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.
Why do people overeat and/or become obese? Is it harder than average for some to lose weight?
Replies
-
but snacking isn't the issue...nor is the food that is being snacked on.
When I go to the beach the food in the cooler is our food for the day...meaning lunch and dinner...maybe even breakfast.
And I snack at the movies too...or at a ball game.
This is normal behaviour that has always happened since the advent of movies, baseball and beaches for fun.
Perhaps. The stuff I see people eating are not what I consider healthy meals. But I'll admit I know mom's who do pack healthy meals.0 -
You have to admit that the sheer quantity is an issue.
but snacking isn't the issue...nor is the food that is being snacked on.
5 -
tlflag1620 wrote: »
Sounds like you are talking about physical vs psychological addiction. Yes, the nicotine leaves your system within three days. Physical withdrawal symptoms subside shortly after that. But you still have to cope with the remaining psychological addiction. Dependence is just that - a physical dependence on a substance, iow needing to have it in order to feel "normal" physically. The dependence is over after appx 72 hours of being nicotine free. Psychological "dependence" is just another word for psychological addiction.
Seems you are confusing dependence with psychological addiction. Psychological addiction is just as real as physical addiction, and is actually the harder component for most people to break, regardless of the substance in question. That's why there is such a high rate of relapse for addicts - even after they've beaten the physical addiction and dependence, the psychological addiction remains, often for a lifetime.
no I am not.
psychological addiction is a perceived need or compulsion to engage in an activity or substance.
IE MJ...it's not physically addictive but lots feel they need it to fall asleep..
You can have a dependency on something but not be addicted.
With a physical addiction you need to detox...then move to the psychological part of it.
Trust me I know what addiction is...and what dependency is and all that goes with it.1 -
Per the snacking... If it's properly planned for, a treat rather than a regular occurrence, or a mix of nutritious and less nutrient-dense items that let kids self-regulate, it can be fine. Snacking isn't a problem for me now because I plan my snacks. If I'm going to have a day that's more active that normal (i.e. playing all day on the beach), I definitely want the snacks - I get lightheaded and grumpy if I don't eat enough. My (very slender) best friend is an eat-every-two-hours kind of person, and she turns into a hangry monster if she doesn't have a snack. I stock granola bars for her when she visits so she can carry them with her.
That said, snacking was a problem for me growing up because I'd drink two sodas and eat half a box of graham crackers while watching TV. I don't think most people plan snacks well, help their kids make nutritious food choices, or factor how quickly calories from snacks add up. Also, the alcohol - my husband is in his 40s, and he commented yesterday while watching golf how his generation has turned every event into an excuse to get drunk. Things that used to have a particular etiquette to them are now booze-fueled, when half a century ago being publicly intoxicated was a shameful thing. (ETA: maybe. I guess attitudes toward alcohol depended on your community.)2 -
no I am not.
psychological addiction is a perceived need or compulsion to engage in an activity or substance.
IE MJ...it's not physically addictive but lots feel they need it to fall asleep..
You can have a dependency on something but not be addicted.
With a physical addiction you need to detox...then move to the psychological part of it.
Trust me I know what addiction is...and what dependency is and all that goes with it.
Then your writing simply wasn't clear. "Dependency" typically refers to the physical dependence that can develop (uncomfortable physical withdrawal symptoms when the substance is not consumed). When the physical addiction or dependency is broken, yes, you still have to deal with the psychological addiction. What you were discussing wrt smoking (long after the physical addiction/dependency being broken, still wanting one with a cup of coffee, or a drink, or during stressful time, or just "craving" one even 20 years later) is all psychological addiction. Not dependency. The dependency was broken as soon as the headaches, insomnia, constipation, irritability, etc went away (sometime in the first week or two of a cold turkey quit). With physical addiction, yes, you need to detox, especially to break the physical dependence. Then the psychological addiction can be dealt with (though that may never fully "go away").
4 -
no I am not.
psychological addiction is a perceived need or compulsion to engage in an activity or substance.
IE MJ...it's not physically addictive but lots feel they need it to fall asleep..
You can have a dependency on something but not be addicted.
With a physical addiction you need to detox...then move to the psychological part of it.
Trust me I know what addiction is...and what dependency is and all that goes with it.
The way you use those terms is transposed from the norm. What you are calling addiction, most people describe as dependence. What you call dependence, most people describe as addiction. I posted these definitions earlier, but the following thread has more substantial definitions from more appropriate sources.
• addiction – a medical condition characterized by compulsive engagement in rewarding stimuli despite adverse consequences
• addictive behavior – a behavior that is both rewarding and reinforcing
• addictive drug – a drug that is both rewarding and reinforcing
• dependence – an adaptive state associated with a withdrawal syndrome upon cessation of repeated exposure to a stimulus (e.g., drug intake)
http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10388272/addiction-versus-dependence
You can be addicted without forming a dependence and you can form a dependence without forming an addiction (though I believe addiction is much more common after a dependence is formed). Or you can have both...or neither.4 -
The way you use those terms is transposed from the norm. What you are calling addiction, most people describe as dependence. What you call dependence, most people describe as addiction. I posted these definitions earlier, but the following thread has more substantial definitions from more appropriate sources.
• addiction – a medical condition characterized by compulsive engagement in rewarding stimuli despite adverse consequences
• addictive behavior – a behavior that is both rewarding and reinforcing
• addictive drug – a drug that is both rewarding and reinforcing
• dependence – an adaptive state associated with a withdrawal syndrome upon cessation of repeated exposure to a stimulus (e.g., drug intake)
http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10388272/addiction-versus-dependence
You can be addicted without forming a dependence and you can form a dependence without forming an addiction (though I believe addiction is much more common after a dependence is formed). Or you can have both...or neither.
Mine are text book definitions...doesn't matter how people use them.
The two actually take place in different parts of the brain.
you can be dependent but not addicted...example MJ or morphine for pain
Addiction typical includes dependence....
https://drugpubs.drugabuse.gov/
http://www.naabt.org/faq_answers.cfm?ID=15
and since you got your def from the 2nd link I am not sure where you see me confusing the two terms.0 -
It's from years of conditioning by advertising then passed from generation to generation.0
-
The way you use those terms is transposed from the norm. What you are calling addiction, most people describe as dependence. What you call dependence, most people describe as addiction. I posted these definitions earlier, but the following thread has more substantial definitions from more appropriate sources.
• addiction – a medical condition characterized by compulsive engagement in rewarding stimuli despite adverse consequences
• addictive behavior – a behavior that is both rewarding and reinforcing
• addictive drug – a drug that is both rewarding and reinforcing
• dependence – an adaptive state associated with a withdrawal syndrome upon cessation of repeated exposure to a stimulus (e.g., drug intake)
http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10388272/addiction-versus-dependence
You can be addicted without forming a dependence and you can form a dependence without forming an addiction (though I believe addiction is much more common after a dependence is formed). Or you can have both...or neither.
So theoretically, with repeated exposure to ingesting sugar, my body could adapt and become "dependent" on it without forming an addiction?0 -
Mine are text book definitions...doesn't matter how people use them.
The two actually take place in different parts of the brain.
you can be dependent but not addicted...example MJ or morphine for pain
Addiction typical includes dependence....
https://drugpubs.drugabuse.gov/
http://www.naabt.org/faq_answers.cfm?ID=15
and since you got your def from the 2nd link I am not sure where you see me confusing the two terms.
???
Yeah, but if you are not using them according to your text book, wouldn't you be wrong?
Your first link was just general and nothing was returned when I searched for "dependence". Your second link defines it as follows:Physical dependence is a state of adaptation that is manifested by a drug class specific withdrawal syndrome that can be produced by abrupt cessation, rapid dose reduction, decreasing blood level of the drug, and/or administration of an antagonist.
You stated before that you felt one could form a dependency based on habits around food but not become addicted to it.
So, are you saying that a person who is dependent on foods will suffer withdrawal symptoms if they break their habit? In other words, exemplifying the definition as given above, if I take cookies away from someone who is dependent on them I would expect the manifestation of withdrawal syndrome. I know that can't be what you mean...it can't be.5 -
Steph, you've made your "belief" more than clear. You're not the only person in this thread who has dealt with addiction. Maybe (to use some Recovery terms) you could open your mind and not take yourself so seriously? You're the only one with the belief you have... Can you accept that everyone else sees it differently?
I find that when I say one thing and thirty people say another - it's usually me who needs to rethink.19 -
So theoretically, with repeated exposure to ingesting sugar, my body could adapt and become "dependent" on it without forming an addiction?
I do not believe sugar to be a substance on which one could become dependent. It would have to trigger withdrawal syndrome...which it doesn't. However, one can still be addicted to it in the same way that people are addicted to gambling or shopping.
Alcohol on the other hand does create a dependency. I am not addicted to alcohol, but if I drank enough, often enough, I would become dependent. Afterwards (after I have detoxed), it is conceivable that I could become a normal drinker again, though I don't think that is too common. I have to look into it.
ETA: clarified after detox or overcoming withdrawal syndrome.2 -
I'm not overweight, but I certainly would be if I followed my heart. Food makes fireworks of dopamine explode in my brain, and I want FAR more than I need. If I don't watch it, I'll quadruple my TDEE, or more. One of my fondest memories (seriously) was when I ate literally pounds of ravioli in one sitting. If I could do that kind of thing every day... I think I'd enter some sort of Nirvana state. No matter how hard someone might try to ruin my day, I'd be like like sorry, too busy with all these ravioli.
But, ultimately I want to be lean and healthy more than I want that happiness and comfort. So, I barely eat anything (~1700 calories of nutrient dense food) in an endless attempt to cut down to less than 10% body fat.11 -
One reason I think the addiction theory isn't particularly informative or enlightening is that it doesn't really explain why the increase in the obesity rate -- if people were "addicted" to carbs or carbs + fat or sugar, you'd expect that rate to be relatively consistent across populations and over time. To look at why people overeat it seems like we should focus on what's different in societies and times where the obesity rate is higher.
As I said upthread, I think it's a combination of easy availability of food and changing customs around food, for the most part, as well as a largely sedentary population. The snacking point fits in with this -- I think people eat much more often (and typically don't make great choices) than they did even when I was a kid.2 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »One reason I think the addiction theory isn't particularly informative or enlightening is that it doesn't really explain why the increase in the obesity rate -- if people were "addicted" to carbs or carbs + fat or sugar, you'd expect that rate to be relatively consistent across populations and over time. To look at why people overeat it seems like we should focus on what's different in societies and times where the obesity rate is higher.
As I said upthread, I think it's a combination of easy availability of food and changing customs around food, for the most part, as well as a largely sedentary population. The snacking point fits in with this -- I think people eat much more often (and typically don't make great choices) than they did even when I was a kid.
I thought we were talking about why people overeat even when they know they are doing it and know there are adverse consequences.
I do think you make a good point though, but it is probably off topic, even more so than addiction.2 -
I thought we were talking about why people overeat even when they know they are doing it and know there are adverse consequences.
I do think you make a good point though, but it is probably off topic, even more so than addiction.
I thought we were talking societally, not just why do we personally do it.
Anyway, I think the reason why people do it IS that food is so available.
People talk about lacking breaks that prevent them from overeating. I don't think humans naturally have breaks; most of us (not all) overeat easily. It's the idea that this means there's something wrong with us that I think is wrong. When growing up and in my early 20s I was never overweight and didn't have to try for that to be so. I don't think I got fat later because I lost my breaks. Instead, my activity level and environment changed (food is much more available now -- it always seems to be around, as opposed to how it was in earlier parts of my life). When I lost weight in my 30s and was intentionally active and changed my eating habits (got prissy about eating non homemade food for a while), I effortlessly got down to my goal weight and maintained for years, and then regained when my habits changed again (depression, became sedentary, fell back into major stress eating), but it was all due to habits.
I think society has changed re food since I was a kid, and I think this is related to why people seem to overeat much more (as demonstrated by obesity rate).
I mean, people overeat because eating is enjoyable, but environmental factors encourage it in ways they didn't use to -- I think people recreationally eat much more now.0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »
I thought we were talking societally, not just why do we personally do it.
Yeah, me too. I think there are likely to be many reasons. Most people will fall into different categories based on their personal situation.
Anyway, I think the reason why people do it IS that food is so available.
People talk about lacking breaks that prevent them from overeating. I don't think humans naturally have breaks; most of us (not all) overeat easily. It's the idea that this means there's something wrong with us that I think is wrong. When growing up and in my early 20s I was never overweight and didn't have to try for that to be so. I don't think I got fat later because I lost my breaks. Instead, my activity level and environment changed (food is much more available now -- it always seems to be around, as opposed to how it was in earlier parts of my life). When I lost weight in my 30s and was intentionally active and changed my eating habits (got prissy about eating non homemade food for a while), I effortlessly got down to my goal weight and maintained for years, and then regained when my habits changed again (depression, became sedentary, fell back into major stress eating), but it was all due to habits.
I think society has changed re food since I was a kid, and I think this is related to why people seem to overeat much more (as demonstrated by obesity rate).
I mean, people overeat because eating is enjoyable, but environmental factors encourage it in ways they didn't use to -- I think people recreationally eat much more now.
I think that is a definite probability.0 -
Well when I was a kid, I was not "allowed" to eat whenever whatever wherever I wanted. If I had been able, I would have over eaten as a kid - and I did when I found myself alone with ice cream, potato chips, nuts, peanut butter and crackers, candy, soda pop - if I knew I could get away with it. I didn't have access as a kid. The adults in my life tried to form good habits through control and access/structure.
I had bigger consequences than just gaining a few pounds. I had punishment from people bigger than me.
3 -
cmriverside wrote: »Well when I was a kid, I was not "allowed" to eat whenever whatever wherever I wanted. If I had been able, I would have over eaten as a kid - and I did when I found myself alone with ice cream, potato chips, nuts, peanut butter and crackers, candy. I didn't have access as a kid. The adults in my life tried to form good habits through control and access/structure.
Same0 -
For me it was a lazy young adult who didn't necessarily overeat, but made poor choices when eating due to choosing convinience foods over bothering to make something. And the vast majority, are very high in calories!0
-
cmriverside wrote: »Steph, you've made your "belief" more than clear. You're not the only person in this thread who has dealt with addiction. Maybe (to use some Recovery terms) you could open your mind and not take yourself so seriously? You're the only one with the belief you have... Can you accept that everyone else sees it differently?
I find that when I say one thing and thirty people say another - it's usually me who needs to rethink.
I was asked a question and answered it...I already accept people see things differently way back in my 20's...
...I have said that a dozen times but shall I ignore the questions directed at me???? I would find that rude.
and if I can't express my opinions without this kind of retort then it is no longer a debate is it...it's a one side conversation.
and for those others who have said they don't believe in it...direct it this at the too please...
or better yet direct it at those trying to convince me that people are addicted to food...perhaps they should accept that not everyone believes that due to lack of proof (peer reviewed studies etc) and tell them perhaps they should accept people see stuff differently and they need not take themselves so seriously...-1 -
???
Yeah, but if you are not using them according to your text book, wouldn't you be wrong?
Your first link was just general and nothing was returned when I searched for "dependence". Your second link defines it as follows:
You stated before that you felt one could form a dependency based on habits around food but not become addicted to it.
So, are you saying that a person who is dependent on foods will suffer withdrawal symptoms if they break their habit? In other words, exemplifying the definition as given above, if I take cookies away from someone who is dependent on them I would expect the manifestation of withdrawal syndrome. I know that can't be what you mean...it can't be.
let me ask you this...why is your way correct and mine not correct?
I have seen people dependant on morphine for pain management...where they need more and more to get the same affect...but they were not addicted...because when it was taken away they were "ill at ease" but didn't require a detox to get it out of their system...
this link says it better
https://www.drugabuse.gov/publications/principles-drug-addiction-treatment-research-based-guide-third-edition/frequently-asked-questions/there-difference-between-physical-dependence
but due to the fact that this has turned into what is addiction and what is dependency I won't be commenting on this derailment any further...not because I feel I am wrong but because this debate could go somewhere and I don't want to be the cause of any further derailment.0 -
???
Yeah, but if you are not using them according to your text book, wouldn't you be wrong?
Your first link was just general and nothing was returned when I searched for "dependence". Your second link defines it as follows:
You stated before that you felt one could form a dependency based on habits around food but not become addicted to it.
So, are you saying that a person who is dependent on foods will suffer withdrawal symptoms if they break their habit? In other words, exemplifying the definition as given above, if I take cookies away from someone who is dependent on them I would expect the manifestation of withdrawal syndrome. I know that can't be what you mean...it can't be.
btw I gave you over link instead of the specific page but here is a more specific link
https://www.drugabuse.gov/publications/teaching-packets/neurobiology-drug-addiction/section-iii-action-heroin-morphine/10-addiction-vs-dependence-1 -
...or better yet direct it at those trying to convince me that people are addicted to food...perhaps they should accept that not everyone believes that due to lack of proof (peer reviewed studies etc) and tell them perhaps they should accept people see stuff differently and they need not take themselves so seriously...
There seem to be conflicting reports.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/04/13/sugar-addiction-like-drug-abuse-study-reveals/
Stef in your defense this scientist says it isn't really an addiction:
http://www.wbur.org/hereandnow/2015/01/07/sugar-health-research
There definitely are differences of opinions.
I don't think we can ignore the subject just because we don't like the word. Plus it does have an impact as to why more and more people are getting overweight.
http://drhyman.com/blog/2013/06/27/5-clues-you-are-addicted-to-sugar/
1 -
I don't think we can ignore the subject just because we don't like the word. Plus it does have an impact as to why more and more people are getting overweight.
http://drhyman.com/blog/2013/06/27/5-clues-you-are-addicted-to-sugar/
I actually think stuff like this, from people with programs to sell, are why so many people think they are addicted to stuff like sugar when the same phenomenon wouldn't have been called an addiction back in the '80s or '90s, probably (at least I don't remember anyone ever claiming to be addicted to food back then). They are told that it's an addiction, that if they crave tasty food or tend to overeat it there must be something wrong with them.
I also think that some of the research on the addiction hypothesis tends to be based on the notion that something is needed to explain why people overeat and get fat. But for me that is not surprising and requires nothing more than basic human biology + environment.4 -
The definitions from the sources you provided.
let me ask you this...why is your way correct and mine not correct?
The latter reflect physical dependence in which the body adapts to the drug, requiring more of it to achieve a certain effect (tolerance) and eliciting drug-specific physical or mental symptoms if drug use is abruptly ceased (withdrawal).
The key terms of tolerance and withdrawal are always associated with dependence.I have seen people dependant on morphine for pain management...where they need more and more to get the same affect...but they were not addicted...because when it was taken away they were "ill at ease" but didn't require a detox to get it out of their system...
this link says it better
https://www.drugabuse.gov/publications/principles-drug-addiction-treatment-research-based-guide-third-edition/frequently-asked-questions/there-difference-between-physical-dependence
See above. The definition is pulled from your link. Also, keep in mind that the definition provided is specific to drug addiction as opposed to addiction in general. That being said, it is either tolerance or withdrawal (or both). The longer the drug is taken, the greater the withdrawal symptoms would be. What you describe seems to be a mild dependence.but due to the fact that this has turned into what is addiction and what is dependency I won't be commenting on this derailment any further...not because I feel I am wrong but because this debate could go somewhere and I don't want to be the cause of any further derailment.
I do think it is kind of relevant because your initial rebuttal to my suggestion is dependent on the definition of those terms. Based on subsequent posts from both you and me, we agree. Food does not form a physical condition which would cause withdrawal symptoms if stopped abruptly.
We can discuss it more here if you're up for it as it is a thread literally dedicated to this exact subject:
http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10388272/addiction-versus-dependence
ETA: spacing and typos. And some more about tolerance vs withdrawal.0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »
I actually think stuff like this, from people with programs to sell, are why so many people think they are addicted to stuff like sugar when the same phenomenon wouldn't have been called an addiction back in the '80s or '90s, probably (at least I don't remember anyone ever claiming to be addicted to food back then). They are told that it's an addiction, that if they crave tasty food or tend to overeat it there must be something wrong with them.
I also think that some of the research on the addiction hypothesis tends to be based on the notion that something is needed to explain why people overeat and get fat. But for me that is not surprising and requires nothing more than basic human biology + environment.
I actually agree on most of this. The only item of the 5 that would have any relevance is item 4.SpoilerYou have health or social problems (affecting school or work) because of food issues and yet keep eating the way you do despite negative consequences.
That would be an indicator of addiction according to the definitions both Stef and I provided. Item 5 would indicate dependence, but I'm pretty sure physical dependence has never been indicated in any of the studies I've read. That being said, there addictions considered truth today that would not have been considered so in the '80s, '90s.
1 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »
I actually think stuff like this, from people with programs to sell, are why so many people think they are addicted to stuff like sugar when the same phenomenon wouldn't have been called an addiction back in the '80s or '90s, probably (at least I don't remember anyone ever claiming to be addicted to food back then). They are told that it's an addiction, that if they crave tasty food or tend to overeat it there must be something wrong with them.
I also think that some of the research on the addiction hypothesis tends to be based on the notion that something is needed to explain why people overeat and get fat. But for me that is not surprising and requires nothing more than basic human biology + environment.
I'm in the middle about this (until I see more studies) after hearing both sides here in the MFP Community. I'm not sure if sugar is addictive or not. I do know that it is put into all kinds of foods. I've seen it in bread, spaghetti sauce, juice drinks, and on and on. I feel better without it so I'm personally going to try to cut the largest sources out.
When I counterbalance the high glycemic starchy or sugary foods with protein and high fiber vegetables it changes and lowers the glycemic index. I have found that I don't get the sugar spike-highs and dip-crashes when I go lower glycemic and choose to eat more protein, veggies and foods with fiber along with cutting back sugar or starchy foods. When I don't get the sugar ups and downs then I don't crave more.
The fact that I can cut processed sugar and flour out in order to avoid negative repercussions, and I don't suffer (actually feel much better), makes me tend to think that I am not actually addicted according to the definition of the word.1 -
There seem to be conflicting reports.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/04/13/sugar-addiction-like-drug-abuse-study-reveals/
Stef in your defense this scientist says it isn't really an addiction:
http://www.wbur.org/hereandnow/2015/01/07/sugar-health-research
There definitely are differences of opinions.
I don't think we can ignore the subject just because we don't like the word. Plus it does have an impact as to why more and more people are getting overweight.
http://drhyman.com/blog/2013/06/27/5-clues-you-are-addicted-to-sugar/
I don't ignore it at all.
I get that there are people who have this desire/need to eat themselves silly...I've seen it irl...as a child it fascinated me actually.
but Deb you have to understand too that the sources you site as proof of addiction are not the most reliable...as with a lot of people here to me any "Dr" who is selling something to do with a diet or food etc to help people lose weight have figured out how to make money off of this obesity issue we are discussing right now.
1 -
(edited to erase accidental double quote)
0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 395.9K Introduce Yourself
- 44.1K Getting Started
- 260.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 176.3K Food and Nutrition
- 47.6K Recipes
- 232.8K Fitness and Exercise
- 448 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153.3K Motivation and Support
- 8.2K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 4.4K MyFitnessPal Information
- 16 News and Announcements
- 18 MyFitnessPal Academy
- 1.4K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions