What's the deal with the obsession of sweets?
Replies
-
The thread expanded again! Weird...
It is too bad OP hasn't come back to clarify her original post. I really was unclear if she was trying to make the point about sugar is addictive, or if there is a more positive stigma associated with eating sugar compared to other foods. And whether or not that was just in her circle of friends or if she believes this to be more widespread. Oh and if she could also tell us what's unhealthy about burgers, hot dogs, pizza, lattes, pies and milkshakes that would be awesome too.
I just need to know which type of thread this is ultimately going to be... personally I feel that the "sugar is addictive" and "what makes a food unhealthy" have already been covered ad nauseum in the last couple of weeks, so talking about social stigmas associated with eating these types of foods in public would at least be a slightly different thread...0 -
If you made your own mayo, I am sure you would change your tune on this!
Heck yuuuuus, mayo is so nasty.Okay, so I've noticed that a lot of people with binge-eating problems really go after sweets. I am definitely a love of sweets but it's hot and cold for me. I don't really eat many sweets unless it's the holidays or I've bought a pack of cookies or a candy bar or something. I do really like cake and icing but it doesn't have the same urgency for me as for a lot of people. Why do you think other people (or yourself) can basically eat thousands of calories in mostly sugar and carbs and not get tired of it? Basically, I know a lot of younger girls who get most of their calories from sugary drinks, milkshakes, and desserts and don't even eat regular food. This baffles me because eating a proper meal seems much better to me. Is it because the lack of fiber and nutrients in sweet food, or maybe it's because of the presentation of sweet food? Most desserts look a certain way, gooey or colorful, presented as very tempting. Is the society's emphasis on sweet foods to represent celebration and love (Christmas, Halloween, birthdays, etc?)
This sort of obsession is definitely reinforced my social media and dieters, to an extent. People love posting desserts even if it's only to sigh "I wish I could eat that" or plan to have an indulges after doing well for a little while. I think part of it comes down to the moral implications of certain foods. Meat, grease, and condiments like mayo are sort of are like stereotypical of fat people. If you don't want to "look like a fatty" in front of your friends, you aren't going to order a burger, even if the latte or dessert your ordered has just as many calories. Cakes and chocolate are sort of universally adored. I mean, are people going to judge you more if you are sipping a milkshake or digging into some mayo-laden fat monstrosity?
I really don't understand your post. Are you saying that certain people are more prone to binging on sweets, or that sweets have a more positive stigma than burgers and fried foods? I think if people are concerned about judgement from others regarding what they order or what you post on Facebook that you are eating, they have self esteem issues and potentially disordered thinking about food and should probably seek help with that.
I'm w/ Jkwolly, I eat burgers and ice cream and don't fear judgement from anyone because I have worked them into my calorie goals for the day. Although my burger doesn't have mayo on it because blech!
0 -
After I eat sweet I need salty. After I eat salty I need sweet. Hands down every time.
If there is chocolate around I will need the chips after!!!
Chocolate covered pretzels!After I eat sweet I need salty. After I eat salty I need sweet. Hands down every time.
If there is chocolate around I will need the chips after!!!
0 -
I was once told by a man that watching me eat a big burger loaded up with cheese and avocado and bacon was sexy. I really, really love burgers. I now take them without the bun, which is decidedly less sexy, but whatever. 0
-
I'm not sure that it is the argument. If you point out that it isn't true, they say, "Well, I didn't mean that! I didn't mean that the body treats all sugars the same! What I meant was...(something else)." The (something else) varies, depending on the poster. It's all over the board.DeirdreWoodwardSanders wrote: »mamapeach910 wrote: »
I still have some treats I have problems with. Brownies are something I can't control myself around. So I don't make them or buy them. Again, this is me controlling my behavior. Brownies aren't the problem, I am.
Ok, this is how I understand the anti-sugar addiction argument:
The body processes all sugars the same, regardless of the source. Your body cannot tell the difference between sugars.
It really doesn't matter if a person is addicted to sugar or not. Everyone has to view their weight loss in their own way and make their own changes.
There is no reason to dump all over them.-1 -
Chocolate covered pretzels are amazing...drool.
For me, sweets are cheap, fast, and easy. If I'm hungry, I don't have to cook a full meal to get 225 calories, I can just eat a Mars bar. No need for a fridge, stove/oven, kitchen equipment, or preparation time, doesn't spoil when I buy ahead in bulk, and cleanup is just throwing the wrapper in the trash. And a whopping 2 grams of protein in the deal (did anyone know that Mars bars have fiber? Weird).
My other attraction to sweets is love. When someone makes me cookies or cake I feel loved. When I make cookies or cakes for others, it is an expression of my love. Cakes are also a "special occassion" food for me (i.e. birthdays, celebrations) so my associations with it are positive.
The other thing that sweets does for me is stress relief. Depression and chocolate consumption is linked, and the amount chocolate consumption goes up with the degree of depression.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20421555
At the office I worked at, one of the secretaries kept a mini chocolate bars in a drawer. After we had a screaming client at the counter, I felt a strong impulse to go to the drawer, but I told myself to wait 15 minutes to see if I still wanted to. I did, but by the time I got there, the rest of the office had cleaned it out. I'm not the only one who craves chocolate under stress, it seems.
I like meat, but nowhere near as much as I love chocolate. I need to exert myself to get enough protein, and exert myself to restrict my carbs/chocolate consumption. I do care what others think of my food consumption to some degree (sometimes I get self-consious at the grocery check-out), but that pops up more around my shame that I don't eat enough vegetables than anything else.
I don't really judge what other people are eating, though. I think most people are too caught up in their own drama to care about that...0 -
Noooo thank you.
If you made your own mayo, I am sure you would change your tune on this!
Heck yuuuuus, mayo is so nasty.Okay, so I've noticed that a lot of people with binge-eating problems really go after sweets. I am definitely a love of sweets but it's hot and cold for me. I don't really eat many sweets unless it's the holidays or I've bought a pack of cookies or a candy bar or something. I do really like cake and icing but it doesn't have the same urgency for me as for a lot of people. Why do you think other people (or yourself) can basically eat thousands of calories in mostly sugar and carbs and not get tired of it? Basically, I know a lot of younger girls who get most of their calories from sugary drinks, milkshakes, and desserts and don't even eat regular food. This baffles me because eating a proper meal seems much better to me. Is it because the lack of fiber and nutrients in sweet food, or maybe it's because of the presentation of sweet food? Most desserts look a certain way, gooey or colorful, presented as very tempting. Is the society's emphasis on sweet foods to represent celebration and love (Christmas, Halloween, birthdays, etc?)
This sort of obsession is definitely reinforced my social media and dieters, to an extent. People love posting desserts even if it's only to sigh "I wish I could eat that" or plan to have an indulges after doing well for a little while. I think part of it comes down to the moral implications of certain foods. Meat, grease, and condiments like mayo are sort of are like stereotypical of fat people. If you don't want to "look like a fatty" in front of your friends, you aren't going to order a burger, even if the latte or dessert your ordered has just as many calories. Cakes and chocolate are sort of universally adored. I mean, are people going to judge you more if you are sipping a milkshake or digging into some mayo-laden fat monstrosity?
I really don't understand your post. Are you saying that certain people are more prone to binging on sweets, or that sweets have a more positive stigma than burgers and fried foods? I think if people are concerned about judgement from others regarding what they order or what you post on Facebook that you are eating, they have self esteem issues and potentially disordered thinking about food and should probably seek help with that.
I'm w/ Jkwolly, I eat burgers and ice cream and don't fear judgement from anyone because I have worked them into my calorie goals for the day. Although my burger doesn't have mayo on it because blech!
0 -
DeirdreWoodwardSanders wrote: »mamapeach910 wrote: »
I still have some treats I have problems with. Brownies are something I can't control myself around. So I don't make them or buy them. Again, this is me controlling my behavior. Brownies aren't the problem, I am.
Ok, this is how I understand the anti-sugar addiction argument:
The body processes all sugars the same, regardless of the source. Your body cannot tell the difference between sugars.
Ergo, sugar addiction does not exist.
Therefore, eating all sugary foods in moderation is fine, because one type of sugar does not kick off some bodily process that other types of sugar do not also kick off (if you are addicted to cookies you should also be addicted to fruit).
Yet people continue to provide evidence that they do have trouble eating certain foods in moderation -- your issue with brownies, for instance.
I occasionally struggle with eating French fries and naan in moderation, because I really like them. I've even struggled with eating ribs, steak, and cheese in moderation, all foods that lack the sugar or even carbs that are supposed to be the issue by those on the addiction bandwagon.
Also, saying you are addicted to sugar in cookies but not sugar straight or in fruit is akin to saying you are addicted to the alcohol in pinot noir, but not beer. Which would be foolish.Here's my problem with the argument -- if there are no bodily functions in play, what non-bodily function is occurring that is causing your body to want more brownies?
(1) For most people what is being discussed is simply that they really, really like the foods in question and often eat them in contexts which make portion control difficult. There's a reason people talk about eating the whole bag or eat more when there's a bottomless basket of something on the table.
(2) For a smaller portion of people, there's some kind of emotional/mental component (which may operate in some ways analogous to an addiction, but that does not mean it's physical or related to the "addictiveness" of "sugar"--especially when a higher percentage of the calories in most of the relevant foods are actually from fat). I suspect strongly that one reason for this mental element is the forbidden fruit relationship that gets built up, that triggers the idea that once you have one you might as well go nuts. I also think emotional eating is a way of being able to go numb to other emotions and so there's a kind of relief that is provided and other such things that psychological counseling could probably address (or working through it on your own or even using some 12 step related tools could help with). But again that has nothing to do with sugar or some special addictive property of snickerdoodles that somehow is not present in chocolate chip cookies, say.
The problem with your physical argument is that people are too specific in what their trigger foods are.
0 -
The thread expanded again! Weird...
It is too bad OP hasn't come back to clarify her original post. I really was unclear if she was trying to make the point about sugar is addictive, or if there is a more positive stigma associated with eating sugar compared to other foods. And whether or not that was just in her circle of friends or if she believes this to be more widespread. Oh and if she could also tell us what's unhealthy about burgers, hot dogs, pizza, lattes, pies and milkshakes that would be awesome too.
I just need to know which type of thread this is ultimately going to be... personally I feel that the "sugar is addictive" and "what makes a food unhealthy" have already been covered ad nauseum in the last couple of weeks, so talking about social stigmas associated with eating these types of foods in public would at least be a slightly different thread...
Does it really matter what the OP's initial intentions were in writing her post as it has sparked a lot of interesting discussion and there have been some really good responses. I feel it is not important where the thread is going because these topics despite the fact they have been as you say "covered ad nauseum in the last of weeks" are obviously of interest to people, especially the new members. These are topics that concern and are of interest to people or else they would not keep reappearing.0 -
DeirdreWoodwardSanders wrote: »mamapeach910 wrote: »
I still have some treats I have problems with. Brownies are something I can't control myself around. So I don't make them or buy them. Again, this is me controlling my behavior. Brownies aren't the problem, I am.
Ok, this is how I understand the anti-sugar addiction argument:
The body processes all sugars the same, regardless of the source. Your body cannot tell the difference between sugars.
Ergo, sugar addiction does not exist.
Therefore, eating all sugary foods in moderation is fine, because one type of sugar does not kick off some bodily process that other types of sugar do not also kick off (if you are addicted to cookies you should also be addicted to fruit).
Yet people continue to provide evidence that they do have trouble eating certain foods in moderation -- your issue with brownies, for instance.
Here's my problem with the argument -- if there are no bodily functions in play, what non-bodily function is occurring that is causing your body to want more brownies?
I think there are bodily functions at play, and they are at play LONG before the sugar gets processed in the GI tract.
Smells -- before the food even enters the body -- trigger a host of chemical reactions in the body. Taste does the same thing, as does chewing and swallowing. The food hasn't even entered into the bloodstream, but the body is reacting to the food in massively powerful ways.
It's at this point that people struggle with food addictions -- not at the GI tract end. It's at the front end where all kinds of chemical reactions are occurring in the brain, and all kinds of messages are being sent back and forth.
The pro-sugar addiction people -- or at least me -- are arguing that in some people, these chemical reactions and messages are more powerful than our willpower / self-control. Are we responsible for overeating? Yes -- we shouldn't have taken the first bite that kicks off the chemical reactions that we then struggle with.
Even mamapeach, who knows that sugar isn't addictive, can't eat brownies because something more powerful than her willpower and self-control kicks in when she eats brownies. What is that something?
I keep thinking about alcoholism -- just because someone is dry doesn't mean they aren't still an alcoholic. The same is true with drug users, smokers, and coffee drinkers. Even though their system is clean, they still crave. Their bodies want the substance and send powerful messages to the brain about getting the substance.
While sugar itself might not be addictive, the brownie is something your body wants and sends powerful messages to the brain about getting. How is that any different than a drug or alcohol or nicotine message in an addict who is clean?
I could be completely wrong. I'd like to hear some arguments (complete with studies!) that deal with the smell and taste end of the eating process, not just the GI tract end of the process.
Sorry, but yes, you're wrong. Because I can eat one small piece of dark chocolate and walk away and leave the rest of the container. Because I had a box of gluten-free Jo-Jo's, and ate my way through them, 2 cookies at a time, just fine.
But brownies? It's about more than the sugar. It's the mouth feel and the taste.
Let's put it this way. I used to smoke. A smoker is not only addicted to the nicotine, but there are also habits that have to be broken like the feel of something in the mouth, and the hands being busy. The mouth and hands aren't addicted, but it's part of what makes quitting hard. they are side issues, apart from the genuine addictive substance.
Now, sugar is not an addictive substance, otherwise it could be proven to be so. However, the thing with me and brownies? It's the side issues are part of what make brownies appealing to me. It's not the sugar. The whole sensory experience. The smell. The contrast of flavors and wanting to continue experiencing that. The mouth feel. Those things are powerful. They're not addicting, but they come together and they test my willpower a bit too much. Just because I'm weak-willed when it comes to one sweet, does not mean that particular food is addictive for me. It means I'm weak.
0 -
.0
-
After I eat sweet I need salty. After I eat salty I need sweet. Hands down every time.
If there is chocolate around I will need the chips after!!!
Chocolate covered pretzels!After I eat sweet I need salty. After I eat salty I need sweet. Hands down every time.
If there is chocolate around I will need the chips after!!!
So often, they are disappointingly not salty enough. They just are never worth the calories.
0 -
Mamapeach, it doesn't mean you are weak, it means you are human.
0 -
This thread reeks of arrogance, judgement and diet shaming and fat shaming. And reporting people for abuse for not agreeing with you? Seriously?
How about you do you and let other people decide what they would like to eat?
0 -
0
-
Mamapeach, it doesn't mean you are weak, it means you are human.
Sorry, but I'm taking responsibility for my own behavior here, something I didn't do for far too long when it came to food, and something I realize that naturally slim people can do. My late mother in law ADORED sweets, but when she felt like her pants were getting too tight for her? She had no trouble avoiding them and just drinking coffee while everyone else had dessert. Normally, she'd be leading the charge for seconds and thirds at it. That woman never wore anything larger than a size 10.
0 -
As someone who dealt with binge eating and emotional eating at separate periods of their life (and for a little bit, at the same time - but mostly separate times) I guess I'll try to explain why I think I was (and kind of still am) obsessed with sweets. To say that this is the case for everyone would, I think, be a generalization. The relationship an individual has with food is going to be unique to the individual. While it could, theoretically, be applied to society as a whole, it cannot be applied to each individual necessarily.
Anyway. I think, in my case, it was largely environmental and societal. Socially, sweets and 'junk' food (note I use that word loosely, as I don't really think of anything as true junk food) are kind of... revered. We're told (especially women) that we're supposed to crave them. Even health conscious commercials (such as the Yoplait ones) make sweets seem as though they are a 'bad' decision to make. This has, in the past, affected my food decisions. And the more you restrict something you enjoy, the more you are going to eat of it when you finally do eat it. This view of sweets and 'junk' food as being bad led me to believe that I shouldn't enjoy them at all. I have long since come past that belief, and am working on it, but that doesn't change the fact that that's how I believed for so long. I felt almost ashamed to like sweets. And when I was overweight, I even felt ashamed to be caught liking sweets. The stereotype of overweight people eating nothing but 'junk' food made me feel ashamed when I made food choices in public that could be considered 'junk' food. This would often lead to me eating my feelings of guilt and shame away when I was home alone.
Another factor was the way I was raised. It's not that my mother put good/bad labels on food. Rather, I grew up poor, so food was scarce. Sweets were especially scarce. But sweets were so good. When I got them, I felt I had to eat them fast, or it would be a waste if I didn't. That or - my brother, the bottomless pit would eat them all before I could. I learned moderation with meats, grains, vegetables, fruits. Because these were things we always had enough of. I never learned moderation with sweets, because we never had them except once in a blue moon.
I have been learning moderation, and I still love sweets. Other than not knowing moderation, I'm also obsessed with them because they taste great. And if you can fit them into your goals, all the better. But as a former binge eater and emotional eater, I can say that there are/were deeper reasons for the obsession... and much deeper reasons for my eventual demonization of them before I came to my senses.0 -
My daughter has a sweet tooth; I do not. Neither of us have cravings in the obsession range. If she is feeling vulnerable and sweets are around, she's taking the sweet and feeling guilty about it. If I am having a low day I will go for the salty/crunchy. Popcorn, baby!
I appreciate the abstention/binge cycle, and I've been careful not to deprive myself of anything I truly want these past eighteen months. I'm still losing, and at a healthy rate.
I blogged about halting a binge session here:
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/blog/jgnatca/view/halting-a-binge-session-7151310 -
mamapeach910 wrote: »
Sorry, but yes, you're wrong. Because I can eat one small piece of dark chocolate and walk away and leave the rest of the container. Because I had a box of gluten-free Jo-Jo's, and ate my way through them, 2 cookies at a time, just fine.
But brownies? It's about more than the sugar. It's the mouth feel and the taste.
Let's put it this way. I used to smoke. A smoker is not only addicted to the nicotine, but there are also habits that have to be broken like the feel of something in the mouth, and the hands being busy. The mouth and hands aren't addicted, but it's part of what makes quitting hard. they are side issues, apart from the genuine addictive substance.
Now, sugar is not an addictive substance, otherwise it could be proven to be so. However, the thing with me and brownies? It's the side issues are part of what make brownies appealing to me. It's not the sugar. The whole sensory experience. The smell. The contrast of flavors and wanting to continue experiencing that. The mouth feel. Those things are powerful. They're not addicting, but they come together and they test my willpower a bit too much. Just because I'm weak-willed when it comes to one sweet, does not mean that particular food is addictive for me. It means I'm weak.
How am I wrong? You just basically repeated my argument. It's not about the sugar, it's about the smell and taste -- powerful sensory experiences that can overpower self-control. Much like addicts who struggle with craving for their substance of choice even though they are clean, people with food issues struggle with their trigger food.
-1 -
DeirdreWoodwardSanders wrote: »mamapeach910 wrote: »
Sorry, but yes, you're wrong. Because I can eat one small piece of dark chocolate and walk away and leave the rest of the container. Because I had a box of gluten-free Jo-Jo's, and ate my way through them, 2 cookies at a time, just fine.
But brownies? It's about more than the sugar. It's the mouth feel and the taste.
Let's put it this way. I used to smoke. A smoker is not only addicted to the nicotine, but there are also habits that have to be broken like the feel of something in the mouth, and the hands being busy. The mouth and hands aren't addicted, but it's part of what makes quitting hard. they are side issues, apart from the genuine addictive substance.
Now, sugar is not an addictive substance, otherwise it could be proven to be so. However, the thing with me and brownies? It's the side issues are part of what make brownies appealing to me. It's not the sugar. The whole sensory experience. The smell. The contrast of flavors and wanting to continue experiencing that. The mouth feel. Those things are powerful. They're not addicting, but they come together and they test my willpower a bit too much. Just because I'm weak-willed when it comes to one sweet, does not mean that particular food is addictive for me. It means I'm weak.
How am I wrong? You just basically repeated my argument. It's not about the sugar, it's about the smell and taste -- powerful sensory experiences that can overpower self-control. Much like addicts who struggle with craving for their substance of choice even though they are clean, people with food issues struggle with their trigger food.
You're wrong because it's just ONE thing I have a problem with. It's not universal to all chocolate treats or wouldn't even apply to a blondie, which has a similar texture. It's a combination of all the factors.
The thing is that it's still just ME. And who knows, for all I'm blathering about being weak, I haven't tested myself lately. I might be strong enough now to not binge on them. I haven't tried in a while.
I used to think I had a problem with ALL sweets too. I don't. I used to blame sugar too. It wasn't the problem, I was.
I had the same issues with all those other treats. Those issues went beyond the sweetness too. I'm fine with all those other things now.
0 -
DeirdreWoodwardSanders wrote: »
How am I wrong? You just basically repeated my argument. It's not about the sugar, it's about the smell and taste -- powerful sensory experiences that can overpower self-control. Much like addicts who struggle with craving for their substance of choice even though they are clean, people with food issues struggle with their trigger food.
Your idea that addiction is about the sensory experience and enjoyment is what seems wrong to me.
As mamapeach posted about smoking, those things are also implicated when you are struggling to give up an addiction, but they aren't the essence of it. I have pleasurable sensory experiences and situations and habits all associated with drinking wine, and definitely those things can be triggering or a powerful call to go bad to an addiction again, but they DON'T overpower will power--you just have to be aware of what's going on, especially when you are otherwise in a weak state (tired, hungry, angry, willpower sapped). There's something else physical that happens too, that's apart from those pleasurable elements.
I strongly dislike certain kinds of alcoholic drinks, even wine (especially wine, I was a wine snob, fitting with my longtime pretense that I was an oenophile, not a drunk). Soon after I stopped drinking, a vendor I work with gave me some chardonnay that I can't stand as a Christmas gift (presumably he didn't know I disliked it). If the wine had been any of the kinds I like or one I don't know but looked interesting, I would have given it away in a second, because it was too much temptation to have it around at that point. As it was, I had it in my office for ages, and eventually took it home for guests who might want it, since I wasn't going to open it.
However, I know from past experience that if I had for some reason decided to drink it, I would have kind of choked down the first glass, and then I would have finished the bottle, or at least I would have done that often enough and kind of unpredicatably. It wouldn't have had a thing to do with enjoying the bottle, it's because once I start drinking I can't imagine stopping, and I want to get high.
When people talk about trigger foods, they don't generally talk about it that way--they talk about wanting to keep eating a food because it tastes good and they enjoy it and they just want it even more after tasting it. I get that--I can not think about fries, but if I say I'll just have one I'm likely to then want one more and so on. But that's nothing at all what my experience with booze is like. (And this has nothing to do with me being physically dependent on alcohol. It would no doubt happen now, and I haven't had a drink for a long time.)
I think there's a connection to what I experience with alcohol and what some people experience with food in general. But it's nothing like what people are usually talking about when they come in and say "I'm addicted to pizza, I just love it so much I can't stop eating it." No one in an AA meeting, IME, says the issue was that they just loved wine or vodka or whatever so much. They might have--I did (I really was an oenophile), and I was in love with it more than anything else in my life (I think the essence of addiction is that the thing becomes the center of your life), and I hated it and I was terrified of it, and most of all I loved the fact that it blotted out everything else in a particular way, and of course I needed it. Comparing that kind of thing to what most people are talking about with trigger foods just seems wrong.0 -
I occasionally struggle with eating French fries and naan in moderation, because I really like them. I've even struggled with eating ribs, steak, and cheese in moderation, all foods that lack the sugar or even carbs that are supposed to be the issue by those on the addiction bandwagon.
Also, saying you are addicted to sugar in cookies but not sugar straight or in fruit is akin to saying you are addicted to the alcohol in pinot noir, but not beer. Which would be foolish.
Naan is delicious! Now I want some.(1) For most people what is being discussed is simply that they really, really like the foods in question and often eat them in contexts which make portion control difficult. There's a reason people talk about eating the whole bag or eat more when there's a bottomless basket of something on the table.
(2) For a smaller portion of people, there's some kind of emotional/mental component (which may operate in some ways analogous to an addiction, but that does not mean it's physical or related to the "addictiveness" of "sugar"--especially when a higher percentage of the calories in most of the relevant foods are actually from fat). I suspect strongly that one reason for this mental element is the forbidden fruit relationship that gets built up, that triggers the idea that once you have one you might as well go nuts. I also think emotional eating is a way of being able to go numb to other emotions and so there's a kind of relief that is provided and other such things that psychological counseling could probably address (or working through it on your own or even using some 12 step related tools could help with). But again that has nothing to do with sugar or some special addictive property of snickerdoodles that somehow is not present in chocolate chip cookies, say.
The problem with your physical argument is that people are too specific in what their trigger foods are.
The problem with THE physical argument. It's not my argument. I don't believe that sugar is addictive. I do know that people struggle with trigger foods and I do believe that eating in moderation isn't the answer for everyone, but beyond that, I am still waiting to learn more.
Well, I'm off to a delicious dinner. Good night, y'all.0 -
DeirdreWoodwardSanders wrote: »
I occasionally struggle with eating French fries and naan in moderation, because I really like them. I've even struggled with eating ribs, steak, and cheese in moderation, all foods that lack the sugar or even carbs that are supposed to be the issue by those on the addiction bandwagon.
Also, saying you are addicted to sugar in cookies but not sugar straight or in fruit is akin to saying you are addicted to the alcohol in pinot noir, but not beer. Which would be foolish.
Naan is delicious! Now I want some.(1) For most people what is being discussed is simply that they really, really like the foods in question and often eat them in contexts which make portion control difficult. There's a reason people talk about eating the whole bag or eat more when there's a bottomless basket of something on the table.
(2) For a smaller portion of people, there's some kind of emotional/mental component (which may operate in some ways analogous to an addiction, but that does not mean it's physical or related to the "addictiveness" of "sugar"--especially when a higher percentage of the calories in most of the relevant foods are actually from fat). I suspect strongly that one reason for this mental element is the forbidden fruit relationship that gets built up, that triggers the idea that once you have one you might as well go nuts. I also think emotional eating is a way of being able to go numb to other emotions and so there's a kind of relief that is provided and other such things that psychological counseling could probably address (or working through it on your own or even using some 12 step related tools could help with). But again that has nothing to do with sugar or some special addictive property of snickerdoodles that somehow is not present in chocolate chip cookies, say.
The problem with your physical argument is that people are too specific in what their trigger foods are.
The problem with THE physical argument. It's not my argument. I don't believe that sugar is addictive. I do know that people struggle with trigger foods and I do believe that eating in moderation isn't the answer for everyone, but beyond that, I am still waiting to learn more.
Well, I'm off to a delicious dinner. Good night, y'all.
wait you argue that sugar is like addiction then you tell the person who says that sugar addiction is not real that they are wrong AND then you come back and say you don't believe it is addictive????? talk about covering all your bases….
troll-la-la-la-la-la-la-1 -
furioushummingbird wrote: »
We just baked some white chocolate macadamia cookies. Looked at my after-dinner calories, enough for two, and.....
Ate them! Just two!
0 -
DeirdreWoodwardSanders wrote: »
The problem with THE physical argument. It's not my argument. I don't believe that sugar is addictive. I do know that people struggle with trigger foods and I do believe that eating in moderation isn't the answer for everyone, but beyond that, I am still waiting to learn more.
Well, I'm off to a delicious dinner. Good night, y'all.
Well, honestly, now I'm confused as to what your argument actually is.
The thing is... trigger foods are usually very specific. They don't encompass broad categories like ALL carbs, or all sugar. People who say they can't be moderate usually say they must give it all up. That's not true in my experience. I realize I'm not everyone. I also realize that sometimes, it's helpful to indeed take a break at first before going back to take some time to reprogram your thinking about what you thought were your problem foods.
Moderation while avoiding specific triggers is possible. Throwing out the baby with the bath water (whole categories of foods) is unnecessary.
0 -
This content has been removed.
-
I am a big lover of sweet food. I think it's just because it's associated with treats and celebrations and happiness. Nowadays I try to be more selective with sweet treats and only go for stuff I REALLY want or that I haven't tried before or that someone has homemade. So no random chocolate bars bought from the work vending machines when I'm stressed, or big stodgy coffee shop muffins just because my friend has chosen to have one. Banoffee pie at a birthday party? YES. Lemon meringue tart at a restaurant? YES. My mum's Kit-Kat cookies? HELL YES PLEASE.
I never really buy packs of biscuits except at Christmas, because history has taught me I cannot control myself! I can and will eat 30 chocolate hobnobs in one night.0 -
mamapeach910 wrote: »Mamapeach, it doesn't mean you are weak, it means you are human.
Sorry, but I'm taking responsibility for my own behavior here, something I didn't do for far too long when it came to food, and something I realize that naturally slim people can do. My late mother in law ADORED sweets, but when she felt like her pants were getting too tight for her? She had no trouble avoiding them and just drinking coffee while everyone else had dessert. Normally, she'd be leading the charge for seconds and thirds at it. That woman never wore anything larger than a size 10.
Mamapeach, You also said "Just because I'm weak-willed when it comes to one sweet, does not mean that particular food is addictive for me. It means I'm weak."
Something about these comments worried me and then then the reason occurred to me. All the overweight people I know are not weak or weak willed or weak minded. In fact, they are the most incredible, gifted and amazing people I know. They have confidence, courage, commitment, control and purpose. All characteristics of a strong minded person. So something else is happening here that they have no control over.
I have seen some of these people put themselves through the most difficult of diets using pure determination and achieved their goal only to slowly but surely regain the weight.
Now your mother in law was probably one of the naturally thin people of this world, their commitment to losing was easier and not a constant battle. I was one of them and being thin was not evidence that I was strong minded because I ate my way through life. I was blessed - simple as that. Three events changed that. Cancer scare and surgery, Ross River Virus and menopause. Life slowed for me when I was ill for nearly two years and later on, hormonal changes effected me as well. Thus my ability to lose weight is now different.
Will power, calories in, calories out and exercise will certainly get you results but is it sustainable? I believe there are far more factors at play and will power is only a minor one.0 -
fearlesslove wrote: »I'm saying I believe at least part of America's obesity problem has to do with the ridiculously positive perception of desserts and sweets, especially by women.
I'm a sugar addict. If I didn't love sweets so much I'd probably be skinny mini but I struggle with my sugar addiction. I love sweets and it has NOTHING to do with how I perceive sweets or how the sweets are represented in media/stores/etc. Sugar is addictive and for some people (like myself) it is difficult not to overindulge.
I'm currently on my 4th day straight of no sugary snacks or treats other than fruit...and I feel like I have a sugar monkey on my back!
I wonder what a Sugar Monkey would look like?0 -
This content has been removed.
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