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.
"Addiction" versus "Dependence"
Replies
-
goldthistime wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »goldthistime wrote: »goldthistime wrote: »I DO think it's harder for someone who is dealing with intense sugar cravings than it is for someone who is not. They both have all the normal challenges of staying in a calorie deficit, plus the so called sugar addict is dealing with an added element. One that they often consider to be their biggest challenge.
Yeah but it's the end of the MFP forum world to say someone has a harder time than another person. Bad bad bad!
I think everyone has their own challenges. Some have it easier than others. With the differences in bodies (hormone levels as an example), it is harder and easier for individuals. Uhoh, another end of the world statements.
Lol at "bad bad bad". Guess I should have started with "all things being equal". Certainly I agree that there are other challenges out there that are as bad or worse. I agree on the hormonal stuff, and meds that have been shown to cause weight gain comes to mind, depression and high stress levels etc.
What gets me with the addiction posts specifically, is the posters often assume that being tempted or wanting to eat more than you should = addiction, and other posters who don't claim addiction don't experience this. So why would we get fat? Of course we have temptation and all the rest and messed up eating behaviors often. I just don't think that's addiction or that someone who claims to be "addicted" has it harder than everyone else.
I think focusing on the actual specifics (vs. claiming "oh, can't help it, once I have sugar I lose it, because addict" -- BigSugar made me fat) tends to be extremely illuminating and helpful, as it focuses in on why you are actually overeating, when, in what context, so on. Not eating certain trigger foods (even all aggressively sweet things) can certainly be a part of the solution, depending on context. None of that has to do with addiction, again, however.
I'm thrilled that this discussion has moved out of the main forums where it used to pop up all the time.
Agreed, although I will point out AGAIN that for ages I've posted "I don't think addiction is the right word, but..." and then three paragraphs of what I think is helpful advice and my experience with being out of control with food, so on, and while sometimes the OP responds (I don't care if the OP takes my advice or not, usually it's worded as "these might help" not "do this" but an acknowledgement would be nice) often there is none. MORE often someone new jumps in, ignores the substance of the post and offers NOTHING helpful and insists that sugar is more addictive than heroin, it's been proven, the only choice is to cut out all sugar and "processed foods" or some such. In that IMO that's false information (and not responsive to the OP or helpful), I am forced to respond. Now I can tell that person he or she is off topic and link to a thread here.
But, that person is still the one trying to drag the thread off topic, not me in my first response.I hope that we, as a community can stick to helpful stuff, like suggesting they avoid aggressively sweet trigger foods, as your example, rather than taking the time to educate them in their misuse of the word "addict" as had been happening for most of the three years I've been here.
I have always done this, and me remarking -- as I feel obligated to by conscience -- that I don't think addiction is really the right word (or more often, the word I would use) does not change that.5 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »goldthistime wrote: »goldthistime wrote: »I DO think it's harder for someone who is dealing with intense sugar cravings than it is for someone who is not. They both have all the normal challenges of staying in a calorie deficit, plus the so called sugar addict is dealing with an added element. One that they often consider to be their biggest challenge.
Yeah but it's the end of the MFP forum world to say someone has a harder time than another person. Bad bad bad!
I think everyone has their own challenges. Some have it easier than others. With the differences in bodies (hormone levels as an example), it is harder and easier for individuals. Uhoh, another end of the world statements.
Lol at "bad bad bad". Guess I should have started with "all things being equal". Certainly I agree that there are other challenges out there that are as bad or worse. I agree on the hormonal stuff, and meds that have been shown to cause weight gain comes to mind, depression and high stress levels etc.
What gets me with the addiction posts specifically, is the posters often assume that being tempted or wanting to eat more than you should = addiction, and other posters who don't claim addiction don't experience this. So why would we get fat? Of course we have temptation and all the rest and messed up eating behaviors often. I just don't think that's addiction or that someone who claims to be "addicted" has it harder than everyone else.
I think focusing on the actual specifics (vs. claiming "oh, can't help it, once I have sugar I lose it, because addict" -- BigSugar made me fat) tends to be extremely illuminating and helpful, as it focuses in on why you are actually overeating, when, in what context, so on. Not eating certain trigger foods (even all aggressively sweet things) can certainly be a part of the solution, depending on context. None of that has to do with addiction, again, however.
I don't think anyone is saying all overweight people are food addicts.
It seems to me that what you are saying -- and correct me if I'm wrong, because I'd like to understand -- is that some people who self identify as addicts have it harder than the rest of us, who don't self identify as addicts. I'd like to know what makes you so sure that it's harder for you just because you use that term for stuff that many of the rest of us also experience, but simply think is quite different from addiction, when the term is correctly used.
I've never chosen to self-identify as an alcoholic, although by every definition I've ever read I clearly met enough criteria to do so. I find the whole, "Hi, I'm Kshama and I'm and alcoholic" to be disempowering. But when someone posts a thread saying they are a sugar addict, I'm not going to get into all that, but rather offer them help.
(This is not to say you don't offer help despite your feeling about their label - you certainly do.)1 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »goldthistime wrote: »goldthistime wrote: »I DO think it's harder for someone who is dealing with intense sugar cravings than it is for someone who is not. They both have all the normal challenges of staying in a calorie deficit, plus the so called sugar addict is dealing with an added element. One that they often consider to be their biggest challenge.
Yeah but it's the end of the MFP forum world to say someone has a harder time than another person. Bad bad bad!
I think everyone has their own challenges. Some have it easier than others. With the differences in bodies (hormone levels as an example), it is harder and easier for individuals. Uhoh, another end of the world statements.
Lol at "bad bad bad". Guess I should have started with "all things being equal". Certainly I agree that there are other challenges out there that are as bad or worse. I agree on the hormonal stuff, and meds that have been shown to cause weight gain comes to mind, depression and high stress levels etc.
What gets me with the addiction posts specifically, is the posters often assume that being tempted or wanting to eat more than you should = addiction, and other posters who don't claim addiction don't experience this. So why would we get fat? Of course we have temptation and all the rest and messed up eating behaviors often. I just don't think that's addiction or that someone who claims to be "addicted" has it harder than everyone else.
I think focusing on the actual specifics (vs. claiming "oh, can't help it, once I have sugar I lose it, because addict" -- BigSugar made me fat) tends to be extremely illuminating and helpful, as it focuses in on why you are actually overeating, when, in what context, so on. Not eating certain trigger foods (even all aggressively sweet things) can certainly be a part of the solution, depending on context. None of that has to do with addiction, again, however.
I don't think anyone is saying all overweight people are food addicts.
It seems to me that what you are saying -- and correct me if I'm wrong, because I'd like to understand -- is that some people who self identify as addicts have it harder than the rest of us, who don't self identify as addicts. I'd like to know what makes you so sure that it's harder for you just because you use that term for stuff that many of the rest of us also experience, but simply think is quite different from addiction, when the term is correctly used.
I think it's a fine line. Consider - what's the difference between and alcoholic and a heavy drinker? Not every heavy drinker qualifies as an alcoholic under current definitions (only about 10% do). That doesn't mean they don't have struggles or that their alcohol use isn't problematic. They just aren't "alcoholics".
I guess my point is - it's not clear cut. If someone says they feel "addicted" to sugar/fast food/whatever, I'm inclined to give that person the benefit of the doubt and assume that they, if nothing else, are really struggling and aren't looking to argue the semantics of whether or not what they are dealing with is truly "addiction" or not (and they certainly aren't looking to get into a contest in He!!, attempting oneupsmanship or trying to minimize the struggles of others). They need help, strategies for dealing with problem foods or situations. They need encouragement, possibly professional counseling. They aren't trying to minimize anyone else's struggles or successes. They are seeking help.
2 -
tlflag1620 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »goldthistime wrote: »I DO think it's harder for someone who is dealing with intense sugar cravings than it is for someone who is not. They both have all the normal challenges of staying in a calorie deficit, plus the so called sugar addict is dealing with an added element. One that they often consider to be their biggest challenge.
I don't. For me a craving is relatively easy to deal with because it's clear and can either be fought or dealt with. If I crave a food I figure out how to satisfy the craving in a healthier way, have a little, or fight it/put it off. What has always been harder for me are other things -- like the mind saying "oh, it doesn't matter" or "I'll do this tonight and then tomorrow will be different." Similarly, with aggressive cravings you can figure out how to satisfy them in some way, but there's also the constant feeling of wanting to eat or the habitual response of wanting to eat with certain triggers (emotional eating).
You can figure out how to deal with this other stuff too, and I have been successfully (and not, from time to time) working on it, but I disagree that it's inherently easier than cravings or that someone who tends to prefer savory foods (me, although I like plenty of sweet things) is somehow more responsible for their weight issues than someone who is a sugar fiend.
NOT saying my stuff is harder, of course, but this idea that some people have a much harder time than others (just because they say they do) is IMO a way of making an excuse.
I think some people do have a harder time -- I think having eating disorder type thinking or long-term messed up ideas about food (vs. logical thinking) or being really wrapped up in the idea that being fat/overeating makes you a failure so you end up with a cycle of shame and depression and the like ALL make it harder. (But that doesn't mean you have a harder time in general than others -- I find it really offputting when people do the "poor me, everyone else has it so easy" stuff.) But usually that has exactly nothing to do with who is claiming addiction and who is not. I've been motivated to reach out to some posters (and seen others I wanted to reach out to but didn't know how to help) who I felt like were really struggling and had a harder time than others (often people who were morbidly obese) and I have a friend in RL in that situation who I wish I knew how to help, but these aren't generally the people I've seen claiming "addiction" (and I don't think that's the issue--it's rarely just sugar, or just some specific food, after all, but maladaptive eating behaviors).
I also think not having experience with eating healthfully at all (the people who seem to never eat vegetables, not to have an idea of what a balanced meal is, who don't cook ever, or ask what to eat if they cut down on sugar, as if dinner normally involved lots of added sugar) can certainly make things harder, but again that's not about addiction. It's about education and developing your palate.
The bolded part reminds me of the "contests in He!!" that my husband I and used to have early on in our marriage (when we were both younger and less mature). I'm a sahm, my husband commutes for work. He gets up earlier than I do, but often my sleep is broken because I'm the one who attends to the children if they wake at night. We used to spend considerable time arguing over 'who is most tired' lol. I refer to it as a "contest in He!!" because whoever "wins" ultimately loses (you're the most tired? congratulations, you lose). Once we stopped seeing it as some sort of competition, we were able to help each other and work together to maximize everyone's sleep.
Acknowledging that some people may have a harder time managing weight than others is not making excuses (it's only an excuse if they use it as a reason to stop trying altogether).
But that's what they often seem to be doing. (I'm also thinking of the posts that are basically "it's not fair, my friends eat worse than me" or "it's not fair, I don't eat very much"). That strikes me as denial (amusingly, given the topic of the thread). I just figure that someone claiming that isn't ready and usually don't engage.
More to the point, however, you seem to be making assumptions that certain specific people have it harder, and simply because they claim addiction. What I see is the people using the term addiction go on to describe the same sorts of things that many or most of us deal with, and just don't yet have the tools or strategies to deal (I usually try to help with this). The purpose of the term addiction seems to be to take something that's really quite typical and human (bad habits re eating behaviors aggravated by how available food is and often a lack of organization or logical thought about food) and classify it as a special disorder that only a few people have, which leads them to think that what they are dealing with is not normal or what many of us successfully have dealt with, but some sort of extra problem that makes things different or harder for them. I don't think that's helpful. When I stopped thinking "why is this happening to me" about food and realized how much it was the result of my choices is when I was able to lose weight. Not always -- I've regained, struggled with stuff (including depression), etc. I know it's not always easy. But thinking that there's something wrong with you if it's not easy or you are tempted or struggle or act contrary to your intentions (all part of the human condition, really), is what seems to me to be a huge mistake. You aren't tempted because you have been made addicted by BigSugar. You are tempted because you are a normal human being.If you are finding it off putting that others deal with issues you apparently don't deal with, that's a reflection on you.
This is not what I've said at all, and I don't believe you could have gotten this from an honest reading of my posts.2 -
kshama2001 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »goldthistime wrote: »goldthistime wrote: »I DO think it's harder for someone who is dealing with intense sugar cravings than it is for someone who is not. They both have all the normal challenges of staying in a calorie deficit, plus the so called sugar addict is dealing with an added element. One that they often consider to be their biggest challenge.
Yeah but it's the end of the MFP forum world to say someone has a harder time than another person. Bad bad bad!
I think everyone has their own challenges. Some have it easier than others. With the differences in bodies (hormone levels as an example), it is harder and easier for individuals. Uhoh, another end of the world statements.
Lol at "bad bad bad". Guess I should have started with "all things being equal". Certainly I agree that there are other challenges out there that are as bad or worse. I agree on the hormonal stuff, and meds that have been shown to cause weight gain comes to mind, depression and high stress levels etc.
What gets me with the addiction posts specifically, is the posters often assume that being tempted or wanting to eat more than you should = addiction, and other posters who don't claim addiction don't experience this. So why would we get fat? Of course we have temptation and all the rest and messed up eating behaviors often. I just don't think that's addiction or that someone who claims to be "addicted" has it harder than everyone else.
I think focusing on the actual specifics (vs. claiming "oh, can't help it, once I have sugar I lose it, because addict" -- BigSugar made me fat) tends to be extremely illuminating and helpful, as it focuses in on why you are actually overeating, when, in what context, so on. Not eating certain trigger foods (even all aggressively sweet things) can certainly be a part of the solution, depending on context. None of that has to do with addiction, again, however.
I don't think anyone is saying all overweight people are food addicts.
It seems to me that what you are saying -- and correct me if I'm wrong, because I'd like to understand -- is that some people who self identify as addicts have it harder than the rest of us, who don't self identify as addicts. I'd like to know what makes you so sure that it's harder for you just because you use that term for stuff that many of the rest of us also experience, but simply think is quite different from addiction, when the term is correctly used.
I've never chosen to self-identify as an alcoholic, although by every definition I've ever read I clearly met enough criteria to do so. I find the whole, "Hi, I'm Kshama and I'm and alcoholic" to be disempowering. But when someone posts a thread saying they are a sugar addict, I'm not going to get into all that, but rather offer them help.
(This is not to say you don't offer help despite your feeling about their label - you certainly do.)
Thanks for acknowledging that. (The last sentence.)
I think the usual criteria for alcohol addiction could be met by the average college student (this is problem drinking), so it's clearly not sufficient. Those are typically scare straight things. But I agree it's not useful to get into all that, although I think it's an interesting topic.
I'm not saying that anyone who claims an addiction is saying things are harder for them, because to me that's contrary to the whole taking responsibility thing which acknowledging the addiction is part of. I'm saying that typically the specifics of what people who claim "sugar addiction" (or the like) are talking about isn't different than the norm -- it's habit and temptation and so on. Yet by choosing the label (and claiming it's harder to deal with than heroin addiction, which is something I keep seeing in those threads lately) they are saying that they think they have some special hardship that others who lose weight don't have. I think it's often a form of excuse making -- that others can lose weight doesn't mean they should or can.
The funny thing is I think the need to make the excuse is self imposed. I certainly don't think anyone needs to apologize (or explain) getting overweight and I acknowledge that LOTS of reasons make it hard to lose weight, even if I think addiction is extremely rarely part of it (again, I think there is a rare eating addiction that people can develop). Saying it's not an addiction means, to me, that there are strategies that will work in addressing the various out of control feelings.1 -
tlflag1620 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »goldthistime wrote: »goldthistime wrote: »I DO think it's harder for someone who is dealing with intense sugar cravings than it is for someone who is not. They both have all the normal challenges of staying in a calorie deficit, plus the so called sugar addict is dealing with an added element. One that they often consider to be their biggest challenge.
Yeah but it's the end of the MFP forum world to say someone has a harder time than another person. Bad bad bad!
I think everyone has their own challenges. Some have it easier than others. With the differences in bodies (hormone levels as an example), it is harder and easier for individuals. Uhoh, another end of the world statements.
Lol at "bad bad bad". Guess I should have started with "all things being equal". Certainly I agree that there are other challenges out there that are as bad or worse. I agree on the hormonal stuff, and meds that have been shown to cause weight gain comes to mind, depression and high stress levels etc.
What gets me with the addiction posts specifically, is the posters often assume that being tempted or wanting to eat more than you should = addiction, and other posters who don't claim addiction don't experience this. So why would we get fat? Of course we have temptation and all the rest and messed up eating behaviors often. I just don't think that's addiction or that someone who claims to be "addicted" has it harder than everyone else.
I think focusing on the actual specifics (vs. claiming "oh, can't help it, once I have sugar I lose it, because addict" -- BigSugar made me fat) tends to be extremely illuminating and helpful, as it focuses in on why you are actually overeating, when, in what context, so on. Not eating certain trigger foods (even all aggressively sweet things) can certainly be a part of the solution, depending on context. None of that has to do with addiction, again, however.
I don't think anyone is saying all overweight people are food addicts.
It seems to me that what you are saying -- and correct me if I'm wrong, because I'd like to understand -- is that some people who self identify as addicts have it harder than the rest of us, who don't self identify as addicts. I'd like to know what makes you so sure that it's harder for you just because you use that term for stuff that many of the rest of us also experience, but simply think is quite different from addiction, when the term is correctly used.
I think it's a fine line. Consider - what's the difference between and alcoholic and a heavy drinker? Not every heavy drinker qualifies as an alcoholic under current definitions (only about 10% do). That doesn't mean they don't have struggles or that their alcohol use isn't problematic. They just aren't "alcoholics".
I guess my point is - it's not clear cut. If someone says they feel "addicted" to sugar/fast food/whatever, I'm inclined to give that person the benefit of the doubt and assume that they, if nothing else, are really struggling and aren't looking to argue the semantics of whether or not what they are dealing with is truly "addiction" or not (and they certainly aren't looking to get into a contest in He!!, attempting oneupsmanship or trying to minimize the struggles of others). They need help, strategies for dealing with problem foods or situations. They need encouragement, possibly professional counseling. They aren't trying to minimize anyone else's struggles or successes. They are seeking help.
And exactly who has refused to help them? Who has said the primary response should be "you are not an addict"?
Not me, so I am puzzled why you are saying this to me.
IMO, they AREN'T addicts, but sure, they are struggling and don't know what to do to deal with their stumbling blocks to weight loss. I always try to help with that. (I also think NOT calling it an addiction is part of what's helpful, but I don't actually push that. I simply CANNOT myself pretend to believe it is an addiction when to do so would be a lie.)0 -
tlflag1620 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »goldthistime wrote: »goldthistime wrote: »I DO think it's harder for someone who is dealing with intense sugar cravings than it is for someone who is not. They both have all the normal challenges of staying in a calorie deficit, plus the so called sugar addict is dealing with an added element. One that they often consider to be their biggest challenge.
Yeah but it's the end of the MFP forum world to say someone has a harder time than another person. Bad bad bad!
I think everyone has their own challenges. Some have it easier than others. With the differences in bodies (hormone levels as an example), it is harder and easier for individuals. Uhoh, another end of the world statements.
Lol at "bad bad bad". Guess I should have started with "all things being equal". Certainly I agree that there are other challenges out there that are as bad or worse. I agree on the hormonal stuff, and meds that have been shown to cause weight gain comes to mind, depression and high stress levels etc.
What gets me with the addiction posts specifically, is the posters often assume that being tempted or wanting to eat more than you should = addiction, and other posters who don't claim addiction don't experience this. So why would we get fat? Of course we have temptation and all the rest and messed up eating behaviors often. I just don't think that's addiction or that someone who claims to be "addicted" has it harder than everyone else.
I think focusing on the actual specifics (vs. claiming "oh, can't help it, once I have sugar I lose it, because addict" -- BigSugar made me fat) tends to be extremely illuminating and helpful, as it focuses in on why you are actually overeating, when, in what context, so on. Not eating certain trigger foods (even all aggressively sweet things) can certainly be a part of the solution, depending on context. None of that has to do with addiction, again, however.
I don't think anyone is saying all overweight people are food addicts.
It seems to me that what you are saying -- and correct me if I'm wrong, because I'd like to understand -- is that some people who self identify as addicts have it harder than the rest of us, who don't self identify as addicts. I'd like to know what makes you so sure that it's harder for you just because you use that term for stuff that many of the rest of us also experience, but simply think is quite different from addiction, when the term is correctly used.
I think it's a fine line. Consider - what's the difference between and alcoholic and a heavy drinker? Not every heavy drinker qualifies as an alcoholic under current definitions (only about 10% do). That doesn't mean they don't have struggles or that their alcohol use isn't problematic. They just aren't "alcoholics".
I guess my point is - it's not clear cut. If someone says they feel "addicted" to sugar/fast food/whatever, I'm inclined to give that person the benefit of the doubt and assume that they, if nothing else, are really struggling and aren't looking to argue the semantics of whether or not what they are dealing with is truly "addiction" or not (and they certainly aren't looking to get into a contest in He!!, attempting oneupsmanship or trying to minimize the struggles of others). They need help, strategies for dealing with problem foods or situations. They need encouragement, possibly professional counseling. They aren't trying to minimize anyone else's struggles or successes. They are seeking help.
Good morning everyone. Wow, this thread went interesting places.
Alcoholics have a physiological response to alcohol that can't be fixed or improved upon with counseling. They must abstain. Problem drinkers are often drinking to cope with other issues - depression, anxiety, stress, grief, etc., and if you get to the root of the issue and provide other tools, they can usually manage their drinking. Some can even drink in moderation.
Since there is no known physiological mechanism to be dependent/addicted to sugar (or any other food), anyone's claims about addiction are 1) an exaggeration of temptation 2) buying into media hype or 3) a real psychological issue, akin to problem drinking. It's a behavioral disorder than can be corrected with help and a new tool set for coping with issues. I also think that if sugar wasn't available, these people would overeat/binge eat on other foods because they are satisfying a compulsion to eat. Sugary foods are very common binge foods because they're highly palatable and easy to eat a lot of it without feeling full, so the compulsion to eat can be given into for longer periods without discomfort.
All of that said, I completely agree with keeping the debating to a thread like this and not questioning their "addiction." Anyone who comes on here seeking help for how to manage their sugar/otherfood consumption should be given tips and strategies, and in some cases encouraged to seek professional help.5 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »tlflag1620 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »goldthistime wrote: »I DO think it's harder for someone who is dealing with intense sugar cravings than it is for someone who is not. They both have all the normal challenges of staying in a calorie deficit, plus the so called sugar addict is dealing with an added element. One that they often consider to be their biggest challenge.
I don't. For me a craving is relatively easy to deal with because it's clear and can either be fought or dealt with. If I crave a food I figure out how to satisfy the craving in a healthier way, have a little, or fight it/put it off. What has always been harder for me are other things -- like the mind saying "oh, it doesn't matter" or "I'll do this tonight and then tomorrow will be different." Similarly, with aggressive cravings you can figure out how to satisfy them in some way, but there's also the constant feeling of wanting to eat or the habitual response of wanting to eat with certain triggers (emotional eating).
You can figure out how to deal with this other stuff too, and I have been successfully (and not, from time to time) working on it, but I disagree that it's inherently easier than cravings or that someone who tends to prefer savory foods (me, although I like plenty of sweet things) is somehow more responsible for their weight issues than someone who is a sugar fiend.
NOT saying my stuff is harder, of course, but this idea that some people have a much harder time than others (just because they say they do) is IMO a way of making an excuse.
I think some people do have a harder time -- I think having eating disorder type thinking or long-term messed up ideas about food (vs. logical thinking) or being really wrapped up in the idea that being fat/overeating makes you a failure so you end up with a cycle of shame and depression and the like ALL make it harder. (But that doesn't mean you have a harder time in general than others -- I find it really offputting when people do the "poor me, everyone else has it so easy" stuff.) But usually that has exactly nothing to do with who is claiming addiction and who is not. I've been motivated to reach out to some posters (and seen others I wanted to reach out to but didn't know how to help) who I felt like were really struggling and had a harder time than others (often people who were morbidly obese) and I have a friend in RL in that situation who I wish I knew how to help, but these aren't generally the people I've seen claiming "addiction" (and I don't think that's the issue--it's rarely just sugar, or just some specific food, after all, but maladaptive eating behaviors).
I also think not having experience with eating healthfully at all (the people who seem to never eat vegetables, not to have an idea of what a balanced meal is, who don't cook ever, or ask what to eat if they cut down on sugar, as if dinner normally involved lots of added sugar) can certainly make things harder, but again that's not about addiction. It's about education and developing your palate.
The bolded part reminds me of the "contests in He!!" that my husband I and used to have early on in our marriage (when we were both younger and less mature). I'm a sahm, my husband commutes for work. He gets up earlier than I do, but often my sleep is broken because I'm the one who attends to the children if they wake at night. We used to spend considerable time arguing over 'who is most tired' lol. I refer to it as a "contest in He!!" because whoever "wins" ultimately loses (you're the most tired? congratulations, you lose). Once we stopped seeing it as some sort of competition, we were able to help each other and work together to maximize everyone's sleep.
Acknowledging that some people may have a harder time managing weight than others is not making excuses (it's only an excuse if they use it as a reason to stop trying altogether).
But that's what they often seem to be doing. (I'm also thinking of the posts that are basically "it's not fair, my friends eat worse than me" or "it's not fair, I don't eat very much"). That strikes me as denial (amusingly, given the topic of the thread). I just figure that someone claiming that isn't ready and usually don't engage.
More to the point, however, you seem to be making assumptions that certain specific people have it harder, and simply because they claim addiction. What I see is the people using the term addiction go on to describe the same sorts of things that many or most of us deal with, and just don't yet have the tools or strategies to deal (I usually try to help with this). The purpose of the term addiction seems to be to take something that's really quite typical and human (bad habits re eating behaviors aggravated by how available food is and often a lack of organization or logical thought about food) and classify it as a special disorder that only a few people have, which leads them to think that what they are dealing with is not normal or what many of us successfully have dealt with, but some sort of extra problem that makes things different or harder for them. I don't think that's helpful. When I stopped thinking "why is this happening to me" about food and realized how much it was the result of my choices is when I was able to lose weight. Not always -- I've regained, struggled with stuff (including depression), etc. I know it's not always easy. But thinking that there's something wrong with you if it's not easy or you are tempted or struggle or act contrary to your intentions (all part of the human condition, really), is what seems to me to be a huge mistake. You aren't tempted because you have been made addicted by BigSugar. You are tempted because you are a normal human being.If you are finding it off putting that others deal with issues you apparently don't deal with, that's a reflection on you.
This is not what I've said at all, and I don't believe you could have gotten this from an honest reading of my posts.
To clarify - I'm not saying that everyone who claims to be addicted truly is addicted. They may very well be just learning to cope with the same things everyone else deals with. And again, the distinction isn't always clear cut, and often only happens in retrospect.
I see the "it's not fair" posts in a whole different category - people making assumptions about how much others eat the rest of the time based on one meal (and that one meal often being at a restaraunt or the like), or people just starting out and learning how small portions of certain foods really are (it isn't fair how small one ounce of cheese really is - not. fair. dammit.). I don't think those people simply aren't ready (tho some may not be), but rather they are dealing with the initial shock and disconnect over how much food they were eating vs how little they have to eat in order to lose weight.
As for the last part - I may certainly misunderstood your saying that you find the "poor me, everyone else has it so much easier" aspect of claiming addiction off putting (I'm paraphrasing here). I guess I don't take someone dealing with issues that I don't deal with (or that I've learned to deal with effectively) as a commentary on how hard/easy it is for me or anyone else. I do truly believe that some people do have it harder than others, for a multitude of reasons (addiction being a possibility, uncommon, but still possible). There is a marked difference between acknowledging one's personal hurdles and challenges and working to find solutions vs having a pity party and using those challenges as a reason to give up altogether. I do find the latter offputting, not because they feel they have it harder than some others, but because they decide that's reason to stop trying or they think they are the *only one evah* to have the issue in question. If that's more what you meant, I'm sorry if I misunderstood.
0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »goldthistime wrote: »goldthistime wrote: »I DO think it's harder for someone who is dealing with intense sugar cravings than it is for someone who is not. They both have all the normal challenges of staying in a calorie deficit, plus the so called sugar addict is dealing with an added element. One that they often consider to be their biggest challenge.
Yeah but it's the end of the MFP forum world to say someone has a harder time than another person. Bad bad bad!
I think everyone has their own challenges. Some have it easier than others. With the differences in bodies (hormone levels as an example), it is harder and easier for individuals. Uhoh, another end of the world statements.
Lol at "bad bad bad". Guess I should have started with "all things being equal". Certainly I agree that there are other challenges out there that are as bad or worse. I agree on the hormonal stuff, and meds that have been shown to cause weight gain comes to mind, depression and high stress levels etc.
What gets me with the addiction posts specifically, is the posters often assume that being tempted or wanting to eat more than you should = addiction, and other posters who don't claim addiction don't experience this. So why would we get fat? Of course we have temptation and all the rest and messed up eating behaviors often. I just don't think that's addiction or that someone who claims to be "addicted" has it harder than everyone else.
I think focusing on the actual specifics (vs. claiming "oh, can't help it, once I have sugar I lose it, because addict" -- BigSugar made me fat) tends to be extremely illuminating and helpful, as it focuses in on why you are actually overeating, when, in what context, so on. Not eating certain trigger foods (even all aggressively sweet things) can certainly be a part of the solution, depending on context. None of that has to do with addiction, again, however.
I don't think anyone is saying all overweight people are food addicts.
It seems to me that what you are saying -- and correct me if I'm wrong, because I'd like to understand -- is that some people who self identify as addicts have it harder than the rest of us, who don't self identify as addicts. I'd like to know what makes you so sure that it's harder for you just because you use that term for stuff that many of the rest of us also experience, but simply think is quite different from addiction, when the term is correctly used.
I am saying that everyone has a different level of hard when it comes to losing weight. If food addiction is involved, it is a layer of hard. Some people post that it's easy for them to lose. Some people post that they have a hard time.
I have never said it was harder for me than anyone else. I certainly have never said it was harder for me and easier for Lemurcat12. You seem to take what I have said personally. I have said that it is hard for ME to lose weight.
I believe it is correct to use the word addiction for food addiction. I don't believe that everyone who is overweight is a food addict.
@tlflag1620 contest in he!! Perfectly explains those immature early in marriage fights. Love it!!1 -
HI! I liked your post as I am someone who just posted with a title about sugar addiction. It was more meant to just be a silly illustration about how I feel (taken pretty seriously by a lot of people, I wish I would not have titled it that), but you are right to say I was looking for some help and encouragement about strategies to avoid overindulgence. Sometimes you just get a little off track for the short term and are trying to get back to the healthy lifestyle you have been working at.
I "know" the right thing to do but you need some people to help influence and encourage you. For me, being healthy is a big mental game. That is one thing I love about MyFitnessPal. It is a tool to connect with people and help you keep accountable to your health and fitness goals. Sweets are always something I have struggled with and I think those who don't have those kind of specific food related struggles have trouble understanding where you are coming from. In no way am I a person who thinks anything about my decisions "are not my fault"... but I do often think of sugar is the devil for me personally as it tempts me. Sometimes I do not do well regarding eating and feel defeated by the choices I have made, but I know they are my choices and I can change them. This encourages me to think that changing my thoughts on this (e.g. thinking of sugar as the devil at times, not all the time) it will help me to be stronger in the face of temptation. Something to work on.
I did think the definitions you gave were a good read. What I am not sure is if you are saying it is possible to have a food addiction or dependence? RobD, I would be interested to hear what you think. I have never read much about it, but know a lot of people who experience something similar to your definition of addiction to food.
I totally agree because I share the same issues.0 -
I'm late to the game and so this may have been covered and I missed it, but the OP seems to put things into one of two categories: addiction (in my mind a debilitating and all consuming physiological component) or dependence (relying heavily on a substance or a habit to satisfy a particular need). What I see often in these forums, when a person claims they are addicted to sugar or food, is more of what I would call a behavioral compulsion tied to a very strong craving. Often, if the OP is interested in discussing in detail their particular challenges, it seems that the issues arise in under certain situations (stress, boredom, depression) and are related to a particular food (M&Ms) but not an overarching substance (ie all sugar) which indicates to me neither addiction, nor dependence are the correct terminology for what they are experiencing.
What I usually try to offer with posts like those is to acknowledge that those desires can make the poster feel out of control and like the food has power over them, similar to what an addict describes, but when a person analyzes the situational and emotional triggers they often realize that these are more of a factor than the food itself. To me, it is empowering to acknowledge that the food itself is not addictive, or that they aren't dependent on it; but that they can work through these emotional and habitual triggers and learn to either avoid the food altogether, or eventually learn to moderate it. I don't try to diminish what they are going through, but instead try to offer them some alternatives (Cognitive Behavioral Therapy is a good one for someone who is really struggling with these triggers) so that they may get at the root cause of the issue.
I think that words and the way we use them do matter, and that by letting something slide when someone says they are "addicted to food" or "sugar is worse than heroin" while it may seem harmless, it can in fact perpetuate that person's learned helplessness.
6 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »tlflag1620 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »goldthistime wrote: »goldthistime wrote: »I DO think it's harder for someone who is dealing with intense sugar cravings than it is for someone who is not. They both have all the normal challenges of staying in a calorie deficit, plus the so called sugar addict is dealing with an added element. One that they often consider to be their biggest challenge.
Yeah but it's the end of the MFP forum world to say someone has a harder time than another person. Bad bad bad!
I think everyone has their own challenges. Some have it easier than others. With the differences in bodies (hormone levels as an example), it is harder and easier for individuals. Uhoh, another end of the world statements.
Lol at "bad bad bad". Guess I should have started with "all things being equal". Certainly I agree that there are other challenges out there that are as bad or worse. I agree on the hormonal stuff, and meds that have been shown to cause weight gain comes to mind, depression and high stress levels etc.
What gets me with the addiction posts specifically, is the posters often assume that being tempted or wanting to eat more than you should = addiction, and other posters who don't claim addiction don't experience this. So why would we get fat? Of course we have temptation and all the rest and messed up eating behaviors often. I just don't think that's addiction or that someone who claims to be "addicted" has it harder than everyone else.
I think focusing on the actual specifics (vs. claiming "oh, can't help it, once I have sugar I lose it, because addict" -- BigSugar made me fat) tends to be extremely illuminating and helpful, as it focuses in on why you are actually overeating, when, in what context, so on. Not eating certain trigger foods (even all aggressively sweet things) can certainly be a part of the solution, depending on context. None of that has to do with addiction, again, however.
I don't think anyone is saying all overweight people are food addicts.
It seems to me that what you are saying -- and correct me if I'm wrong, because I'd like to understand -- is that some people who self identify as addicts have it harder than the rest of us, who don't self identify as addicts. I'd like to know what makes you so sure that it's harder for you just because you use that term for stuff that many of the rest of us also experience, but simply think is quite different from addiction, when the term is correctly used.
I think it's a fine line. Consider - what's the difference between and alcoholic and a heavy drinker? Not every heavy drinker qualifies as an alcoholic under current definitions (only about 10% do). That doesn't mean they don't have struggles or that their alcohol use isn't problematic. They just aren't "alcoholics".
I guess my point is - it's not clear cut. If someone says they feel "addicted" to sugar/fast food/whatever, I'm inclined to give that person the benefit of the doubt and assume that they, if nothing else, are really struggling and aren't looking to argue the semantics of whether or not what they are dealing with is truly "addiction" or not (and they certainly aren't looking to get into a contest in He!!, attempting oneupsmanship or trying to minimize the struggles of others). They need help, strategies for dealing with problem foods or situations. They need encouragement, possibly professional counseling. They aren't trying to minimize anyone else's struggles or successes. They are seeking help.
And exactly who has refused to help them? Who has said the primary response should be "you are not an addict"?
Not me, so I am puzzled why you are saying this to me.
IMO, they AREN'T addicts, but sure, they are struggling and don't know what to do to deal with their stumbling blocks to weight loss. I always try to help with that. (I also think NOT calling it an addiction is part of what's helpful, but I don't actually push that. I simply CANNOT myself pretend to believe it is an addiction when to do so would be a lie.)
I have seen posts of people asking for help in managing their "sugar addiction" where people have responded with only the following (AND NOTHING ELSE):
"Sugar addiction is not a thing."
I agree that I have never seen you respond this way; but I have seen others do so. I really don't think, in the context of someone asking for help, whether it qualifies clinically as an addiction is important.
And even if it IS an addiction, it is not helpful or productive for anyone to use that as an excuse.9 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »tlflag1620 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »goldthistime wrote: »goldthistime wrote: »I DO think it's harder for someone who is dealing with intense sugar cravings than it is for someone who is not. They both have all the normal challenges of staying in a calorie deficit, plus the so called sugar addict is dealing with an added element. One that they often consider to be their biggest challenge.
Yeah but it's the end of the MFP forum world to say someone has a harder time than another person. Bad bad bad!
I think everyone has their own challenges. Some have it easier than others. With the differences in bodies (hormone levels as an example), it is harder and easier for individuals. Uhoh, another end of the world statements.
Lol at "bad bad bad". Guess I should have started with "all things being equal". Certainly I agree that there are other challenges out there that are as bad or worse. I agree on the hormonal stuff, and meds that have been shown to cause weight gain comes to mind, depression and high stress levels etc.
What gets me with the addiction posts specifically, is the posters often assume that being tempted or wanting to eat more than you should = addiction, and other posters who don't claim addiction don't experience this. So why would we get fat? Of course we have temptation and all the rest and messed up eating behaviors often. I just don't think that's addiction or that someone who claims to be "addicted" has it harder than everyone else.
I think focusing on the actual specifics (vs. claiming "oh, can't help it, once I have sugar I lose it, because addict" -- BigSugar made me fat) tends to be extremely illuminating and helpful, as it focuses in on why you are actually overeating, when, in what context, so on. Not eating certain trigger foods (even all aggressively sweet things) can certainly be a part of the solution, depending on context. None of that has to do with addiction, again, however.
I don't think anyone is saying all overweight people are food addicts.
It seems to me that what you are saying -- and correct me if I'm wrong, because I'd like to understand -- is that some people who self identify as addicts have it harder than the rest of us, who don't self identify as addicts. I'd like to know what makes you so sure that it's harder for you just because you use that term for stuff that many of the rest of us also experience, but simply think is quite different from addiction, when the term is correctly used.
I think it's a fine line. Consider - what's the difference between and alcoholic and a heavy drinker? Not every heavy drinker qualifies as an alcoholic under current definitions (only about 10% do). That doesn't mean they don't have struggles or that their alcohol use isn't problematic. They just aren't "alcoholics".
I guess my point is - it's not clear cut. If someone says they feel "addicted" to sugar/fast food/whatever, I'm inclined to give that person the benefit of the doubt and assume that they, if nothing else, are really struggling and aren't looking to argue the semantics of whether or not what they are dealing with is truly "addiction" or not (and they certainly aren't looking to get into a contest in He!!, attempting oneupsmanship or trying to minimize the struggles of others). They need help, strategies for dealing with problem foods or situations. They need encouragement, possibly professional counseling. They aren't trying to minimize anyone else's struggles or successes. They are seeking help.
And exactly who has refused to help them? Who has said the primary response should be "you are not an addict"?
Not me, so I am puzzled why you are saying this to me.
IMO, they AREN'T addicts, but sure, they are struggling and don't know what to do to deal with their stumbling blocks to weight loss. I always try to help with that. (I also think NOT calling it an addiction is part of what's helpful, but I don't actually push that. I simply CANNOT myself pretend to believe it is an addiction when to do so would be a lie.)
I have seen posts of people asking for help in managing their "sugar addiction" where people have responded with only the following (AND NOTHING ELSE):
"Sugar addiction is not a thing."
I agree that I have never seen you respond this way; but I have seen others do so. I really don't think, in the context of someone asking for help, whether it qualifies clinically as an addiction is important.
And even if it IS an addiction, it is not helpful or productive for anyone to use that as an excuse.
That is my opinion as well. I think Sunnybeaches said something similar earlier. The point is that there are in fact practical actions which can be implemented to combat a prospective addiction which are beneficial regardless of the definition you assign the condition.0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »goldthistime wrote: »goldthistime wrote: »I DO think it's harder for someone who is dealing with intense sugar cravings than it is for someone who is not. They both have all the normal challenges of staying in a calorie deficit, plus the so called sugar addict is dealing with an added element. One that they often consider to be their biggest challenge.
Yeah but it's the end of the MFP forum world to say someone has a harder time than another person. Bad bad bad!
I think everyone has their own challenges. Some have it easier than others. With the differences in bodies (hormone levels as an example), it is harder and easier for individuals. Uhoh, another end of the world statements.
Lol at "bad bad bad". Guess I should have started with "all things being equal". Certainly I agree that there are other challenges out there that are as bad or worse. I agree on the hormonal stuff, and meds that have been shown to cause weight gain comes to mind, depression and high stress levels etc.
What gets me with the addiction posts specifically, is the posters often assume that being tempted or wanting to eat more than you should = addiction, and other posters who don't claim addiction don't experience this. So why would we get fat? Of course we have temptation and all the rest and messed up eating behaviors often. I just don't think that's addiction or that someone who claims to be "addicted" has it harder than everyone else.
I think focusing on the actual specifics (vs. claiming "oh, can't help it, once I have sugar I lose it, because addict" -- BigSugar made me fat) tends to be extremely illuminating and helpful, as it focuses in on why you are actually overeating, when, in what context, so on. Not eating certain trigger foods (even all aggressively sweet things) can certainly be a part of the solution, depending on context. None of that has to do with addiction, again, however.
I don't think anyone is saying all overweight people are food addicts.
It seems to me that what you are saying -- and correct me if I'm wrong, because I'd like to understand -- is that some people who self identify as addicts have it harder than the rest of us, who don't self identify as addicts. I'd like to know what makes you so sure that it's harder for you just because you use that term for stuff that many of the rest of us also experience, but simply think is quite different from addiction, when the term is correctly used.
I am saying that everyone has a different level of hard when it comes to losing weight. If food addiction is involved, it is a layer of hard.
What do you mean by "food addiction" in this statement (because again I don't think it's possible to be addicted to food).Some people post that it's easy for them to lose. Some people post that they have a hard time.
You actually can't get much from this either. Some people find it hard until it clicks and is easy. Some people don't like to admit when things are hard for them (I am in this category -- used to pretend I never studied, for example, that I dashed off every paper in about an hour, whereas others would brag about how much they studied -- different personality types). Some people interpret different things as hardships. You just can't tell.
Obviously there are various stumbling blocks that individuals can have that make weight loss more or less difficult at a specific time, I agree with this. I don't think this has a thing to do with "addiction" or that we know who is actually dealing with more.I have never said it was harder for me than anyone else. I certainly have never said it was harder for me and easier for Lemurcat12. You seem to take what I have said personally. I have said that it is hard for ME to lose weight.
You seem to be claiming that there's a thing called food addiction and people who have food addiction (and you put yourself in that category) have it harder. So I am asking you what specifically you think makes it harder for you? To me you seem to be suggesting that there's a category of people (non addicts) who don't deal with temptation or bad habits or the like, who simply became fat because they chose to overindulge all logically and can easily stop without any difficulty. I think that's a misunderstanding. Maybe there are some like that, but people who deny food addiction aren't saying they aren't tempted or feel out of control or eat for reasons they don't always get or find logical, etc. Nor are they saying that once they realized that overeating made them fat that they immediately stopped, because of course only an addict would eat with negative consequences and being fat apparently counts as a negative consequence.0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »goldthistime wrote: »goldthistime wrote: »I DO think it's harder for someone who is dealing with intense sugar cravings than it is for someone who is not. They both have all the normal challenges of staying in a calorie deficit, plus the so called sugar addict is dealing with an added element. One that they often consider to be their biggest challenge.
Yeah but it's the end of the MFP forum world to say someone has a harder time than another person. Bad bad bad!
I think everyone has their own challenges. Some have it easier than others. With the differences in bodies (hormone levels as an example), it is harder and easier for individuals. Uhoh, another end of the world statements.
Lol at "bad bad bad". Guess I should have started with "all things being equal". Certainly I agree that there are other challenges out there that are as bad or worse. I agree on the hormonal stuff, and meds that have been shown to cause weight gain comes to mind, depression and high stress levels etc.
What gets me with the addiction posts specifically, is the posters often assume that being tempted or wanting to eat more than you should = addiction, and other posters who don't claim addiction don't experience this. So why would we get fat? Of course we have temptation and all the rest and messed up eating behaviors often. I just don't think that's addiction or that someone who claims to be "addicted" has it harder than everyone else.
I think focusing on the actual specifics (vs. claiming "oh, can't help it, once I have sugar I lose it, because addict" -- BigSugar made me fat) tends to be extremely illuminating and helpful, as it focuses in on why you are actually overeating, when, in what context, so on. Not eating certain trigger foods (even all aggressively sweet things) can certainly be a part of the solution, depending on context. None of that has to do with addiction, again, however.
I don't think anyone is saying all overweight people are food addicts.
It seems to me that what you are saying -- and correct me if I'm wrong, because I'd like to understand -- is that some people who self identify as addicts have it harder than the rest of us, who don't self identify as addicts. I'd like to know what makes you so sure that it's harder for you just because you use that term for stuff that many of the rest of us also experience, but simply think is quite different from addiction, when the term is correctly used.
I am saying that everyone has a different level of hard when it comes to losing weight. If food addiction is involved, it is a layer of hard.
What do you mean by "food addiction" in this statement (because again I don't think it's possible to be addicted to food).Some people post that it's easy for them to lose. Some people post that they have a hard time.
You actually can't get much from this either. Some people find it hard until it clicks and is easy. Some people don't like to admit when things are hard for them (I am in this category -- used to pretend I never studied, for example, that I dashed off every paper in about an hour, whereas others would brag about how much they studied -- different personality types). Some people interpret different things as hardships. You just can't tell.
Obviously there are various stumbling blocks that individuals can have that make weight loss more or less difficult at a specific time, I agree with this. I don't think this has a thing to do with "addiction" or that we know who is actually dealing with more.I have never said it was harder for me than anyone else. I certainly have never said it was harder for me and easier for Lemurcat12. You seem to take what I have said personally. I have said that it is hard for ME to lose weight.
You seem to be claiming that there's a thing called food addiction and people who have food addiction (and you put yourself in that category) have it harder. So I am asking you what specifically you think makes it harder for you? To me you seem to be suggesting that there's a category of people (non addicts) who don't deal with temptation or bad habits or the like, who simply became fat because they chose to overindulge all logically and can easily stop without any difficulty. I think that's a misunderstanding. Maybe there are some like that, but people who deny food addiction aren't saying they aren't tempted or feel out of control or eat for reasons they don't always get or find logical, etc. Nor are they saying that once they realized that overeating made them fat that they immediately stopped, because of course only an addict would eat with negative consequences and being fat apparently counts as a negative consequence.
Look I agree to disagree with you about food addiction. There's nothing you are going to say to change my mind. There is nothing I am going to say to change your mind.
Luckily it doesn't matter what either of us think about it. Either perspective can work when losing weight.4 -
tlflag1620 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »tlflag1620 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »goldthistime wrote: »I DO think it's harder for someone who is dealing with intense sugar cravings than it is for someone who is not. They both have all the normal challenges of staying in a calorie deficit, plus the so called sugar addict is dealing with an added element. One that they often consider to be their biggest challenge.
I don't. For me a craving is relatively easy to deal with because it's clear and can either be fought or dealt with. If I crave a food I figure out how to satisfy the craving in a healthier way, have a little, or fight it/put it off. What has always been harder for me are other things -- like the mind saying "oh, it doesn't matter" or "I'll do this tonight and then tomorrow will be different." Similarly, with aggressive cravings you can figure out how to satisfy them in some way, but there's also the constant feeling of wanting to eat or the habitual response of wanting to eat with certain triggers (emotional eating).
You can figure out how to deal with this other stuff too, and I have been successfully (and not, from time to time) working on it, but I disagree that it's inherently easier than cravings or that someone who tends to prefer savory foods (me, although I like plenty of sweet things) is somehow more responsible for their weight issues than someone who is a sugar fiend.
NOT saying my stuff is harder, of course, but this idea that some people have a much harder time than others (just because they say they do) is IMO a way of making an excuse.
I think some people do have a harder time -- I think having eating disorder type thinking or long-term messed up ideas about food (vs. logical thinking) or being really wrapped up in the idea that being fat/overeating makes you a failure so you end up with a cycle of shame and depression and the like ALL make it harder. (But that doesn't mean you have a harder time in general than others -- I find it really offputting when people do the "poor me, everyone else has it so easy" stuff.) But usually that has exactly nothing to do with who is claiming addiction and who is not. I've been motivated to reach out to some posters (and seen others I wanted to reach out to but didn't know how to help) who I felt like were really struggling and had a harder time than others (often people who were morbidly obese) and I have a friend in RL in that situation who I wish I knew how to help, but these aren't generally the people I've seen claiming "addiction" (and I don't think that's the issue--it's rarely just sugar, or just some specific food, after all, but maladaptive eating behaviors).
I also think not having experience with eating healthfully at all (the people who seem to never eat vegetables, not to have an idea of what a balanced meal is, who don't cook ever, or ask what to eat if they cut down on sugar, as if dinner normally involved lots of added sugar) can certainly make things harder, but again that's not about addiction. It's about education and developing your palate.
The bolded part reminds me of the "contests in He!!" that my husband I and used to have early on in our marriage (when we were both younger and less mature). I'm a sahm, my husband commutes for work. He gets up earlier than I do, but often my sleep is broken because I'm the one who attends to the children if they wake at night. We used to spend considerable time arguing over 'who is most tired' lol. I refer to it as a "contest in He!!" because whoever "wins" ultimately loses (you're the most tired? congratulations, you lose). Once we stopped seeing it as some sort of competition, we were able to help each other and work together to maximize everyone's sleep.
Acknowledging that some people may have a harder time managing weight than others is not making excuses (it's only an excuse if they use it as a reason to stop trying altogether).
But that's what they often seem to be doing. (I'm also thinking of the posts that are basically "it's not fair, my friends eat worse than me" or "it's not fair, I don't eat very much"). That strikes me as denial (amusingly, given the topic of the thread). I just figure that someone claiming that isn't ready and usually don't engage.
More to the point, however, you seem to be making assumptions that certain specific people have it harder, and simply because they claim addiction. What I see is the people using the term addiction go on to describe the same sorts of things that many or most of us deal with, and just don't yet have the tools or strategies to deal (I usually try to help with this). The purpose of the term addiction seems to be to take something that's really quite typical and human (bad habits re eating behaviors aggravated by how available food is and often a lack of organization or logical thought about food) and classify it as a special disorder that only a few people have, which leads them to think that what they are dealing with is not normal or what many of us successfully have dealt with, but some sort of extra problem that makes things different or harder for them. I don't think that's helpful. When I stopped thinking "why is this happening to me" about food and realized how much it was the result of my choices is when I was able to lose weight. Not always -- I've regained, struggled with stuff (including depression), etc. I know it's not always easy. But thinking that there's something wrong with you if it's not easy or you are tempted or struggle or act contrary to your intentions (all part of the human condition, really), is what seems to me to be a huge mistake. You aren't tempted because you have been made addicted by BigSugar. You are tempted because you are a normal human being.If you are finding it off putting that others deal with issues you apparently don't deal with, that's a reflection on you.
This is not what I've said at all, and I don't believe you could have gotten this from an honest reading of my posts.
To clarify - I'm not saying that everyone who claims to be addicted truly is addicted. They may very well be just learning to cope with the same things everyone else deals with. And again, the distinction isn't always clear cut, and often only happens in retrospect.
Other than the fact I see 0 reason to believe that there is any kind of food addiction (again, eating addiction is different, though rare), I mostly agree with this. I think they are learning to cope with the same things many others are or have.I guess I don't take someone dealing with issues that I don't deal with (or that I've learned to deal with effectively) as a commentary on how hard/easy it is for me or anyone else.
So far I've seen no evidence that the people claiming addiction ARE dealing with issues others are not. When you read the specifics, it seems to me that they are simply assuming that the same things most deal with are abnormal and uncommon, are "addiction." They assume others are not tempted, that they will naturally just stop eating when full if eating out of a big basket of tortilla chips or some such. That's how I think they are like those insisting that everyone else has it easier. What they are claiming is some huge difficulty for them is just normal human stuff.I do truly believe that some people do have it harder than others, for a multitude of reasons (addiction being a possibility, uncommon, but still possible).
Sure, I just don't think we can typically tell from MFP who has it easier such that it's possible to claim (as people seemed to be) that anyone who doesn't believe in food addiction just doesn't understand how HARD it is for some. I've certainly found it harder at some stages of life than others (why I've lost weight when I did and not or even gained at other times). If by addiction you mean eating addiction, I can agree with the statement (and certainly that it's uncommon and a hurdle).There is a marked difference between acknowledging one's personal hurdles and challenges and working to find solutions vs having a pity party and using those challenges as a reason to give up altogether. I do find the latter offputting, not because they feel they have it harder than some others, but because they decide that's reason to stop trying or they think they are the *only one evah* to have the issue in question. If that's more what you meant, I'm sorry if I misunderstood.
Yes, that's basically what I meant, as well as assuming that most people who get fat just ate too much in some kind of chosen celebration of gluttony or something, whereas they couldn't help it, they were "addicted" (by which they mean were tempted and felt out of control around food).
It's not abnormal or a psychological problem or an "addiction" to have trouble moderating foods absent a strategy and when you've been eating immoderately for some time. It's 100% normal and expected. I'm more surprised that some don't have such troubles.0 -
WinoGelato wrote: »I'm late to the game and so this may have been covered and I missed it, but the OP seems to put things into one of two categories: addiction (in my mind a debilitating and all consuming physiological component) or dependence (relying heavily on a substance or a habit to satisfy a particular need). What I see often in these forums, when a person claims they are addicted to sugar or food, is more of what I would call a behavioral compulsion tied to a very strong craving. Often, if the OP is interested in discussing in detail their particular challenges, it seems that the issues arise in under certain situations (stress, boredom, depression) and are related to a particular food (M&Ms) but not an overarching substance (ie all sugar) which indicates to me neither addiction, nor dependence are the correct terminology for what they are experiencing.
What I usually try to offer with posts like those is to acknowledge that those desires can make the poster feel out of control and like the food has power over them, similar to what an addict describes, but when a person analyzes the situational and emotional triggers they often realize that these are more of a factor than the food itself. To me, it is empowering to acknowledge that the food itself is not addictive, or that they aren't dependent on it; but that they can work through these emotional and habitual triggers and learn to either avoid the food altogether, or eventually learn to moderate it. I don't try to diminish what they are going through, but instead try to offer them some alternatives (Cognitive Behavioral Therapy is a good one for someone who is really struggling with these triggers) so that they may get at the root cause of the issue.
I think that words and the way we use them do matter, and that by letting something slide when someone says they are "addicted to food" or "sugar is worse than heroin" while it may seem harmless, it can in fact perpetuate that person's learned helplessness.
Since I've gotten distracted into rather bizarre tangents (my own fault), I just want to say that this is precisely my own view as well, and thank you for putting it so well.0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »tlflag1620 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »goldthistime wrote: »goldthistime wrote: »I DO think it's harder for someone who is dealing with intense sugar cravings than it is for someone who is not. They both have all the normal challenges of staying in a calorie deficit, plus the so called sugar addict is dealing with an added element. One that they often consider to be their biggest challenge.
Yeah but it's the end of the MFP forum world to say someone has a harder time than another person. Bad bad bad!
I think everyone has their own challenges. Some have it easier than others. With the differences in bodies (hormone levels as an example), it is harder and easier for individuals. Uhoh, another end of the world statements.
Lol at "bad bad bad". Guess I should have started with "all things being equal". Certainly I agree that there are other challenges out there that are as bad or worse. I agree on the hormonal stuff, and meds that have been shown to cause weight gain comes to mind, depression and high stress levels etc.
What gets me with the addiction posts specifically, is the posters often assume that being tempted or wanting to eat more than you should = addiction, and other posters who don't claim addiction don't experience this. So why would we get fat? Of course we have temptation and all the rest and messed up eating behaviors often. I just don't think that's addiction or that someone who claims to be "addicted" has it harder than everyone else.
I think focusing on the actual specifics (vs. claiming "oh, can't help it, once I have sugar I lose it, because addict" -- BigSugar made me fat) tends to be extremely illuminating and helpful, as it focuses in on why you are actually overeating, when, in what context, so on. Not eating certain trigger foods (even all aggressively sweet things) can certainly be a part of the solution, depending on context. None of that has to do with addiction, again, however.
I don't think anyone is saying all overweight people are food addicts.
It seems to me that what you are saying -- and correct me if I'm wrong, because I'd like to understand -- is that some people who self identify as addicts have it harder than the rest of us, who don't self identify as addicts. I'd like to know what makes you so sure that it's harder for you just because you use that term for stuff that many of the rest of us also experience, but simply think is quite different from addiction, when the term is correctly used.
I think it's a fine line. Consider - what's the difference between and alcoholic and a heavy drinker? Not every heavy drinker qualifies as an alcoholic under current definitions (only about 10% do). That doesn't mean they don't have struggles or that their alcohol use isn't problematic. They just aren't "alcoholics".
I guess my point is - it's not clear cut. If someone says they feel "addicted" to sugar/fast food/whatever, I'm inclined to give that person the benefit of the doubt and assume that they, if nothing else, are really struggling and aren't looking to argue the semantics of whether or not what they are dealing with is truly "addiction" or not (and they certainly aren't looking to get into a contest in He!!, attempting oneupsmanship or trying to minimize the struggles of others). They need help, strategies for dealing with problem foods or situations. They need encouragement, possibly professional counseling. They aren't trying to minimize anyone else's struggles or successes. They are seeking help.
And exactly who has refused to help them? Who has said the primary response should be "you are not an addict"?
Not me, so I am puzzled why you are saying this to me.
IMO, they AREN'T addicts, but sure, they are struggling and don't know what to do to deal with their stumbling blocks to weight loss. I always try to help with that. (I also think NOT calling it an addiction is part of what's helpful, but I don't actually push that. I simply CANNOT myself pretend to believe it is an addiction when to do so would be a lie.)
I have seen posts of people asking for help in managing their "sugar addiction" where people have responded with only the following (AND NOTHING ELSE):
"Sugar addiction is not a thing."
I agree that I have never seen you respond this way; but I have seen others do so. I really don't think, in the context of someone asking for help, whether it qualifies clinically as an addiction is important.
And even if it IS an addiction, it is not helpful or productive for anyone to use that as an excuse.
So why make that response TO ME? I've never seen such a thread where the person doesn't get good advice, and yet the advice is normally ignored to fight about addiction -- and usually the claims are dependence, with assertions about withdrawal and comparisons to heroin, again.1 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »tlflag1620 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »goldthistime wrote: »goldthistime wrote: »I DO think it's harder for someone who is dealing with intense sugar cravings than it is for someone who is not. They both have all the normal challenges of staying in a calorie deficit, plus the so called sugar addict is dealing with an added element. One that they often consider to be their biggest challenge.
Yeah but it's the end of the MFP forum world to say someone has a harder time than another person. Bad bad bad!
I think everyone has their own challenges. Some have it easier than others. With the differences in bodies (hormone levels as an example), it is harder and easier for individuals. Uhoh, another end of the world statements.
Lol at "bad bad bad". Guess I should have started with "all things being equal". Certainly I agree that there are other challenges out there that are as bad or worse. I agree on the hormonal stuff, and meds that have been shown to cause weight gain comes to mind, depression and high stress levels etc.
What gets me with the addiction posts specifically, is the posters often assume that being tempted or wanting to eat more than you should = addiction, and other posters who don't claim addiction don't experience this. So why would we get fat? Of course we have temptation and all the rest and messed up eating behaviors often. I just don't think that's addiction or that someone who claims to be "addicted" has it harder than everyone else.
I think focusing on the actual specifics (vs. claiming "oh, can't help it, once I have sugar I lose it, because addict" -- BigSugar made me fat) tends to be extremely illuminating and helpful, as it focuses in on why you are actually overeating, when, in what context, so on. Not eating certain trigger foods (even all aggressively sweet things) can certainly be a part of the solution, depending on context. None of that has to do with addiction, again, however.
I don't think anyone is saying all overweight people are food addicts.
It seems to me that what you are saying -- and correct me if I'm wrong, because I'd like to understand -- is that some people who self identify as addicts have it harder than the rest of us, who don't self identify as addicts. I'd like to know what makes you so sure that it's harder for you just because you use that term for stuff that many of the rest of us also experience, but simply think is quite different from addiction, when the term is correctly used.
I think it's a fine line. Consider - what's the difference between and alcoholic and a heavy drinker? Not every heavy drinker qualifies as an alcoholic under current definitions (only about 10% do). That doesn't mean they don't have struggles or that their alcohol use isn't problematic. They just aren't "alcoholics".
I guess my point is - it's not clear cut. If someone says they feel "addicted" to sugar/fast food/whatever, I'm inclined to give that person the benefit of the doubt and assume that they, if nothing else, are really struggling and aren't looking to argue the semantics of whether or not what they are dealing with is truly "addiction" or not (and they certainly aren't looking to get into a contest in He!!, attempting oneupsmanship or trying to minimize the struggles of others). They need help, strategies for dealing with problem foods or situations. They need encouragement, possibly professional counseling. They aren't trying to minimize anyone else's struggles or successes. They are seeking help.
And exactly who has refused to help them? Who has said the primary response should be "you are not an addict"?
Not me, so I am puzzled why you are saying this to me.
IMO, they AREN'T addicts, but sure, they are struggling and don't know what to do to deal with their stumbling blocks to weight loss. I always try to help with that. (I also think NOT calling it an addiction is part of what's helpful, but I don't actually push that. I simply CANNOT myself pretend to believe it is an addiction when to do so would be a lie.)
I have seen posts of people asking for help in managing their "sugar addiction" where people have responded with only the following (AND NOTHING ELSE):
"Sugar addiction is not a thing."
I agree that I have never seen you respond this way; but I have seen others do so. I really don't think, in the context of someone asking for help, whether it qualifies clinically as an addiction is important.
And even if it IS an addiction, it is not helpful or productive for anyone to use that as an excuse.
That is my opinion as well. I think Sunnybeaches said something similar earlier. The point is that there are in fact practical actions which can be implemented to combat a prospective addiction which are beneficial regardless of the definition you assign the condition.
For the record (again), I agree with this. That's how I respond in those threads.
I think THIS thread is about the broader question of whether it's CORRECT to call it an addiction.
There seems to be a difference between participants as to whether it is unhelpful to call something that is clearly (IMO) not an addiction an addiction -- some of us think it doesn't matter, some think it is harmful. Personally, I'm undecided on that. I feel like I have to say that I don't think it is -- to do otherwise would be dishonest and a violation of my own strong beliefs on the topic -- but I don't argue it with OP and try to get to what I have to say about strategy. Some people (not the OPs, normally) don't seem to be able to accept even that. Everyone must be made to admit it IS an addiction (although it's not), and that's IMO what brings the threads into that argument more often than not. Extreme claims about heroin, etc.
As a side issue, and related to my own issues with addiction, as well as close family members, it bothers me when people seem to be misunderstanding what addiction is -- for example, basically suggesting that addiction is just really liking something a super lot, or having a taste for it, or even overdoing it even when the short term pleasures are outweighed by rather attenuated longterm consequences.
That last I get as a way of interpreting the criteria of doing it despite negative consequences, but humans do lots of things despite negative consequences because we are bad at weighing short term vs. long term consequences. That, to me, is very unlike the kinds of behaviors that I think addicts indulge in. In other words, no, doing something even though it makes you fat doesn't mean you are an addict. It means in the moment no one really thinks eating a cookie or going out to eat or even having an overall indulgent day is going to make a real difference as to how fat they are. It's a longterm consequence. (Just like no one thinks that blowing off school to go hang out with friends will affect the job they ultimately have, even though a serious of such choices and it likely could.)0 -
Nevermind. Just repeating myself again. ;-)0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.3K Introduce Yourself
- 43.4K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 387 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 901 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.2K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions