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.
The Sugar Conspiracy
Options
Replies
-
tlflag1620 wrote: »I can't answer for nvmomketo, obviously, but I will tell you my experience. For me, it's not sugar, per se. It's carbs of all sorts.
But the same question applies. IF you find a banana not filling and happen to be hungry, wouldn't you choose a different food if hunger was the issue. Beef jerky (which I don't like, but perhaps you do) or a hard boiled egg or some cheese. It doesn't matter. What I was addressing was the claim that a weakness for sugar is different and harder to deal with than other temptations to overeat since eating sugar doesn't help with hunger -- you remain hungry enough to want dinner. My question was if you are eating because so hungry (as claimed) wouldn't you just switch to something filling? I would, if I was eating due to hunger. (But hunger is not my issue, nor is a desire to be "full.")
I totally get why you'd shift your diet away from carbs if you found carbs unsatisfying or they made you hungry. That's not hard for me to understand at all. Nor is the idea that IR might result in carbs being unsatisfying. What I don't get -- and frankly do not accept -- is this claim that normal fat people, well, they just overeat because they are gluttons, but people with carb sensitivities, they can't help it, because carbs make them starving. If so, eat something that fills you up when you are hungry.
I see the same thing from people who don't have carb sensitivity but eat a non filling diet. Why not eat something filling? Fat doesn't fill me up one bit. I tried a breakfast of bacon and eggs once and ended up starving before lunch (which is super rare for me), because there wasn't enough protein or fiber and fat is not satisfying to me (I know the low carb doctrine is that fat is the most satisfying macro, but to me low fat or skim dairy is equally filling as full fat, a high cal olive oil based dressing is delicious, but doesn't make the salad more filling, high fat meat is if anything much less filling that the same calories of lean meat or even the same amount). So, anyway, I learned this about myself, so I eat somewhat less fat than I used to. (I still eat it because it's tasty and doesn't make me hungrier, it's just not filling for me.)It really sounds like you are trying to understand, but that you just don't "get it" because you don't react to carbs that way. That's not an indictment of your character; I don't think I got fat because carbs and you got fat because you're a glutton. I got fat for many reasons (mostly things like a motorcycle accident that left me bedridden for weeks, too much alcohol while at college, a sedentary job after college, and having kids). I imagine you had life circumstances going on as well. And whatever the mechanism, I made poor choices, same as you. Once I figured out what works for me, I started making better choices. Just like you.
Yep, I think you and I are basically on the same page here. That's simply not what I see some others saying, but my argument is not with you at all.5 -
Christine_72 wrote: »Christine_72 wrote: »Why don't we see loads of posts from people having to reduce protein and fat because it causes them cravings and they can't lose weight without reducing these 2? It's most always carbs/sugar, there's got to be something to it...
Could it be because people define cookies as carbs, despite having more fat in them than anything?
Good point.. Although, my favourite cookies have 15g carbs and 5g fat per serving.
Lots of people have also said that they overate things like cheese, which has negligible carbs. So, I'm guessing that there's likely something beyond the food itself that connects all these people.1 -
stevencloser wrote: »AlabasterVerve wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »I overeat everything (well, if I like it -- I don't like straight sugar or soda or candy, but I do like sugar + fat, just not more than savory items of various sorts and less if they are too sweet, usually). You want to make that into something beyond a taste difference. Instead, because I don't care for jujubes, this means that you are an "addict" and I can't understand the struggles you face. My overeating is of a different kind. That strikes me as pretty strange.
And that's where the disconnect lies, I think. I can't speak for nvmomketo but I can say that there absolutely is a difference between overindulging in a food because it's delicious and convenient and the compulsion to eat and keep eating some experience from carbs/sugar.
I believe the first responds best to good eating habits and the second to abstinence. Whether it's an addiction, some sort of insulin or other hormone problem I don't know. But I do know it's a real phenomenon that has nothing to do with bad habits, emotional eating or a relationship with food.
But how do you know the things we had problems with weren't doing to us the same sugar did to you?
Precisely.3 -
Christine_72 wrote: »Why don't we see loads of posts from people having to reduce protein and fat because it causes them cravings and they can't lose weight without reducing these 2? It's most always carbs/sugar, there's got to be something to it...
Peanut butter.9 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »masterwilde wrote: »So firstly here is the link for you to read yourselves:-
http://www.theguardian.com/society/2016/apr/07/the-sugar-conspiracy-robert-lustig-john-yudkin
Its definitely interesting reading, let me have your thoughts please
I thought this was better: http://www.thenutritionwonk.com/#!Ancel-Keys-and-the-Seven-Country-Study-A-Response-to-The-Sugar-Conspiracy/cmbz/570ed1910cf20b4e25a4d9f2
Thanks for this @lemurcat12. I hadn't heard of the Seven Country Study before today. I'm learning new things!3 -
stevencloser wrote: »tlflag1620 wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »AlabasterVerve wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »I overeat everything (well, if I like it -- I don't like straight sugar or soda or candy, but I do like sugar + fat, just not more than savory items of various sorts and less if they are too sweet, usually). You want to make that into something beyond a taste difference. Instead, because I don't care for jujubes, this means that you are an "addict" and I can't understand the struggles you face. My overeating is of a different kind. That strikes me as pretty strange.
And that's where the disconnect lies, I think. I can't speak for nvmomketo but I can say that there absolutely is a difference between overindulging in a food because it's delicious and convenient and the compulsion to eat and keep eating some experience from carbs/sugar.
I believe the first responds best to good eating habits and the second to abstinence. Whether it's an addiction, some sort of insulin or other hormone problem I don't know. But I do know it's a real phenomenon that has nothing to do with bad habits, emotional eating or a relationship with food.
But how do you know the things we had problems with weren't doing to us the same sugar did to you?
Because good habits worked for you. That wasn't enough for us. If it wasn't enough for you, you'd have employed abstinence, or you would still be fat.
How many people who had problems because of eating too much sugar were able to get by by getting good habits?
How many people who had problems because of eating too much other things weren't?
There are plenty of people who attempt carb restriction and find it doesn't work for them. I have no problem imagining that there are some people who have trouble with sugar who manage to "get by", at least for a while - I was one of them. With good habits I managed not to get obese (I was merely overweight). If the trouble isn't sugar, then LC won't work for that person. If the trouble is sugar then they will have a hard time adhering to simple calorie counting. It's really a matter of finding what works for you.
1 -
Christine_72 wrote: »Christine_72 wrote: »Why don't we see loads of posts from people having to reduce protein and fat because it causes them cravings and they can't lose weight without reducing these 2? It's most always carbs/sugar, there's got to be something to it...
Could it be because people define cookies as carbs, despite having more fat in them than anything?
Good point.. Although, my favourite cookies have 15g carbs and 5g fat per serving.
So 60 calories from carbs and 45 from fat? Not a huge difference.
My favorite cookies all have more fat. The only cookies I've bothered to put in my recipe box have 14 g of fat (126 calories) and 22 carbs (88 calories) with only 14 g of sugar (56 calories) and a plurality of calories from butter (I would have to look up the specific number as there is also fat in the eggs and chocolate).
I will note also that these cookies have fewer calories from sugar than a typical banana or apple, yet more calories than your cookies, due to all the fat (that's also probably what makes them so tasty).1 -
diannethegeek wrote: »Christine_72 wrote: »Why don't we see loads of posts from people having to reduce protein and fat because it causes them cravings and they can't lose weight without reducing these 2? It's most always carbs/sugar, there's got to be something to it...
Peanut butter.
Ooooh yeah. I struggle stopping at just 1 or 2 tbs2 -
Sugar tastes good. Ask monkeysstevencloser wrote: »There is indeed a sugar conspiracy. That is, there's a handful of people who make a lot of money by telling desperate dieters that sugar is the root of their obesity instead of longterm overeating.
They abuse the fact that many people try to look for an outside reason for why they're not successful instead of looking within themselves. It's the perfect scapegoat. A nutrient that tastes good, that we're evolutionarily inclined to seek out, often found in "bad/ junk" foods. It's easy making people who don't know all facts about how weight gain and loss works believe it somehow is addictive or making them fat regardless of overall diet.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-KSryJXDpZo
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
"Ask monkeys"
1 -
Christine_72 wrote: »diannethegeek wrote: »Christine_72 wrote: »Why don't we see loads of posts from people having to reduce protein and fat because it causes them cravings and they can't lose weight without reducing these 2? It's most always carbs/sugar, there's got to be something to it...
Peanut butter.
Ooooh yeah. I struggle stopping at just 1 or 2 tbs
I misread this as "I struggle stopping at just 1 or 2 pounds" and was in full agreement! I used to skip dinner and have half a jar of peanut butter instead (maybe on toast with extra butter under the peanut butter, maybe not) once upon a time. I manage it better now than I used to, but still don't buy it often.5 -
diannethegeek wrote: »Christine_72 wrote: »diannethegeek wrote: »Christine_72 wrote: »Why don't we see loads of posts from people having to reduce protein and fat because it causes them cravings and they can't lose weight without reducing these 2? It's most always carbs/sugar, there's got to be something to it...
Peanut butter.
Ooooh yeah. I struggle stopping at just 1 or 2 tbs
I misread this as "I struggle stopping at just 1 or 2 pounds" and was in full agreement! I used to skip dinner and have half a jar of peanut butter instead (maybe on toast with extra butter under the peanut butter, maybe not) once upon a time. I manage it better now than I used to, but still don't buy it often.
Haha I reckon I could pack away that much in a day... And no, I don't buy it often either. I bought the natural PB once, no chance of over eating that
0 -
Another issue with so-called "carbs" vs. other foods is availability.
If there was the kind of cheese I like in the office break room, I wonder if I'd have managed to lose weight. ;-) If someone brought in bacon and those egg muffins (no actual bread), I'd be tempted to eat them. When I do buy nuts I have to restrain myself and have to portion them out in a serving size, as I otherwise will keep eating.
But what is actually available in my office? People bring in bagels and donuts in the morning. Candy is out all day (most candy I dislike, but I have a weakness for peanut M&Ms). Someone's client sends up that flavored popcorn from Nuts on Clark (which has about a million calories per serving). There are Kind bars and a bunch of other packaged stuff. Cookies are leftover from a lunch. Chips are in the kitchen, Soda is free in the refrigerator. My co-worker who has a bakery/catering business with her family on the side brings in cupcakes. Last Friday someone dropped off cannoli from a good Italian bakery. On and on. Most of this stuff is carbs+fat, and gets called "carbs." And it's way more likely to be what's on offer or sitting around than something high in protein. If I let myself start grazing, I'd just as soon have a pickle or cheese or leftover pulled pork or roasted chicken than any of this, but how likely is it to be available? IME, not at all.
For the record, I'm NOT blaming any of this for me gaining weight. It's just one reason why I think people perceive "carbs" or certain kinds of foods as the issue. It's more likely to be easily available all the time. Protein in particular takes more planning/preparation.4 -
tlflag1620 wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »tlflag1620 wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »AlabasterVerve wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »I overeat everything (well, if I like it -- I don't like straight sugar or soda or candy, but I do like sugar + fat, just not more than savory items of various sorts and less if they are too sweet, usually). You want to make that into something beyond a taste difference. Instead, because I don't care for jujubes, this means that you are an "addict" and I can't understand the struggles you face. My overeating is of a different kind. That strikes me as pretty strange.
And that's where the disconnect lies, I think. I can't speak for nvmomketo but I can say that there absolutely is a difference between overindulging in a food because it's delicious and convenient and the compulsion to eat and keep eating some experience from carbs/sugar.
I believe the first responds best to good eating habits and the second to abstinence. Whether it's an addiction, some sort of insulin or other hormone problem I don't know. But I do know it's a real phenomenon that has nothing to do with bad habits, emotional eating or a relationship with food.
But how do you know the things we had problems with weren't doing to us the same sugar did to you?
Because good habits worked for you. That wasn't enough for us. If it wasn't enough for you, you'd have employed abstinence, or you would still be fat.
How many people who had problems because of eating too much sugar were able to get by by getting good habits?
How many people who had problems because of eating too much other things weren't?
There are plenty of people who attempt carb restriction and find it doesn't work for them. I have no problem imagining that there are some people who have trouble with sugar who manage to "get by", at least for a while - I was one of them. With good habits I managed not to get obese (I was merely overweight). If the trouble isn't sugar, then LC won't work for that person. If the trouble is sugar then they will have a hard time adhering to simple calorie counting. It's really a matter of finding what works for you.
You keep on saying that. But I don't know where you take that confidence. Maybe the people who have a hard time adhering to simple calorie counting are a minority?
The only people you see on MfP are the ones with problems, because the ones who just do it don't need to make threads asking about advice. I never needed any advice because I just went and did it even though I was eating lots of sweets (and everything else) before.
I don't feel special because of that, or better than you or other people. In fact I believe that you'd be able to do the same without depriving yourself of sweets. If you have no problem with removing them then that's absolutely fine.
However I do see a weird contradiction between having problems controlling sugar to the point where it sounds like you basically eat it against your will and just being able to cut it out completely and be absolutely fine.8 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »tlflag1620 wrote: »I can't answer for nvmomketo, obviously, but I will tell you my experience. For me, it's not sugar, per se. It's carbs of all sorts.
But the same question applies. IF you find a banana not filling and happen to be hungry, wouldn't you choose a different food if hunger was the issue. Beef jerky (which I don't like, but perhaps you do) or a hard boiled egg or some cheese. It doesn't matter. What I was addressing was the claim that a weakness for sugar is different and harder to deal with than other temptations to overeat since eating sugar doesn't help with hunger -- you remain hungry enough to want dinner. My question was if you are eating because so hungry (as claimed) wouldn't you just switch to something filling? I would, if I was eating due to hunger. (But hunger is not my issue, nor is a desire to be "full.")
I totally get why you'd shift your diet away from carbs if you found carbs unsatisfying or they made you hungry. That's not hard for me to understand at all. Nor is the idea that IR might result in carbs being unsatisfying. What I don't get -- and frankly do not accept -- is this claim that normal fat people, well, they just overeat because they are gluttons, but people with carb sensitivities, they can't help it, because carbs make them starving. If so, eat something that fills you up when you are hungry.
I see the same thing from people who don't have carb sensitivity but eat a non filling diet. Why not eat something filling? Fat doesn't fill me up one bit. I tried a breakfast of bacon and eggs once and ended up starving before lunch (which is super rare for me), because there wasn't enough protein or fiber and fat is not satisfying to me (I know the low carb doctrine is that fat is the most satisfying macro, but to me low fat or skim dairy is equally filling as full fat, a high cal olive oil based dressing is delicious, but doesn't make the salad more filling, high fat meat is if anything much less filling that the same calories of lean meat or even the same amount). So, anyway, I learned this about myself, so I eat somewhat less fat than I used to. (I still eat it because it's tasty and doesn't make me hungrier, it's just not filling for me.)It really sounds like you are trying to understand, but that you just don't "get it" because you don't react to carbs that way. That's not an indictment of your character; I don't think I got fat because carbs and you got fat because you're a glutton. I got fat for many reasons (mostly things like a motorcycle accident that left me bedridden for weeks, too much alcohol while at college, a sedentary job after college, and having kids). I imagine you had life circumstances going on as well. And whatever the mechanism, I made poor choices, same as you. Once I figured out what works for me, I started making better choices. Just like you.
Yep, I think you and I are basically on the same page here. That's simply not what I see some others saying, but my argument is not with you at all.
I chose bananas and low fat yogurt and whole grain cereals and potatoes with their skins and the like because I was told my whole life how "healthy" those foods were (those are "good" carbs after all - turns out for me "good" carb is an oxymoron). I couldn't wrap my head around those foods being bad. I never made the connection between the insatiable hunger and the "healthy" carbs I was eating. I thought I was weak and unmotivated and undisciplined and lazy and that I just needed to "eat less and move more". Basically the whole 'put down the cookie, fattie' sentiment that's seen a lot among those who think everyone should just be able to eat everything "in moderation". I blamed myself for being fat for many years. I thought I was failing at my diet. I didn't realize my diet was failing ME. Once I made the connection, and saw what was happening, I did start choosing jerky and eggs and cheeses. Made all the difference.
I understand a lot of people find protein to be the most satiating. I think for me it's the combo of fat and protein that's satiating - a can of tuna will fill me up in the moment, but an hour later I'll be hungry. Add a couple Tbsp of mayo to that tuna? Full for hours. For me the fat is absolutely a necessary component.
I can see how the idea that for some people carbs make weight loss harder could be construed as 'it's not my fault I got fat, it's because of the carbs' (and therefore implying that if you didn't get fat because of the carbs that it must be because you are just a gluttonous sloth). I can also see that when the calorie counters insist that those who needed to cut carbs think carbs = cookies and assume they must have had a poor diet in general before going LC it implies that those who do LC were too lazy/stupid to try the conventional methods first. Or that they tried them, they just didn't do them "right" - that line of thinking, blaming the dieter, rather than taking a good look at the diet, is what kept me overweight for so long. So strong was the CICO, eat less, move more message in my generation that I beat my head against that brick wall for nearly 20 years.
In short - both attitudes suck.5 -
I also do wonder how many people only think they have a problem with carbs because they get told left and right how bad and addictive they are.16
-
stevencloser wrote: »I also do wonder how many people only think they have a problem with carbs because they get told left and right how bad and addictive they are.
I do think this is part of it, although not for everyone. I suspect the claims would be different if this forum had existed in 1992.2 -
stevencloser wrote: »tlflag1620 wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »tlflag1620 wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »AlabasterVerve wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »I overeat everything (well, if I like it -- I don't like straight sugar or soda or candy, but I do like sugar + fat, just not more than savory items of various sorts and less if they are too sweet, usually). You want to make that into something beyond a taste difference. Instead, because I don't care for jujubes, this means that you are an "addict" and I can't understand the struggles you face. My overeating is of a different kind. That strikes me as pretty strange.
And that's where the disconnect lies, I think. I can't speak for nvmomketo but I can say that there absolutely is a difference between overindulging in a food because it's delicious and convenient and the compulsion to eat and keep eating some experience from carbs/sugar.
I believe the first responds best to good eating habits and the second to abstinence. Whether it's an addiction, some sort of insulin or other hormone problem I don't know. But I do know it's a real phenomenon that has nothing to do with bad habits, emotional eating or a relationship with food.
But how do you know the things we had problems with weren't doing to us the same sugar did to you?
Because good habits worked for you. That wasn't enough for us. If it wasn't enough for you, you'd have employed abstinence, or you would still be fat.
How many people who had problems because of eating too much sugar were able to get by by getting good habits?
How many people who had problems because of eating too much other things weren't?
There are plenty of people who attempt carb restriction and find it doesn't work for them. I have no problem imagining that there are some people who have trouble with sugar who manage to "get by", at least for a while - I was one of them. With good habits I managed not to get obese (I was merely overweight). If the trouble isn't sugar, then LC won't work for that person. If the trouble is sugar then they will have a hard time adhering to simple calorie counting. It's really a matter of finding what works for you.
You keep on saying that. But I don't know where you take that confidence. Maybe the people who have a hard time adhering to simple calorie counting are a minority?
The only people you see on MfP are the ones with problems, because the ones who just do it don't need to make threads asking about advice. I never needed any advice because I just went and did it even though I was eating lots of sweets (and everything else) before.
I don't feel special because of that, or better than you or other people. In fact I believe that you'd be able to do the same without depriving yourself of sweets. If you have no problem with removing them then that's absolutely fine.
However I do see a weird contradiction between having problems controlling sugar to the point where it sounds like you basically eat it against your will and just being able to cut it out completely and be absolutely fine.
Huh.... I'm sorry I've given you the impression that I think I'm better than others for "giving up" sweets! Not in the slightest. Nor do I feel deprived - if I felt deprived I don't think I'd have been able to manage "giving them up" for so long (FWIW - if I want a cookie, I have a damn cookie. a real one, with cane sugar and wheat flour. I just don't eat them often, and only have one). And I never claimed that people having trouble sticking with calorie counting are the majority - I'd wager that we are the minority. The only time I've suggested anything other than straight calorie counting (on MFP or IRL) is when someone tells me they are struggling to stick with it. Then I'll talk about macros and the possibility of cutting carbs. Of course I'll say "increasing fat, protein, and fiber" rather than "cutting carbs"... but it's really the same thing
As for the disconnect, I can see where you are coming from. Giving up carbs (for me it's not just "sweets" that are triggering. heck, sugar isn't so bad, it's wheat that really f's me up) wasn't easy. At first. When I decided to do it, I told no one. I picked a start date when my husband would be leaving for a TDY for two weeks. I went shopping for some LC-friendly foods. As the date approached, I felt the same sense of dread that I've felt every single time I've tried to quit smoking. It stopped me cold. I made the connection that this wasn't just about bread and rice and potatoes. That, at least for me, there was something else going on. I never felt that way embarking on any other kind of diet before (not even when I tried eliminating dairy to see if it would help my eczema). I eased into low carb, rather than dropping them all at once, so I wasn't super miserable those first couple weeks (a few headaches, a little brain fog, nothing major). By the time DH got back from TDY I was fully adjusted and had already seen improvement. And things just got better and better. Heck, it's been 3 years come July, and I'm still excited about it. Restricting my carbs was the one of the most liberating things I ever did.
4 -
I didn't mean to imply that you think you're better for giving up sweets. I was just afraid you might think we think we are better than you for being able to "deal with it" or "having superior willpower" or whatever.1
-
tlflag1620 wrote: »I chose bananas and low fat yogurt and whole grain cereals and potatoes with their skins and the like because I was told my whole life how "healthy" those foods were (those are "good" carbs after all - turns out for me "good" carb is an oxymoron).
That makes sense. I actually had to learn that fat didn't fill me up and that carbs do (well, some of them) given that by the time I started this in '14 I was so overwhelmed with all the "carbs are bad" propaganda and "fat is filling" stuff. That's why generalizations like that drive me crazy. And probably if I hadn't been successful once before doing basically what I ended up doing I might have spent more time spinning my wheels and wondering why bacon and full fat yogurt aren't the most filling thing ever, for me.I thought I was weak and unmotivated and undisciplined and lazy and that I just needed to "eat less and move more". Basically the whole 'put down the cookie, fattie' sentiment that's seen a lot among those who think everyone should just be able to eat everything "in moderation".
I really, really, really don't think this is what anyone is saying. I think everyone agrees that it's sensible to choose foods based on satiety and that there are individual differences as to what's sating. If cookies make you hungry, that's a sensible reason not to bother with them, unless it's a special occasion when you really want one. There are tons of foods I'm not interested in bothering with, and I have never interpreted moderation as "eat everything, whether you like it that much or not, and regardless of how it makes you feel." I do think that for many people -- those who buy into the bad/good foods thing and feel like they ruined everything if they eat a "bad food" like a cookie, that that attitude can be counterproductive, but that's something different and I don't think it applies to everyone (and I don't see you as having those kinds of attitudes).I can see how the idea that for some people carbs make weight loss harder could be construed as 'it's not my fault I got fat, it's because of the carbs' (and therefore implying that if you didn't get fat because of the carbs that it must be because you are just a gluttonous sloth). I can also see that when the calorie counters insist that those who needed to cut carbs think carbs = cookies and assume they must have had a poor diet in general before going LC it implies that those who do LC were too lazy/stupid to try the conventional methods first. Or that they tried them, they just didn't do them "right" - that line of thinking, blaming the dieter, rather than taking a good look at the diet, is what kept me overweight for so long. So strong was the CICO, eat less, move more message in my generation that I beat my head against that brick wall for nearly 20 years.
From my experience on MFP, though, many, many people DO equate carbs with "junk food." Not everyone, generally not experienced LC dieters, of course, but many newbies who come in and talk about cutting carbs without knowing what they are, because carbs have been so soundly demonized. That's what I feel like I'm fighting against on MFP much of the time -- the notion that carbs are inherently bad, for all, and in all amounts. The whole "carbs will give you dementia" thing or the endless links to claims that carbs cause cancer that ignore that the links identify sat fat as an even more strong correlation and fruits and veg (carbs) as foods that seem to have positive effects.
But anyway, I really don't think the fact that you say that you found dieting harder with more carbs and easy with fewer to be a claim that you weren't responsible for being overweight, unlike the rest of us former fatties. I do think some of the claims -- the addiction stuff, the assertion that we just can't understand the cravings, that the desire to overeat with sugar is different in kind than the desire to overeat other foods -- do go there. (And I didn't think that's what you were saying.)
I feel responsible for getting overweight, I felt responsible while I was overweight, although there were reasons I could point to, of course, but I guess I'm lucky that I didn't beat myself up about it as much as many did. There were reasons I didn't feel like I could deal with changing my habits and eating, and then I was at a point where I could and I figured out how. Not as easy as that makes it sound, of course. ;-)4 -
I simply followed the same exact format which you used when you replied immediately after you quoted me. The same one in which you capitalized "YOU". Do you seriously not see that?lemurcat12 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »Likewise, I also think demonizing abstinence because YOU find the practice to be unsustainable is a bad idea. I have never said that anybody has an easier road than I do, but there are those who are unfamiliar with my exact situation (as I am with theirs). We all have our trials and tribulations, weaknesses and strengths, we just have to play the cards we're dealt. However, our ability to offer useful advice is limited by our experience and if you have no experience concerning problems with sugary foods, the value of that advice to me is greatly diminished.
Saying you have a problem with sugar/fat/salt doesn't absolve you of responsibility.
I have never once demonized abstinence (nor do I believe it is unsustainable), so once again you are arguing with something I've never said. Why? What's the point? Do you think I will forget that I am not against abstinence if someone prefers it and start arguing that everyone should eat cake? (I barely ever eat cake myself -- not worth the calories.)
lol. Take it easy, lady. I have never once demonized individual components of diet. So why are you arguing with something I never said? The answer (I'm hoping) is that you weren't talking about me specifically (if you were, you must have me confused with someone else). Likewise, I was not talking about you specifically. I still don't get why you would think that.
Seriously? You wrote that to me, immediately after quoting me, in a conversation we were having, and capitalized YOU. Of course it appeared like you were referring to me. I was specifically referring to the Lustig piece and keto mom's comments in the post you quoted, as was clear from the entirety of the post. I do believe that both of them have demonized components of a diet, yes.
1
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.4K Getting Started
- 259.6K 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
- 96.2K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 914 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions