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.

Sugar addiction like drug abuse, study reveals

135

Replies

  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    AlabasterVerve wrote: »
    WinoGelato wrote: »
    leanjogreen18 wrote: »
    Why don't the "sugar is addictive" see the rat study for proof folks ever point to the rat study that bacon & fat is addictive?

    https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/addicted-to-fat-eating/

    Is it a different type of study? Did they handle it different than the sugar study?

    Same reason most conveniently ignore the fact that the foods that people feel they are "addicted" to are largely a hyperpalatable combination of sugar + fat, not just exclusively sugar. But acknowledging that fat is part of the problem would be an issue for many who lean into a LCHF way of eating as a way to address their "sugar addiction".

    I know this is a popular debate point but I don't think this is true at all. In my experience, most people who eat low carb, high fat diets (LCHF) and find their food issues resolved eating that way ignore the fat side of the equation because it doesn't fit their real world experience.

    Sugar = Problem
    Sugar + Fat = Problem
    Fat = No Problem

    Perhaps that line of thinking is wrongheaded - I don't know - but it doesn't matter. No sugar, no problem is good enough for most who've been struggling and find relief eating a low carb diet.

    People are different.

    When I was overeating my tendency to overeat was mainly:

    Sugar = no problem
    Sugar + fat = possible problem (if something I liked)
    Fat = possible problem (same, I certainly did not guzzle olive oil, but my #1 most overeaten food was cheese. I'd buy a chunk of Maytag blue or manchego or good cheddar or anything else that looked interesting from WF or this local cheesemonger or the green market and then at night I'd decide to have some and end up eating all of it. If we had a cocktail party with cheese as something to snack on I'd similarly go to town on cheese, and often nuts and olives, and ignore the crackers and chips and the like).

    The studies don't support the notion that physiologically sugar addiction is more likely than fat addiction or hyperpalatable food addiction (I think it's a behavioral eating addiction when it's addiction at all). Do some have trigger foods more likely to be on the sweet side? I'm sure -- among other things, eating lots of sweets, especially as a kid, seems to affect the palate, and I have been surprised at how many of the same people who express feelings of having been "addicted" to sweets also say that they didn't appreciate vegetables or even fruit as sweet at all until they cut way down on sweets, and didn't care for them as a result. (How salty your diet is also affects the palate, so this makes sense. It just seems surprising to me as I never found fruits and veg hard to appreciate or perceive as sweet even when I consumed plenty of sweet stuff. Too sweet or sweet when it shouldn't be -- like sweet dressings or ketchup or honey mustard or sweetened coffee, etc., have always been a negative for me, though, so I really think this is a taste difference, in part.)
  • amusedmonkey
    amusedmonkey Posts: 10,330 Member
    AlabasterVerve wrote: »
    WinoGelato wrote: »
    leanjogreen18 wrote: »
    Why don't the "sugar is addictive" see the rat study for proof folks ever point to the rat study that bacon & fat is addictive?

    https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/addicted-to-fat-eating/

    Is it a different type of study? Did they handle it different than the sugar study?

    Same reason most conveniently ignore the fact that the foods that people feel they are "addicted" to are largely a hyperpalatable combination of sugar + fat, not just exclusively sugar. But acknowledging that fat is part of the problem would be an issue for many who lean into a LCHF way of eating as a way to address their "sugar addiction".

    I know this is a popular debate point but I don't think this is true at all. In my experience, most people who eat low carb, high fat diets (LCHF) and find their food issues resolved eating that way ignore the fat side of the equation because it doesn't fit their real world experience.

    Sugar = Problem
    Sugar + Fat = Problem
    Fat = No Problem

    Perhaps that line of thinking is wrongheaded - I don't know - but it doesn't matter. No sugar, no problem is good enough for most who've been struggling and find relief eating a low carb diet.

    Curious, could it be the effect of ketosis (tends to stabilize appetite for some) that helps with their problem? Because I know many who are capable of plowing through an entire wheel of cheese and I used to eat 1k worth of nuts a day. In other words, do you think those who are "addicted" to cheese are also helped if they are one of those people who get a desirable appetite adjustment on ketosis?
  • WayTooHonest
    WayTooHonest Posts: 144 Member
    Let's start with the basic definition of addiction, as brought to you by ASAM (American Society of Addiction Medicine):
    "Addiction is characterized by inability to consistently abstain, impairment in behavioral control, craving, diminished recognition of significant problems with one’s behaviors and interpersonal relationships, and a dysfunctional emotional response. Like other chronic diseases, addiction often involves cycles of relapse and remission. Without treatment or engagement in recovery activities, addiction is progressive and can result in disability or premature death."

    Now, think about this in relation to sugar. Are you unable to consistently abstain? Do you feel out of control? Have cravings? Do you minimize the problem? Does this cause significant problems (such as obesity)? Unhealthy emotional responses? And can it result in premature death?

    I think the answer is pretty clear. The reality is that almost anything can become addictive. Scoff if you will, but it is the lack of control and the negative life impacts that are the defining factors here.

    See also: DSM-5 and ICD-10.
  • leanjogreen18
    leanjogreen18 Posts: 2,492 Member
    amusedmonkey wrote: »
    AlabasterVerve wrote: »
    WinoGelato wrote: »
    leanjogreen18 wrote: »
    Why don't the "sugar is addictive" see the rat study for proof folks ever point to the rat study that bacon & fat is addictive?

    https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/addicted-to-fat-eating/

    Is it a different type of study? Did they handle it different than the sugar study?

    Same reason most conveniently ignore the fact that the foods that people feel they are "addicted" to are largely a hyperpalatable combination of sugar + fat, not just exclusively sugar. But acknowledging that fat is part of the problem would be an issue for many who lean into a LCHF way of eating as a way to address their "sugar addiction".

    I know this is a popular debate point but I don't think this is true at all. In my experience, most people who eat low carb, high fat diets (LCHF) and find their food issues resolved eating that way ignore the fat side of the equation because it doesn't fit their real world experience.

    Sugar = Problem
    Sugar + Fat = Problem
    Fat = No Problem

    Perhaps that line of thinking is wrongheaded - I don't know - but it doesn't matter. No sugar, no problem is good enough for most who've been struggling and find relief eating a low carb diet.

    Curious, could it be the effect of ketosis (tends to stabilize appetite for some) that helps with their problem? Because I know many who are capable of plowing through an entire wheel of cheese and I used to eat 1k worth of nuts a day. In other words, do you think those who are "addicted" to cheese are also helped if they are one of those people who get a desirable appetite adjustment on ketosis?

    Good point. I could plow through bacon & cheese when I was on Atkins!
  • leanjogreen18
    leanjogreen18 Posts: 2,492 Member
    edited January 2017
    Researchers at the University of Michigan surveyed nearly 400 people to determine what foods most commonly cause them to lose control. Cheese pizza topped the list— beating out everything from cookies and ice cream to chips and chocolate.

    Self reporting but I thought this was interesting....

    http://www.pcrm.org/media/good-medicine/winter-2017/cheese-addiction

    I will leave this here, if one thinks they are addicted to sugar then they probably are.

    Thankfully I don't believe its physically/chemically addictive so I can moderate.
  • WayTooHonest
    WayTooHonest Posts: 144 Member
    edited January 2017
    chocolate_owl wrote: »
    redheaddee1974 wrote: »
    Let's start with the basic definition of addiction, as brought to you by ASAM (American Society of Addiction Medicine):
    "Addiction is characterized by inability to consistently abstain, impairment in behavioral control, craving, diminished recognition of significant problems with one’s behaviors and interpersonal relationships, and a dysfunctional emotional response. Like other chronic diseases, addiction often involves cycles of relapse and remission. Without treatment or engagement in recovery activities, addiction is progressive and can result in disability or premature death."

    Now, think about this in relation to sugar. Are you unable to consistently abstain? Do you feel out of control? Have cravings? Do you minimize the problem? Does this cause significant problems (such as obesity)? Unhealthy emotional responses? And can it result in premature death?

    I think the answer is pretty clear. The reality is that almost anything can become addictive. Scoff if you will, but it is the lack of control and the negative life impacts that are the defining factors here.

    See also: DSM-5 and ICD-10.

    That doesn't make sugar (or any other food) physiologically addictive. And it doesn't mean everyone who says they're "addicted" actually is - there's a vast number of steps between "no problem at all" and "addiction." Habits, compulsions, and evolutionary urges to eat when food is readily available do not automatically translate into addiction, even if there is some difficulty with craving or abstaining.

    Hmm. I read it all again. No specifier for physiologically addictive, but did specify behavioral and emotional concerns. And you are correct, it does not mean "everyone" is addicted, and I implied no such thing. Of course there is a spectrum, as you said "a vast number of steps between "no problem at all" and "addiction". Life is a spectrum. But it DOES mean that a person CAN be addicted by the very definition designated by professionals in the addiction field. The original question posed was basically can sugar be addictive. The answer is yes.

    Here's the link if you like: http://www.asam.org/quality-practice/definition-of-addiction
  • WayTooHonest
    WayTooHonest Posts: 144 Member
    edited January 2017
    amusedmonkey wrote: »
    redheaddee1974 wrote: »
    Let's start with the basic definition of addiction, as brought to you by ASAM (American Society of Addiction Medicine):
    "Addiction is characterized by inability to consistently abstain, impairment in behavioral control, craving, diminished recognition of significant problems with one’s behaviors and interpersonal relationships, and a dysfunctional emotional response. Like other chronic diseases, addiction often involves cycles of relapse and remission. Without treatment or engagement in recovery activities, addiction is progressive and can result in disability or premature death."

    Now, think about this in relation to sugar. Are you unable to consistently abstain? Do you feel out of control? Have cravings? Do you minimize the problem? Does this cause significant problems (such as obesity)? Unhealthy emotional responses? And can it result in premature death?

    I think the answer is pretty clear. The reality is that almost anything can become addictive. Scoff if you will, but it is the lack of control and the negative life impacts that are the defining factors here.

    See also: DSM-5 and ICD-10.

    Let's assume, for the sake of argument, that people are truly addicted to these foods. Wouldn't it be more accurate to say they are addicted to certain foods (that happen to contain sugar among other things) instead of saying they are addicted to sugar? Table sugar is readily available in every household and I have yet to see someone who has a hard time moderating it as long as it is in the house and feels an unhealthy compulsion to dig in with a spoon until it's all gone, ignoring problems in their relationships because all they can think of is sugar, or drinking salad dressing when there is no table sugar.

    First, I think that would entirely depend on the problem foods. If all the problem items are sugary treats, than yes, I feel it can be called a sugar addiction. If it is all chips and salty snacks, than one could argue a potential salt addiction. And I know people who have actually eaten a spoonful of sugar. Other than myself. Not too many people would admit to doing so, however.

    Second, it is more than ignoring problems in a relationship. For example, a person who is obese refuses to be intimate with their partner because of their insecurities about their size. They have become obese, in large part, because of their problems with sugary snacks. And now, they have cut off the physical connection with their partner. This would certainly cause problems in both my relationship and my behavior!

    This is the kind of thing these professionals are talking about. It is so much more complicated than simply ignoring problems and eating table sugar. And isn't that the point.
  • WinoGelato
    WinoGelato Posts: 13,454 Member
    edited January 2017
    redheaddee1974 wrote: »
    amusedmonkey wrote: »
    redheaddee1974 wrote: »
    Let's start with the basic definition of addiction, as brought to you by ASAM (American Society of Addiction Medicine):
    "Addiction is characterized by inability to consistently abstain, impairment in behavioral control, craving, diminished recognition of significant problems with one’s behaviors and interpersonal relationships, and a dysfunctional emotional response. Like other chronic diseases, addiction often involves cycles of relapse and remission. Without treatment or engagement in recovery activities, addiction is progressive and can result in disability or premature death."

    Now, think about this in relation to sugar. Are you unable to consistently abstain? Do you feel out of control? Have cravings? Do you minimize the problem? Does this cause significant problems (such as obesity)? Unhealthy emotional responses? And can it result in premature death?

    I think the answer is pretty clear. The reality is that almost anything can become addictive. Scoff if you will, but it is the lack of control and the negative life impacts that are the defining factors here.

    See also: DSM-5 and ICD-10.

    Let's assume, for the sake of argument, that people are truly addicted to these foods. Wouldn't it be more accurate to say they are addicted to certain foods (that happen to contain sugar among other things) instead of saying they are addicted to sugar? Table sugar is readily available in every household and I have yet to see someone who has a hard time moderating it as long as it is in the house and feels an unhealthy compulsion to dig in with a spoon until it's all gone, ignoring problems in their relationships because all they can think of is sugar, or drinking salad dressing when there is no table sugar.

    First, I think that would entirely depend on the problem foods. If all the problem items are sugary treats, than yes, I feel it can be called a sugar addiction. If it is all chips and salty snacks, than one could argue a potential salt addiction. And I know people who have actually eaten a spoonful of sugar. Other than myself. Not too many people would admit to doing so, however.

    Second, it is more than ignoring problems in a relationship. For example, a person who is obese refuses to be intimate with their partner because of their insecurities about their size. They have become obese, in large part, because of their problems with sugary snacks. And now, they have cut off the physical connection with their partner. This would certainly cause problems in both my relationship and my behavior!

    This is the kind of thing these professionals are talking about. It is so much more complicated than simply ignoring problems and eating table sugar. And isn't that the point.

    See my posts above. Usually what people are talking about when they say they can't stop eating something are hyperpalatable baked goods like cookies, or something like ice cream. When you look at the makeup of these foods, a good percentage of the calories in them come from fat, not just the sugar. As @amusedmonkey is pointing out, if it were really sugar that were the substance a person was addicted to, wouldn't it be easier to go straight to the pantry for the bag of domino white sugar, and eat straight spoonfuls of it?

  • amusedmonkey
    amusedmonkey Posts: 10,330 Member
    redheaddee1974 wrote: »
    amusedmonkey wrote: »
    redheaddee1974 wrote: »
    Let's start with the basic definition of addiction, as brought to you by ASAM (American Society of Addiction Medicine):
    "Addiction is characterized by inability to consistently abstain, impairment in behavioral control, craving, diminished recognition of significant problems with one’s behaviors and interpersonal relationships, and a dysfunctional emotional response. Like other chronic diseases, addiction often involves cycles of relapse and remission. Without treatment or engagement in recovery activities, addiction is progressive and can result in disability or premature death."

    Now, think about this in relation to sugar. Are you unable to consistently abstain? Do you feel out of control? Have cravings? Do you minimize the problem? Does this cause significant problems (such as obesity)? Unhealthy emotional responses? And can it result in premature death?

    I think the answer is pretty clear. The reality is that almost anything can become addictive. Scoff if you will, but it is the lack of control and the negative life impacts that are the defining factors here.

    See also: DSM-5 and ICD-10.

    Let's assume, for the sake of argument, that people are truly addicted to these foods. Wouldn't it be more accurate to say they are addicted to certain foods (that happen to contain sugar among other things) instead of saying they are addicted to sugar? Table sugar is readily available in every household and I have yet to see someone who has a hard time moderating it as long as it is in the house and feels an unhealthy compulsion to dig in with a spoon until it's all gone, ignoring problems in their relationships because all they can think of is sugar, or drinking salad dressing when there is no table sugar.

    First, I think that would entirely depend on the problem foods. If all the problem items are sugary treats, than yes, I feel it can be called a sugar addiction. If it is all chips and salty snacks, than one could argue a potential salt addiction. And I know people who have actually eaten a spoonful of sugar. Other than myself. Not too many people would admit to doing so, however.

    Second, it is more than ignoring problems in a relationship. For example, a person who is obese refuses to be intimate with their partner because of their insecurities about their size. They have become obese, in part, because of their problems with sugary snacks. And now, they have cut off the physical connection with their partner. This would certainly cause problems in both my relationship and my behavior!

    This is the kind of thing these professionals are talking about. It is so much more complicated than simply ignoring problems and eating table sugar. And isn't that the point.

    You have eaten A spoonful of sugar, so you were essentially moderating it, and I assume you are able to abstain from eating table sugar with a spoon on most days (I assume).

    I think occam's razor serves us better in this case than convoluted explanations that try to read too much into definitions and twist them to fit an idea. Humans seek both immediate and storable energy, so the combination of carbs and fat, especially if hyper palatable, is very attractive them from a survival standpoint. It's a much simpler and more elegant explanation. Some behavioral issues may be involved, of course, but those can be involved in just about anything.
  • Annie_01
    Annie_01 Posts: 3,096 Member
    I am curious...

    My two thoughts would be how does addictive personality traits might play in to this and the other would be impulse control issues. Could these people that have trouble controlling their intake of sugar actually have an eating disorder and not the addiction that they believe that they have.

    I have known people that were compulsive about sweet sugary foods. I had a brother in law that even if he was low on money would come back from the store with 2 or 3 sacks of "sweets". He not only ate them but kept offering them to everyone else. When he became diabetic he still continued to buy those 2 or 3 bags of "sweets". He didn't eat very much of it but his attempt to share with others increased. I never understood his compulsion when it came to not only eating sweet things but also the act of buying it.

    I compulsively used to eat cheese crackers...mostly reduced fat cheezits. When I first cut them out I didn't go in to withdrawals but I did think about them a lot. I associated them with sitting and watching a show or sitting and reading. I can go months without buying a box but when I do...I know that I am going to eat the whole box. Try as I might I haven't been able to moderate them. So it is best that I just leave them at the store. Darn...at first...when I went to the store I swear I could hear them calling me!
  • WayTooHonest
    WayTooHonest Posts: 144 Member
    amusedmonkey wrote: »
    redheaddee1974 wrote: »
    amusedmonkey wrote: »
    redheaddee1974 wrote: »
    Let's start with the basic definition of addiction, as brought to you by ASAM (American Society of Addiction Medicine):
    "Addiction is characterized by inability to consistently abstain, impairment in behavioral control, craving, diminished recognition of significant problems with one’s behaviors and interpersonal relationships, and a dysfunctional emotional response. Like other chronic diseases, addiction often involves cycles of relapse and remission. Without treatment or engagement in recovery activities, addiction is progressive and can result in disability or premature death."

    Now, think about this in relation to sugar. Are you unable to consistently abstain? Do you feel out of control? Have cravings? Do you minimize the problem? Does this cause significant problems (such as obesity)? Unhealthy emotional responses? And can it result in premature death?

    I think the answer is pretty clear. The reality is that almost anything can become addictive. Scoff if you will, but it is the lack of control and the negative life impacts that are the defining factors here.

    See also: DSM-5 and ICD-10.

    Let's assume, for the sake of argument, that people are truly addicted to these foods. Wouldn't it be more accurate to say they are addicted to certain foods (that happen to contain sugar among other things) instead of saying they are addicted to sugar? Table sugar is readily available in every household and I have yet to see someone who has a hard time moderating it as long as it is in the house and feels an unhealthy compulsion to dig in with a spoon until it's all gone, ignoring problems in their relationships because all they can think of is sugar, or drinking salad dressing when there is no table sugar.

    First, I think that would entirely depend on the problem foods. If all the problem items are sugary treats, than yes, I feel it can be called a sugar addiction. If it is all chips and salty snacks, than one could argue a potential salt addiction. And I know people who have actually eaten a spoonful of sugar. Other than myself. Not too many people would admit to doing so, however.

    Second, it is more than ignoring problems in a relationship. For example, a person who is obese refuses to be intimate with their partner because of their insecurities about their size. They have become obese, in part, because of their problems with sugary snacks. And now, they have cut off the physical connection with their partner. This would certainly cause problems in both my relationship and my behavior!

    This is the kind of thing these professionals are talking about. It is so much more complicated than simply ignoring problems and eating table sugar. And isn't that the point.

    You have eaten A spoonful of sugar, so you were essentially moderating it, and I assume you are able to abstain from eating table sugar with a spoon on most days (I assume).

    I think occam's razor serves us better in this case than convoluted explanations that try to read too much into definitions and twist them to fit an idea. Humans seek both immediate and storable energy, so the combination of carbs and fat, especially if hyper palatable, is very attractive them from a survival standpoint. It's a much simpler and more elegant explanation. Some behavioral issues may be involved, of course, but those can be involved in just about anything.

    I just wonder how many here have actually worked with people with addictions in a professional setting. The human psyche is so much more complicated than we can even begin to fathom. I am actually a behavioral psychologist, have worked in addictions and rehabilitation for over a decade. I assure you, my explanations are far from convoluted. Psychology is neither elegant nor simple, and neither are people.
  • amusedmonkey
    amusedmonkey Posts: 10,330 Member
    Annie_01 wrote: »
    I am curious...

    My two thoughts would be how does addictive personality traits might play in to this and the other would be impulse control issues. Could these people that have trouble controlling their intake of sugar actually have an eating disorder and not the addiction that they believe that they have.

    I have known people that were compulsive about sweet sugary foods. I had a brother in law that even if he was low on money would come back from the store with 2 or 3 sacks of "sweets". He not only ate them but kept offering them to everyone else. When he became diabetic he still continued to buy those 2 or 3 bags of "sweets". He didn't eat very much of it but his attempt to share with others increased. I never understood his compulsion when it came to not only eating sweet things but also the act of buying it.

    I compulsively used to eat cheese crackers...mostly reduced fat cheezits. When I first cut them out I didn't go in to withdrawals but I did think about them a lot. I associated them with sitting and watching a show or sitting and reading. I can go months without buying a box but when I do...I know that I am going to eat the whole box. Try as I might I haven't been able to moderate them. So it is best that I just leave them at the store. Darn...at first...when I went to the store I swear I could hear them calling me!

    I had this exact problem with nuts so I never buy them unless I can find single serving packs or if they are a part of a dish. Certain holidays are hard for me because we make traditional sweets that contain walnuts and we often have leftovers. I go as far as ask family members to hide the leftover walnuts from me. It's weird, and it's behavioral, and I believe I know how I got this obsession, but this doesn't change the fact that it's a problem and I'm dealing with it successfully so far.
  • Annie_01
    Annie_01 Posts: 3,096 Member
    Christine_72 wrote: »
    redheaddee1974 wrote: »
    amusedmonkey wrote: »
    redheaddee1974 wrote: »
    amusedmonkey wrote: »
    redheaddee1974 wrote: »
    Let's start with the basic definition of addiction, as brought to you by ASAM (American Society of Addiction Medicine):
    "Addiction is characterized by inability to consistently abstain, impairment in behavioral control, craving, diminished recognition of significant problems with one’s behaviors and interpersonal relationships, and a dysfunctional emotional response. Like other chronic diseases, addiction often involves cycles of relapse and remission. Without treatment or engagement in recovery activities, addiction is progressive and can result in disability or premature death."

    Now, think about this in relation to sugar. Are you unable to consistently abstain? Do you feel out of control? Have cravings? Do you minimize the problem? Does this cause significant problems (such as obesity)? Unhealthy emotional responses? And can it result in premature death?

    I think the answer is pretty clear. The reality is that almost anything can become addictive. Scoff if you will, but it is the lack of control and the negative life impacts that are the defining factors here.

    See also: DSM-5 and ICD-10.

    Let's assume, for the sake of argument, that people are truly addicted to these foods. Wouldn't it be more accurate to say they are addicted to certain foods (that happen to contain sugar among other things) instead of saying they are addicted to sugar? Table sugar is readily available in every household and I have yet to see someone who has a hard time moderating it as long as it is in the house and feels an unhealthy compulsion to dig in with a spoon until it's all gone, ignoring problems in their relationships because all they can think of is sugar, or drinking salad dressing when there is no table sugar.

    First, I think that would entirely depend on the problem foods. If all the problem items are sugary treats, than yes, I feel it can be called a sugar addiction. If it is all chips and salty snacks, than one could argue a potential salt addiction. And I know people who have actually eaten a spoonful of sugar. Other than myself. Not too many people would admit to doing so, however.

    Second, it is more than ignoring problems in a relationship. For example, a person who is obese refuses to be intimate with their partner because of their insecurities about their size. They have become obese, in part, because of their problems with sugary snacks. And now, they have cut off the physical connection with their partner. This would certainly cause problems in both my relationship and my behavior!

    This is the kind of thing these professionals are talking about. It is so much more complicated than simply ignoring problems and eating table sugar. And isn't that the point.

    You have eaten A spoonful of sugar, so you were essentially moderating it, and I assume you are able to abstain from eating table sugar with a spoon on most days (I assume).

    I think occam's razor serves us better in this case than convoluted explanations that try to read too much into definitions and twist them to fit an idea. Humans seek both immediate and storable energy, so the combination of carbs and fat, especially if hyper palatable, is very attractive them from a survival standpoint. It's a much simpler and more elegant explanation. Some behavioral issues may be involved, of course, but those can be involved in just about anything.

    I just wonder how many here have actually worked with people with addictions in a professional setting. The human psyche is so much more complicated than we can even begin to fathom. I am actually a behavioral psychologist, have worked in addictions and rehabilitation for over a decade. I assure you, my explanations are far from convoluted. Psychology is neither elegant nor simple, and neither are people.

    I hate bringing this up because it's embarrassing! But many years ago (1999) I had a drug addiction, and i was in rehab surrounded by other drug addicts. The very best Councillors were ex addicts themselves because they actually understood what we were going through. The ones who learnt all about addiction from books and in school lacked a certain empathy and understanding, just something, something that i never was able to put my finger on.

    Please don't be embarrassed...we all have gone to those places in life which we wish we hadn't...at least I have. When I look back however those places that I went...I learned a lot and have tried to use those to make me a better person and be more empathetic towards others.

    Your story reminds me of what I used to tell my son...life isn't a text book and neither are humans. I think that when you have been there yourself you are more empathetic toward those that are experiencing what you have.

  • SymbolismNZ
    SymbolismNZ Posts: 190 Member
    People jumping to heroin, or cocaine... do you know how few of the recreational drug user population use these substances?

    Compare it with psylocibin, or marijuana.
  • amusedmonkey
    amusedmonkey Posts: 10,330 Member
    SymbolismNZ wrote: »
    People jumping to heroin, or cocaine... do you know how few of the recreational drug user population use these substances?

    Compare it with psylocibin, or marijuana.

    How about something more common? A smoker has no problem smoking nasty brands if that's all they could get their hands on even it makes them gag and cough, or dig through the ashtray for salvageable butts. I know an alcohol addict who was once hospitalized because he drank rubbing alcohol when he couldn't get his hands on his choice of alcoholic drink.
  • WayTooHonest
    WayTooHonest Posts: 144 Member
    Christine_72 wrote: »
    redheaddee1974 wrote: »
    amusedmonkey wrote: »
    redheaddee1974 wrote: »
    amusedmonkey wrote: »
    redheaddee1974 wrote: »
    Let's start with the basic definition of addiction, as brought to you by ASAM (American Society of Addiction Medicine):
    "Addiction is characterized by inability to consistently abstain, impairment in behavioral control, craving, diminished recognition of significant problems with one’s behaviors and interpersonal relationships, and a dysfunctional emotional response. Like other chronic diseases, addiction often involves cycles of relapse and remission. Without treatment or engagement in recovery activities, addiction is progressive and can result in disability or premature death."

    Now, think about this in relation to sugar. Are you unable to consistently abstain? Do you feel out of control? Have cravings? Do you minimize the problem? Does this cause significant problems (such as obesity)? Unhealthy emotional responses? And can it result in premature death?

    I think the answer is pretty clear. The reality is that almost anything can become addictive. Scoff if you will, but it is the lack of control and the negative life impacts that are the defining factors here.

    See also: DSM-5 and ICD-10.

    Let's assume, for the sake of argument, that people are truly addicted to these foods. Wouldn't it be more accurate to say they are addicted to certain foods (that happen to contain sugar among other things) instead of saying they are addicted to sugar? Table sugar is readily available in every household and I have yet to see someone who has a hard time moderating it as long as it is in the house and feels an unhealthy compulsion to dig in with a spoon until it's all gone, ignoring problems in their relationships because all they can think of is sugar, or drinking salad dressing when there is no table sugar.

    First, I think that would entirely depend on the problem foods. If all the problem items are sugary treats, than yes, I feel it can be called a sugar addiction. If it is all chips and salty snacks, than one could argue a potential salt addiction. And I know people who have actually eaten a spoonful of sugar. Other than myself. Not too many people would admit to doing so, however.

    Second, it is more than ignoring problems in a relationship. For example, a person who is obese refuses to be intimate with their partner because of their insecurities about their size. They have become obese, in part, because of their problems with sugary snacks. And now, they have cut off the physical connection with their partner. This would certainly cause problems in both my relationship and my behavior!

    This is the kind of thing these professionals are talking about. It is so much more complicated than simply ignoring problems and eating table sugar. And isn't that the point.

    You have eaten A spoonful of sugar, so you were essentially moderating it, and I assume you are able to abstain from eating table sugar with a spoon on most days (I assume).

    I think occam's razor serves us better in this case than convoluted explanations that try to read too much into definitions and twist them to fit an idea. Humans seek both immediate and storable energy, so the combination of carbs and fat, especially if hyper palatable, is very attractive them from a survival standpoint. It's a much simpler and more elegant explanation. Some behavioral issues may be involved, of course, but those can be involved in just about anything.

    I just wonder how many here have actually worked with people with addictions in a professional setting. The human psyche is so much more complicated than we can even begin to fathom. I am actually a behavioral psychologist, have worked in addictions and rehabilitation for over a decade. I assure you, my explanations are far from convoluted. Psychology is neither elegant nor simple, and neither are people.

    I hate bringing this up because it's embarrassing! But many years ago (1999) I had a drug addiction, and i was in rehab surrounded by other drug addicts. The very best Councillors were ex addicts themselves because they actually understood what we were going through. The ones who learnt all about addiction from books and in school lacked a certain empathy and understanding, just something, something that i never was able to put my finger on.

    You have no reason to be embarassed. Good on you for the work! Your success is because you worked hard as hell, likely fell more than once, picked yourself up, and now here you are. That is a feat of superhuman determination and you should be proud of your hard work.
  • WayTooHonest
    WayTooHonest Posts: 144 Member
    kimny72 wrote: »
    redheaddee1974 wrote: »
    amusedmonkey wrote: »
    redheaddee1974 wrote: »
    amusedmonkey wrote: »
    redheaddee1974 wrote: »
    Let's start with the basic definition of addiction, as brought to you by ASAM (American Society of Addiction Medicine):
    "Addiction is characterized by inability to consistently abstain, impairment in behavioral control, craving, diminished recognition of significant problems with one’s behaviors and interpersonal relationships, and a dysfunctional emotional response. Like other chronic diseases, addiction often involves cycles of relapse and remission. Without treatment or engagement in recovery activities, addiction is progressive and can result in disability or premature death."

    Now, think about this in relation to sugar. Are you unable to consistently abstain? Do you feel out of control? Have cravings? Do you minimize the problem? Does this cause significant problems (such as obesity)? Unhealthy emotional responses? And can it result in premature death?

    I think the answer is pretty clear. The reality is that almost anything can become addictive. Scoff if you will, but it is the lack of control and the negative life impacts that are the defining factors here.

    See also: DSM-5 and ICD-10.

    Let's assume, for the sake of argument, that people are truly addicted to these foods. Wouldn't it be more accurate to say they are addicted to certain foods (that happen to contain sugar among other things) instead of saying they are addicted to sugar? Table sugar is readily available in every household and I have yet to see someone who has a hard time moderating it as long as it is in the house and feels an unhealthy compulsion to dig in with a spoon until it's all gone, ignoring problems in their relationships because all they can think of is sugar, or drinking salad dressing when there is no table sugar.

    First, I think that would entirely depend on the problem foods. If all the problem items are sugary treats, than yes, I feel it can be called a sugar addiction. If it is all chips and salty snacks, than one could argue a potential salt addiction. And I know people who have actually eaten a spoonful of sugar. Other than myself. Not too many people would admit to doing so, however.

    Second, it is more than ignoring problems in a relationship. For example, a person who is obese refuses to be intimate with their partner because of their insecurities about their size. They have become obese, in part, because of their problems with sugary snacks. And now, they have cut off the physical connection with their partner. This would certainly cause problems in both my relationship and my behavior!

    This is the kind of thing these professionals are talking about. It is so much more complicated than simply ignoring problems and eating table sugar. And isn't that the point.

    You have eaten A spoonful of sugar, so you were essentially moderating it, and I assume you are able to abstain from eating table sugar with a spoon on most days (I assume).

    I think occam's razor serves us better in this case than convoluted explanations that try to read too much into definitions and twist them to fit an idea. Humans seek both immediate and storable energy, so the combination of carbs and fat, especially if hyper palatable, is very attractive them from a survival standpoint. It's a much simpler and more elegant explanation. Some behavioral issues may be involved, of course, but those can be involved in just about anything.

    I just wonder how many here have actually worked with people with addictions in a professional setting. The human psyche is so much more complicated than we can even begin to fathom. I am actually a behavioral psychologist, have worked in addictions and rehabilitation for over a decade. I assure you, my explanations are far from convoluted. Psychology is neither elegant nor simple, and neither are people.

    This is an honest question - If someone physically addicted to sugar, in the absence of a sweet treat, wouldn't they logically just eat sugar out of a bag? Isn't it more likely that they have a behavioral addiction to eating in general, or to eating hyper-palatable foods (which does not necessarily mean sweet)?

    I think this is the sticking point to me, that when people blame a "sugar addiction", what is really going on is either 1) some kind of a behavioral addiction to eating palatable foods/eating disorder, or 2) a need to not take responsibility for a more generic lack of willpower or better way to deal with boredom or bad habits. It's not so much that I don't think there is a possibility there is an addiction involved, just that I don't believe someone can be physically addicted to sugar.

    That last sentence is what resonates with everything I have been saying. I liken it to marijuana. Studies have shown over and over that marijuana has no physical addictive properties. But it is absolutely psychologically addictive. I view sugar in the same light. It would be difficult to design a study which separates out sugary foods vs pure sugar, which would give a more definitive answer. Maybe I should write a grant proposal and settle it once and for all.
  • kimny72
    kimny72 Posts: 16,011 Member
    redheaddee1974 wrote: »
    kimny72 wrote: »
    redheaddee1974 wrote: »
    amusedmonkey wrote: »
    redheaddee1974 wrote: »
    amusedmonkey wrote: »
    redheaddee1974 wrote: »
    Let's start with the basic definition of addiction, as brought to you by ASAM (American Society of Addiction Medicine):
    "Addiction is characterized by inability to consistently abstain, impairment in behavioral control, craving, diminished recognition of significant problems with one’s behaviors and interpersonal relationships, and a dysfunctional emotional response. Like other chronic diseases, addiction often involves cycles of relapse and remission. Without treatment or engagement in recovery activities, addiction is progressive and can result in disability or premature death."

    Now, think about this in relation to sugar. Are you unable to consistently abstain? Do you feel out of control? Have cravings? Do you minimize the problem? Does this cause significant problems (such as obesity)? Unhealthy emotional responses? And can it result in premature death?

    I think the answer is pretty clear. The reality is that almost anything can become addictive. Scoff if you will, but it is the lack of control and the negative life impacts that are the defining factors here.

    See also: DSM-5 and ICD-10.

    Let's assume, for the sake of argument, that people are truly addicted to these foods. Wouldn't it be more accurate to say they are addicted to certain foods (that happen to contain sugar among other things) instead of saying they are addicted to sugar? Table sugar is readily available in every household and I have yet to see someone who has a hard time moderating it as long as it is in the house and feels an unhealthy compulsion to dig in with a spoon until it's all gone, ignoring problems in their relationships because all they can think of is sugar, or drinking salad dressing when there is no table sugar.

    First, I think that would entirely depend on the problem foods. If all the problem items are sugary treats, than yes, I feel it can be called a sugar addiction. If it is all chips and salty snacks, than one could argue a potential salt addiction. And I know people who have actually eaten a spoonful of sugar. Other than myself. Not too many people would admit to doing so, however.

    Second, it is more than ignoring problems in a relationship. For example, a person who is obese refuses to be intimate with their partner because of their insecurities about their size. They have become obese, in part, because of their problems with sugary snacks. And now, they have cut off the physical connection with their partner. This would certainly cause problems in both my relationship and my behavior!

    This is the kind of thing these professionals are talking about. It is so much more complicated than simply ignoring problems and eating table sugar. And isn't that the point.

    You have eaten A spoonful of sugar, so you were essentially moderating it, and I assume you are able to abstain from eating table sugar with a spoon on most days (I assume).

    I think occam's razor serves us better in this case than convoluted explanations that try to read too much into definitions and twist them to fit an idea. Humans seek both immediate and storable energy, so the combination of carbs and fat, especially if hyper palatable, is very attractive them from a survival standpoint. It's a much simpler and more elegant explanation. Some behavioral issues may be involved, of course, but those can be involved in just about anything.

    I just wonder how many here have actually worked with people with addictions in a professional setting. The human psyche is so much more complicated than we can even begin to fathom. I am actually a behavioral psychologist, have worked in addictions and rehabilitation for over a decade. I assure you, my explanations are far from convoluted. Psychology is neither elegant nor simple, and neither are people.

    This is an honest question - If someone physically addicted to sugar, in the absence of a sweet treat, wouldn't they logically just eat sugar out of a bag? Isn't it more likely that they have a behavioral addiction to eating in general, or to eating hyper-palatable foods (which does not necessarily mean sweet)?

    I think this is the sticking point to me, that when people blame a "sugar addiction", what is really going on is either 1) some kind of a behavioral addiction to eating palatable foods/eating disorder, or 2) a need to not take responsibility for a more generic lack of willpower or better way to deal with boredom or bad habits. It's not so much that I don't think there is a possibility there is an addiction involved, just that I don't believe someone can be physically addicted to sugar.

    That last sentence is what resonates with everything I have been saying. I liken it to marijuana. Studies have shown over and over that marijuana has no physical addictive properties. But it is absolutely psychologically addictive. I view sugar in the same light. It would be difficult to design a study which separates out sugary foods vs pure sugar, which would give a more definitive answer. Maybe I should write a grant proposal and settle it once and for all.

    Thanks for responding :drinker:
  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    AlabasterVerve wrote: »
    amusedmonkey wrote: »
    AlabasterVerve wrote: »
    WinoGelato wrote: »
    leanjogreen18 wrote: »
    Why don't the "sugar is addictive" see the rat study for proof folks ever point to the rat study that bacon & fat is addictive?

    https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/addicted-to-fat-eating/

    Is it a different type of study? Did they handle it different than the sugar study?

    Same reason most conveniently ignore the fact that the foods that people feel they are "addicted" to are largely a hyperpalatable combination of sugar + fat, not just exclusively sugar. But acknowledging that fat is part of the problem would be an issue for many who lean into a LCHF way of eating as a way to address their "sugar addiction".

    I know this is a popular debate point but I don't think this is true at all. In my experience, most people who eat low carb, high fat diets (LCHF) and find their food issues resolved eating that way ignore the fat side of the equation because it doesn't fit their real world experience.

    Sugar = Problem
    Sugar + Fat = Problem
    Fat = No Problem

    Perhaps that line of thinking is wrongheaded - I don't know - but it doesn't matter. No sugar, no problem is good enough for most who've been struggling and find relief eating a low carb diet.

    Curious, could it be the effect of ketosis (tends to stabilize appetite for some) that helps with their problem? Because I know many who are capable of plowing through an entire wheel of cheese and I used to eat 1k worth of nuts a day. In other words, do you think those who are "addicted" to cheese are also helped if they are one of those people who get a desirable appetite adjustment on ketosis?

    I don't know. As lemurcat12 said, people are different.

    For myself, no it doesn't. A light level of ketosis for at least part of the day normalizes my insatiable appetite but I don't need to be in constant ketosis in order to get that effect. That hunger, never feeling satiated and always feeling like I could eat even when I know I'm not physically hungry is what ketosis resolves for me. Even if I eat a thousand of calories of cheese in one sitting it doesn't matter -- I just won't be hungry later and the calories will work themselves out as long as my carbs remain low.

    That's distinctly different from the cravings, compulsive eating and out of control feeling that can be triggered by eating too much sugar or carbs. The "too much" part of that equation isn't static. Smaller amounts infrequently are fine. Smaller amounts frequently and it seems like I build up a tolerance and I start looking for more, more, more until the compulsive, out of control feeling returns.

    It's fascinating, TBH. I don't label myself as a sugar addict but I'm pretty sure if there is such a thing as sugar addiction I'd be diagnosed with it. It's the exact same experience I had with smoking. Manageable and a non-issue the longer I've quit ... but it takes a tremendous amount of willpower and determination to come back from the holiday season where I repeatedly push and exceed my limits of what I can tolerate. It's much easier now that I understand what the problem is, how to deal with the cravings and knowing those feelings are only temporary and I'll be back to normal within a week or two.

    I mentioned this in another thread recently, but I have a similar thing that seems to be related to meal timing, I think. I don't feel hungry, exactly (I'm fortunate that hunger is not a problem for me, maybe because of how I eat, maybe just because, dunno), but if I let myself graze I think about food and want to eat all day long for days afterwards sometimes (sometimes it's just that day and I'm fine the next). If I snack I often want to keep snacking. I had to break myself of that habit when I started, and every time I've restarted it (even when it was simply because I was on a bike trip for a week where we were snacking while riding), it's been a kitten to get past it.

    I had a bad holiday season -- really went on for about a month -- and I was feeling like I had no control at all and angry with myself "what's wrong with you, why don't you care anymore, why are you obsessed with food?" and really hardcore decided to stop it when I got back from visiting my parents at Christmas and it was hard at first and now it's gone again. We still are getting amazing treats left in the breakroom and I've stopped thinking about them, whereas when I was snacking I'd be super consciously aware of them at all times. I would agree that it's not totally different from how I'd think about alcohol sometimes when I was drinking -- it's there, would it be okay to have a drink, can I drink more, etc. There are also ways in which it is very different, but I don't deny there are relationships, for me even though I can't possibly be talking about a physical addiction, because for me it's not the type of food, this would happen if it were cheese or nuts (I've had the keep snacking thing with Epic bars or similar), although of course it's mostly been baked goods and chocolates that are there.
This discussion has been closed.

Categories