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.
Arguing Semantics - sugar addiction
Replies
-
Therealobi1 wrote: »
for some people they will absolutely fail. no different to the op who feels that they have done EVERYTHING possible to lose weight and nothing will work for them and they give up. Hoping that more will later see the light and take control, whether or not they come back to the post to admit that. Not everyone gets cured at the first post
No, but you seem under the impression that trying is free. I don't see that as psychologically true. Every time a person's belief that they cannot lose weight is reinforced by another failure is an increase that they'll give and never try to diet again. The more times a person has done everything that doesn't work, the more they'll assume nothing works rather than that they simply haven't tried what does.0 -
No, but you seem under the impression that trying is free. I don't see that as psychologically true. Every time a person's belief that they cannot lose weight is reinforced by another failure is an increase that they'll give and never try to diet again. The more times a person has done everything that doesn't work, the more they'll assume nothing works rather than that they simply haven't tried what does.
So much truth here.0 -
0
-
No, but you seem under the impression that trying is free. I don't see that as psychologically true. Every time a person's belief that they cannot lose weight is reinforced by another failure is an increase that they'll give and never try to diet again. The more times a person has done everything that doesn't work, the more they'll assume nothing works rather than that they simply haven't tried what does.
and then there are those who will slap themselves awake and roll up their sleeves
loads of people will give up and never lose weight thats just the way it is
you have to be mentally ready to make the change, and when you are you will stop clinging onto the latest cleanse or fad or term0 -
There you go..
Its not the correcting of misinformation. .. its that fact that its the only thing people do... while completely ignoring the OP.
The only conspiracies are the ones that are beig made up by those people who dont find the balance between correcting erroneous data and provide help to the OP.
If providing help to the OP is part of the criteria, than shouldn't all replies that say sugar addiction is real end up here, 100% of the time, as lying to someone and reinforcing false information is never going to be helpful?
Instead it seems like the burden is inverted. The assumption is that people saying sugar addiction isn't a thing are automatically assumed unproductive and moved here.0 -
brianpperkins wrote: »
If a person bases a position based on misinformation then how is not not helpful to correct that misinformation so the person can then reassess their position?
Funny, i never see threads that would ask if you feel their sugar addiction is real. I see people asking for help to make better choices and get passed said addiction.0 -
Nm0
-
tincanonastring wrote: »
It depends. Did you protect the feelz while correcting the misinformation?
but i often wondered if the feelz of those trying to help our hurt too
not everyone will accept the great help given right away or even ever.
so therefore its annoying why the OP asked for help in the first place
i just read a post about an OP who is doing everything but gaining weight
so rightly everyone tells op you are eating more than you think
op is more convinced that its an illness, and seems to name a different illness it could be at every other post
op is getting flustered that she is being told she is eating too much doesnt want any more comments
that op is not ready0 -
Funny, i never see threads that would ask if you feel their sugar addiction is real. I see people asking for help to make better choices and get passed said addiction.
Funny that you've skipped right past my question about how many posts from sugar-addiction advocates have been moved.0 -
Therealobi1 wrote: »
but i often wondered if the feelz of those trying to help our hurt too
not everyone will accept the great help given right away or even ever.
so therefore its annoying why the OP asked for help in the first place
i just read a post about an OP who is doing everything but gaining weight
so rightly everyone tells op you are eating more than you think
op is more convinced that its an illness, and seems to name a different illness it could be at every other post
op is getting flustered that she is being told she is eating too much doesnt want any more comments
that op is not ready
Does that mean people should stop telling her?0 -
Funny, i never see threads that would ask if you feel their sugar addiction is real. I see people asking for help to make better choices and get passed said addiction.
I see threads where people flat out state they are addicted to sugar .. a fallacy upon which they base their position.
Funny, I don't see the questions asked of MFP getting answered here. You just side stepped this question and the question of why posts countering sugar addiction get moved/deleted while those claiming it are permitted still goes unanswered.0 -
tincanonastring wrote: »
Does that mean people should stop telling her?
yes, she has a couple of pages of you are eating too much in different forms, she is off to the doctor, when the doctor gives her the all clear she will come back and read the post clearly0 -
If providing help to the OP is part of the criteria, than shouldn't all replies that say sugar addiction is real end up here, 100% of the time, as lying to someone and reinforcing false information is never going to be helpful?
Instead it seems like the burden is inverted. The assumption is that people saying sugar addiction isn't a thing are automatically assumed unproductive and moved here.
Helping the OP doesnt mean lying to them. I dont know why this concept is so hard but helping people is more than correcting bad information... its provide the next step...
Essentially, so you told them physical addiction doesnt exit... great. .. how do apply that to their situation?0 -
Therealobi1 wrote: »
yes, she has a couple of pages of you are eating too much in different forms, she is off to the doctor, when the doctor gives her the all clear she will come back and read the post clearly
Wait, is your position actually that no one should be told the truth if they are not ready to hear it?0 -
brianpperkins wrote: »
I see threads where people flat out state they are addicted to sugar .. a fallacy upon which they base their position.
Funny, I don't see the questions asked of MFP getting answered here. You just side stepped this question and the question of why posts countering sugar addiction get moved/deleted while those claiming it are permitted still goes unanswered.
I only explain things so many times. If people dont want to understand, that is on them.0 -
I thought that addicts pimped their kids for crack. Do you have your kids turning tricks so you can have brownies? No? What's your point in watering down a perfectly functional word? Not only do word have no meaning when they lose their value, we can no longer communicate.
I have loved ones that are addicts, ruined their jobs, lives, and marriages from their substances abuse, had to take antibuse so they wouldn't drink, and went into delirium tremors. Are you experiencing that?
No? That what conduct are you attempting to excuse?brianpperkins wrote: »The introduction to the Nutrition Debate subforum is frightening if one believes in presenting fact to counter those who mangle the language in order to excuse their actions. The reference to the guidelines is that thinly veiled threat of impending warnings for countering the common claim of "sugar addiction". Feelings and beliefs now trump logic and science.
When words have no meaning they lose their value.0 -
brianpperkins wrote: »"your body becomes addicted to the sugar and doesn't recognize the other stuff as food" ... a post allowed to stand.
MFP is clearly taking a position that countering fallacy based positions is not acceptable while endorsing them is.
That quote is from a thread out there. The op never said anything about sugar addiction and a so called "fitness professional" came in and claimed "your body becomes addicted to the sugar and doesn't recognize the other stuff as food". How come this type of post is allowed out there? They aren't helping the op.0 -
I only explain things so many times. If people dont want to understand, that is on them.
Can you do me a favor and explain the 1 thing I've asked of you in this thread?0 -
tincanonastring wrote: »
Wait, is your position actually that no one should be told the truth if they are not ready to hear it?
nope not at all
she has been told pages of you are eating too much
how many more pages does she need esp if not listening and getting upset?0 -
Therealobi1 wrote: »
nope not at all
she has been told pages of you are eating too much
how many more pages does she need esp if not listening and getting upset?
If she is continuing to engage, then she's going to get honest answers. The truth will stop when she stops posting.0 -
I sold my kids to the Girl Scouts of America for Thin Mints. Works out in a certain way.caroldavison332 wrote: »I thought that addicts pimped their kids for crack. Do you have your kids turning tricks so you can have brownies? No? What's your point in watering down a perfectly functional word? Not only do word have no meaning when they lose their value, we can no longer communicate.
I have loved ones that are addicts, ruined their jobs, lives, and marriages from their substances abuse, had to take antibuse so they wouldn't drink, and went into delirium tremors. Are you experiencing that?
No? That what conduct are you attempting to excuse?
0 -
Helping the OP doesnt mean lying to them. I dont know why this concept is so hard but helping people is more than correcting bad information... its provide the next step...
Essentially, so you told them physical addiction doesnt exit... great. .. how do apply that to their situation?
Which usually includes strategies to deal with cutting to much, IIFYM or the most common - "if you want to continue to cut xxx, that's fine, but understand that other long term strategies may also work...."0 -
tincanonastring wrote: »
If she is continuing to engage, then she's going to get honest answers. The truth will stop when she stops posting.
The op deactivated her account0 -
tincanonastring wrote: »
Can you do me a favor and explain the 1 thing I've asked of you in this thread?
As long as its not about moderation... if you have questions on why things are done then pm is the approach.0 -
I only explain things so many times. If people dont want to understand, that is on them.
Let me know when you address any of the questions actually asked of you. What you've done isn't "explain" .. it isn't answer ... it's dance around the questions and hope nobody notices.0 -
singingflutelady wrote: »
The op deactivated her account
oh dear, so she cant even come back after her all clear from the doctor0 -
EvgeniZyntx wrote: »
Which usually includes strategies to deal with cutting to much, IIFYM or the most common - "if you want to continue to cut xxx, that's fine, but understand that other long term strategies may also work...."
And unfortunately this is the part that gets left out. At least more often than not in thr gd&w section.0 -
Helping the OP doesnt mean lying to them. I dont know why this concept is so hard but helping people is more than correcting bad information... its provide the next step...
Essentially, so you told them physical addiction doesnt exit... great. .. how do apply that to their situation?
The Enlightenment (known in French as the Siècle des Lumières, the Century of Enlightenment and in German as the Aufklärung) was a philosophical movement which dominated the world of ideas in Europe in the 18th century. The Enlightenment included a scope of ideas centered on reason as the primary source of authority and legitimacy, and came to advance ideals such as liberty, progress, tolerance, fraternity, constitutional government and ending the abuses of the church and state.[1][2] In France, the central doctrines of the Lumières were individual liberty and religious tolerance, in opposition to the principle of absolute monarchy and the fixed dogmas of the Roman Catholic Church.[3] The Enlightenment was marked by increasing empiricism, scientific rigor, and reductionism, along with increased questioning of religious orthodoxy.[4]
There was a whole era of educating people by telling them to use reason and empirical science. It was around the time where literacy in the common public went up enormously.
Telling facts and clearing up misinformation about the person's situation is a good start to conquering a problem.0 -
stevencloser wrote: »
The Enlightenment (known in French as the Siècle des Lumières, the Century of Enlightenment and in German as the Aufklärung) was a philosophical movement which dominated the world of ideas in Europe in the 18th century. The Enlightenment included a scope of ideas centered on reason as the primary source of authority and legitimacy, and came to advance ideals such as liberty, progress, tolerance, fraternity, constitutional government and ending the abuses of the church and state.[1][2] In France, the central doctrines of the Lumières were individual liberty and religious tolerance, in opposition to the principle of absolute monarchy and the fixed dogmas of the Roman Catholic Church.[3] The Enlightenment was marked by increasing empiricism, scientific rigor, and reductionism, along with increased questioning of religious orthodoxy.[4]
There was a whole era of educating people by telling them to use reason and empirical science.
Telling facts and clearing up misinformation about the person's situation is a good start to conquering a problem.
I'm glad your post ended that way. For a moment I thought your idea of help would involve more guillotines.0 -
stevencloser wrote: »
The Enlightenment (known in French as the Siècle des Lumières, the Century of Enlightenment and in German as the Aufklärung) was a philosophical movement which dominated the world of ideas in Europe in the 18th century. The Enlightenment included a scope of ideas centered on reason as the primary source of authority and legitimacy, and came to advance ideals such as liberty, progress, tolerance, fraternity, constitutional government and ending the abuses of the church and state.[1][2] In France, the central doctrines of the Lumières were individual liberty and religious tolerance, in opposition to the principle of absolute monarchy and the fixed dogmas of the Roman Catholic Church.[3] The Enlightenment was marked by increasing empiricism, scientific rigor, and reductionism, along with increased questioning of religious orthodoxy.[4]
There was a whole era of educating people by telling them to use reason and empirical science. It was around the time where literacy in the common public went up enormously.
Telling facts and clearing up misinformation about the person's situation is a good start to conquering a problem.
Except on MFP.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 396K Introduce Yourself
- 44.1K Getting Started
- 260.8K Health and Weight Loss
- 176.3K Food and Nutrition
- 47.6K Recipes
- 232.8K Fitness and Exercise
- 448 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153.3K Motivation and Support
- 8.2K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 4.4K MyFitnessPal Information
- 16 News and Announcements
- 18 MyFitnessPal Academy
- 1.4K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions