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
Replies
-
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.2 -
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.1 -
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.1 -
redheaddee1974 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:0 -
redheaddee1974 wrote: »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.
Thank you, and yes it was the hardest thing I've ever had to overcome. This is why it irks me when people nonchalantly compare sugar cravings to drug addiction. Speak8ng from experience, there is NO comparison between the two.
9 -
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.2 -
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.
But why? Let's say the person goes nuts for chocolates and cookies and brownies and ice cream and cake. All foods that are about half sugar and half fat. The person won't overeat straight sugar, and also won't overeat straight fat.
Why would this be a "sugar" addiction and not fat+sugar addiction (if an addiction at all, and I don't think it is, I think there's "eating addiction" but it's kind of uncommon)?
I actually think it's quite a bit more common for people to claim to have issues with "junk food" (sometimes the sweets + things like chips which are half carb/half fat also, with salt, sometimes also including fast food (which is high fat, but has protein too, and not that much sugar)),
Anyway apart from that, I don't really have a problem with the criteria, but how you are defining them down. For example:
* inability to consistently abstain -- problem is that any healthy diet will include some sugar (vegetables) and likely more (carbs are basically sugar to the body, fruit is good for most people, etc.). Another issue is that people can't abstain if they don't think they have a reason to (will one cookie hurt me?). Not abstaining when you believe disastrous things are likely to happen -- and happen in the near future, not hypothetically in the far from now future (which people are bad at weighing) -- is quite different. Would you eat a cookie if you thought it would cost you a job or a friendship?
* impairment in behavioral control -- again, I think this is more than feeling out of control (I think feeling out of control around food is really common and related to our biology so many of us need structure); it's doing things we know will have bad results, possibly even more (I am not 100% sure how this is defined but there are numerous ways it seems to me related to drug abuse and not the usual issues with food -- are there people that reach this level with eating/food? Sure, I think so)
* craving -- you can crave foods without being addicted. I've certainly craved foods I am not addicted to.
* diminished recognition of significant problems with one’s behaviors and interpersonal relationships, and a dysfunctional emotional response -- this to me is the biggest difference, and I used to explain it as being an addict (thinking of myself, back in the day, and yes family members) generally makes you a rotten selfish person in some ways, caring about nothing but your substance. The vast majority of people with food issues don't have that, thank goodness! When I was fat and overeating, I was a moral and ethical person, good friend, good family member, good employee, etc. Yeah, probably I was lessening my chance of getting a date (although lots of people have no issues with that while fat), but that's not remotely the same.5 -
SymbolismNZ wrote: »People jumping to heroin, or cocaine... do you know how few of the recreational drug user population use these substances?
I've been surprised at how many, although my source for this is people who thought they had a problem with some substance (although often primarily alcohol).1 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »SymbolismNZ wrote: »People jumping to heroin, or cocaine... do you know how few of the recreational drug user population use these substances?
I've been surprised at how many, although my source for this is people who thought they had a problem with some substance (although often primarily alcohol).
Smoking/Nicotine abuse is the obvious one but it's hardly "in moderation" - it's why I like using psylocibin or marijuana because "moderate use" would be more indicative of "moderate consumption of refined sugar sources" because of the obvious parallels.
You've got people who sneak a bar of chocolate in once a week, versus people who consume (either edible or inhalation) marijuana once per week...
You've also got people who eat chocolate every single day of the week, versus people who consume marijuana every day of the week.
Forgetting the recent evidence linking refined sugar to other health problems, if we just look at weight - I still don't think it's sugar addiction; from what I've read and just thinking through things logically, I think it's more to do with your body/brain/genes feeling like they just had a massive intake of energy, and preparing itself to function on the basis of that energy through the day... only for 30 minutes later as the glucose spike fades away, it says "Hey.. what... but I had all this good beautiful glucose to work with, where did it go? Tell that punk I'm hungry"
Some are able to regulate that better than others.
1 -
SymbolismNZ wrote: »Forgetting the recent evidence linking refined sugar to other health problems, if we just look at weight - I still don't think it's sugar addiction; from what I've read and just thinking through things logically, I think it's more to do with your body/brain/genes feeling like they just had a massive intake of energy, and preparing itself to function on the basis of that energy through the day... only for 30 minutes later as the glucose spike fades away, it says "Hey.. what... but I had all this good beautiful glucose to work with, where did it go? Tell that punk I'm hungry"
Some are able to regulate that better than others.
Hunger is complicated -- people aren't even necessarily good at saying whether they've been hungry (there was a study related to whether those who lose weight tend to be more hungry that controlled for this well). I guess this even raises the question "what do I mean by hunger"? Desire to eat? Something more?
This is good on the complexity of satiety: https://examine.com/nutrition/high-carb-high-satiety/
My personal belief, which of course is largely based on my experiences, but other evidence too, is that hunger is overrated as an explanation. Despite our often crappy food choices as a country, I don't think the US (for example) has actually gotten more hungry since the 80s as the explanation for the huge increase in calories consumed. I think our food environments have changed and that humans respond to food environments -- basically if there's no structure limiting when and what we eat and food is on offer all the time and it's a variety of tasty looking foods, we overeat, often by a lot.
I ate a pretty healthy diet, plenty of healthy fats and protein, whole grains, lots of vegetables and fruits, mostly home cooking, etc., when I was getting fat. But I'd still think about food during the day, eat overly large portions, use food for self comfort, etc.
I went to Nicaragua for a couple of weeks on a trip where we were planting trees and working with kids and so on, and was very active. Didn't change the essence of my diet (it was probably higher carb while I was there, and I ate things like fruit for breakfast, more bread), and yet I never thought about food between meals and didn't overeat at meals. Lost a good amount of weight.
Made me think about how I'd not eaten especially well in high school or college or post college, but not overeaten. Partly it was activity, but a large part was that there just wasn't an opportunity to snack (or it was a rarer thing). Food was on offer at meal time (and not the huge variety, really) and not at other times unless you made an effort.
So I realized based on these that the reason I ate more at home in the US wasn't food choice, it was food environment -- my own desire to eat followed what I had available/on offer to eat. I think some experience this as hunger.
So for me finding a structure that allowed me to deal with this was helpful.4 -
^can dig it
For some I've seen, and myself at times, is boredom = hunger, need a break from stress=hunger, need distraction from life=hunger, etc. basically not really knowing when we are really hungry.
Also, it blows my mind whenever I go to any restaurant. The plate sizes are unbelievable. Huge. The restaurant makes more money, but then I feel forced to " finish my plate"-as was drilled into me from childhood, when we actually had sensible to smallish portions, and not the dessert first. Dessert was maybe once a day or week if poor ATM, not any ole time of day or for breakfast either (we were too poor to buy fancy cereals thank goodness).
I do remember my shortish stint with drugs didn't care for food much at all then. They were quite the replacement. When I did eat at all it was pastas, crackers or chocolate - all sugar. Hmmm. Connections?2 -
Sugar addiction? Not exactly. A self control issue? For some, yes. Some people are more prone to be "addicted" to things and with help and discipline they can stop.
I'm yet to be held up and mugged on the street by someone wanting a pixy stick. So I'm going to say no on this. Also when people rob a house, they don't steal your sugar and candy... they tend to go for, money and jewelry, if you had meth in the house and a meth addict knew it, they'd probably go for the meth too... but I doubt if they eat sugar they'd steal all the sugar in the house...
I think the issue is self control and demonizing sugar is a way to say "I'm not fat because I lack discipline and have no self control"... "I'm fat because I'm addicted" and not feel as guilty. At the end of the day it's still a self control issue, which isn't 100% "addiction". With discipline you train yourself to stop eating large amounts of high calorie garbage... though I imagine some people might not find it that easy to do and maybe they need to go cold turkey... I don't think everyone needs to though.
A year ago I could eat a whole 500gms of chocolate in a day... feel horrible about it, then I'd go eat a burger. I don't think it was "sugar addiction" for me. It's because I didn't give a damn and I enjoyed eating it. It didn't seem like it was harmful, it was just food and I loved food. It made me feel great, but that's hardly an "addiction" you could compare to taking heroin. Yes my brain's reacting to it and that's why i feel great but food can do that. I feel great after I walk, watch a good movie or read a good book. What changed me was seeing so many docu's on obesity and the health related issues. I now feel disgusted at the thought of eating so much garbage. I look at what I'm planning to eat before i buy it.
3 -
DietVanillaCoke wrote: »Sugar addiction? Not exactly. A self control issue? For some, yes. Some people are more prone to be "addicted" to things and with help and discipline they can stop.
I'm yet to be held up and mugged on the street by someone wanting a pixy stick. So I'm going to say no on this. Also when people rob a house, they don't steal your sugar and candy... they tend to go for, money and jewelry, if you had meth in the house and a meth addict knew it, they'd probably go for the meth too... but I doubt if they eat sugar they'd steal all the sugar in the house...
I think the issue is self control and demonizing sugar is a way to say "I'm not fat because I lack discipline and have no self control"... "I'm fat because I'm addicted" and not feel as guilty. At the end of the day it's still a self control issue, which isn't 100% "addiction". With discipline you train yourself to stop eating large amounts of high calorie garbage... though I imagine some people might not find it that easy to do and maybe they need to go cold turkey... I don't think everyone needs to though.
A year ago I could eat a whole 500gms of chocolate in a day... feel horrible about it, then I'd go eat a burger. I don't think it was "sugar addiction" for me. It's because I didn't give a damn and I enjoyed eating it. It didn't seem like it was harmful, it was just food and I loved food. It made me feel great, but that's hardly an "addiction" you could compare to taking heroin. Yes my brain's reacting to it and that's why i feel great but food can do that. I feel great after I walk, watch a good movie or read a good book. What changed me was seeing so many docu's on obesity and the health related issues. I now feel disgusted at the thought of eating so much garbage. I look at what I'm planning to eat before i buy it.
Yes you are correct in saying "Some people are more prone to be addicted to things..."
Addictions are a common trait on my father's side of the family. In my case I do not think I had a specific "Sugar Addition" but it more a "Carb Addiction" in general. I never drank alcohol because I grew up seeing how it was abused by my uncles and the negative impact on the wivess and kids but I sure was able to abuse/over eat carbs in food that was negative for my health until I went off of sugar and all forms of all grains 30 months ago. Thankfully I am seeing some health gains even at my age after giving up that addiction cold turkey finally at the age of 63. While from time to time I will eat a piece of candy the urge to keep eating it still strong after the first piece. In the past I never opened box of chocolate covered cherries that I did not wind up eating the entire box in short order. Perhaps I still have that addiction but I just made the choice not to live off of mainly carbs any longer.0 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »DietVanillaCoke wrote: »Sugar addiction? Not exactly. A self control issue? For some, yes. Some people are more prone to be "addicted" to things and with help and discipline they can stop.
I'm yet to be held up and mugged on the street by someone wanting a pixy stick. So I'm going to say no on this. Also when people rob a house, they don't steal your sugar and candy... they tend to go for, money and jewelry, if you had meth in the house and a meth addict knew it, they'd probably go for the meth too... but I doubt if they eat sugar they'd steal all the sugar in the house...
I think the issue is self control and demonizing sugar is a way to say "I'm not fat because I lack discipline and have no self control"... "I'm fat because I'm addicted" and not feel as guilty. At the end of the day it's still a self control issue, which isn't 100% "addiction". With discipline you train yourself to stop eating large amounts of high calorie garbage... though I imagine some people might not find it that easy to do and maybe they need to go cold turkey... I don't think everyone needs to though.
A year ago I could eat a whole 500gms of chocolate in a day... feel horrible about it, then I'd go eat a burger. I don't think it was "sugar addiction" for me. It's because I didn't give a damn and I enjoyed eating it. It didn't seem like it was harmful, it was just food and I loved food. It made me feel great, but that's hardly an "addiction" you could compare to taking heroin. Yes my brain's reacting to it and that's why i feel great but food can do that. I feel great after I walk, watch a good movie or read a good book. What changed me was seeing so many docu's on obesity and the health related issues. I now feel disgusted at the thought of eating so much garbage. I look at what I'm planning to eat before i buy it.
Yes you are correct in saying "Some people are more prone to be addicted to things..."
Addictions are a common trait on my father's side of the family. In my case I do not think I had a specific "Sugar Addition" but it more a "Carb Addiction" in general. I never drank alcohol because I grew up seeing how it was abused by my uncles and the negative impact on the wives and kids but I sure was able to abuse/over eat carbs in food that was negative for my health until I went off of sugar and all forms of all grains 30 months ago. Thankfully I am seeing some health gains even at my age after giving up that addiction cold turkey finally at the age of 63. While from time to time I will eat a piece of candy the urge to keep eating it still strong after the first piece. In the past I never opened box of chocolate covered cherries that I did not wind up eating the entire box in short order. Perhaps I still have that addiction but I just made the choice not to live off of mainly carbs any longer.
There's a danger in watering down definitions as this trend often masks root causes.
If you are able to not consume a substance (in this case alcohol) due to recognition of a negative impact, then you are by definition, not addicted.3 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »DietVanillaCoke wrote: »Sugar addiction? Not exactly. A self control issue? For some, yes. Some people are more prone to be "addicted" to things and with help and discipline they can stop.
I'm yet to be held up and mugged on the street by someone wanting a pixy stick. So I'm going to say no on this. Also when people rob a house, they don't steal your sugar and candy... they tend to go for, money and jewelry, if you had meth in the house and a meth addict knew it, they'd probably go for the meth too... but I doubt if they eat sugar they'd steal all the sugar in the house...
I think the issue is self control and demonizing sugar is a way to say "I'm not fat because I lack discipline and have no self control"... "I'm fat because I'm addicted" and not feel as guilty. At the end of the day it's still a self control issue, which isn't 100% "addiction". With discipline you train yourself to stop eating large amounts of high calorie garbage... though I imagine some people might not find it that easy to do and maybe they need to go cold turkey... I don't think everyone needs to though.
A year ago I could eat a whole 500gms of chocolate in a day... feel horrible about it, then I'd go eat a burger. I don't think it was "sugar addiction" for me. It's because I didn't give a damn and I enjoyed eating it. It didn't seem like it was harmful, it was just food and I loved food. It made me feel great, but that's hardly an "addiction" you could compare to taking heroin. Yes my brain's reacting to it and that's why i feel great but food can do that. I feel great after I walk, watch a good movie or read a good book. What changed me was seeing so many docu's on obesity and the health related issues. I now feel disgusted at the thought of eating so much garbage. I look at what I'm planning to eat before i buy it.
Yes you are correct in saying "Some people are more prone to be addicted to things..."
Addictions are a common trait on my father's side of the family. In my case I do not think I had a specific "Sugar Addition" but it more a "Carb Addiction" in general. I never drank alcohol because I grew up seeing how it was abused by my uncles and the negative impact on the wives and kids but I sure was able to abuse/over eat carbs in food that was negative for my health until I went off of sugar and all forms of all grains 30 months ago. Thankfully I am seeing some health gains even at my age after giving up that addiction cold turkey finally at the age of 63. While from time to time I will eat a piece of candy the urge to keep eating it still strong after the first piece. In the past I never opened box of chocolate covered cherries that I did not wind up eating the entire box in short order. Perhaps I still have that addiction but I just made the choice not to live off of mainly carbs any longer.
There's a danger in watering down definitions as this trend often masks root causes.
If you are able to not consume a substance (in this case alcohol) due to recognition of a negative impact, then you are by definition, not addicted.
That is true. I am not addicted to alcohol because I have never consumed any. Since alcohol typically is a carb containing drink and carb additions runs in my family and in me specifically I just see "carbs" as being the least common denominator in my family food addictions.0 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »DietVanillaCoke wrote: »Sugar addiction? Not exactly. A self control issue? For some, yes. Some people are more prone to be "addicted" to things and with help and discipline they can stop.
I'm yet to be held up and mugged on the street by someone wanting a pixy stick. So I'm going to say no on this. Also when people rob a house, they don't steal your sugar and candy... they tend to go for, money and jewelry, if you had meth in the house and a meth addict knew it, they'd probably go for the meth too... but I doubt if they eat sugar they'd steal all the sugar in the house...
I think the issue is self control and demonizing sugar is a way to say "I'm not fat because I lack discipline and have no self control"... "I'm fat because I'm addicted" and not feel as guilty. At the end of the day it's still a self control issue, which isn't 100% "addiction". With discipline you train yourself to stop eating large amounts of high calorie garbage... though I imagine some people might not find it that easy to do and maybe they need to go cold turkey... I don't think everyone needs to though.
A year ago I could eat a whole 500gms of chocolate in a day... feel horrible about it, then I'd go eat a burger. I don't think it was "sugar addiction" for me. It's because I didn't give a damn and I enjoyed eating it. It didn't seem like it was harmful, it was just food and I loved food. It made me feel great, but that's hardly an "addiction" you could compare to taking heroin. Yes my brain's reacting to it and that's why i feel great but food can do that. I feel great after I walk, watch a good movie or read a good book. What changed me was seeing so many docu's on obesity and the health related issues. I now feel disgusted at the thought of eating so much garbage. I look at what I'm planning to eat before i buy it.
Yes you are correct in saying "Some people are more prone to be addicted to things..."
Addictions are a common trait on my father's side of the family. In my case I do not think I had a specific "Sugar Addition" but it more a "Carb Addiction" in general. I never drank alcohol because I grew up seeing how it was abused by my uncles and the negative impact on the wives and kids but I sure was able to abuse/over eat carbs in food that was negative for my health until I went off of sugar and all forms of all grains 30 months ago. Thankfully I am seeing some health gains even at my age after giving up that addiction cold turkey finally at the age of 63. While from time to time I will eat a piece of candy the urge to keep eating it still strong after the first piece. In the past I never opened box of chocolate covered cherries that I did not wind up eating the entire box in short order. Perhaps I still have that addiction but I just made the choice not to live off of mainly carbs any longer.
There's a danger in watering down definitions as this trend often masks root causes.
If you are able to not consume a substance (in this case alcohol) due to recognition of a negative impact, then you are by definition, not addicted.
That is true. I am not addicted to alcohol because I have never consumed any. Since alcohol typically is a carb containing drink and carb additions runs in my family and in me specifically I just see "carbs" as being the least common denominator in my family food addictions.
Some alcohol-containing drinks may have carbohydrates, but alcohol itself is carbohydrate-free. Vodka, rum, whiskey, all free of carbohydrates. If someone has trouble with alcohol, framing that as a carbohydrate issue doesn't really make sense.
We *know* that alcohol is addictive. We don't know that for carbohydrates. Are you saying the alcoholics in your family would turn down a rum and diet Coke or a glass of neat bourbon because it wouldn't satisfy their addiction?8 -
janejellyroll wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »DietVanillaCoke wrote: »Sugar addiction? Not exactly. A self control issue? For some, yes. Some people are more prone to be "addicted" to things and with help and discipline they can stop.
I'm yet to be held up and mugged on the street by someone wanting a pixy stick. So I'm going to say no on this. Also when people rob a house, they don't steal your sugar and candy... they tend to go for, money and jewelry, if you had meth in the house and a meth addict knew it, they'd probably go for the meth too... but I doubt if they eat sugar they'd steal all the sugar in the house...
I think the issue is self control and demonizing sugar is a way to say "I'm not fat because I lack discipline and have no self control"... "I'm fat because I'm addicted" and not feel as guilty. At the end of the day it's still a self control issue, which isn't 100% "addiction". With discipline you train yourself to stop eating large amounts of high calorie garbage... though I imagine some people might not find it that easy to do and maybe they need to go cold turkey... I don't think everyone needs to though.
A year ago I could eat a whole 500gms of chocolate in a day... feel horrible about it, then I'd go eat a burger. I don't think it was "sugar addiction" for me. It's because I didn't give a damn and I enjoyed eating it. It didn't seem like it was harmful, it was just food and I loved food. It made me feel great, but that's hardly an "addiction" you could compare to taking heroin. Yes my brain's reacting to it and that's why i feel great but food can do that. I feel great after I walk, watch a good movie or read a good book. What changed me was seeing so many docu's on obesity and the health related issues. I now feel disgusted at the thought of eating so much garbage. I look at what I'm planning to eat before i buy it.
Yes you are correct in saying "Some people are more prone to be addicted to things..."
Addictions are a common trait on my father's side of the family. In my case I do not think I had a specific "Sugar Addition" but it more a "Carb Addiction" in general. I never drank alcohol because I grew up seeing how it was abused by my uncles and the negative impact on the wives and kids but I sure was able to abuse/over eat carbs in food that was negative for my health until I went off of sugar and all forms of all grains 30 months ago. Thankfully I am seeing some health gains even at my age after giving up that addiction cold turkey finally at the age of 63. While from time to time I will eat a piece of candy the urge to keep eating it still strong after the first piece. In the past I never opened box of chocolate covered cherries that I did not wind up eating the entire box in short order. Perhaps I still have that addiction but I just made the choice not to live off of mainly carbs any longer.
There's a danger in watering down definitions as this trend often masks root causes.
If you are able to not consume a substance (in this case alcohol) due to recognition of a negative impact, then you are by definition, not addicted.
That is true. I am not addicted to alcohol because I have never consumed any. Since alcohol typically is a carb containing drink and carb additions runs in my family and in me specifically I just see "carbs" as being the least common denominator in my family food addictions.
Some alcohol-containing drinks may have carbohydrates, but alcohol itself is carbohydrate-free. Vodka, rum, whiskey, all free of carbohydrates. If someone has trouble with alcohol, framing that as a carbohydrate issue doesn't really make sense.
We *know* that alcohol is addictive. We don't know that for carbohydrates. Are you saying the alcoholics in your family would turn down a rum and diet Coke or a glass of neat bourbon because it wouldn't satisfy their addiction?
Thank you for articulating this, I was trying to formulate a response but kept having to start over...
The attempt to paint everything "bad" as CARBS has sunk to a new low when we make statements like 'alcohol is a carb containing drink' and try to extend that to why alcohol is addictive. It's as frustrating as people who insist they are addicted to sugar or carbs and use cookies and ice cream as examples - foods that also have about 50% of their calories from fat.... but of course it must be the sugar to blame.9 -
Between all the sugar threads and the pop tart thread, I am finally throwing in the towel, admitting my addiction to an evil substance, and will be spending the rest of the afternoon either in the hallway or under my desk, clutching a packet of pop tarts and covered in a suspicious white powder. I...I...I thought I could moderate....!
18 -
WinoGelato wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »DietVanillaCoke wrote: »Sugar addiction? Not exactly. A self control issue? For some, yes. Some people are more prone to be "addicted" to things and with help and discipline they can stop.
I'm yet to be held up and mugged on the street by someone wanting a pixy stick. So I'm going to say no on this. Also when people rob a house, they don't steal your sugar and candy... they tend to go for, money and jewelry, if you had meth in the house and a meth addict knew it, they'd probably go for the meth too... but I doubt if they eat sugar they'd steal all the sugar in the house...
I think the issue is self control and demonizing sugar is a way to say "I'm not fat because I lack discipline and have no self control"... "I'm fat because I'm addicted" and not feel as guilty. At the end of the day it's still a self control issue, which isn't 100% "addiction". With discipline you train yourself to stop eating large amounts of high calorie garbage... though I imagine some people might not find it that easy to do and maybe they need to go cold turkey... I don't think everyone needs to though.
A year ago I could eat a whole 500gms of chocolate in a day... feel horrible about it, then I'd go eat a burger. I don't think it was "sugar addiction" for me. It's because I didn't give a damn and I enjoyed eating it. It didn't seem like it was harmful, it was just food and I loved food. It made me feel great, but that's hardly an "addiction" you could compare to taking heroin. Yes my brain's reacting to it and that's why i feel great but food can do that. I feel great after I walk, watch a good movie or read a good book. What changed me was seeing so many docu's on obesity and the health related issues. I now feel disgusted at the thought of eating so much garbage. I look at what I'm planning to eat before i buy it.
Yes you are correct in saying "Some people are more prone to be addicted to things..."
Addictions are a common trait on my father's side of the family. In my case I do not think I had a specific "Sugar Addition" but it more a "Carb Addiction" in general. I never drank alcohol because I grew up seeing how it was abused by my uncles and the negative impact on the wives and kids but I sure was able to abuse/over eat carbs in food that was negative for my health until I went off of sugar and all forms of all grains 30 months ago. Thankfully I am seeing some health gains even at my age after giving up that addiction cold turkey finally at the age of 63. While from time to time I will eat a piece of candy the urge to keep eating it still strong after the first piece. In the past I never opened box of chocolate covered cherries that I did not wind up eating the entire box in short order. Perhaps I still have that addiction but I just made the choice not to live off of mainly carbs any longer.
There's a danger in watering down definitions as this trend often masks root causes.
If you are able to not consume a substance (in this case alcohol) due to recognition of a negative impact, then you are by definition, not addicted.
That is true. I am not addicted to alcohol because I have never consumed any. Since alcohol typically is a carb containing drink and carb additions runs in my family and in me specifically I just see "carbs" as being the least common denominator in my family food addictions.
Some alcohol-containing drinks may have carbohydrates, but alcohol itself is carbohydrate-free. Vodka, rum, whiskey, all free of carbohydrates. If someone has trouble with alcohol, framing that as a carbohydrate issue doesn't really make sense.
We *know* that alcohol is addictive. We don't know that for carbohydrates. Are you saying the alcoholics in your family would turn down a rum and diet Coke or a glass of neat bourbon because it wouldn't satisfy their addiction?
Thank you for articulating this, I was trying to formulate a response but kept having to start over...
The attempt to paint everything "bad" as CARBS has sunk to a new low when we make statements like 'alcohol is a carb containing drink' and try to extend that to why alcohol is addictive. It's as frustrating as people who insist they are addicted to sugar or carbs and use cookies and ice cream as examples - foods that also have about 50% of their calories from fat.... but of course it must be the sugar to blame.
It's as if he thinks an alcoholic would be as happy with a glass of Kool-Aid or a handful of Oreos as s/he would be with a drink.1 -
janejellyroll wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »DietVanillaCoke wrote: »Sugar addiction? Not exactly. A self control issue? For some, yes. Some people are more prone to be "addicted" to things and with help and discipline they can stop.
I'm yet to be held up and mugged on the street by someone wanting a pixy stick. So I'm going to say no on this. Also when people rob a house, they don't steal your sugar and candy... they tend to go for, money and jewelry, if you had meth in the house and a meth addict knew it, they'd probably go for the meth too... but I doubt if they eat sugar they'd steal all the sugar in the house...
I think the issue is self control and demonizing sugar is a way to say "I'm not fat because I lack discipline and have no self control"... "I'm fat because I'm addicted" and not feel as guilty. At the end of the day it's still a self control issue, which isn't 100% "addiction". With discipline you train yourself to stop eating large amounts of high calorie garbage... though I imagine some people might not find it that easy to do and maybe they need to go cold turkey... I don't think everyone needs to though.
A year ago I could eat a whole 500gms of chocolate in a day... feel horrible about it, then I'd go eat a burger. I don't think it was "sugar addiction" for me. It's because I didn't give a damn and I enjoyed eating it. It didn't seem like it was harmful, it was just food and I loved food. It made me feel great, but that's hardly an "addiction" you could compare to taking heroin. Yes my brain's reacting to it and that's why i feel great but food can do that. I feel great after I walk, watch a good movie or read a good book. What changed me was seeing so many docu's on obesity and the health related issues. I now feel disgusted at the thought of eating so much garbage. I look at what I'm planning to eat before i buy it.
Yes you are correct in saying "Some people are more prone to be addicted to things..."
Addictions are a common trait on my father's side of the family. In my case I do not think I had a specific "Sugar Addition" but it more a "Carb Addiction" in general. I never drank alcohol because I grew up seeing how it was abused by my uncles and the negative impact on the wives and kids but I sure was able to abuse/over eat carbs in food that was negative for my health until I went off of sugar and all forms of all grains 30 months ago. Thankfully I am seeing some health gains even at my age after giving up that addiction cold turkey finally at the age of 63. While from time to time I will eat a piece of candy the urge to keep eating it still strong after the first piece. In the past I never opened box of chocolate covered cherries that I did not wind up eating the entire box in short order. Perhaps I still have that addiction but I just made the choice not to live off of mainly carbs any longer.
There's a danger in watering down definitions as this trend often masks root causes.
If you are able to not consume a substance (in this case alcohol) due to recognition of a negative impact, then you are by definition, not addicted.
That is true. I am not addicted to alcohol because I have never consumed any. Since alcohol typically is a carb containing drink and carb additions runs in my family and in me specifically I just see "carbs" as being the least common denominator in my family food addictions.
Some alcohol-containing drinks may have carbohydrates, but alcohol itself is carbohydrate-free. Vodka, rum, whiskey, all free of carbohydrates. If someone has trouble with alcohol, framing that as a carbohydrate issue doesn't really make sense.
We *know* that alcohol is addictive. We don't know that for carbohydrates. Are you saying the alcoholics in your family would turn down a rum and diet Coke or a glass of neat bourbon because it wouldn't satisfy their addiction?
All of the alcoholics that I knew personally in my family are now dead. Getting drunk every time one starts drinking carries grave health risks.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 392.9K Introduce Yourself
- 43.7K Getting Started
- 260.1K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.8K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 415 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.9K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.6K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.5K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions