Welcome to Debate Club! Please be aware that this is a space for respectful debate, and that your ideas will be challenged here. Please remember to critique the argument, not the author.
Food Addiction - A Different Perspective
Replies
-
Working with people who have been or are suffering from clinical substance abuse/dependency, I do get concerned with the casual way we toss around the word "addicted." It changes the way we societally perceive those conditions and ...
I agree with this. It's very similar to tossing around the word "depression".
For minor problematic food behaviors, I consider it a victory in discussions with my family member who has trouble with M&Ms, to now say, "I choose not to stop eating those when I'm around them." It's just a language switch, but it's helping both of us. (I've got my own trouble foods, hello Aldi chocolate dipped peppermint crème cookies.) We have caught ourselves recently using the word "addicted" and have changed it to taking responsibility and saying, "I won't stop eating them" or "I choose not to stop."
0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »Well I have been addicted to opiates, crack and food. I'm still addicted to food be quite frank with you.
Sorry, no such thing as being addicted to food. What substance do you think you are addicted to?
You may well have an ED, that doesn't require addiction and is a serious problem.
Yeah, it's a controversial issue and Yale has a scale for food addiction. You cannot just sit there and type to strangers online 'sorry you do not have a food addiction'
http://fastlab.psych.lsa.umich.edu/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/MeuleGearhardt_FiveYearsoftheYaleFoodAddictionScale-TakingStockMovingForward_2014.pdf
The authors of the Yale Food Addiction Scale themselves admit that there's no evidence for addiction to food as a substance in humans.
Please re-read the first post. The point here is not to negate your experience or invalidate you. It's obvious that this is an important issue to you, but the distinction being made in this thread is a fine one, and I think you're missing the point.
There's a difference between being addicted to foods as substances and having a behavioral addiction to eating.
There's also a whole spectrum of problematic behavior that falls short of being classified as addiction but is still, well, problematic.
That being said, it doesn't really matter whether you're addicted or not, if you want to consider yourself addicted to food, go ahead. Alright... you're addicted.
What are you going to do about it?
There are many suggestions in this thread, and some revolve around seeking therapy, others mention self-help techniques others employed. All involved behavior modification.0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »Well I have been addicted to opiates, crack and food. I'm still addicted to food be quite frank with you.
Sorry, no such thing as being addicted to food. What substance do you think you are addicted to?
You may well have an ED, that doesn't require addiction and is a serious problem.
I agree with there being no food addiction, rather an eating addiction. I'm unsure as to why people need food to physically be addictive, I mean above and beyond the part where we literally need it to live, and cannot accept it as a behavioral addiction. It's consistent with what science has currently demonstrated and, frankly, just makes sense.
Along this note, isn't the most "addicting" food according to that Yale study pizza? I've always found that to be the most interesting, especially due to the fact that most people who claim to be addicted to food claim to be addicted to sugar.0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »Well I have been addicted to opiates, crack and food. I'm still addicted to food be quite frank with you.
Sorry, no such thing as being addicted to food. What substance do you think you are addicted to?
You may well have an ED, that doesn't require addiction and is a serious problem.
Yeah, it's a controversial issue and Yale has a scale for food addiction. You cannot just sit there and type to strangers online 'sorry you do not have a food addiction'
http://fastlab.psych.lsa.umich.edu/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/MeuleGearhardt_FiveYearsoftheYaleFoodAddictionScale-TakingStockMovingForward_2014.pdf
Except those scales and measures all report a mental desire for food, bot addiction as in phyaical dependence.
Look at the foods dubbed most "addictive" and they aren't the raw ingredients, they are foods composed of many complex things. That's not how substances addiction works - you can't be addicted to a mixture, only to a chemical. Yet people who are "addicted" to sugar don't want raw pixie stix, nor do they even gnaw down fruit - they want to eat cakes, ice creams, and chocolates.
That tells us the food itself isn't addictive, it is a behavioral thing, which would make it at best eating addiction, rather than addiction to a substance.0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »Well I have been addicted to opiates, crack and food. I'm still addicted to food be quite frank with you.
Sorry, no such thing as being addicted to food. What substance do you think you are addicted to?
You may well have an ED, that doesn't require addiction and is a serious problem.
I agree with there being no food addiction, rather an eating addiction. I'm unsure as to why people need food to physically be addictive, I mean above and beyond the part where we literally need it to live, and cannot accept it as a behavioral addiction. It's consistent with what science has currently demonstrated and, frankly, just makes sense.
Along this note, isn't the most "addicting" food according to that Yale study pizza? I've always found that to be the most interesting, especially due to the fact that most people who claim to be addicted to food claim to be addicted to sugar.
Yes, and similarly in the book Sugar, Salt, Fat (I always get the order wrong), they discuss the studies about brain responses to hyperpalatable foods (NOT the same thing as addiction), and fat scores as high as sugar.0 -
"Paul Fletcher, professor of health neuroscience at Cambridge University, is baffled by the "apparently uncritical acceptance of food addiction." In his opinion, it is way too early for it to be taken as a valid or useful concept. While the rat studies are sound, he says, the degree to which they can be extrapolated to humans is limited. And the rest of the research results are inconsistent. He also wonders what, precisely, the addictive substance in food is: sugar, salt, fat or just anything that tastes good?" http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/wordofmouth/2013/aug/20/food-addiction-exist-fat-sugar0
-
susan100df wrote: »thorsmom01 wrote: »I believe that some use the " food addict" card as an excuse. Its easier for those people to claim they are addicted to candy then to admit they just aren't ready to change . rather then use food as comfort.
I see many posts like this on MFP regarding addiction to food and/or sugar. It puzzles me because I assume that if someone has bothered to make an account on MFP and post on a forum, they are looking for help to change. I don't think people are looking for "oh poor you, just eat thousands of calories of candy since you can't help it". Maybe some want to be told to have at it but not most. Not if they are on a calorie counting site.
I think they are looking to talk about how others have overcome bad issues around food. Those discussions are difficult to have on this forum. For some their "help me" post might be the very first time they have ever talked about it. To have the thread go crazy is a disservice to all that have issues around food.
I was floored and disgusted by many of the posts on this thread, what I disliked even more was some posters had this way of talking like all food abusers are morbidly obese lazy slobs..many sufferers wouldn't even qualify as obese..many not even reaching overweight..therefore these ideas keep people hidden in denial or ashamed of themselves...
Some sound like a substance abuser has thrown in their face they have no idea? This upsets me that other addicts in recovery would be so cold to another human being and downplay a habit/addiction they have just all around a very disappointing read
Actually, I'm quite floored and disgusted that you're disgusted by the possibility of people who have eating disorders being described as possibly or probably overweight like that's the worst thing in the world.
Many of the points you missed about addiction is addiction is usually used to describe things that are not just a habit, but also create a physical dependency with painful, sometimes deadly, withdrawal symptoms. Food does not have that, the closest thing you have to food withdrawal is hunger and starvation - symptoms that exist because you are supposed to actually get food in your system to keep yourself alive. You're even inverting the idea of who is downplaying whom.
HA you're funny! Food addiction causes diabetes, slow colons, constipation (to a point of becoming septic), acid reflux, ulcers, dental problems, and a myriad of other life threatening issues.
Appealing to consequences doesn't make something have withdrawal.
Anything stressful can cause ulcers and acid reflux. Not brushing leads to dental problems, that doesn't make my child being forgetful comparable to heroin withdrawal. Everything you listed is attributable to the way a person might eat. I could saying gambling addiction can cause flesh eating neceotis infections because people have to touch dirty gambling chips. You can't have withdrawal from food.
And food addiction doesn't cause any of that just like Bigfoot doesn't cause them.0 -
This content has been removed.
-
@Therealobi1 - I agree with you, and sadly this is going to result in another long post from me =P
I've been in more discussion about this (on a different board where I have more freedom to discuss the topic). As a result, if I were to participate in future on an "I'm addicted to sugar" (or addicted to whatever) thread on MFP, I'd still point out that in MY OWN life I haven't had experiences or seen enough clear evidence yet to convince me that food per se is addictive. But I wouldn't try to debate what other posters call themselves, even if they insist on calling themselves food/sugar/carb addicts.
I realized this because these MFP debates made me think not only about my own recovery from drug addiction, but also about people I work with as clients. I've worked for years with people who've been doing things like prostituting and stealing to pay for drugs, or using nails to poke holes in the veins on the back of their hands to try and drip the drugs in because they didn't have access to syringes. But they refused to call themselves addicts. And for me, it was perfectly fine if they didn't want to use that label as long as they kept showing up.
I let them know I didn't care about whether they called themselves addicts or not, because the label wasn't as important as the simple fact that they wanted to change. I knew that if the change succeeded, they might or might not come around to acknowledging the label themselves. But if they did come to view themselves as addicts, it had to happen on THEIR timetable. Not mine.
Conversely, on MFP, a person may have to experience for themselves what it's like to be free of their unhealthy eating before they might look back and say to themselves, "OK. I see now the sugar by itself wasn't an addiction. It was just all wrapped up in a lot of eating/thought/behavior patterns, and I had to work on all of that together to get free".
Or they might never let go of the "I'm a sugar addict" label. It doesn't really matter as long as they'll own their part of the responsibility to create change, and keep moving forward. But if they use the addict label as an excuse not to change, that becomes part of the problem - and even then it's not about the addict label itself. It's about the fact that they're claiming to be helpless when that isn't the case.
I view the whole addict label debate as sort of an academic issue. I can insist on doing battle with someone over how they use the term, but that means that the debate over language will become the focus. Or I can let go of the debate, and focus on whether the person is in a place where they're interested in changing, what that might look like, and what they learning from trying. Because doing that, and the courage to talk about what's learned from both success and failure, is what matters.
None of that takes away from the importance of keeping up with the ongoing research about eating patterns, the influence of hyper-palatable foods on eating patterns, and whether and how there's any overlap with addictions. Because that's one hell of an interesting set of topics, at least for a nerd like me. And as information becomes clearer, hopefully we'll have more and better tools and strategies to help ourselves and others. But in the meantime I think the "I'm a sugar addict" "no you're not" "yes I am" dance is pointless, and takes away from what's really important.
*applause*0 -
@Therealobi1 - I agree with you, and sadly this is going to result in another long post from me =P
I've been in more discussion about this (on a different board where I have more freedom to discuss the topic). As a result, if I were to participate in future on an "I'm addicted to sugar" (or addicted to whatever) thread on MFP, I'd still point out that in MY OWN life I haven't had experiences or seen enough clear evidence yet to convince me that food per se is addictive. But I wouldn't try to debate what other posters call themselves, even if they insist on calling themselves food/sugar/carb addicts.
I realized this because these MFP debates made me think not only about my own recovery from drug addiction, but also about people I work with as clients. I've worked for years with people who've been doing things like prostituting and stealing to pay for drugs, or using nails to poke holes in the veins on the back of their hands to try and drip the drugs in because they didn't have access to syringes. But they refused to call themselves addicts. And for me, it was perfectly fine if they didn't want to use that label as long as they kept showing up.
I let them know I didn't care about whether they called themselves addicts or not, because the label wasn't as important as the simple fact that they wanted to change. I knew that if the change succeeded, they might or might not come around to acknowledging the label themselves. But if they did come to view themselves as addicts, it had to happen on THEIR timetable. Not mine.
Conversely, on MFP, a person may have to experience for themselves what it's like to be free of their unhealthy eating before they might look back and say to themselves, "OK. I see now the sugar by itself wasn't an addiction. It was just all wrapped up in a lot of eating/thought/behavior patterns, and I had to work on all of that together to get free".
Or they might never let go of the "I'm a sugar addict" label. It doesn't really matter as long as they'll own their part of the responsibility to create change, and keep moving forward. But if they use the addict label as an excuse not to change, that becomes part of the problem - and even then it's not about the addict label itself. It's about the fact that they're claiming to be helpless when that isn't the case.
I view the whole addict label debate as sort of an academic issue. I can insist on doing battle with someone over how they use the term, but that means that the debate over language will become the focus. Or I can let go of the debate, and focus on whether the person is in a place where they're interested in changing, what that might look like, and what they learning from trying. Because doing that, and the courage to talk about what's learned from both success and failure, is what matters.
None of that takes away from the importance of keeping up with the ongoing research about eating patterns, the influence of hyper-palatable foods on eating patterns, and whether and how there's any overlap with addictions. Because that's one hell of an interesting set of topics, at least for a nerd like me. And as information becomes clearer, hopefully we'll have more and better tools and strategies to help ourselves and others. But in the meantime I think the "I'm a sugar addict" "no you're not" "yes I am" dance is pointless, and takes away from what's really important.
Your post might be long but IMO worth a repost. It is by far one of the most reasonable and fair posts that I have read here in a long time.
I want to preface this with I have never been addicted to hard drugs nor have I ever felt as if I have any type of food addiction. Having said that...
I have battled the process of trying to quit smoking. I have also battled to stop using eating as a way to deal with other issues in my life. Eating became a way of distracting myself from the issues that I needed to face.
The anxiety that I experienced was and is the same in both cases...if I don't smoke what do I do now...if I don't eat what do I do now...
Thanks again for you post(s)...
I often wonder what happens with the OP after starting a thread that brings on these debates. Most often they disappear and are never heard from again.0 -
@Therealobi1 - I agree with you, and sadly this is going to result in another long post from me =P
I've been in more discussion about this (on a different board where I have more freedom to discuss the topic). As a result, if I were to participate in future on an "I'm addicted to sugar" (or addicted to whatever) thread on MFP, I'd still point out that in MY OWN life I haven't had experiences or seen enough clear evidence yet to convince me that food per se is addictive. But I wouldn't try to debate what other posters call themselves, even if they insist on calling themselves food/sugar/carb addicts.
I realized this because these MFP debates made me think not only about my own recovery from drug addiction, but also about people I work with as clients. I've worked for years with people who've been doing things like prostituting and stealing to pay for drugs, or using nails to poke holes in the veins on the back of their hands to try and drip the drugs in because they didn't have access to syringes. But they refused to call themselves addicts. And for me, it was perfectly fine if they didn't want to use that label as long as they kept showing up.
I let them know I didn't care about whether they called themselves addicts or not, because the label wasn't as important as the simple fact that they wanted to change. I knew that if the change succeeded, they might or might not come around to acknowledging the label themselves. But if they did come to view themselves as addicts, it had to happen on THEIR timetable. Not mine.
Conversely, on MFP, a person may have to experience for themselves what it's like to be free of their unhealthy eating before they might look back and say to themselves, "OK. I see now the sugar by itself wasn't an addiction. It was just all wrapped up in a lot of eating/thought/behavior patterns, and I had to work on all of that together to get free".
Or they might never let go of the "I'm a sugar addict" label. It doesn't really matter as long as they'll own their part of the responsibility to create change, and keep moving forward. But if they use the addict label as an excuse not to change, that becomes part of the problem - and even then it's not about the addict label itself. It's about the fact that they're claiming to be helpless when that isn't the case.
I view the whole addict label debate as sort of an academic issue. I can insist on doing battle with someone over how they use the term, but that means that the debate over language will become the focus. Or I can let go of the debate, and focus on whether the person is in a place where they're interested in changing, what that might look like, and what they learning from trying. Because doing that, and the courage to talk about what's learned from both success and failure, is what matters.
None of that takes away from the importance of keeping up with the ongoing research about eating patterns, the influence of hyper-palatable foods on eating patterns, and whether and how there's any overlap with addictions. Because that's one hell of an interesting set of topics, at least for a nerd like me. And as information becomes clearer, hopefully we'll have more and better tools and strategies to help ourselves and others. But in the meantime I think the "I'm a sugar addict" "no you're not" "yes I am" dance is pointless, and takes away from what's really important.
YES!!!!!! Completely explains why it's pointless to debate whether food addiction exists in order to help someone. I hope that other posters see the benefit and apply it when they are responding to posters who are reaching out to discuss their issues around food.
Thank you for starting the thread @PeachyCarol. I appreciate all of the posts and different perspectives. I understand a little better why addiction threads get so nutty.0 -
@Therealobi1 - I agree with you, and sadly this is going to result in another long post from me =P
I've been in more discussion about this (on a different board where I have more freedom to discuss the topic). As a result, if I were to participate in future on an "I'm addicted to sugar" (or addicted to whatever) thread on MFP, I'd still point out that in MY OWN life I haven't had experiences or seen enough clear evidence yet to convince me that food per se is addictive. But I wouldn't try to debate what other posters call themselves, even if they insist on calling themselves food/sugar/carb addicts.
I realized this because these MFP debates made me think not only about my own recovery from drug addiction, but also about people I work with as clients. I've worked for years with people who've been doing things like prostituting and stealing to pay for drugs, or using nails to poke holes in the veins on the back of their hands to try and drip the drugs in because they didn't have access to syringes. But they refused to call themselves addicts. And for me, it was perfectly fine if they didn't want to use that label as long as they kept showing up.
I let them know I didn't care about whether they called themselves addicts or not, because the label wasn't as important as the simple fact that they wanted to change. I knew that if the change succeeded, they might or might not come around to acknowledging the label themselves. But if they did come to view themselves as addicts, it had to happen on THEIR timetable. Not mine.
Conversely, on MFP, a person may have to experience for themselves what it's like to be free of their unhealthy eating before they might look back and say to themselves, "OK. I see now the sugar by itself wasn't an addiction. It was just all wrapped up in a lot of eating/thought/behavior patterns, and I had to work on all of that together to get free".
Or they might never let go of the "I'm a sugar addict" label. It doesn't really matter as long as they'll own their part of the responsibility to create change, and keep moving forward. But if they use the addict label as an excuse not to change, that becomes part of the problem - and even then it's not about the addict label itself. It's about the fact that they're claiming to be helpless when that isn't the case.
I view the whole addict label debate as sort of an academic issue. I can insist on doing battle with someone over how they use the term, but that means that the debate over language will become the focus. Or I can let go of the debate, and focus on whether the person is in a place where they're interested in changing, what that might look like, and what they're learning from trying. Because doing that, and the courage to talk about what's learned from both success and failure, is what matters.
None of that takes away from the importance of keeping up with the ongoing research about eating patterns, the influence of hyper-palatable foods on eating patterns, and whether and how there's any overlap with addictions. Because that's one hell of an interesting set of topics, at least for a nerd like me. And as information becomes clearer, hopefully we'll have more and better tools and strategies to help ourselves and others. But in the meantime I think the "I'm a sugar addict" "no you're not" "yes I am" dance is pointless, and takes away from what's really important.
0 -
I just would appreciate if some of you would refrain from your harmful comments to people you do not know on this website or IRL speaking of FA because you obviously aren't suffering from it and aren't a professional. You can possibly be doing a lot of damage to this person. There are plenty of things today that used to not be considered MI or the opposite; homosexuality was a MI at one point--now your precious DSM back then, what would you say to that?0
-
@Caitwn I loved your post and thought it was very insightful. I especially resonated with this:Conversely, on MFP, a person may have to experience for themselves what it's like to be free of their unhealthy eating before they might look back and say to themselves, "OK. I see now the sugar by itself wasn't an addiction. It was just all wrapped up in a lot of eating/thought/behavior patterns, and I had to work on all of that together to get free".
I've played with the sugar addict label at times, and I've come to see that in fact I just have some very resilient unhealthy overeating habits that high sugar/fat foods make more difficult to deal with because they trigger dopamine. Whether we call that an "addiction" or not to high sugar/fat foods is irrelevant. But I have more difficulty controlling my compulsive behavior around those foods. I find my tricky brain coming up with more excuses for overeating when those foods are present. So, identifying those foods as special triggers (whether or not I'm "addicted" to them) is important because I can take more caution around them. I keep them out of my house and space most of the time and when I know I might encounter them, I prepare strategies. I know it's important for me to monitor the quantity of them I eat very closely, if I eat them at all, and have strategies for ending consumption once it's begun. Knowing those foods play that role for me allows me to be on the alert for the excuses my brain comes up with for why I should eat more than I had planned of those foods, and to counteract them. It doesn't mean I have no responsibility for it if I overeat those foods - it means I have more responsibility to make sure I take extra effort to manage myself around them.
0 -
People do steal food, people do eat out of garbage cans, people do steal money and spend money that is for other things on food, people do isolate themselves and even call out work to binge/-you just don't realize this...you havent been so sick from eating "hungover" that you didn't go to work, or quit out of embarrassment of people finding out your addiction..hiding food...lying to others...withdrawal is real also I just think you don't understand, ignorance....obsession...0
-
A great post by @Caitwn . @PeachyCarol thank you for this thread.0
-
Thank you @Caitwn 0
-
I just would appreciate if some of you would refrain from your harmful comments to people you do not know on this website or IRL speaking of FA because you obviously aren't suffering from it and aren't a professional. You can possibly be doing a lot of damage to this person. There are plenty of things today that used to not be considered MI or the opposite; homosexuality was a MI at one point--now your precious DSM back then, what would you say to that?
I truly don't think you are reading the context of this thread correctly. No one is making harmful comments. People are being respectful and having a rational discussion about a sensitive topic, discussing various techniques which could help someone like you. Many of the people here have similarly struggled with addictions to narcotics, alcohol, and nicotine as you indicated. Some of those same people, and others, at one point also believed they had a food addiction. people are discussing whether or not labeling food as addictive is helpful or harmful to the person who believes it is. @caitwyn posted an excellent summary of why it doesn't matter what someone calls it, as long as they are taking action to deal with it and own their part of the responsibility. It may be time to take a deep breath and try to re-read the thread without so much defensiveness that people are critical of addicts. People here are trying to help, and they are trying to have an adult conversation about a sensitive concept. if you can't see that and participate with an open mind then perhaps this is not a good thread for you to be in.
Best of luck with what you are working on, I admire your resilience, fortitude and passion.
0 -
WinoGelato wrote: »I just would appreciate if some of you would refrain from your harmful comments to people you do not know on this website or IRL speaking of FA because you obviously aren't suffering from it and aren't a professional. You can possibly be doing a lot of damage to this person. There are plenty of things today that used to not be considered MI or the opposite; homosexuality was a MI at one point--now your precious DSM back then, what would you say to that?
I truly don't think you are reading the context of this thread correctly. No one is making harmful comments. People are being respectful and having a rational discussion about a sensitive topic, discussing various techniques which could help someone like you. Many of the people here have similarly struggled with addictions to narcotics, alcohol, and nicotine as you indicated. Some of those same people, and others, at one point also believed they had a food addiction. people are discussing whether or not labeling food as addictive is helpful or harmful to the person who believes it is. @caitwyn posted an excellent summary of why it doesn't matter what someone calls it, as long as they are taking action to deal with it and own their part of the responsibility. It may be time to take a deep breath and try to re-read the thread without so much defensiveness that people are critical of addicts. People here are trying to help, and they are trying to have an adult conversation about a sensitive concept. if you can't see that and participate with an open mind then perhaps this is not a good thread for you to be in.
Best of luck with what you are working on, I admire your resilience, fortitude and passion.
You can read up and see some responses people having toward me
0 -
0
-
it was a long post but worth the read, thank you. @Caitwn
0 -
WinoGelato wrote: »I just would appreciate if some of you would refrain from your harmful comments to people you do not know on this website or IRL speaking of FA because you obviously aren't suffering from it and aren't a professional. You can possibly be doing a lot of damage to this person. There are plenty of things today that used to not be considered MI or the opposite; homosexuality was a MI at one point--now your precious DSM back then, what would you say to that?
I truly don't think you are reading the context of this thread correctly. No one is making harmful comments. People are being respectful and having a rational discussion about a sensitive topic, discussing various techniques which could help someone like you. Many of the people here have similarly struggled with addictions to narcotics, alcohol, and nicotine as you indicated. Some of those same people, and others, at one point also believed they had a food addiction. people are discussing whether or not labeling food as addictive is helpful or harmful to the person who believes it is. @caitwyn posted an excellent summary of why it doesn't matter what someone calls it, as long as they are taking action to deal with it and own their part of the responsibility. It may be time to take a deep breath and try to re-read the thread without so much defensiveness that people are critical of addicts. People here are trying to help, and they are trying to have an adult conversation about a sensitive concept. if you can't see that and participate with an open mind then perhaps this is not a good thread for you to be in.
Best of luck with what you are working on, I admire your resilience, fortitude and passion.
You can read up and see some responses people having toward me
I have read all the comments. People discussing the merits of certain studies and information shared in this thread does not mean they are being hostile or negative toward you as an individual. That they are challenging your point of view is not an assessment of your character or your experiences.
0 -
robingmurphy wrote: »I've played with the sugar addict label at times, and I've come to see that in fact I just have some very resilient unhealthy overeating habits that high sugar/fat foods make more difficult to deal with because they trigger dopamine. Whether we call that an "addiction" or not to high sugar/fat foods is irrelevant. But I have more difficulty controlling my compulsive behavior around those foods. I find my tricky brain coming up with more excuses for overeating when those foods are present. So, identifying those foods as special triggers (whether or not I'm "addicted" to them) is important because I can take more caution around them.
I think the "addict" label is bad for lots of reasons (as well as inaccurate), but I like this post. I do think it's important to be self-aware and figure out strategies and that one can make it harder or easier for one's self. Some of the things I do re food are similar to what I did re alcohol, because habit comes into play with both. One reason I dislike the "addict" thing is I think you need specifics to brainstorm what will help and claiming it's an uncontrollable addiction (and no addictions are uncontrollable) precludes what needs to happen from happening.
For me not snacking is the key, but in that people vary for others snacking is part of the solution.0 -
People do steal food, people do eat out of garbage cans, people do steal money and spend money that is for other things on food, people do isolate themselves and even call out work to binge/-you just don't realize this...you havent been so sick from eating "hungover" that you didn't go to work, or quit out of embarrassment of people finding out your addiction..hiding food...lying to others...withdrawal is real also I just think you don't understand, ignorance....obsession...
Nope.
Re withdrawal, you mean starvation? Yeah, that's real.0 -
susan100df wrote: »@Therealobi1 - I agree with you, and sadly this is going to result in another long post from me =P
I've been in more discussion about this (on a different board where I have more freedom to discuss the topic). As a result, if I were to participate in future on an "I'm addicted to sugar" (or addicted to whatever) thread on MFP, I'd still point out that in MY OWN life I haven't had experiences or seen enough clear evidence yet to convince me that food per se is addictive. But I wouldn't try to debate what other posters call themselves, even if they insist on calling themselves food/sugar/carb addicts.
I realized this because these MFP debates made me think not only about my own recovery from drug addiction, but also about people I work with as clients. I've worked for years with people who've been doing things like prostituting and stealing to pay for drugs, or using nails to poke holes in the veins on the back of their hands to try and drip the drugs in because they didn't have access to syringes. But they refused to call themselves addicts. And for me, it was perfectly fine if they didn't want to use that label as long as they kept showing up.
I let them know I didn't care about whether they called themselves addicts or not, because the label wasn't as important as the simple fact that they wanted to change. I knew that if the change succeeded, they might or might not come around to acknowledging the label themselves. But if they did come to view themselves as addicts, it had to happen on THEIR timetable. Not mine.
Conversely, on MFP, a person may have to experience for themselves what it's like to be free of their unhealthy eating before they might look back and say to themselves, "OK. I see now the sugar by itself wasn't an addiction. It was just all wrapped up in a lot of eating/thought/behavior patterns, and I had to work on all of that together to get free".
Or they might never let go of the "I'm a sugar addict" label. It doesn't really matter as long as they'll own their part of the responsibility to create change, and keep moving forward. But if they use the addict label as an excuse not to change, that becomes part of the problem - and even then it's not about the addict label itself. It's about the fact that they're claiming to be helpless when that isn't the case.
I view the whole addict label debate as sort of an academic issue. I can insist on doing battle with someone over how they use the term, but that means that the debate over language will become the focus. Or I can let go of the debate, and focus on whether the person is in a place where they're interested in changing, what that might look like, and what they learning from trying. Because doing that, and the courage to talk about what's learned from both success and failure, is what matters.
None of that takes away from the importance of keeping up with the ongoing research about eating patterns, the influence of hyper-palatable foods on eating patterns, and whether and how there's any overlap with addictions. Because that's one hell of an interesting set of topics, at least for a nerd like me. And as information becomes clearer, hopefully we'll have more and better tools and strategies to help ourselves and others. But in the meantime I think the "I'm a sugar addict" "no you're not" "yes I am" dance is pointless, and takes away from what's really important.
YES!!!!!! Completely explains why it's pointless to debate whether food addiction exists in order to help someone. I hope that other posters see the benefit and apply it when they are responding to posters who are reaching out to discuss their issues around food.
Thank you for starting the thread @PeachyCarol. I appreciate all of the posts and different perspectives. I understand a little better why addiction threads get so nutty.
My impression is that people claiming food addiction don't want to admit that they just overate like the rest of us. They want to say they are different -- that we overate, and were responsible, but that they are helpless victims or aren't gluttons or somehow aren't responsible, not like other fat people. IMO, that makes them bad people who are being nasty to others who become overweight.
Also IMO, of course humans are, for the most part, inclined to hedonic eating. We are made that way and have to figure out how to deal with it. It isn't a special condition.0 -
People do steal food, people do eat out of garbage cans, people do steal money and spend money that is for other things on food, people do isolate themselves and even call out work to binge/-you just don't realize this...you havent been so sick from eating "hungover" that you didn't go to work, or quit out of embarrassment of people finding out your addiction..hiding food...lying to others...withdrawal is real also I just think you don't understand, ignorance....obsession...
Do you understand the difference between a behavioral addiction and a chemical addiction? My ex-husband is addicted to shopping. He drove us to the brink of bankruptcy several times, would hide his purchases, had anxiety if he could not shop, he has a scar on his arm from donating blood so he could afford to buy things. We are talking about an actual diagnosed "addiction". He is not addicted to cardboard, plastic, fabric, or whatever the things were made out of that he is purchasing. He is addicted to the elation he feels when he finds something, and purchases it. Two different things.0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »Well I have been addicted to opiates, crack and food. I'm still addicted to food be quite frank with you.
Sorry, no such thing as being addicted to food. What substance do you think you are addicted to?
You may well have an ED, that doesn't require addiction and is a serious problem.
I agree with there being no food addiction, rather an eating addiction. I'm unsure as to why people need food to physically be addictive, I mean above and beyond the part where we literally need it to live, and cannot accept it as a behavioral addiction. It's consistent with what science has currently demonstrated and, frankly, just makes sense.
Along this note, isn't the most "addicting" food according to that Yale study pizza? I've always found that to be the most interesting, especially due to the fact that most people who claim to be addicted to food claim to be addicted to sugar.
Yes, and similarly in the book Sugar, Salt, Fat (I always get the order wrong), they discuss the studies about brain responses to hyperpalatable foods (NOT the same thing as addiction), and fat scores as high as sugar.
These phrases are used in the section about the studies about sugar and fat: "potentially addictive", "same narcotic-like effects on the brain" [as cocaine], "scientists have studied the brain's reaction to processed foods and drugs like cocaine, and have concluded that some drugs achieve their allure, and addictive qualities, by following the same neurological channels that our bodies first developed for food."
Several of the food scientists and executives in "Salt, Sugar, Fat" seem quite comfortable using the word "addictive" to describe their foods and some ingredients.0 -
Well I have been addicted to opiates, crack and food. I'm still addicted to food be quite frank with you. I wrote my first response as a mixture of anger sarcasm and real curiosity to what general posters are thinking. The OP did mention it being open to discussion? I have myself began to think food is possibly more dangerous than any illegal drug I have been addicted to, if that shocks you I'm sorry but that's how I feel..there are nights I have spent way too much on food I've lost jobs and opportunities due to binge cycles...sounds absurd you many of you, I read...no I'm not having diet issues either I'll diet all the way down to a weight and safely binge myself back...kinda sounds like when I would try to lower my tolerance to other things to deal w less consequences but still get what I want..I would like to believe people understand that there isn't ONE idea of food abuse..minds..
@Aisle4 I can totally relate. I've self-medicated with food, alcohol, and other substances and behaviors. I've used the same strategies to deal with food issues as I did with alcohol, etc., mostly Addictive Voice Recognition that I learned in Smart or Rational Recovery.0 -
This content has been removed.
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K 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
- 426 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