Anybody a sugar addict? Want to give it up together?
Options
Replies
-
I know this thread has "sugar" in the title, and therefore will become a dumpster fire, but since we're only a few pages in, I'm going to remind everyone of the following guideline:
2. No Hi-Jacking, Trolling, or Flame-baiting
Please stay on-topic in an existing thread, and post new threads in the appropriate forum. Taking a thread off-topic is considered hi-jacking. Please either contribute politely and constructively to a topic, or move on without posting. This includes posts that encourage the drama in a topic to escalate, or posts intended to incite an uproar from the community.
This guideline is pretty cool as well:
11. No Airing of Grievances With Moderators
b) If you have concerns about another poster, or wish to report a guideline violation, the only appropriate venue is to use the Report Post link or to message a moderator or Olivia, MFP's Community Manager. You may not air such concerns on the message boards themselves. If you have a general concern that does not involve a specific member, you may post your question in the Feedback or Help forums.
We now return to our regularly-scheduled sugar argument, already in progress.0 -
tennisdude2004 wrote: »it would be nice if OP came back and clarified the "addicted" part of her title..
is she claiming..
1) lack of self control around sugar
or
2) addicted to sugar in the true sense, and the fore needs to go on a 12 step program because she binges on ALL forms of sugar, not just one maligned class of sugar, which in this case appears to be added sugar.
Why would the OP want to come back?
I would assume she means lack of self control - in fact I would think all rational thinking adults (and small children) would think that.
You are just assuming that is what she is thinking, like everyone else.
I think people say "addiction" and not self control instead, because it takes the blame off of them. When people own up to it or stop making excuses, they will have a better chance of getting to their goals.0 -
tennisdude2004 wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »Op and everyone else expressing a wish to cut/remove sugar....
Why?
Why reduce sugar???
Easy - quick and simple route to a calorie deficit!!
Question to you!!
OP has made (as an adult) a decisions (although poorly worded, in the original post, i would suggest) to reduce her sugar intake - what does it matter.
I'm sure most people aren't ignorant enough to believe the OP means to cut sugar to zero and have the ability to not read things so literally.
It doesn't matter to me in the slightest.
I was merely curious as to why the OP and others chose to cut/remove sugar, as it's something that has never given me any issues and something I am able to fit in to my balanced dietary intake.
I assumed the purpose of a discussion forum was to discuss things.
Most people who are new to this site are looking to get their eating under control and into a calorie deficit.
The simplest (not always the easiest) is to cut back on sugar (in particular things like cakes, sweets etc). As sugar is probably the least healthy of the foods we eat, and some of the things like sweets/cakes are possibly high in calories and low in micro nutrients, why not target those.
Lord knows the MFP general forums are never going to be a supportive place, but the idiocy and childishness of some of the posters is general unhelpful.
So sorry to hear you won't be eating any more fruits, vegetables, breads, etc. My condolences.
These forum are for the purpose of discussion, but this topic has been hijacked to death, it might be a novel approach to let one run it's proper course, with people not jumping in getting all butthurt that we don't all love sugar.
For clarification I'm not on the side of anti-sugar, but I'm not under the illusion it's that great either. It's pretty much a neutral food that serves its purpose in a healthy balanced diet and when that diet consists of too many calories, why shouldn't it be the first thing to be cut back on to get back into a deficit?
How is the simplest way to cut back on sugars, wouldn't cutting the most caloric macro ie fat, be the easiest? Except sugars are all saccharides, not all would fit the description as least healthy.
Actually it's not people getting butthurt, it's pointing out the general ignorance of posters who want to make excuses and blame "sugar" for their inability to lose weight. If you're going to blame something for your inability to lose weight, you should probably know what that thing actually is
The OP has decided cutting back on sugar is the simplest way for HER to cut calories. Why is there such a debate on it? She isn't telling everyone else to cut back, she was asking for others who were interested in cutting back as well. Yet so often, so many here feel the need to insist someone eat sugar. She DIDN'T say all sugar, she specifically mentioned cakes and sweets. I didn't hear the OP say sugar was her reason for not losing weight, I heard her say she has a sweet tooth she wants to get under control. And I'll be honest, the term "butthurt" (a term I actually detest) comes to my mind from the "pro sugar" camp every single time this topic comes up.
Actually where does she mention cutting back on sugar is the simplest way for her to cut back on calories. Please be specific
She said "obvious sugar", which would include obvious sources like fruit, which could have been included in the etc.
Where did I say the OP say sugar was her reason for not losing weight, if you reread what I wrote it makes no mention of the OP.
Where does she say she has a sweet tooth she wants to get under control? Again be specific
Sigh. My point is, why are you debating something that has nothing to do with the OP? You're right, maybe she isn't cutting calories (really, though, this is just getting silly) but she DID say she was cutting sugar and asked for friends. End of post. WHY the debate about something she DIDN'T ask? I must have missed the posts where she said she was cutting out fruit and asking for everyone's opinions on her decision to cut back on sugar. She didn't ask for a debate. I could understand if the OP says they're cutting out all sugar of all sorts for all time. I've yet to see anyone actually write that but there sure seem to be a lot of people who jump to that conclusion. I must be missing those posts, I guess.
OP, if you're still reading this - and I think you're brave if so - I seriously recommend finding a low carb or sugar group.0 -
tennisdude2004 wrote: »it would be nice if OP came back and clarified the "addicted" part of her title..
is she claiming..
1) lack of self control around sugar
or
2) addicted to sugar in the true sense, and the fore needs to go on a 12 step program because she binges on ALL forms of sugar, not just one maligned class of sugar, which in this case appears to be added sugar.
Why would the OP want to come back?
I would assume she means lack of self control - in fact I would think all rational thinking adults (and small children) would think that.
You are just assuming that is what she is thinking, like everyone else.
I think people say "addiction" and not self control instead, because it takes the blame off of them. When people own up to it or stop making excuses, they will have a better chance of getting to their goals.
Well okay, but I have self control when I simply don't buy it, too. But what is a good word for whatever change happens in my little not-a-rat brain if I were to right now start eating it and want more when if I don't have it at all, I don't crave it?0 -
tennisdude2004 wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »Op and everyone else expressing a wish to cut/remove sugar....
Why?
Why reduce sugar???
Easy - quick and simple route to a calorie deficit!!
Question to you!!
OP has made (as an adult) a decisions (although poorly worded, in the original post, i would suggest) to reduce her sugar intake - what does it matter.
I'm sure most people aren't ignorant enough to believe the OP means to cut sugar to zero and have the ability to not read things so literally.
It doesn't matter to me in the slightest.
I was merely curious as to why the OP and others chose to cut/remove sugar, as it's something that has never given me any issues and something I am able to fit in to my balanced dietary intake.
I assumed the purpose of a discussion forum was to discuss things.
Most people who are new to this site are looking to get their eating under control and into a calorie deficit.
The simplest (not always the easiest) is to cut back on sugar (in particular things like cakes, sweets etc). As sugar is probably the least healthy of the foods we eat, and some of the things like sweets/cakes are possibly high in calories and low in micro nutrients, why not target those.
Lord knows the MFP general forums are never going to be a supportive place, but the idiocy and childishness of some of the posters is general unhelpful.
So sorry to hear you won't be eating any more fruits, vegetables, breads, etc. My condolences.
These forum are for the purpose of discussion, but this topic has been hijacked to death, it might be a novel approach to let one run it's proper course, with people not jumping in getting all butthurt that we don't all love sugar.
For clarification I'm not on the side of anti-sugar, but I'm not under the illusion it's that great either. It's pretty much a neutral food that serves its purpose in a healthy balanced diet and when that diet consists of too many calories, why shouldn't it be the first thing to be cut back on to get back into a deficit?
How is the simplest way to cut back on sugars, wouldn't cutting the most caloric macro ie fat, be the easiest? Except sugars are all saccharides, not all would fit the description as least healthy.
Actually it's not people getting butthurt, it's pointing out the general ignorance of posters who want to make excuses and blame "sugar" for their inability to lose weight. If you're going to blame something for your inability to lose weight, you should probably know what that thing actually is
The OP has decided cutting back on sugar is the simplest way for HER to cut calories. Why is there such a debate on it? She isn't telling everyone else to cut back, she was asking for others who were interested in cutting back as well. Yet so often, so many here feel the need to insist someone eat sugar. She DIDN'T say all sugar, she specifically mentioned cakes and sweets. I didn't hear the OP say sugar was her reason for not losing weight, I heard her say she has a sweet tooth she wants to get under control. And I'll be honest, the term "butthurt" (a term I actually detest) comes to my mind from the "pro sugar" camp every single time this topic comes up.
If you post in a public forum, you're going to get a lot of different answers. And as the guidelines state, topics in which you are only looking for responses from a limited pool of users are better in grouos, not the main forums.
And for ease of typing I'm with lemurcat...
I could say the same about the "pro" sugar group. The ones getting offended by the term "addicted" when they know full well the meaning behind it.0 -
tennisdude2004 wrote: »it would be nice if OP came back and clarified the "addicted" part of her title..
is she claiming..
1) lack of self control around sugar
or
2) addicted to sugar in the true sense, and the fore needs to go on a 12 step program because she binges on ALL forms of sugar, not just one maligned class of sugar, which in this case appears to be added sugar.
Why would the OP want to come back?
I would assume she means lack of self control - in fact I would think all rational thinking adults (and small children) would think that.
You are just assuming that is what she is thinking, like everyone else.
I think people say "addiction" and not self control instead, because it takes the blame off of them. When people own up to it or stop making excuses, they will have a better chance of getting to their goals.
I think it's a pretty reasonable assumption and a very common phrase used by millions of people daily to describe a habit or lack of will power towards food.
I sometimes will say when I am really hungry ' jeez I'm starving, I need some food'.
Now, I know I am not actually starving, but it's a common enough saying to not be taken in the literal sense.
0 -
Now I'm really going to annoy some people, but too darn bad. I heard an interesting Dr. Lustig lecture on a theory of one reason we might have a tendency to overeat sugar. It's because at one time it was very beneficial for our bodies to store fat for lean times, and when fruit was available our bodies prompted us to overeat while it lasted.
He mentioned orangutans doing this.
Sugar is also addictive in rats. Now I'm not a rat and I assume no one else reading this is, either, but we use rats to learn something about human health all the time, so I'm not convinced sugar isn't addictive.
And by chance what was the study design of the studies that showed sugar was addictive? 12 on 12 off?
Professor Bart Hoebel and his team in the Department of Psychology and the Princeton Neuroscience Institute have been studying signs of sugar addiction in rats for years. Until now, the rats under study have met two of the three elements of addiction. They have demonstrated a behavioral pattern of increased intake and then showed signs of withdrawal. His current experiments captured craving and relapse to complete the picture.
http://www.princeton.edu/main/news/archive/S22/88/56G31/index.xml?section=topstories
From an evolutionary perspective, it is in the best interest of humans to have an inherent desire for food for survival. However, this desire may go awry, and certain people, including some obese and bulimic patients in particular, may develop an unhealthy dependence on palatable food that interferes with well-being. The concept of “food addiction” materialized in the diet industry on the basis of subjective reports, clinical accounts and case studies described in self-help books. The rise in obesity, coupled with the emergence of scientific findings of parallels between drugs of abuse and palatable foods has given credibility to this idea. The reviewed evidence supports the theory that, in some circumstances, intermittent access to sugar can lead to behavior and neurochemical changes that resemble the effects of a substance of abuse. According to the evidence in rats, intermittent access to sugar and chow is capable of producing a “dependency”. This was operationally defined by tests for bingeing, withdrawal, craving and cross-sensitization to amphetamine and alcohol. The correspondence to some people with binge eating disorder or bulimia is striking, but whether or not it is a good idea to call this a “food addiction” in people is both a scientific and societal question that has yet to be answered. What this review demonstrates is that rats with intermittent access to food and a sugar solution can show both a constellation of behaviors and parallel brain changes that are characteristic of rats that voluntarily self-administer addictive drugs. In the aggregrate, this is evidence that sugar can be addictive.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2235907/
LOL, at least that is real world. Oh wait it isn't
In this animal model, rats are food deprived daily for 12 h, then after a delay of 4 h into their normal circadian-driven active period, they are given 12-h access to a sugar solution and chow. As a result, they learn to drink the sugar solution copiously, especially when it first becomes available each day.0 -
tennisdude2004 wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »it would be nice if OP came back and clarified the "addicted" part of her title..
is she claiming..
1) lack of self control around sugar
or
2) addicted to sugar in the true sense, and the fore needs to go on a 12 step program because she binges on ALL forms of sugar, not just one maligned class of sugar, which in this case appears to be added sugar.
Why would the OP want to come back?
I would assume she means lack of self control - in fact I would think all rational thinking adults (and small children) would think that.
You are just assuming that is what she is thinking, like everyone else.
I think people say "addiction" and not self control instead, because it takes the blame off of them. When people own up to it or stop making excuses, they will have a better chance of getting to their goals.
I think it's a pretty reasonable assumption and a very common phrase used by millions of people daily to describe a habit or lack of will power towards food.
I sometimes will say when I am really hungry ' jeez I'm starving, I need some food'.
Now, I know I am not actually starving, but it's a common enough saying to not be taken in the literal sense.
well, you know what happens when you make assumptions….0 -
tennisdude2004 wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »it would be nice if OP came back and clarified the "addicted" part of her title..
is she claiming..
1) lack of self control around sugar
or
2) addicted to sugar in the true sense, and the fore needs to go on a 12 step program because she binges on ALL forms of sugar, not just one maligned class of sugar, which in this case appears to be added sugar.
Why would the OP want to come back?
I would assume she means lack of self control - in fact I would think all rational thinking adults (and small children) would think that.
You are just assuming that is what she is thinking, like everyone else.
I think people say "addiction" and not self control instead, because it takes the blame off of them. When people own up to it or stop making excuses, they will have a better chance of getting to their goals.
I think it's a pretty reasonable assumption and a very common phrase used by millions of people daily to describe a habit or lack of will power towards food.
I sometimes will say when I am really hungry ' jeez I'm starving, I need some food'.
Now, I know I am not actually starving, but it's a common enough saying to not be taken in the literal sense.
well, you know what happens when you make assumptions….
Yep!
0 -
Now I'm really going to annoy some people, but too darn bad. I heard an interesting Dr. Lustig lecture on a theory of one reason we might have a tendency to overeat sugar. It's because at one time it was very beneficial for our bodies to store fat for lean times, and when fruit was available our bodies prompted us to overeat while it lasted.
He mentioned orangutans doing this.
Sugar is also addictive in rats. Now I'm not a rat and I assume no one else reading this is, either, but we use rats to learn something about human health all the time, so I'm not convinced sugar isn't addictive.
And by chance what was the study design of the studies that showed sugar was addictive? 12 on 12 off?
Professor Bart Hoebel and his team in the Department of Psychology and the Princeton Neuroscience Institute have been studying signs of sugar addiction in rats for years. Until now, the rats under study have met two of the three elements of addiction. They have demonstrated a behavioral pattern of increased intake and then showed signs of withdrawal. His current experiments captured craving and relapse to complete the picture.
http://www.princeton.edu/main/news/archive/S22/88/56G31/index.xml?section=topstories
From an evolutionary perspective, it is in the best interest of humans to have an inherent desire for food for survival. However, this desire may go awry, and certain people, including some obese and bulimic patients in particular, may develop an unhealthy dependence on palatable food that interferes with well-being. The concept of “food addiction” materialized in the diet industry on the basis of subjective reports, clinical accounts and case studies described in self-help books. The rise in obesity, coupled with the emergence of scientific findings of parallels between drugs of abuse and palatable foods has given credibility to this idea. The reviewed evidence supports the theory that, in some circumstances, intermittent access to sugar can lead to behavior and neurochemical changes that resemble the effects of a substance of abuse. According to the evidence in rats, intermittent access to sugar and chow is capable of producing a “dependency”. This was operationally defined by tests for bingeing, withdrawal, craving and cross-sensitization to amphetamine and alcohol. The correspondence to some people with binge eating disorder or bulimia is striking, but whether or not it is a good idea to call this a “food addiction” in people is both a scientific and societal question that has yet to be answered. What this review demonstrates is that rats with intermittent access to food and a sugar solution can show both a constellation of behaviors and parallel brain changes that are characteristic of rats that voluntarily self-administer addictive drugs. In the aggregrate, this is evidence that sugar can be addictive.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2235907/
LOL, at least that is real world. Oh wait it isn't
In this animal model, rats are food deprived daily for 12 h, then after a delay of 4 h into their normal circadian-driven active period, they are given 12-h access to a sugar solution and chow. As a result, they learn to drink the sugar solution copiously, especially when it first becomes available each day.
Are you saying they did the same thing with just rat chow?
Also there are studies showing brain changes in rats, too.
Abstract
The distinction between natural addiction and drug addiction is interesting from many points of view, including scientific and medical perspectives. “Natural addictions” are those based on activation of a physiobehavioral system, such as the one that controls metabolism, foraging, and eating to achieve energy balance. “Drug addictions” activate many systems based on their pharmacology. This review discusses the following questions: (1) When does food produce a natural addiction? Sugar causes signs of addiction if the scheduling conditions are appropriate to cause binge eating. (2) Why does addictive-like behavior result? Bingeing on a 10% sucrose solution repeatedly releases dopamine in the nucleus accumbens, and it delays the release of acetylcholine, thereby postponing satiety. Opioid involvement is shown by withdrawal caused by naloxone or food deprivation. Bingeing, withdrawal, and abstinence-induced motivation are described as the basis for a vicious cycle leading to excessive eating. (3) Which foods can lead to natural addiction? A variety of sugars, saccharin, and sham feeding are compared with bingeing on high-fat diets, which seem to lack sugar’s opioid-withdrawal characteristic. (4) How does natural food addiction relate to obesity? Low basal dopamine may be a common factor, leading to “eating for dopamine.” (5) In a neural model, the accumbens is depicted as having separate GABA output pathways for approach and avoidance, both controlled by dopamine and acetylcholine. These outputs, in turn, control lateral hypothalamic glutamate release, which starts a meal, and GABA release, which stops it.
http://journals.lww.com/journaladdictionmedicine/Abstract/2009/03000/Natural_Addiction__A_Behavioral_and_Circuit_Model.5.aspx0 -
tennisdude2004 wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »Op and everyone else expressing a wish to cut/remove sugar....
Why?
Why reduce sugar???
Easy - quick and simple route to a calorie deficit!!
Question to you!!
OP has made (as an adult) a decisions (although poorly worded, in the original post, i would suggest) to reduce her sugar intake - what does it matter.
I'm sure most people aren't ignorant enough to believe the OP means to cut sugar to zero and have the ability to not read things so literally.
It doesn't matter to me in the slightest.
I was merely curious as to why the OP and others chose to cut/remove sugar, as it's something that has never given me any issues and something I am able to fit in to my balanced dietary intake.
I assumed the purpose of a discussion forum was to discuss things.
Most people who are new to this site are looking to get their eating under control and into a calorie deficit.
The simplest (not always the easiest) is to cut back on sugar (in particular things like cakes, sweets etc). As sugar is probably the least healthy of the foods we eat, and some of the things like sweets/cakes are possibly high in calories and low in micro nutrients, why not target those.
Lord knows the MFP general forums are never going to be a supportive place, but the idiocy and childishness of some of the posters is general unhelpful.
So sorry to hear you won't be eating any more fruits, vegetables, breads, etc. My condolences.
These forum are for the purpose of discussion, but this topic has been hijacked to death, it might be a novel approach to let one run it's proper course, with people not jumping in getting all butthurt that we don't all love sugar.
For clarification I'm not on the side of anti-sugar, but I'm not under the illusion it's that great either. It's pretty much a neutral food that serves its purpose in a healthy balanced diet and when that diet consists of too many calories, why shouldn't it be the first thing to be cut back on to get back into a deficit?
How is the simplest way to cut back on sugars, wouldn't cutting the most caloric macro ie fat, be the easiest? Except sugars are all saccharides, not all would fit the description as least healthy.
Actually it's not people getting butthurt, it's pointing out the general ignorance of posters who want to make excuses and blame "sugar" for their inability to lose weight. If you're going to blame something for your inability to lose weight, you should probably know what that thing actually is
The OP has decided cutting back on sugar is the simplest way for HER to cut calories. Why is there such a debate on it? She isn't telling everyone else to cut back, she was asking for others who were interested in cutting back as well. Yet so often, so many here feel the need to insist someone eat sugar. She DIDN'T say all sugar, she specifically mentioned cakes and sweets. I didn't hear the OP say sugar was her reason for not losing weight, I heard her say she has a sweet tooth she wants to get under control. And I'll be honest, the term "butthurt" (a term I actually detest) comes to my mind from the "pro sugar" camp every single time this topic comes up.
Actually where does she mention cutting back on sugar is the simplest way for her to cut back on calories. Please be specific
She said "obvious sugar", which would include obvious sources like fruit, which could have been included in the etc.
Where did I say the OP say sugar was her reason for not losing weight, if you reread what I wrote it makes no mention of the OP.
Where does she say she has a sweet tooth she wants to get under control? Again be specific
Sigh. My point is, why are you debating something that has nothing to do with the OP? You're right, maybe she isn't cutting calories (really, though, this is just getting silly) but she DID say she was cutting sugar and asked for friends. End of post. WHY the debate about something she DIDN'T ask? I must have missed the posts where she said she was cutting out fruit and asking for everyone's opinions on her decision to cut back on sugar. She didn't ask for a debate. I could understand if the OP says they're cutting out all sugar of all sorts for all time. I've yet to see anyone actually write that but there sure seem to be a lot of people who jump to that conclusion. I must be missing those posts, I guess.
OP, if you're still reading this - and I think you're brave if so - I seriously recommend finding a low carb or sugar group.
Oh so you just made up a bunch of statements? Shocking
Actually she mentioned cutting all obvious sugars and asking for similar friends, so others asked if she was cutting fruits and the such, also obvious sugars. How do you know if you're doing something similar if you don't ask?
Maybe you should try reading and comprehending things instead of making things up0 -
tennisdude2004 wrote: »it would be nice if OP came back and clarified the "addicted" part of her title..
is she claiming..
1) lack of self control around sugar
or
2) addicted to sugar in the true sense, and the fore needs to go on a 12 step program because she binges on ALL forms of sugar, not just one maligned class of sugar, which in this case appears to be added sugar.
Why would the OP want to come back?
I would assume she means lack of self control - in fact I would think all rational thinking adults (and small children) would think that.
You are just assuming that is what she is thinking, like everyone else.
I think people say "addiction" and not self control instead, because it takes the blame off of them. When people own up to it or stop making excuses, they will have a better chance of getting to their goals.
Well okay, but I have self control when I simply don't buy it, too. But what is a good word for whatever change happens in my little not-a-rat brain if I were to right now start eating it and want more when if I don't have it at all, I don't crave it?
You're still giving it control over you by saying that you can't stop yourself if it's around. You firmly believe that it's bigger than you are and takes you over, when it's really a matter of your personal behavior and impulse control.
I'm a former sugar and carb "addict". I now eat both. Moderately. I had to learn that it was all about my choice, it was all my responsibility first. For too many years, I was blaming the foods for my own lack of self-control.
I agree that many people who feel that they have lost their impulse control with overeating any food group can benefit from giving it up for a time to sort of reset their behavior with it. Your taste buds can be retrained. I have much greater sensitivity to sweetness now, for example. I think that throwing in the towel and planning to abstain from anything for life is just setting yourself up for failure. Food is all around us. You'll see a commercial on tv, you'll be at a family gathering, and MOST people will cave. Long-term restriction of any kind is a dismal way to live.
0 -
mamapeach910 wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »it would be nice if OP came back and clarified the "addicted" part of her title..
is she claiming..
1) lack of self control around sugar
or
2) addicted to sugar in the true sense, and the fore needs to go on a 12 step program because she binges on ALL forms of sugar, not just one maligned class of sugar, which in this case appears to be added sugar.
Why would the OP want to come back?
I would assume she means lack of self control - in fact I would think all rational thinking adults (and small children) would think that.
You are just assuming that is what she is thinking, like everyone else.
I think people say "addiction" and not self control instead, because it takes the blame off of them. When people own up to it or stop making excuses, they will have a better chance of getting to their goals.
Well okay, but I have self control when I simply don't buy it, too. But what is a good word for whatever change happens in my little not-a-rat brain if I were to right now start eating it and want more when if I don't have it at all, I don't crave it?
You're still giving it control over you by saying that you can't stop yourself if it's around. You firmly believe that it's bigger than you are and takes you over, when it's really a matter of your personal behavior and impulse control.
I'm a former sugar and carb "addict". I now eat both. Moderately. I had to learn that it was all about my choice, it was all my responsibility first. For too many years, I was blaming the foods for my own lack of self-control.
I can stop myself. I just don't want to deal with the cravings. I have better things to spend willpower on. Like focusing sufficiently that I don't land on my butt while rollerblading every time I go over a twig or crack in the driveway! I'm very distractible, it costs me willpower to focus and not look around at every car sound and dog bark. Sad but true.0 -
mamapeach910 wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »it would be nice if OP came back and clarified the "addicted" part of her title..
is she claiming..
1) lack of self control around sugar
or
2) addicted to sugar in the true sense, and the fore needs to go on a 12 step program because she binges on ALL forms of sugar, not just one maligned class of sugar, which in this case appears to be added sugar.
Why would the OP want to come back?
I would assume she means lack of self control - in fact I would think all rational thinking adults (and small children) would think that.
You are just assuming that is what she is thinking, like everyone else.
I think people say "addiction" and not self control instead, because it takes the blame off of them. When people own up to it or stop making excuses, they will have a better chance of getting to their goals.
Well okay, but I have self control when I simply don't buy it, too. But what is a good word for whatever change happens in my little not-a-rat brain if I were to right now start eating it and want more when if I don't have it at all, I don't crave it?
You're still giving it control over you by saying that you can't stop yourself if it's around. You firmly believe that it's bigger than you are and takes you over, when it's really a matter of your personal behavior and impulse control.
I'm a former sugar and carb "addict". I now eat both. Moderately. I had to learn that it was all about my choice, it was all my responsibility first. For too many years, I was blaming the foods for my own lack of self-control.
I can stop myself. I just don't want to deal with the cravings. I have better things to spend willpower on. Like focusing sufficiently that I don't land on my butt while rollerblading every time I go over a twig or crack in the driveway! I'm very distractible, it costs me willpower to focus and not look around at every car sound and dog bark. Sad but true.
How long have you done without sugar without caving before?
There comes a point that you can reintroduce in moderation it and be craving-free. Promise.
0 -
mamapeach910 wrote: »mamapeach910 wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »it would be nice if OP came back and clarified the "addicted" part of her title..
is she claiming..
1) lack of self control around sugar
or
2) addicted to sugar in the true sense, and the fore needs to go on a 12 step program because she binges on ALL forms of sugar, not just one maligned class of sugar, which in this case appears to be added sugar.
Why would the OP want to come back?
I would assume she means lack of self control - in fact I would think all rational thinking adults (and small children) would think that.
You are just assuming that is what she is thinking, like everyone else.
I think people say "addiction" and not self control instead, because it takes the blame off of them. When people own up to it or stop making excuses, they will have a better chance of getting to their goals.
Well okay, but I have self control when I simply don't buy it, too. But what is a good word for whatever change happens in my little not-a-rat brain if I were to right now start eating it and want more when if I don't have it at all, I don't crave it?
You're still giving it control over you by saying that you can't stop yourself if it's around. You firmly believe that it's bigger than you are and takes you over, when it's really a matter of your personal behavior and impulse control.
I'm a former sugar and carb "addict". I now eat both. Moderately. I had to learn that it was all about my choice, it was all my responsibility first. For too many years, I was blaming the foods for my own lack of self-control.
I can stop myself. I just don't want to deal with the cravings. I have better things to spend willpower on. Like focusing sufficiently that I don't land on my butt while rollerblading every time I go over a twig or crack in the driveway! I'm very distractible, it costs me willpower to focus and not look around at every car sound and dog bark. Sad but true.
How long have you done without sugar without caving before?
There comes a point that you can reintroduce in moderation it and be craving-free. Promise.
Around six months on a low carb diet. I'm back on low carb and getting more vigorous exercise this time. So far I feel great, mentally and physically. If I keep feeling great I see no reason to change.
Edit: The only food I really want to reintroduce (because it's good for me and I feel good eating it) is trailmix with raw almonds, cashews, and sunflower seeds and raisins. Someday I will do it!0 -
mamapeach910 wrote: »mamapeach910 wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »it would be nice if OP came back and clarified the "addicted" part of her title..
is she claiming..
1) lack of self control around sugar
or
2) addicted to sugar in the true sense, and the fore needs to go on a 12 step program because she binges on ALL forms of sugar, not just one maligned class of sugar, which in this case appears to be added sugar.
Why would the OP want to come back?
I would assume she means lack of self control - in fact I would think all rational thinking adults (and small children) would think that.
You are just assuming that is what she is thinking, like everyone else.
I think people say "addiction" and not self control instead, because it takes the blame off of them. When people own up to it or stop making excuses, they will have a better chance of getting to their goals.
Well okay, but I have self control when I simply don't buy it, too. But what is a good word for whatever change happens in my little not-a-rat brain if I were to right now start eating it and want more when if I don't have it at all, I don't crave it?
You're still giving it control over you by saying that you can't stop yourself if it's around. You firmly believe that it's bigger than you are and takes you over, when it's really a matter of your personal behavior and impulse control.
I'm a former sugar and carb "addict". I now eat both. Moderately. I had to learn that it was all about my choice, it was all my responsibility first. For too many years, I was blaming the foods for my own lack of self-control.
I can stop myself. I just don't want to deal with the cravings. I have better things to spend willpower on. Like focusing sufficiently that I don't land on my butt while rollerblading every time I go over a twig or crack in the driveway! I'm very distractible, it costs me willpower to focus and not look around at every car sound and dog bark. Sad but true.
How long have you done without sugar without caving before?
There comes a point that you can reintroduce in moderation it and be craving-free. Promise.
Around six months on a low carb diet. I'm back on low carb and getting more vigorous exercise this time. So far I feel great, mentally and physically. If I keep feeling great I see no reason to change.
You might need longer for your taste buds to reset. I was low-carb for about 5-7 years? Maybe more. I'm not saying you need that long, but here's a test for you: once an almond tastes genuinely sweet, you'll be there.
0 -
mamapeach910 wrote: »mamapeach910 wrote: »mamapeach910 wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »it would be nice if OP came back and clarified the "addicted" part of her title..
is she claiming..
1) lack of self control around sugar
or
2) addicted to sugar in the true sense, and the fore needs to go on a 12 step program because she binges on ALL forms of sugar, not just one maligned class of sugar, which in this case appears to be added sugar.
Why would the OP want to come back?
I would assume she means lack of self control - in fact I would think all rational thinking adults (and small children) would think that.
You are just assuming that is what she is thinking, like everyone else.
I think people say "addiction" and not self control instead, because it takes the blame off of them. When people own up to it or stop making excuses, they will have a better chance of getting to their goals.
Well okay, but I have self control when I simply don't buy it, too. But what is a good word for whatever change happens in my little not-a-rat brain if I were to right now start eating it and want more when if I don't have it at all, I don't crave it?
You're still giving it control over you by saying that you can't stop yourself if it's around. You firmly believe that it's bigger than you are and takes you over, when it's really a matter of your personal behavior and impulse control.
I'm a former sugar and carb "addict". I now eat both. Moderately. I had to learn that it was all about my choice, it was all my responsibility first. For too many years, I was blaming the foods for my own lack of self-control.
I can stop myself. I just don't want to deal with the cravings. I have better things to spend willpower on. Like focusing sufficiently that I don't land on my butt while rollerblading every time I go over a twig or crack in the driveway! I'm very distractible, it costs me willpower to focus and not look around at every car sound and dog bark. Sad but true.
How long have you done without sugar without caving before?
There comes a point that you can reintroduce in moderation it and be craving-free. Promise.
Around six months on a low carb diet. I'm back on low carb and getting more vigorous exercise this time. So far I feel great, mentally and physically. If I keep feeling great I see no reason to change.
You might need longer for your taste buds to reset. I was low-carb for about 5-7 years? Maybe more. I'm not saying you need that long, but here's a test for you: once an almond tastes genuinely sweet, you'll be there.
Thanks, I'll remember that. They definitely don't taste sweet to me right now. Delicious, but not sweet. I wonder if that will mean raisins are too sweet? If so no matter, trailmix without raisins is good, too!0 -
mamapeach910 wrote: »mamapeach910 wrote: »mamapeach910 wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »it would be nice if OP came back and clarified the "addicted" part of her title..
is she claiming..
1) lack of self control around sugar
or
2) addicted to sugar in the true sense, and the fore needs to go on a 12 step program because she binges on ALL forms of sugar, not just one maligned class of sugar, which in this case appears to be added sugar.
Why would the OP want to come back?
I would assume she means lack of self control - in fact I would think all rational thinking adults (and small children) would think that.
You are just assuming that is what she is thinking, like everyone else.
I think people say "addiction" and not self control instead, because it takes the blame off of them. When people own up to it or stop making excuses, they will have a better chance of getting to their goals.
Well okay, but I have self control when I simply don't buy it, too. But what is a good word for whatever change happens in my little not-a-rat brain if I were to right now start eating it and want more when if I don't have it at all, I don't crave it?
You're still giving it control over you by saying that you can't stop yourself if it's around. You firmly believe that it's bigger than you are and takes you over, when it's really a matter of your personal behavior and impulse control.
I'm a former sugar and carb "addict". I now eat both. Moderately. I had to learn that it was all about my choice, it was all my responsibility first. For too many years, I was blaming the foods for my own lack of self-control.
I can stop myself. I just don't want to deal with the cravings. I have better things to spend willpower on. Like focusing sufficiently that I don't land on my butt while rollerblading every time I go over a twig or crack in the driveway! I'm very distractible, it costs me willpower to focus and not look around at every car sound and dog bark. Sad but true.
How long have you done without sugar without caving before?
There comes a point that you can reintroduce in moderation it and be craving-free. Promise.
Around six months on a low carb diet. I'm back on low carb and getting more vigorous exercise this time. So far I feel great, mentally and physically. If I keep feeling great I see no reason to change.
You might need longer for your taste buds to reset. I was low-carb for about 5-7 years? Maybe more. I'm not saying you need that long, but here's a test for you: once an almond tastes genuinely sweet, you'll be there.
Thanks, I'll remember that. They definitely don't taste sweet to me right now. Delicious, but not sweet. I wonder if that will mean raisins are too sweet? If so no matter, trailmix without raisins is good, too!
Dried fruit is cloyingly sweet to me at this point, yeah. I really do only eat sweets in moderation. Before I used to like milk chocolate only; now I can't stand it because it's too sweet. A little bit of something very sweet like cookies is really plenty if I have the urge.
0 -
mamapeach910 wrote: »mamapeach910 wrote: »mamapeach910 wrote: »mamapeach910 wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »it would be nice if OP came back and clarified the "addicted" part of her title..
is she claiming..
1) lack of self control around sugar
or
2) addicted to sugar in the true sense, and the fore needs to go on a 12 step program because she binges on ALL forms of sugar, not just one maligned class of sugar, which in this case appears to be added sugar.
Why would the OP want to come back?
I would assume she means lack of self control - in fact I would think all rational thinking adults (and small children) would think that.
You are just assuming that is what she is thinking, like everyone else.
I think people say "addiction" and not self control instead, because it takes the blame off of them. When people own up to it or stop making excuses, they will have a better chance of getting to their goals.
Well okay, but I have self control when I simply don't buy it, too. But what is a good word for whatever change happens in my little not-a-rat brain if I were to right now start eating it and want more when if I don't have it at all, I don't crave it?
You're still giving it control over you by saying that you can't stop yourself if it's around. You firmly believe that it's bigger than you are and takes you over, when it's really a matter of your personal behavior and impulse control.
I'm a former sugar and carb "addict". I now eat both. Moderately. I had to learn that it was all about my choice, it was all my responsibility first. For too many years, I was blaming the foods for my own lack of self-control.
I can stop myself. I just don't want to deal with the cravings. I have better things to spend willpower on. Like focusing sufficiently that I don't land on my butt while rollerblading every time I go over a twig or crack in the driveway! I'm very distractible, it costs me willpower to focus and not look around at every car sound and dog bark. Sad but true.
How long have you done without sugar without caving before?
There comes a point that you can reintroduce in moderation it and be craving-free. Promise.
Around six months on a low carb diet. I'm back on low carb and getting more vigorous exercise this time. So far I feel great, mentally and physically. If I keep feeling great I see no reason to change.
You might need longer for your taste buds to reset. I was low-carb for about 5-7 years? Maybe more. I'm not saying you need that long, but here's a test for you: once an almond tastes genuinely sweet, you'll be there.
Thanks, I'll remember that. They definitely don't taste sweet to me right now. Delicious, but not sweet. I wonder if that will mean raisins are too sweet? If so no matter, trailmix without raisins is good, too!
Dried fruit is cloyingly sweet to me at this point, yeah. I really do only eat sweets in moderation. Before I used to like milk chocolate only; now I can't stand it because it's too sweet. A little bit of something very sweet like cookies is really plenty if I have the urge.
I so want to get to that point! I hope low carb keeps agreeing with me. Last time I just wasn't getting enough exercise, plus I was much heavier (I lost over 60 pounds on it in a year even with going off it on the holidays). I know I'll never look like Keto Stephanie Person because her before picture is better than my best picture, but I'd love to have her energy levels.0 -
Actually it's not people getting butthurt, it's pointing out the general ignorance of posters who want to make excuses and blame "sugar" for their inability to lose weight. If you're going to blame something for your inability to lose weight, you should probably know what that thing actually is
This is more harsh than I'd put it, but bingo.
0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 392.1K Introduce Yourself
- 43.6K Getting Started
- 259.9K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.7K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.4K Fitness and Exercise
- 403 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
- 1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.4K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions