocates that people binge only on carbs, not fat or protein--the argument is made that one won't overeat if one sticks to low carb. I think this might be true for some people and that low carb can be a good strategy. It's absolutely not true for me. I might accidently overeat pasta because I misjudge portion size or get a restaurant meal and think it's super tasty (invariably mostly because of the sauce), but I was kind of surprised when I first heard people say they would "binge on" plain bread or cereal or pasta (I always assumed people overate bread because you get it in situations that make portion control difficult, like when hungry before a meal). On the other hand, I won't eat 'til I'm stuffed on anything really (seems unpleasant), but I can most certainly overconsume calories very easily with meat and I used to do it all the time with cheese.
I find lowering carbs to be a good strategy for me because it makes me more mindful and fits with how I prefer to eat, but not because it prevents overeating. (I think it may do that for some people who overeat due to perceived hunger or cravings.)
so sugar will be the cause of the zombie apocalypse…? LOL
0 -
so people who were showed chocolate chip cookies and then forced to eat radishes were pissed off? this is somehow ground breaking..? - ndj
Maybe all that super-exercised willpower of yours is all used up...no patience to finish the article.
The people who successfully resisted the chocolate were then given a complex problem to solve. Their ability to solve the problem was compromised. All their self-control had been exhausted staring at the chocolate chip cookies.0 -
tigersword wrote: »
None of the foods people binge on in this thread (that have been mentioned) get all (or even most) of their calories from sugar. Therefore, your entire premise is a strawman.Sabine_Stroehm wrote: »tigersword wrote: »Sabine_Stroehm wrote: »
I thought her reference to fructose made perfect sense. It has everything to do with every thread on limiting added sugars.DeirdreWoodwardSanders wrote: »You do realize as I and Tigers pointed out sucrose is found in fruits? There is no excessive fixation on fructose. I do agree the issue is hyperpalatable foods, but as you already saw from one astute poster they laid blame totally on added sugars as what caused their binges
The OP has no point, as sugar has many uses then just a "quick energy fix", and many "sugar" laden foods are highly nutritious and packed with micros.
Yes, I do realize that you and Tigers have pointed out that sucrose is found in fruit.
I have no idea why the two of you are fixated on that point, but clearly you need closure, so here it is -- I saw that you wrote that and I believe you.
You are absolutely right -- many people are blaming added sugars in their food as what causes their binges.
Because in their perception, sugar does cause their binges. They eat a sweet food and before you know it, they are eating the entire house. They don't feel this way about lettuce, so it must be the sugar!
So what does cause their binges? Well who the hell knows -- we never get to the point of discussing that because we get caught up immediately in the fructose loop. heh heh fruit loops I made a joke right there!
The end result is that we get no where. The OP doesn't get help and the issue of binging isn't discussed in any complex or intelligent way.
The next time someone says they are addicted to sugar, just please don't start the tired old fructose subthread.
And don't just blame people for being lazy or weak-willed -- that's simplistic obstructionism. Human beings have a powerful built-in response to food -- it's called instinct! -- and for many people, that response is abnormal and needs some tweeking. For some people, the tweeking is as simple as understanding CICO, and for others, the tweeking needs to be medical intervention.
They may not be lazy or weak willed but certainly you could call them ignorant. If someone says they are addicted to sugar, they should know what sugar actually is, right? Again you're bringing up fructose when that never has anything to do with any of the "sugar addict" threads, why?
How? Point to one thread where anyone brought up fructose as a counter to someone claiming sugar addiction. They don't exist.
Every thread on sugar addiction eventually falls back to "if it's sugar, why don't you binge on apples".
Apples contain fructose, glucose and sucrose. so again that's why her continual mention of fructose is silly
Apples also contain fiber and protein, slowing the glucose spike and making them more satisfying than something that is all sugar, and thus a binge is less likely. The apple is metabolized more slowly than something that has all its calories from sugar (sucrose, HFCS). Apples come naturally portion controlled (unlike a box of cookies), which makes it easier to realize when a serving has been eaten. Also, an apple has less sugar (10 grams only a couple of which are sucrose) than, say, a can of soda (41 grams for 340 ml of Pepsi, pretty much all sucrose), so there is less of a glucose spike and "sugar high". Apples have pectin that appears to help lower LDL cholesterol. Apples have vitamin C and polyphenolic compounts that fight free radicals (protect from cancer), trace minerals like magnesium, potassium and calcium, that are good for the body's aches and pains (among other things), and a host of B vitamins, which are neccessary for maintaining red blood cells and the nervous system. Apples are in no way an equivalent match to soda, or most sugary junk food when making a comparison as far as sucrose impact. Apples (and other fruits and vegetables) are a straw-man argument in this debate.
First of all, in a 100 gram serving of apples, less than 1 gram of the 10 grams total of sugar is sucrose. You are not comparing sucrose to sucrose, very little of the sugar in apples is sucrose.
If you have been reading this thread, you will have read the accounts of many people who, like me, crave sugar. Even someone giving the example of saying no to the second cookie, or grabbing a handful of M&M was using sugar-based examples for bad eating habits. This thread is not just about binging (which is not where people get "most" of their calories, it is just a problem that can derail dieting and lead to added fat), it is also about managing the cravings from sugar-based foods, and the way processd sugar (especially large amounts of sucrose/HFCS/dextrose etc) interact with the body. To be fair, even though I defend fruit, when I eat a 1/2 a grapefruit (with 1 tbs trail mix), I get hungry again within an hour. I could probably pick a lower-sugar fruit to eat, or add more protein, and have an easier time staying in my calorie range. When I have protein powder with greek yogurt, I'm full for 4 hours (the 33 grams of protein eliminate the sugar spike from the lactose, and digests slowly, leading to long-term satisfaction).
People don't get most of their calories from sugar in general (I hope). It's the added calories on top of meeting their macros (most of their calories) that lead to the weight gain. A handful of M&Ms (42 g serving, 240 calories/serving 120 of which were sugar), on top of maintenance calories are only 12% of daily maintenance calories, a small portion of total calories eaten. 250 calories above maintenance every day can lead to 1/2 pound gained per week. Having an apple on hand to eat instead (50 calories for 100 g serving, 40 sugar calories, less than 4 of which come from sucrose) will be physically more filling, have a smaller calorie surplus, and may lead to eating less at dinner, resolving that surplus, as the fiber in the apple slows the digestive process, leaving her filled for longer than the M&Ms would. Also, the fructose in the apple is very sweet, making it harder to over-eat. This is why comparing sucrose-heavy snacks to whole fruits and saying "but you are eating sugar anyways" is a straw argument. They aren't comparable.
I also think some of sugar cravings are because our body wants some of the nutrients in fruit, and the conditioned association is with the sweet of the fruit. If we meet the micronutrient need, we might not want the sweet as much (also if we got enough sleep, enough water, had better diets, and generally took care of ourselves better.) If we eat calorie-dense, nutrient poor alternatives, our need for micronutrients is not met, and cravings continue.
Tigger, I know you want to help, and feel frustrated when your message isn't getting through. Please consider that using terms like "ignorant" (even if they used it first), is alienating. And for those bandying "will power" around, well, people can have trigger words as well as trigger foods. The recomp journey can look very different from a fat loss journey (imaging a cut lasting over a year to get an idea of the will power already used by some of the people that you are accusing of having none). Also, please consider that other people may succeed in ways that don't work for you. Discounting the experiences of others and shutting them down will not help get your message across. We are on MFP partially to benefit from the experiences of other people on similar, but not identical journeys. The forums are a place to find our tools to weight loss. It's good to put more out there, so people have more choices, but what tools they chose to use, and what works best for them, is something they will discover for themselves. Recognize your success, share it, and appreciate the successes of others, even when they look different from yours.
0 -
so people who were showed chocolate chip cookies and then forced to eat radishes were pissed off? this is somehow ground breaking..? - ndj
Maybe all that super-exercised willpower of yours is all used up...no patience to finish the article.
The people who successfully resisted the chocolate were then given a complex problem to solve. Their ability to solve the problem was compromised. All their self-control had been exhausted staring at the chocolate chip cookies.
yes, I read that part too ..
I just am not surprised the people were pissed about having to eat radishes over chocolate chip cookies...0 -
so people who were showed chocolate chip cookies and then forced to eat radishes were pissed off? this is somehow ground breaking..? - ndj
Maybe all that super-exercised willpower of yours is all used up...no patience to finish the article.
The people who successfully resisted the chocolate were then given a complex problem to solve. Their ability to solve the problem was compromised. All their self-control had been exhausted staring at the chocolate chip cookies.
yes, I read that part too ..
I just am not surprised the people were pissed about having to eat radishes over chocolate chip cookies...
It's actually a fairly extensive line of research now, look up ego depletion if you are interested. Like I said, I think the cookie/radish experiment was problematic, but they have studied with this with lots of different things and found that willpower (or more accurately, executive function) does seem to be a limited resource - although one that can be relied on more for some people than others, and may be possible to enhance over time.
When I read about people who have maintained a substantial weight loss the unifying aspect does not seem so much to be willpower as determination and a shift in how they see themselves and food such that it really isn't a constant battle of wills but more the sense that this is the new way that I live my life.
0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »tigersword wrote: »None of the foods people binge on in this thread (that have been mentioned) get all (or even most) of their calories from sugar.
Maybe we missed a few: Custard stuffed eclairs, Peanut M&Ms, blueberry pie with whipped cream, Pizza with pepperoni, sausage, meatballs onions and peppers, linguine with clams, butter toffee with cashews, mint chocolate chip ice cream, Brigham's hot fudge, vanilla layer cake with lemon cream frosting, Godiva, Chinese pork fried rice, buttered toast with cinnamon, Twinkies, Ding Dongs, Hohos, Suzy Qs, Duck Rillette on French bread, crème caramel, kielbasa stuffed potato rolls, ravioli, Italian Chicken sandwich from Burger King, crispy onion rings, Gorton's breaded fish sticks, OreIda Crispers, etc.
Okay okay it's not sugar that makes every one of these divine foods worthy of a glutton party. There's plenty 'o wheat flour here. Plenty indeed. But don't they both break down as sugar. I mean, scientifically that is. Sorry, I can't find my peer reviewed citations.
I don't give myself a half a cup of M&Ms and say deal with it Newmeadow. Not interested. If I'm not eating a gallon sized plastic Halloween pumpkin tote full of candy and falling blissfully into a lovely sugar induced euphoric semi comatose state, I DON'T WANT IT.
It's all or NOTHING.
I suspect the point was that there's fat plus sugar or fat plus salt in the usual suspects.
Like I've pointed out, the main source of calories in a typical cookie (at least based on my recipe) is butter. The flour is second, yet people who usually go on about sugar being addictive frequently don't claim to binge on plain bread (although obviously some people do).
Your list tends to me to support this point.
It's often sometimes claimed by low carb advocates that people binge only on carbs, not fat or protein--the argument is made that one won't overeat if one sticks to low carb. I think this might be true for some people and that low carb can be a good strategy. It's absolutely not true for me. I might accidently overeat pasta because I misjudge portion size or get a restaurant meal and think it's super tasty (invariably mostly because of the sauce), but I was kind of surprised when I first heard people say they would "binge on" plain bread or cereal or pasta (I always assumed people overate bread because you get it in situations that make portion control difficult, like when hungry before a meal). On the other hand, I won't eat 'til I'm stuffed on anything really (seems unpleasant), but I can most certainly overconsume calories very easily with meat and I used to do it all the time with cheese.
I find lowering carbs to be a good strategy for me because it makes me more mindful and fits with how I prefer to eat, but not because it prevents overeating. (I think it may do that for some people who overeat due to perceived hunger or cravings.)
I really think that this is the crux of the thing. Which explains why many people don't have trouble with the sugar in fruit. Or don't just binge on butter sticks. It's the hyperpalatability of the combinations of sugar and fat, and salt and fat, that causes the issues.
I don't binge apples. But I will eat a whole lot of them if they are covered in peanut butter.
And chocolates and cookies are sugar plus fat.
My hubby's aunt doesn't binge sweets. She binges chips. Fat plus salt. Hubs, on his occasional few-and-far-between snacks are fat and salt as well.
So it isn't the sugar per se. It's the sugar and fat coupled together. And it's the response to palatability (taste). Hmmm...something to think about.
0 -
so people who were showed chocolate chip cookies and then forced to eat radishes were pissed off? this is somehow ground breaking..? - ndj
Maybe all that super-exercised willpower of yours is all used up...no patience to finish the article.
The people who successfully resisted the chocolate were then given a complex problem to solve. Their ability to solve the problem was compromised. All their self-control had been exhausted staring at the chocolate chip cookies.
yes, I read that part too ..
I just am not surprised the people were pissed about having to eat radishes over chocolate chip cookies...
I'd be pissed if I had to eat radishes, too. They are nasty. But to each their own.0 -
baconslave wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »tigersword wrote: »None of the foods people binge on in this thread (that have been mentioned) get all (or even most) of their calories from sugar.
Maybe we missed a few: Custard stuffed eclairs, Peanut M&Ms, blueberry pie with whipped cream, Pizza with pepperoni, sausage, meatballs onions and peppers, linguine with clams, butter toffee with cashews, mint chocolate chip ice cream, Brigham's hot fudge, vanilla layer cake with lemon cream frosting, Godiva, Chinese pork fried rice, buttered toast with cinnamon, Twinkies, Ding Dongs, Hohos, Suzy Qs, Duck Rillette on French bread, crème caramel, kielbasa stuffed potato rolls, ravioli, Italian Chicken sandwich from Burger King, crispy onion rings, Gorton's breaded fish sticks, OreIda Crispers, etc.
Okay okay it's not sugar that makes every one of these divine foods worthy of a glutton party. There's plenty 'o wheat flour here. Plenty indeed. But don't they both break down as sugar. I mean, scientifically that is. Sorry, I can't find my peer reviewed citations.
I don't give myself a half a cup of M&Ms and say deal with it Newmeadow. Not interested. If I'm not eating a gallon sized plastic Halloween pumpkin tote full of candy and falling blissfully into a lovely sugar induced euphoric semi comatose state, I DON'T WANT IT.
It's all or NOTHING.
I suspect the point was that there's fat plus sugar or fat plus salt in the usual suspects.
Like I've pointed out, the main source of calories in a typical cookie (at least based on my recipe) is butter. The flour is second, yet people who usually go on about sugar being addictive frequently don't claim to binge on plain bread (although obviously some people do).
Your list tends to me to support this point.
It's often sometimes claimed by low carb advocates that people binge only on carbs, not fat or protein--the argument is made that one won't overeat if one sticks to low carb. I think this might be true for some people and that low carb can be a good strategy. It's absolutely not true for me. I might accidently overeat pasta because I misjudge portion size or get a restaurant meal and think it's super tasty (invariably mostly because of the sauce), but I was kind of surprised when I first heard people say they would "binge on" plain bread or cereal or pasta (I always assumed people overate bread because you get it in situations that make portion control difficult, like when hungry before a meal). On the other hand, I won't eat 'til I'm stuffed on anything really (seems unpleasant), but I can most certainly overconsume calories very easily with meat and I used to do it all the time with cheese.
I find lowering carbs to be a good strategy for me because it makes me more mindful and fits with how I prefer to eat, but not because it prevents overeating. (I think it may do that for some people who overeat due to perceived hunger or cravings.)
I really think that this is the crux of the thing. Which explains why many people don't have trouble with the sugar in fruit. Or don't just binge on butter sticks. It's the hyperpalatability of the combinations of sugar and fat, and salt and fat, that causes the issues.
I don't binge apples. But I will eat a whole lot of them if they are covered in peanut butter.
And chocolates and cookies are sugar plus fat.
My hubby's aunt doesn't binge sweets. She binges chips. Fat plus salt. Hubs, on his occasional few-and-far-between snacks are fat and salt as well.
So it isn't the sugar per se. It's the sugar and fat coupled together. And it's the response to palatability (taste). Hmmm...something to think about.
I think it's probably both, hyperpalateability definitely seems to have effects on overeating, but given the prevalence of undiagnosed insulin resistance, I think specifically eating patterns that result in glucose spikes will be problematic in those people.
Which of course is another reason why the sugar in fruit is often not problematic - there is a low glycemic load.0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »Another is a confusion of hunger or wanting to eat for something else . . .
I'm wondering now if there could be a confusion of signals of a sort, that you think you need to eat until that feeling, that people get?
What I think of when I think of binging is eating for reasons other than the pleasure of the food, that you aren't even really enjoying it after a while. Is that different than what you are talking about?
I confuse hunger with thirst a lot. When I am hungry at times I shouldn't be (half hour after a meal, for instance), I have to ask myself if I am hungry or thirsty. It certainly feels like hunger -- stomach growls, mind thinks of food -- but it's just thirst.
****
When I first went on food plan, I had to train myself to listen to my body's signals. I wouldn't feel full, but when the next bite of food wasn't as tasty as the previous, that's when I knew I was full. Put down the fork, wait for it, wait for it, wait for it, and boom my stomach full signal finally gets to my brain.
Now, 10 years on, my stomach and my brain are in pretty good sync. I can tell when I'm full pretty quickly.
***
Binging for me was pleasurable at first -- yay delicious cookie. But then it quickly turned ugly - the desire for a cookie turned into an urge to eat another one and another one and another one, compulsively, and that was greatly unpleasurable.
0 -
girlviernes wrote: »so people who were showed chocolate chip cookies and then forced to eat radishes were pissed off? this is somehow ground breaking..? - ndj
Maybe all that super-exercised willpower of yours is all used up...no patience to finish the article.
The people who successfully resisted the chocolate were then given a complex problem to solve. Their ability to solve the problem was compromised. All their self-control had been exhausted staring at the chocolate chip cookies.
yes, I read that part too ..
I just am not surprised the people were pissed about having to eat radishes over chocolate chip cookies...
It's actually a fairly extensive line of research now, look up ego depletion if you are interested. Like I said, I think the cookie/radish experiment was problematic, but they have studied with this with lots of different things and found that willpower (or more accurately, executive function) does seem to be a limited resource - although one that can be relied on more for some people than others, and may be possible to enhance over time.
When I read about people who have maintained a substantial weight loss the unifying aspect does not seem to much to be willpower as determination and a shift in how they see themselves and food such that it really isn't a constant battle of wills but more the sense that this is the new way that I live my life.
^This0 -
girlviernes wrote: »so people who were showed chocolate chip cookies and then forced to eat radishes were pissed off? this is somehow ground breaking..? - ndj
Maybe all that super-exercised willpower of yours is all used up...no patience to finish the article.
The people who successfully resisted the chocolate were then given a complex problem to solve. Their ability to solve the problem was compromised. All their self-control had been exhausted staring at the chocolate chip cookies.
yes, I read that part too ..
I just am not surprised the people were pissed about having to eat radishes over chocolate chip cookies...
It's actually a fairly extensive line of research now, look up ego depletion if you are interested. Like I said, I think the cookie/radish experiment was problematic, but they have studied with this with lots of different things and found that willpower (or more accurately, executive function) does seem to be a limited resource - although one that can be relied on more for some people than others, and may be possible to enhance over time.
When I read about people who have maintained a substantial weight loss the unifying aspect does not seem to much to be willpower as determination and a shift in how they see themselves and food such that it really isn't a constant battle of wills but more the sense that this is the new way that I live my life.
I am sure it is interesting and has been looked at extensively.
I guess the common sense part of me says, why do you need a study to determine that if you show people chocolate chip cookies and make them eat radishes they will be pissed.
They probably had a hard time with the puzzle because they were trying to gag/barf from eating radishes.
I would like to know more about these radishes. Were they cooked, raw, sautéed????
0 -
girlviernes wrote: »
It's actually a fairly extensive line of research now, look up ego depletion if you are interested. Like I said, I think the cookie/radish experiment was problematic, but they have studied with this with lots of different things and found that willpower (or more accurately, executive function) does seem to be a limited resource - although one that can be relied on more for some people than others, and may be possible to enhance over time.
When I read about people who have maintained a substantial weight loss the unifying aspect does not seem so much to be willpower as determination and a shift in how they see themselves and food such that it really isn't a constant battle of wills but more the sense that this is the new way that I live my life.
Love you, girl. Yes, I would say my relationship with food has shifted substantially.0 -
It wasn't a pissing contest, ndj. It was a willpower (executive function, thank you girlviernes) study.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.3K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 424 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions