The truth about sugar addiction from a former sugar addict
Options
Replies
-
goldthistime wrote: »goldthistime wrote: »
Sugar is sugar no matter what source it comes from. Your body does not differentiate. If you're going to moderate sugar, which is perfectly fine, moderate all sources, not just one.MotelHoney wrote: »MotelHoney wrote: »I have a question. I eat a lot of fruit, it's like 60% of what I eat everyday (I love the stuff). Does the sugar in it feed into a sugar addiction like a candy bar would?
Neither, in my opinion.
Neither what? It was a yes or no question lol
Whole fruits contain a lot of water and fiber, and some protein, and, for some at least, most of the sugar is fructose. Water, fiber, protein, and fructose are all satisfying - they prevent binges, and cause people to eat less at later meals. The amount of sugar in a serving of fruit is much less than that in a can of pop, or other sugar-added treats. The fiber slows down digestion, so the sugar-sensitive will have less of a glucose spike and crash. Probably none of the fructose will end up stored as visceral fat in one serving of fruit as it might with one serving of pop, as it is released at the rate that the glucose is needed by the body. As visceral fat is increased, insulin resistance can develop, making any issues with sugar worse.
Keep in mind, being active mitigates a lot of the potential problems with higher (added) sugar consumption. It burns off visceral fat, promotes insulin sensitivity, and an appropriate amount of sugar consumed right after a workout will go to immediate metabolic and glycogen storage needs.
60% is high for fruit consumption, however. How you eat it makes a difference. Nutritionists recommend avoiding fruit juice, as it affects blood sugar more like how pop does in similar servings. Eating a lot of fiber, water, and adequate amounts of high-quality protein with fruit will slow glucose spikes, and promote satiation (ie. prevent binges). If you can eat 60% of your diet as fruit, meet all your macros and micros, and aren't experiencing binges, cravings, waist larger than 35", or any signs of insulin resistance, you may be fine, but 1-2 servings of fruit a day (about a cup/serving) is what is recommended for most people.
Sugar is sugar, but some people can moderate easier if their sugar comes with a lot of fiber. Sadly I am not one of those people!
Jolinia, you are a 42 year old woman with only 20 pounds to lose! You MUST have found ways to moderate or you would be much more overweight.
I take that as a great compliment, especially since I am also half the woman I used to be. But no, I don't moderate well. I just duct tape up my diet with every method and combination of methods of food, meal timing, exercise, and everything else you can imagine. It's a daily fight and my goal is to stop backsliding even a few pounds and find a way of eating that doesn't require quite so much of my energy and focus. Because I really want to use my energy and focus for other things in life.
Congratulations on the weight loss. I feel like I should be asking YOU for advice. How have you handled sugar thus far?
Every time I eat bread and/or sugar, I have to lose five to ten pounds again by cutting it out and counting calories. And it takes me twice as long to lose it as to gain it, because when I go nuts on sugar, I don't play around.
Low carb is the easiest for me, seems to damp down excess hunger and cravings the most. Vegan is my ethical choice and I hope one day to return to it, or maybe Paleo with meat just once a week? Not sure. I'm the wrong person to ask, I haven't even figured out my own inner balance yet! I know moderation is the hardest for me, though. It costs me far too much to be worth it. Yet it's the cheapest on my food budget. Go figure.
0 -
Sugar is sugar no matter what source it comes from. Your body does not differentiate. If you're going to moderate sugar, which is perfectly fine, moderate all sources, not just one.MotelHoney wrote: »MotelHoney wrote: »I have a question. I eat a lot of fruit, it's like 60% of what I eat everyday (I love the stuff). Does the sugar in it feed into a sugar addiction like a candy bar would?
Neither, in my opinion.
Neither what? It was a yes or no question lol
Whole fruits contain a lot of water and fiber, and some protein, and, for some at least, most of the sugar is fructose. Water, fiber, protein, and fructose are all satisfying - they prevent binges, and cause people to eat less at later meals. The amount of sugar in a serving of fruit is much less than that in a can of pop, or other sugar-added treats. The fiber slows down digestion, so the sugar-sensitive will have less of a glucose spike and crash. Probably none of the fructose will end up stored as visceral fat in one serving of fruit as it might with one serving of pop, as it is released at the rate that the glucose is needed by the body. As visceral fat is increased, insulin resistance can develop, making any issues with sugar worse.
Keep in mind, being active mitigates a lot of the potential problems with higher (added) sugar consumption. It burns off visceral fat, promotes insulin sensitivity, and an appropriate amount of sugar consumed right after a workout will go to immediate metabolic and glycogen storage needs.
60% is high for fruit consumption, however. How you eat it makes a difference. Nutritionists recommend avoiding fruit juice, as it affects blood sugar more like how pop does in similar servings. Eating a lot of fiber, water, and adequate amounts of high-quality protein with fruit will slow glucose spikes, and promote satiation (ie. prevent binges). If you can eat 60% of your diet as fruit, meet all your macros and micros, and aren't experiencing binges, cravings, waist larger than 35", or any signs of insulin resistance, you may be fine, but 1-2 servings of fruit a day (about a cup/serving) is what is recommended for most people.
Chosing to get sugar from fruit/vegetables and dairy instead of added sugars is moderation, as one serving of fruit/vegetables or dairy has less sugar than one serving of most sweet foods with added sugar (I get that sugar is added to most processed foods, but there are more significant amounts of it in sweet foods). Source of sugar definitely affects how it is processed (rate and glucose spike) by the body - that is what glycemic index and load is about.
Limiting dairy and fruit/vegetables has health consequences, as they contain essential nutrition for the body (micros), and help prevent various diseases like heart disease, diabetes, cancer, etc. Limiting added sugars does not have health consequences, except for those who need them for workout recovery.
Edited just 'cause
Peer reviewed study, please, as to the prevention of disease.
http://jn.nutrition.org/content/141/9/1626.full
Use of high dairy and high protein reduced visceral fat. Visceral fat is strongly correlated with vascular disease, metabolic disorders, insulin resistance, and diabetes.
http://jnci.oxfordjournals.org/content/92/1/61.short
Fruits and vegetables reduce cancer risk
http://jnci.oxfordjournals.org/content/93/7/525.short
Fruits and vegetables reduce colorectal cancer risk0 -
MarziPanda95 wrote: »The amount of people seeing the title and then coming here and going all 'sugar is the devil' without having actually read the post makes me sad. Her point is that she was never really an 'addict' and that you CAN have sugar in moderation. OP, congrats on all that you have achieved!
Thanks! I did purposefully make the title a little tricky, and I guess that's what happens...
0 -
Sugar is sugar no matter what source it comes from. Your body does not differentiate. If you're going to moderate sugar, which is perfectly fine, moderate all sources, not just one.MotelHoney wrote: »MotelHoney wrote: »I have a question. I eat a lot of fruit, it's like 60% of what I eat everyday (I love the stuff). Does the sugar in it feed into a sugar addiction like a candy bar would?
Neither, in my opinion.
Neither what? It was a yes or no question lol
Whole fruits contain a lot of water and fiber, and some protein, and, for some at least, most of the sugar is fructose. Water, fiber, protein, and fructose are all satisfying - they prevent binges, and cause people to eat less at later meals. The amount of sugar in a serving of fruit is much less than that in a can of pop, or other sugar-added treats. The fiber slows down digestion, so the sugar-sensitive will have less of a glucose spike and crash. Probably none of the fructose will end up stored as visceral fat in one serving of fruit as it might with one serving of pop, as it is released at the rate that the glucose is needed by the body. As visceral fat is increased, insulin resistance can develop, making any issues with sugar worse.
Keep in mind, being active mitigates a lot of the potential problems with higher (added) sugar consumption. It burns off visceral fat, promotes insulin sensitivity, and an appropriate amount of sugar consumed right after a workout will go to immediate metabolic and glycogen storage needs.
60% is high for fruit consumption, however. How you eat it makes a difference. Nutritionists recommend avoiding fruit juice, as it affects blood sugar more like how pop does in similar servings. Eating a lot of fiber, water, and adequate amounts of high-quality protein with fruit will slow glucose spikes, and promote satiation (ie. prevent binges). If you can eat 60% of your diet as fruit, meet all your macros and micros, and aren't experiencing binges, cravings, waist larger than 35", or any signs of insulin resistance, you may be fine, but 1-2 servings of fruit a day (about a cup/serving) is what is recommended for most people.
Chosing to get sugar from fruit/vegetables and dairy instead of added sugars is moderation, as one serving of fruit/vegetables or dairy has less sugar than one serving of most sweet foods with added sugar (I get that sugar is added to most processed foods, but there are more significant amounts of it in sweet foods). Source of sugar definitely affects how it is processed (rate and glucose spike) by the body - that is what glycemic index and load is about.
Limiting dairy and fruit/vegetables has health consequences, as they contain essential nutrition for the body (micros), and help prevent various diseases like heart disease, diabetes, cancer, etc. Limiting added sugars does not have health consequences, except for those who need them for workout recovery.
Edited just 'cause
Peer reviewed study, please, as to the prevention of disease.
.http://jn.nutrition.org/content/141/9/1626.full
Use of high dairy and high protein reduced visceral fat. Visceral fat is strongly correlated with vascular disease, metabolic disorders, insulin resistance, and diabetes
This study does not say anything about vascular disease or diabetes. Those are your additions.http://jnci.oxfordjournals.org/content/92/1/61.short
Fruits and vegetables reduce cancer risk
"There is extensive and consistent evidence that high fruit and vegetable intakes are associated with decreased risks of many cancers, but results for prostate cancer risk have been inconsistent."
"No associations were found between fruit intake and prostate cancer risk."http://jnci.oxfordjournals.org/content/93/7/525.short
Fruits and vegetables reduce colorectal cancer risk
These last two studies were conducted by issuing questionnaires about the subjects' food consumption over a 3-5 year period. I would say that in of itself invalidates the study right away due to human nature of not remembering every little nuance about food consumption.
These last two studies are also abstracts, which never provide enough information. Why not post the full studies, since you are the one shared the information? These last two studies are from 1999 and 2000, which makes them basically outdated.
Besides this, this part of the conversation has zilch to do with sugar addiction and how it's all in one's mind, which is the original posting.0 -
Well if we're posting studies, here is one I just found that really scares me. No matter how much I try to control my insulin levels for health and satiety, it seems some things are out of my control and not on my plate at all. Anyone else want nightmares? Read on!
http://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/1307082/
Insulin Resistance and Environmental Pollutants: Experimental Evidence and Future Perspectives0 -
Sugar is sugar no matter what source it comes from. Your body does not differentiate. If you're going to moderate sugar, which is perfectly fine, moderate all sources, not just one.MotelHoney wrote: »MotelHoney wrote: »I have a question. I eat a lot of fruit, it's like 60% of what I eat everyday (I love the stuff). Does the sugar in it feed into a sugar addiction like a candy bar would?
Neither, in my opinion.
Neither what? It was a yes or no question lol
Whole fruits contain a lot of water and fiber, and some protein, and, for some at least, most of the sugar is fructose. Water, fiber, protein, and fructose are all satisfying - they prevent binges, and cause people to eat less at later meals. The amount of sugar in a serving of fruit is much less than that in a can of pop, or other sugar-added treats. The fiber slows down digestion, so the sugar-sensitive will have less of a glucose spike and crash. Probably none of the fructose will end up stored as visceral fat in one serving of fruit as it might with one serving of pop, as it is released at the rate that the glucose is needed by the body. As visceral fat is increased, insulin resistance can develop, making any issues with sugar worse.
Keep in mind, being active mitigates a lot of the potential problems with higher (added) sugar consumption. It burns off visceral fat, promotes insulin sensitivity, and an appropriate amount of sugar consumed right after a workout will go to immediate metabolic and glycogen storage needs.
60% is high for fruit consumption, however. How you eat it makes a difference. Nutritionists recommend avoiding fruit juice, as it affects blood sugar more like how pop does in similar servings. Eating a lot of fiber, water, and adequate amounts of high-quality protein with fruit will slow glucose spikes, and promote satiation (ie. prevent binges). If you can eat 60% of your diet as fruit, meet all your macros and micros, and aren't experiencing binges, cravings, waist larger than 35", or any signs of insulin resistance, you may be fine, but 1-2 servings of fruit a day (about a cup/serving) is what is recommended for most people.
Chosing to get sugar from fruit/vegetables and dairy instead of added sugars is moderation, as one serving of fruit/vegetables or dairy has less sugar than one serving of most sweet foods with added sugar (I get that sugar is added to most processed foods, but there are more significant amounts of it in sweet foods). Source of sugar definitely affects how it is processed (rate and glucose spike) by the body - that is what glycemic index and load is about.
Limiting dairy and fruit/vegetables has health consequences, as they contain essential nutrition for the body (micros), and help prevent various diseases like heart disease, diabetes, cancer, etc. Limiting added sugars does not have health consequences, except for those who need them for workout recovery.
Edited just 'cause
Peer reviewed study, please, as to the prevention of disease.
.http://jn.nutrition.org/content/141/9/1626.full
Use of high dairy and high protein reduced visceral fat. Visceral fat is strongly correlated with vascular disease, metabolic disorders, insulin resistance, and diabetes
This study does not say anything about vascular disease or diabetes. Those are your additions.http://jnci.oxfordjournals.org/content/92/1/61.short
Fruits and vegetables reduce cancer risk
"There is extensive and consistent evidence that high fruit and vegetable intakes are associated with decreased risks of many cancers, but results for prostate cancer risk have been inconsistent."
"No associations were found between fruit intake and prostate cancer risk."http://jnci.oxfordjournals.org/content/93/7/525.short
Fruits and vegetables reduce colorectal cancer risk
These last two studies were conducted by issuing questionnaires about the subjects' food consumption over a 3-5 year period. I would say that in of itself invalidates the study right away due to human nature of not remembering every little nuance about food consumption.
These last two studies are also abstracts, which never provide enough information. Why not post the full studies, since you are the one shared the information? These last two studies are from 1999 and 2000, which makes them basically outdated.
Besides this, this part of the conversation has zilch to do with sugar addiction and how it's all in one's mind, which is the original posting.
Links to full studies for 2nd two.
http://jnci.oxfordjournals.org/content/92/1/61.full
http://jnci.oxfordjournals.org/content/93/7/525.full
This meta-analysis is a little more recent:
http://jn.nutrition.org/content/136/10/2588.full
and claims each serving of fruit lowers heart disease risk by 7%, but admits the relationship may be slightly inflated because:
"Generally, consumers of fruit and vegetables smoke less, exercise more, and are better educated than nonconsumers"
If you looked on the abstract page, just to the right under "This Article" you would have seen the full links. I brought in the links in response to @SLLRunner's request for peer-reviewed studies supporting my claim that fruit, vegetables, and dairy protect against disease and have vital nutrients for health. As the source says:
"There is extensive and consistent evidence that high fruit and vegetable intakes are associated with decreased risks of many cancers" I could bring in many, many more studies, but I'm pretty sure no-one seriously thinks that eliminating fruit, vegetables, or dairy, outside of physician advice, is a good idea.
I made the claim to explain why I would include fruit, vegetables, and dairy in my diet, even though they contain sugar. I see no reason to limit something with major health benefits, although SLLRunner seemed to think that I should have to if I wish to limit added sugars, something that has no benefit for me, and documented risks.
I'm pretty sure the OP is not saying that sugar addiction is "all in one's mind" (a negative, insulting message), but rather that someone can find dietary balance, and overcome the "addiction" experience of sugar cravings and binges (a positive, hopeful message).0 -
Sugar is sugar no matter what source it comes from. Your body does not differentiate. If you're going to moderate sugar, which is perfectly fine, moderate all sources, not just one.MotelHoney wrote: »MotelHoney wrote: »I have a question. I eat a lot of fruit, it's like 60% of what I eat everyday (I love the stuff). Does the sugar in it feed into a sugar addiction like a candy bar would?
Neither, in my opinion.
Neither what? It was a yes or no question lol
Whole fruits contain a lot of water and fiber, and some protein, and, for some at least, most of the sugar is fructose. Water, fiber, protein, and fructose are all satisfying - they prevent binges, and cause people to eat less at later meals. The amount of sugar in a serving of fruit is much less than that in a can of pop, or other sugar-added treats. The fiber slows down digestion, so the sugar-sensitive will have less of a glucose spike and crash. Probably none of the fructose will end up stored as visceral fat in one serving of fruit as it might with one serving of pop, as it is released at the rate that the glucose is needed by the body. As visceral fat is increased, insulin resistance can develop, making any issues with sugar worse.
Keep in mind, being active mitigates a lot of the potential problems with higher (added) sugar consumption. It burns off visceral fat, promotes insulin sensitivity, and an appropriate amount of sugar consumed right after a workout will go to immediate metabolic and glycogen storage needs.
60% is high for fruit consumption, however. How you eat it makes a difference. Nutritionists recommend avoiding fruit juice, as it affects blood sugar more like how pop does in similar servings. Eating a lot of fiber, water, and adequate amounts of high-quality protein with fruit will slow glucose spikes, and promote satiation (ie. prevent binges). If you can eat 60% of your diet as fruit, meet all your macros and micros, and aren't experiencing binges, cravings, waist larger than 35", or any signs of insulin resistance, you may be fine, but 1-2 servings of fruit a day (about a cup/serving) is what is recommended for most people.
Chosing to get sugar from fruit/vegetables and dairy instead of added sugars is moderation, as one serving of fruit/vegetables or dairy has less sugar than one serving of most sweet foods with added sugar (I get that sugar is added to most processed foods, but there are more significant amounts of it in sweet foods). Source of sugar definitely affects how it is processed (rate and glucose spike) by the body - that is what glycemic index and load is about.
Limiting dairy and fruit/vegetables has health consequences, as they contain essential nutrition for the body (micros), and help prevent various diseases like heart disease, diabetes, cancer, etc. Limiting added sugars does not have health consequences, except for those who need them for workout recovery.
Edited just 'cause
Peer reviewed study, please, as to the prevention of disease.
.http://jn.nutrition.org/content/141/9/1626.full
Use of high dairy and high protein reduced visceral fat. Visceral fat is strongly correlated with vascular disease, metabolic disorders, insulin resistance, and diabetes
This study does not say anything about vascular disease or diabetes. Those are your additions.http://jnci.oxfordjournals.org/content/92/1/61.short
Fruits and vegetables reduce cancer risk
"There is extensive and consistent evidence that high fruit and vegetable intakes are associated with decreased risks of many cancers, but results for prostate cancer risk have been inconsistent."
"No associations were found between fruit intake and prostate cancer risk."http://jnci.oxfordjournals.org/content/93/7/525.short
Fruits and vegetables reduce colorectal cancer risk
These last two studies were conducted by issuing questionnaires about the subjects' food consumption over a 3-5 year period. I would say that in of itself invalidates the study right away due to human nature of not remembering every little nuance about food consumption.
These last two studies are also abstracts, which never provide enough information. Why not post the full studies, since you are the one shared the information? These last two studies are from 1999 and 2000, which makes them basically outdated.
Besides this, this part of the conversation has zilch to do with sugar addiction and how it's all in one's mind, which is the original posting.
Links to full studies for 2nd two.
http://jnci.oxfordjournals.org/content/92/1/61.full
http://jnci.oxfordjournals.org/content/93/7/525.full
This meta-analysis is a little more recent:
http://jn.nutrition.org/content/136/10/2588.full
and claims each serving of fruit lowers heart disease risk by 7%, but admits the relationship may be slightly inflated because:
"Generally, consumers of fruit and vegetables smoke less, exercise more, and are better educated than nonconsumers"
If you looked on the abstract page, just to the right under "This Article" you would have seen the full links. I brought in the links in response to @SLLRunner's request for peer-reviewed studies supporting my claim that fruit, vegetables, and dairy protect against disease and have vital nutrients for health. As the source says:
"There is extensive and consistent evidence that high fruit and vegetable intakes are associated with decreased risks of many cancers" I could bring in many, many more studies, but I'm pretty sure no-one seriously thinks that eliminating fruit, vegetables, or dairy, outside of physician advice, is a good idea.
I made the claim to explain why I would include fruit, vegetables, and dairy in my diet, even though they contain sugar. I see no reason to limit something with major health benefits, although SLLRunner seemed to think that I should have to if I wish to limit added sugars, something that has no benefit for me, and documented risks.
I'm pretty sure the OP is not saying that sugar addiction is "all in one's mind" (a negative, insulting message), but rather that someone can find dietary balance, and overcome the "addiction" experience of sugar cravings and binges (a positive, hopeful message).
Kyta, you need to provide direct links, not just a study with the links that lead to your opinion.
No, she's saying g she thought she had a sugar addiction but figured out the true issue is moderation.
Our body does not know the difference between sugar, and no sugar is good or bad, therefore if you're limiting sugar it makes sense to moderate wherever you see fit.
Your last two studies are pretty weak because of the manner the studies were conducted.0 -
Agreed, I don't think it's fair to say it's "all in one's mind" particularly because the premise that the mind can be separated from physiology is flawed in the first place. At the same time, one of my points is that conceptualizing the experience as an addiction can actually make it harder to change, particularly if you buy into the ideas either that you need to eliminate foods from your diet and/or that you are powerless over food.
My personal experience (bearing in mind that I've been diagnosed with insulin resistance) is that a careful balancing of my diet allows me to eliminate sugar/starchy carb cravings, which makes this experience feel good and natural. I am not in a constant battle of wills. When I am a bit less balanced, I can feel some of the cravings reemerge. But, since i know what balance works for me, it is easy enough to return to my regular way of eating. At no time do I need to feel that I'm on the verge of disaster based on how I'm eating.0 -
Kyta, you need to provide direct links, not just a study with the links that lead to your opinion.
No, she's saying g she thought she had a sugar addiction but figured out the true issue is moderation.
Our body does not know the difference between sugar, and no sugar is good or bad, therefore if you're limiting sugar it makes sense to moderate wherever you see fit.
Your last two studies are pretty weak because of the manner the studies were conducted.
Well fruit is different due to the fiber content.
Basically, because of my IR, I focus on keeping blood sugar stable. Fruit generally does not have a problematic glycemic load (banana might, not sure) due to fiber. So various sources of sugar/starch can be balanced in different ways, simple portion control, combining with protein, fiber, fat, and perhaps also certain spices like cinnamon.0 -
girlviernes wrote: »Agreed, I don't think it's fair to say it's "all in one's mind" particularly because the premise that the mind can be separated from physiology is flawed in the first place. At the same time, one of my points is that conceptualizing the experience as an addiction can actually make it harder to change, particularly if you buy into the ideas either that you need to eliminate foods from your diet and/or that you are powerless over food.
My personal experience (bearing in mind that I've been diagnosed with insulin resistance) is that a careful balancing of my diet allows me to eliminate sugar/starchy carb cravings, which makes this experience feel good and natural. I am not in a constant battle of wills. When I am a bit less balanced, I can feel some of the cravings reemerge. But, since i know what balance works for me, it is easy enough to return to my regular way of eating. At no time do I need to feel that I'm on the verge of disaster based on how I'm eating.
Conceptualizing my binging as an addiction was the only thing that made it possible for me to deal with my binge eating. I'd been on plenty of diets, met with dietitians, hired trainers, lost weight, gained weight, etc. etc.
Once I started thinking about my binge eating as an addiction, everything made total sense. I am a compulsive overeater! It felt like I had slipped on a shoe that finally fit.
From there, it was pretty simple -- go to meetings, get a sponsor, work the steps. Boom. Done. I stopped eating my trigger foods, I stopped binging. I lost 75 pounds and have kept 40 of those pounds off for nearly 10 years (35 pounds crept back on because of CICO, not binge eating) (and I'm currently down 20 of those pounds because CICO yay!).
The bonus is that I've also worked through the emotional and spiritual issues that had me turning to binge eating for solace in the first place.
Yay to people who can deal with their binge eating on their own. That's wonderful!
And yay to anonymous programs for people like me, who needed help.
0 -
girlviernes wrote: »Agreed, I don't think it's fair to say it's "all in one's mind" particularly because the premise that the mind can be separated from physiology is flawed in the first place. At the same time, one of my points is that conceptualizing the experience as an addiction can actually make it harder to change, particularly if you buy into the ideas either that you need to eliminate foods from your diet and/or that you are powerless over food.
My personal experience (bearing in mind that I've been diagnosed with insulin resistance) is that a careful balancing of my diet allows me to eliminate sugar/starchy carb cravings, which makes this experience feel good and natural. I am not in a constant battle of wills. When I am a bit less balanced, I can feel some of the cravings reemerge. But, since i know what balance works for me, it is easy enough to return to my regular way of eating. At no time do I need to feel that I'm on the verge of disaster based on how I'm eating.
Conceptualizing my binging as an addiction was the only thing that made it possible for me to deal with my binge eating. I'd been on plenty of diets, met with dietitians, hired trainers, lost weight, gained weight, etc. etc.
Once I started thinking about my binge eating as an addiction, everything made total sense. I am a compulsive overeater! It felt like I had slipped on a shoe that finally fit.
From there, it was pretty simple -- go to meetings, get a sponsor, work the steps. Boom. Done. I stopped eating my trigger foods, I stopped binging. I lost 75 pounds and have kept 40 of those pounds off for nearly 10 years (35 pounds crept back on because of CICO, not binge eating) (and I'm currently down 20 of those pounds because CICO yay!).
The bonus is that I've also worked through the emotional and spiritual issues that had me turning to binge eating for solace in the first place.
Yay to people who can deal with their binge eating on their own. That's wonderful!
And yay to anonymous programs for people like me, who needed help.
I don't think that most people who call themselves sugar addicts have a BED, though. You have a clinically recognized disorder, and that's a separate issue from someone who just REALLY likes sweets. You're not the type of person girlviernes is talking about.
0 -
girlviernes wrote: »Kyta, you need to provide direct links, not just a study with the links that lead to your opinion.
No, she's saying g she thought she had a sugar addiction but figured out the true issue is moderation.
Our body does not know the difference between sugar, and no sugar is good or bad, therefore if you're limiting sugar it makes sense to moderate wherever you see fit.
Your last two studies are pretty weak because of the manner the studies were conducted.
Well fruit is different due to the fiber content.
Basically, because of my IR, I focus on keeping blood sugar stable. Fruit generally does not have a problematic glycemic load (banana might, not sure) due to fiber. So various sources of sugar/starch can be balanced in different ways, simple portion control, combining with protein, fiber, fat, and perhaps also certain spices like cinnamon.
Yes, I understand the fiber content and the special issues when people have insulin resistance and diabetes, for example, and balance of macros and what we choose to eat based on how we feel But, without an underlying medical condition, it seems to me your body would process all sugar the same. That's where I'm coming from.0 -
girlviernes wrote: »Agreed, I don't think it's fair to say it's "all in one's mind" particularly because the premise that the mind can be separated from physiology is flawed in the first place. At the same time, one of my points is that conceptualizing the experience as an addiction can actually make it harder to change, particularly if you buy into the ideas either that you need to eliminate foods from your diet and/or that you are powerless over food.
My personal experience (bearing in mind that I've been diagnosed with insulin resistance) is that a careful balancing of my diet allows me to eliminate sugar/starchy carb cravings, which makes this experience feel good and natural. I am not in a constant battle of wills. When I am a bit less balanced, I can feel some of the cravings reemerge. But, since i know what balance works for me, it is easy enough to return to my regular way of eating. At no time do I need to feel that I'm on the verge of disaster based on how I'm eating.
Yeah, my communication was poor. I understand what you are saying. For me, my sugar addiction was all in my he'd because I can moderate. If I eat a lot of sugar stuff on one day, then I've simply chosen to do so. I realize this is my stuff and not necessarily true for all.
0 -
mamapeach910 wrote: »poohpoohpeapod wrote: »
Sugar has proven to light up the same areas of the brain that cocaine does. Studies were done with PET scans of the brain.mamapeach910 wrote: »kelly30mad wrote: »I also am like u.. I use to snak on sugar snacks all day!!! I wld rather snack than eat a meal.. I've currently gone cold turkey and stopped them all together.. I've had really bad headaches and the shakes... Jus shows tha it is addictive and the more u eat the more u need more
I think you missed her point. It's not addictive. It's all about behavior and choice. You can get control.
Sometimes, it is helpful to give it all up for a time and get some distance to be able to see that.
It's more a compulsion which is about BEHAVIOR, than about addiction, which is about the SUBSTANCE.
Pain triggers dopamine release too. Is pain addictive?
Actually, it can be. A lot of times people who cut do so to feel the pain.
0 -
mamapeach910 wrote: »girlviernes wrote: »Agreed, I don't think it's fair to say it's "all in one's mind" particularly because the premise that the mind can be separated from physiology is flawed in the first place. At the same time, one of my points is that conceptualizing the experience as an addiction can actually make it harder to change, particularly if you buy into the ideas either that you need to eliminate foods from your diet and/or that you are powerless over food.
My personal experience (bearing in mind that I've been diagnosed with insulin resistance) is that a careful balancing of my diet allows me to eliminate sugar/starchy carb cravings, which makes this experience feel good and natural. I am not in a constant battle of wills. When I am a bit less balanced, I can feel some of the cravings reemerge. But, since i know what balance works for me, it is easy enough to return to my regular way of eating. At no time do I need to feel that I'm on the verge of disaster based on how I'm eating.
Conceptualizing my binging as an addiction was the only thing that made it possible for me to deal with my binge eating. I'd been on plenty of diets, met with dietitians, hired trainers, lost weight, gained weight, etc. etc.
Once I started thinking about my binge eating as an addiction, everything made total sense. I am a compulsive overeater! It felt like I had slipped on a shoe that finally fit.
From there, it was pretty simple -- go to meetings, get a sponsor, work the steps. Boom. Done. I stopped eating my trigger foods, I stopped binging. I lost 75 pounds and have kept 40 of those pounds off for nearly 10 years (35 pounds crept back on because of CICO, not binge eating) (and I'm currently down 20 of those pounds because CICO yay!).
The bonus is that I've also worked through the emotional and spiritual issues that had me turning to binge eating for solace in the first place.
Yay to people who can deal with their binge eating on their own. That's wonderful!
And yay to anonymous programs for people like me, who needed help.
I don't think that most people who call themselves sugar addicts have a BED, though. You have a clinically recognized disorder, and that's a separate issue from someone who just REALLY likes sweets. You're not the type of person girlviernes is talking about.
Oh gosh yes I agree with this.0 -
mamapeach910 wrote: »poohpoohpeapod wrote: »
Sugar has proven to light up the same areas of the brain that cocaine does. Studies were done with PET scans of the brain.mamapeach910 wrote: »kelly30mad wrote: »I also am like u.. I use to snak on sugar snacks all day!!! I wld rather snack than eat a meal.. I've currently gone cold turkey and stopped them all together.. I've had really bad headaches and the shakes... Jus shows tha it is addictive and the more u eat the more u need more
I think you missed her point. It's not addictive. It's all about behavior and choice. You can get control.
Sometimes, it is helpful to give it all up for a time and get some distance to be able to see that.
It's more a compulsion which is about BEHAVIOR, than about addiction, which is about the SUBSTANCE.
Pain triggers dopamine release too. Is pain addictive?
Actually, it can be. A lot of times people who cut do so to feel the pain.
It seems to me this is true, but I think the pain goes much deeper than the physical feeling.0 -
mamapeach910 wrote: »poohpoohpeapod wrote: »
Sugar has proven to light up the same areas of the brain that cocaine does. Studies were done with PET scans of the brain.mamapeach910 wrote: »kelly30mad wrote: »I also am like u.. I use to snak on sugar snacks all day!!! I wld rather snack than eat a meal.. I've currently gone cold turkey and stopped them all together.. I've had really bad headaches and the shakes... Jus shows tha it is addictive and the more u eat the more u need more
I think you missed her point. It's not addictive. It's all about behavior and choice. You can get control.
Sometimes, it is helpful to give it all up for a time and get some distance to be able to see that.
It's more a compulsion which is about BEHAVIOR, than about addiction, which is about the SUBSTANCE.
Pain triggers dopamine release too. Is pain addictive?
Actually, it can be. A lot of times people who cut do so to feel the pain.
It seems to me this is true, but I think the pain goes much deeper than the physical feeling.
Yes, I agree. It does go beyond the pain, but feeling something, feeling the pain is part of why people cut. I have a similar disorder, not cutting, but similar. When I am anxious, for whatever reason causing myself pain through my behavior calms me...it is like an addiction for me. Just throwing that out there.
0 -
mamapeach910 wrote: »poohpoohpeapod wrote: »
Sugar has proven to light up the same areas of the brain that cocaine does. Studies were done with PET scans of the brain.mamapeach910 wrote: »kelly30mad wrote: »I also am like u.. I use to snak on sugar snacks all day!!! I wld rather snack than eat a meal.. I've currently gone cold turkey and stopped them all together.. I've had really bad headaches and the shakes... Jus shows tha it is addictive and the more u eat the more u need more
I think you missed her point. It's not addictive. It's all about behavior and choice. You can get control.
Sometimes, it is helpful to give it all up for a time and get some distance to be able to see that.
It's more a compulsion which is about BEHAVIOR, than about addiction, which is about the SUBSTANCE.
Pain triggers dopamine release too. Is pain addictive?
Actually, it can be. A lot of times people who cut do so to feel the pain.
And once again, that just means they LIKE it (though I'd debate that a cutter likes it, I think they do it for emotional release), it doesn't mean they're addicted to it. Addiction is a disease with a whole bunch of other things wrapped up in it besides just liking how something feels and hiding things. Also, AGAIN, pain/pleasure is contextual. That cutter would be singing a different tune if they fell down a flight of stairs and broke a bone.
0 -
mamapeach910 wrote: »mamapeach910 wrote: »poohpoohpeapod wrote: »
Sugar has proven to light up the same areas of the brain that cocaine does. Studies were done with PET scans of the brain.mamapeach910 wrote: »kelly30mad wrote: »I also am like u.. I use to snak on sugar snacks all day!!! I wld rather snack than eat a meal.. I've currently gone cold turkey and stopped them all together.. I've had really bad headaches and the shakes... Jus shows tha it is addictive and the more u eat the more u need more
I think you missed her point. It's not addictive. It's all about behavior and choice. You can get control.
Sometimes, it is helpful to give it all up for a time and get some distance to be able to see that.
It's more a compulsion which is about BEHAVIOR, than about addiction, which is about the SUBSTANCE.
Pain triggers dopamine release too. Is pain addictive?
Actually, it can be. A lot of times people who cut do so to feel the pain.
Also, AGAIN, pain/pleasure is contextual. That cutter would be singing a different tune if they fell down a flight of stairs and broke a bone.
Yes, you make a good point there.
0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 392K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.8K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.7K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 400 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.8K Motivation and Support
- 7.9K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.4K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 990 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.4K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions