Arguing Semantics - sugar addiction

snikkins

senecarr wrote: »

snikkins wrote: »

snickerscharlie wrote: »

I'm one of those who insists there's a difference between physical addiction like heroin, cocaine and, yes, nicotine, and behavioral addiction like food, sex, gambling and sugar. You're not addicted to the actual food, for example, but to the pleasure that eating it gives you.

They are not the same.

Agreed.

As discussed a bit earlier in the thread, people who claim to be addicted to sugar likely have a preference for sweet things and/or habits around comfort and eating sweet things. I'm guilty of this - for a long time, if I was feeling bad, I'd eat a pint of ice cream and watch the Princess Bride.

Was I addicted to the sugar in ice cream? No. It just tasted yummy and was a small comfort when things were bad.

Eating addiction is not sugar addiction and people who try to equate them are doing a disservice to both the people who have an eating addiction as well as the people hiding behind sugar addiction as an explanation for their likely unhealthy relationship with food.

But were you addicted to The Princess Bride it is that inconceivable?

Aha! Silly me. That was clearly what was happening.

I did learn other important things, though, like never getting involved in a land war in Asia.

booksandchocolate12

Since we've brought up The Princess Bride, and since we're talking about semantics, I feel compelled to post this:

lemurcat12

snikkins wrote: »

snickerscharlie wrote: »

I'm one of those who insists there's a difference between physical addiction like heroin, cocaine and, yes, nicotine, and behavioral addiction like food, sex, gambling and sugar. You're not addicted to the actual food, for example, but to the pleasure that eating it gives you.

They are not the same.

Agreed.

As discussed a bit earlier in the thread, people who claim to be addicted to sugar likely have a preference for sweet things and/or habits around comfort and eating sweet things. I'm guilty of this - for a long time, if I was feeling bad, I'd eat a pint of ice cream and watch the Princess Bride.

Using the post as a springboard, since I think we agree.

This makes me think of how I used to grab a pint of ice cream (although I'd normally not finish it) and watch Law & Order reruns for the same purpose. And it would work, and I still kind of want to eat when I watch L&O (and find it comforting). Am I addicted to L&O? No, and I'm also not addicted to ice cream -- instead, I find it's one of the easiest sweet foods I really like to moderate, so long as I don't eat it out of the pint, of course.

So often people claim "addiction" when there are some really obvious reasons they are eating more than intended, such as eating out of the package. But the biggest reason I think most people who claim food-related addictions are not (I do think a small percentage of people likely have an eating addiction), is that it is so specific. No one is addicted to pinot noir but not cabernet or beer (although countless alcoholics have tried that sort of approach -- I'll just give up hard liquor or the like). Claiming you are addicted to Peanut M&Ms and not Snickers or cake would make just as little sense, but I will usually eat way more than I mean to if I start grabbing the peanut M&Ms at work (so I don't), and I have no issues with the other two foods.

summerkissed

The alcohol, tobacco and gambling industries now all have to pay costs and have rules about advertising they have to contribute $$$ to prevention programs medical research.......hmmmm at what point do you think fast food giants, soft drink companies, cola cola and the likes should start becoming liable for the ingredients? the advertising? The massive burden on mental health and medical systems? The burden on family......Is it just me or is it a coincidence that the foods these addictions are stemming from are all processed and unregulated multi national giants with massive profits with a f$&king lot to lose??? These addictions aren't linked to wholesome foods close to natural now are they? I mean how many years did it take the tobacco industry to admit they had purposely added certain chemicals that were addictive?? Is there something being hidden from us? Why are even as we become more health conscious that these massive companies are moving to make the so called 'health' foods more processed with added sugar/salt preservatives? But make it look healthy? You only have to walk down the health food isle and read some of the nutrition panels to work that out.
You can hide under your rocks as long as you want but food/sugar addictions are real my oath they are real.....but there are a lot of people with lots of $$$ who have a vested interest in keeping this quiet for as long as they can!!

nutmegoreo

shell1005 wrote: »

nutmegoreo wrote: »

senecarr wrote: »

summerkissed wrote: »

senecarr wrote: »

To begin with, I'm a bit dismayed that several of the people who have dismissed sugar addiction arguments as semantics are people who have knowledge or links to psychology. If you think semantics is unimportant and reason to dismiss something, I feel you're frankly doing a real poor job understanding psychology as one of the last big shifts in psychology was the development of cognitive therapy and the cognitive approach. In some ways, cognitive therapy is entirely about semantics - how you label the same behavior is important and matters. How you label it mentally, according to cognitive psychology, does change outcomes. Which I think, even without a cognitive psychology approach, many people on MFP are staunchly against letting people label themselves as sugar addicts - the practical experience and learning that achieving long term weight loss is about a relation with food, and how we view it, ourselves, and our connection to it. Labeling oneself an addict absolutely precludes the possibility of having a healthy relationship with a category of food.

What's more, I do, absolutely, 100% deny that it is a semantics argument when at least once per thread about sugar addiction someone says sugar addiction is real, and that the same areas of the brain light up in reaction to sugar that they do for heroin (which I doubly dislike as an example of compounded bad science because the drug comparison is cocaine - heroin acts on opoid receptors while food and cocaine both do work with dopamine and serotonin). There is almost irony in that some of these people who make that claim want to ride two horses going in opposite directions because they'll also be the ones to say it is an unhelpful semantics argument.

Alcohol addiction-so yes it exists? Right?-substance abuse (must be cut out completely there's no going back to moderation)
Drug addiction-so yes it exists? Right?-substance abuse(must be cut out completely no moderation)
Sex addiction-so yes it exists? Right?-addiction to a feel/need(can't be cut out completely must be controlled it's a part of life)
Gambling addiction-yes it exists also? Right?-addiction to an out come or a promise of winning/feeling of winning(another with no moderation must be cut out)
Shopping addiction-yes it also exists? Right?-addiction to a feeling of pleasure (can't be cut out completely must learn self control again it's a part of life)
But food or sugar addiction doesn't exist? Hmmmmmmmmm why not?
Addiction is caused by a few things and one of those is to do with how it makes a person feel whilst they are doing the "activity" some of these addictions are by an activity that is not required to live and as such are not able to be controlled by moderation and must be removed they ruin families and lives (alcohol, drugs, gambling) 2 of those is actually a chemical addiction very nasty! (The father of my children was addicted to all 3 of these things) others are things that are required to live (sex, shopping, food) they are everyday activities that still must be performed so learning moderation is a must but when done to excess they also ruin people's families and lives (my mother had a food addiction and at 58 years old still struggles) as kids we went to school with empty lunch boxes because mum ate our lunches while we were in bed asleep, I'm a mum now and I honestly could never send my kids to school hungry. She would eat all the cereal covered in cream and sugar like you have never seen before, bread, anything she could get her hands on we would wake up and not have anything, she was a single mum and she wasn't coping, eating was her way of coping she only did it when we were asleep never in front of us, never in front of anyone it was always behind closed doors. My sister and I ended up hiding food so we had things to take to school. She ended up at OA it helped for a little while but then she would stop going to meetings and bam we would be straight back to square one again. It was a vicious circle of self destruction and very hard for us kids to understand, I mean how could a mum send her kids to school with empty lunch boxes and hungry it really was hard for us.
Vast majority of people with addictions have underlying mental illness issues that lead them down the path of addictions....vast majority of people with serious weight issues also have underlying mental illness issues.
Yes a lot of people say they are "addicted" to sugar....."addicted" to alcohol..... "Addicted" to shopping but really they are just say they like/love it, just as a lover of meat says they are a carnivore (they aren't really just a figure of speech) if it really came down to it they would/could stop it if they needed too i.e. No chocolate in the house miss it but doesn't really matter, no beer left after a hard days work or can't afford it this week they can go without no stress really, can't afford that dress s-@t happens. But others really can't control it and will use lying,cheating,stealing and deceit to obtain what they desire to get that feeling of pleasure.
So yes I know food addiction does exist and it can be exreamly dangerous, damaging to families and relationships even deadly BUT I also think in most cases it's a figure of speech to say they really really like or love something and it's hard to reduce it.

Sex addiction and shopping addiction are not recognized by the DSM - gambling addiction was added to the DSM V as the only acknowledged (so far) behavioral, rather than substance addiction. By those standards, I believe one day there could be an eating addiction - food addiction would imply that the addiction to the substance which chemically is not true - acknowledged by psychology, but I feel the diagnosis would be far more limited than people use it on themselves.
There are already diagnoses that describe problem behavior with food more accurately than eating addiction would. Interestingly, many of the behaviors of the common binging disorders would generally be exacerbated by engaging in elimination behavior such as cutting out all added sugar foods as some professed sugar addicts do.

This brings an interesting argument to the question of if semantics is an important discussion. It's like misdiagnosing something, treating it as such, and then wondering why the cure isn't working. Naming things appropriately, defining what the issue is, becomes an integral part of figuring out the best approach to countering it.

+1.

That was the experience for me. If I still held on to the incorrect belief that I was a food addict then I know I wouldn't have gotten to the correct treatment and intervention that has made such a difference in my life. So, in my case it so wasn't just a case of semantics. It was a case as misdiagnosis...of the self made variety.

This was my experience as well. I started with "I'm addicted to sugar" followed by "I must completely abstain" followed by "I suck because I ate some chocolate so I'm a failure." The guilt and shame that people place upon themselves is not helpful. It's a cycle that is so hard to break because they have been focusing on the wrong things.

summerkissed

A good example of this is kids, young kids with no knowledge of nutrition....why do we have kids throwing tantrums for junk foods, sodas, sweets? Why do kids have hyper outbursts over these foods....then massive downers??? Why do we have behavioral problems linked to additives in these foods?? We don't have these issues with fruit and veg or lean meats?? You argue over is food/sugar addiction real and one of the arguments is its not a chemical addiction but could it actually be just that....could it?? Could it not be a physical addiction could it be a chemical addiction?? The more I think about what we missed out on as kids the more I look deeper into the types of foods consumed the types of food brought? It wasn't a healthy diet at all? What was it about the highly processed, the high sugar, high salt and high fat combined with colors and flavors?

nutmegoreo

summerkissed wrote: »

The alcohol, tobacco and gambling industries now all have to pay costs and have rules about advertising they have to contribute $$$ to prevention programs medical research.......hmmmm at what point do you think fast food giants, soft drink companies, cola cola and the likes should start becoming liable for the ingredients? the advertising? The massive burden on mental health and medical systems? The burden on family......Is it just me or is it a coincidence that the foods these addictions are stemming from are all processed and unregulated multi national giants with massive profits with a f$&king lot to lose??? These addictions aren't linked to wholesome foods close to natural now are they? I mean how many years did it take the tobacco industry to admit they had purposely added certain chemicals that were addictive?? Is there something being hidden from us? Why are even as we become more health conscious that these massive companies are moving to make the so called 'health' foods more processed with added sugar/salt preservatives? But make it look healthy? You only have to walk down the health food isle and read some of the nutrition panels to work that out.
You can hide under your rocks as long as you want but food/sugar addictions are real my oath they are real.....but there are a lot of people with lots of $$$ who have a vested interest in keeping this quiet for as long as they can!!

The companies are there to make money though. They react to what the consumer is demanding. When low fat was in demand, they increased sugar to compensate and keep the flavor. No company is going to make foods which are unpalatable. That would tank sales. There are regional differences, where companies alter the ingredients and flavors by country because there are cultural differences. Many fast food companies have healthier options available (restaurants in general), but the consumer needs to make a conscious decision to eat those things.

It was eye opening to me when I actually looked at the nutritional information of some of my favorite places. For years, I refused to look at the nutritional information despite knowing it was there. Part of me recognized that what I would see would be shocking. I'm not hiding under a rock (I know that wasn't directed at any one person here). In fact, I'm further out from under it because I am aware of what my choices are doing. I'm not kidding myself that companies make their products to taste good. If they didn't, that would just be a horrible business plan.

People need to take some level of personal responsibility in what they are consuming. I'm not speaking specifically of what you described about your mother. That is a whole other issue. My personal concern with the general "I'm addicted to sugar" phrase is that it is often used to describe a feeling of helplessness and a sense of being out of control. That is a behavioral issue. To define it as such and to treat it as such will be much more successful for people, compared to commiserating with them and allowing them to continue to feel helpless. For most people here, the power is within them.

nutmegoreo

shell1005 wrote: »

I remember one of my most vivid tantrums related to food as a child was about my mom telling me I had eaten too many cucumbers and if I kept eating more I was going to get sick. Didn't matter...I wanted more cukes!!!

Food is not physically or chemically addictive. We do not become dependent on it. I did many many many substance abuse evaluations of inmates in the local jail at my last job. I saw many people in withdrawal and who needed detox. Never and I mean never was it due to a food substance.

I'm fine with a debate, but one done with actual science and knowledge and not someone feelings.

My mom used to bribe us. If we were good in the grocery store we could pick out anything that we wanted. I always chose grapes. I would sit in the cart and not touch them until the cashier passed them back to me. Then I would start eating them. I don't remember this actually, that's how young I was.

tomteboda

The very existence of this forum really irritates me. It seems like the General Diet & Weight-loss Help forum has been declared a "safe space" for pseudoscience, rumors, propaganda and anti-science by the mods specifically targeting science-based discussion and declaring it to be unwanted, something that should be hidden from sensitive souls or simply refrained from.

Now to address the thread topic:

DSM-V Eating Disorders. From Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binge_eating_disorder): "Individuals who have binge eating disorder commonly have other comorbidities such as major depressive disorder, personality disorder, bipolar disorder, substance abuse, body dysmorphic disorder, kleptomania, irritable bowel syndrome, fibromyalgia, or an anxiety disorder"

The American Psychiatric Association recognizes several different kinds of destructive eating patterns. They also have a separate diagnosis for substance use and addictive disorders. Its entirely possible people claiming "addiction" actually suffer from an eating disorder that is a psychiatric problem. That doesn't mean their problem isn't real, but it does mean that they need appropriate help and mechanisms to overcome their problems.

summerkissed

shell1005 wrote: »

I remember one of my most vivid tantrums related to food as a child was about my mom telling me I had eaten too many cucumbers and if I kept eating more I was going to get sick. Didn't matter...I wanted more cukes!!!

Food is not physically or chemically addictive. We do not become dependent on it. I did many many many substance abuse evaluations of inmates in the local jail at my last job. I saw many people in withdrawal and who needed detox. Never and I mean never was it due to a food substance.

I'm fine with a debate, but one done with actual science and knowledge and not someone feelings.

You want knowledge??? I can tell you of many times I went to school hungry with no lunch! I can tell you many times when mum got paid and we came home to cupboards full of junk food only to be gone the next morning....I can also tell you about visiting my mum in hospital but not being able to understand why she was there? I don't even want to write the reason she was there it hurts.....I'm guessing you think mum was just selfish? Didn't care about her kids maybe? Just a bad mum maybe? She was sick eating made her feel better! My ex was/is also sick drinking and drugs makes him feel better.......the highs followed by the lows as described in the previous link......addiction!

ClosetBayesian

summerkissed wrote: »

A good example of this is kids, young kids with no knowledge of nutrition....why do we have kids throwing tantrums for junk foods, sodas, sweets? Why do kids have hyper outbursts over these foods....then massive downers??? Why do we have behavioral problems linked to additives in these foods?? We don't have these issues with fruit and veg or lean meats?? You argue over is food/sugar addiction real and one of the arguments is its not a chemical addiction but could it actually be just that....could it?? Could it not be a physical addiction could it be a chemical addiction?? The more I think about what we missed out on as kids the more I look deeper into the types of foods consumed the types of food brought? It wasn't a healthy diet at all? What was it about the highly processed, the high sugar, high salt and high fat combined with colors and flavors?

You have supported the point of view of the people I think you oppose: if sugar addiction were real, you would see addictive behaviors. You would see kids (or adults) eating sugar straight out of the bag. Likewise, you'd see people eating salt straight out of the container, or Crisco by the spoonful. This just doesn't happen in the general population such that it can be called an addiction.

senecarr

summerkissed wrote: »

The alcohol, tobacco and gambling industries now all have to pay costs and have rules about advertising they have to contribute $$$ to prevention programs medical research.......hmmmm at what point do you think fast food giants, soft drink companies, cola cola and the likes should start becoming liable for the ingredients? the advertising? The massive burden on mental health and medical systems? The burden on family......Is it just me or is it a coincidence that the foods these addictions are stemming from are all processed and unregulated multi national giants with massive profits with a f$&king lot to lose??? These addictions aren't linked to wholesome foods close to natural now are they? I mean how many years did it take the tobacco industry to admit they had purposely added certain chemicals that were addictive?? Is there something being hidden from us? Why are even as we become more health conscious that these massive companies are moving to make the so called 'health' foods more processed with added sugar/salt preservatives? But make it look healthy? You only have to walk down the health food isle and read some of the nutrition panels to work that out.
You can hide under your rocks as long as you want but food/sugar addictions are real my oath they are real.....but there are a lot of people with lots of $$$ who have a vested interest in keeping this quiet for as long as they can!!

Fun fact, did you know the tobacco industry never claimed cigarettes don't cause cancer? They repeatedly said more research was needed, but never claimed cigarettes don't cause cancer. They ended up paying not because their product was addictive but because it causes cancer.
Gambling has restrictions because the state doesn't like competitors. Or does the state lottery stop being addictive because it pays a pittance to schools?
Alcohol has restrictions because it does can lead to impaired judgement.

Interestingly, honey is pretty similar to high fructose corn syrup - higher in fructose than most blends is my recollection. Yet humans haven't nearly killed themselves for it - well maybe my ancestors did as I react less to bee and wasp stings than mosquito bites, but I don't care for honey. It does seem to impaired judgement based on Winnie the Pooh's inability to ever get pants on though.

senecarr

summerkissed wrote: »

A good example of this is kids, young kids with no knowledge of nutrition....why do we have kids throwing tantrums for junk foods, sodas, sweets? Why do kids have hyper outbursts over these foods....then massive downers??? Why do we have behavioral problems linked to additives in these foods?? We don't have these issues with fruit and veg or lean meats?? You argue over is food/sugar addiction real and one of the arguments is its not a chemical addiction but could it actually be just that....could it?? Could it not be a physical addiction could it be a chemical addiction?? The more I think about what we missed out on as kids the more I look deeper into the types of foods consumed the types of food brought? It wasn't a healthy diet at all? What was it about the highly processed, the high sugar, high salt and high fat combined with colors and flavors?

Kids get excited about certain foods. It is purely psychological. Repeated studies that were properly double blind have never found sugar added to foods lead to signs of hyperactivity in children.

summerkissed

ClosetBayesian wrote: »

summerkissed wrote: »

A good example of this is kids, young kids with no knowledge of nutrition....why do we have kids throwing tantrums for junk foods, sodas, sweets? Why do kids have hyper outbursts over these foods....then massive downers??? Why do we have behavioral problems linked to additives in these foods?? We don't have these issues with fruit and veg or lean meats?? You argue over is food/sugar addiction real and one of the arguments is its not a chemical addiction but could it actually be just that....could it?? Could it not be a physical addiction could it be a chemical addiction?? The more I think about what we missed out on as kids the more I look deeper into the types of foods consumed the types of food brought? It wasn't a healthy diet at all? What was it about the highly processed, the high sugar, high salt and high fat combined with colors and flavors?

You have supported the point of view of the people I think you oppose: if sugar addiction were real, you would see addictive behaviors. You would see kids (or adults) eating sugar straight out of the bag. Likewise, you'd see people eating salt straight out of the container, or Crisco by the spoonful. This just doesn't happen in the general population such that it can be called an addiction.

No I'm trying to open the discussion more into the food addiction side of things and the foods consumed by the truly addicted person! Which is why I put it as food/sugar addiction the addiction is real but as you say why don't people consume spoons of sugar?.....that's why I opened is it the things added with these sugars? Why are these sugars added in massive amounts? I'm gluten and lactose free I have been for many years before it was 'cool' why can I now buy gluten free health foods with more sugar in them than gluten containing? Why can I go to the takeaway shop and find lactose free chocolate milk with the masses of sugar? Why is there now lactose free yogurts with huge sugar content? Why are huge companies adding so much sugar to everything we eat but at the same time trying to make it look healthy?? Perhaps these are the questions we need to be asking? Why when there is behavioral problems in kids is this added sugar blamed? What is being hidden from us?

summerkissed

senecarr wrote: »

summerkissed wrote: »

A good example of this is kids, young kids with no knowledge of nutrition....why do we have kids throwing tantrums for junk foods, sodas, sweets? Why do kids have hyper outbursts over these foods....then massive downers??? Why do we have behavioral problems linked to additives in these foods?? We don't have these issues with fruit and veg or lean meats?? You argue over is food/sugar addiction real and one of the arguments is its not a chemical addiction but could it actually be just that....could it?? Could it not be a physical addiction could it be a chemical addiction?? The more I think about what we missed out on as kids the more I look deeper into the types of foods consumed the types of food brought? It wasn't a healthy diet at all? What was it about the highly processed, the high sugar, high salt and high fat combined with colors and flavors?

Kids get excited about certain foods. It is purely psychological. Repeated studies that were properly double blind have never found sugar added to foods lead to signs of hyperactivity in children.

I have 5 children all react differently.....how many kids do you have? And do you notice any change in them?

sunnybeaches105

tomteboda wrote: »

The very existence of this forum really irritates me. It seems like the General Diet & Weight-loss Help forum has been declared a "safe space" for pseudoscience, rumors, propaganda and anti-science by the mods specifically targeting science-based discussion and declaring it to be unwanted, something that should be hidden from sensitive souls or simply refrained from.

Now to address the thread topic:

DSM-V Eating Disorders. From Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binge_eating_disorder): "Individuals who have binge eating disorder commonly have other comorbidities such as major depressive disorder, personality disorder, bipolar disorder, substance abuse, body dysmorphic disorder, kleptomania, irritable bowel syndrome, fibromyalgia, or an anxiety disorder"

The American Psychiatric Association recognizes several different kinds of destructive eating patterns. They also have a separate diagnosis for substance use and addictive disorders. Its entirely possible people claiming "addiction" actually suffer from an eating disorder that is a psychiatric problem. That doesn't mean their problem isn't real, but it does mean that they need appropriate help and mechanisms to overcome their problems.

Well said, on both the forum and the thread topic.