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.
Giving up sugar for good
Replies
-
Gianfranco_R wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »goldthistime wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »SymbolismNZ wrote: »Nothing actually wrong with someone giving up sugar in my view; if nothing else it reduces a lot of calorie dense foods that are far too easy to pick up and scoff down (chocolate, flavored milk, sodas) and forces people to be more mindful of what is going into their diets.
Giving up fruit and most dairy is fine, although I would miss them, and starches like sweet potatoes and plantains can be replaced with others, but I personally think giving up vegetables is really unhealthy (barring a rare medical issue that requires it), and there sure is something wrong with it.
I avoid or limit (or simply find unappealing) lots of high cal foods that also have sugar, but not because sugar is terrible and must be avoided. Focusing on sugar=bad leads to bad nutritional choices, IMO.
I would have assumed that the poster you replied to meant foods with added sugars, not fruit, dairy and sweet potatoes.
Why would avoiding added sugar lead to bad nutritional choices?
(1) The poster did not say added sugar.
(2) The sugar in fruit (for example) and added sugar (sucrose) that in other things is the same, chemically (especially when your body breaks apart the sucrose), so it doesn't even make sense to claim that "sugar" means only added sugar. The arguments about sugar hurting your body would apply to all.
(I happen to agree that we shouldn't consume excessive sugar, or excessive anything else, but that's a different discussion. Or what cwolfman said upthread.)
+1
If you're giving up sugar ... give up sugar. All sugar. Start to do some research as to what contains sugar and how the body breaks nutrients down.
It's the MFP paradox: high carbers push people to embrace no-carb/carnivorism. I would say they are also pretty successful...
Say what? I'm not a "high carber" or a low carber - like many people in this thread, I lost my 75 lbs two years ago through moderation, not elimination.
I love my sugars *and* fats, but realized that the combination of the two provides a delicious but caloric whammy that needs to be eaten moderately within a diet structure that satisfies not only my appetite but my macro needs as well.
6 -
goldthistime wrote: »Another year another sugar thread...sad part is all the folks trying to give up all sugars will probably never reach their goals as they given power to a substance that is not inherently bad, barring a medical condition..,
The Success Forum has lots of keto and lchf success stories.
You could say that I have "given power" to sugar by recognizing the unique difficulties I have when I consume it in certain situations. Yet I've been successful. In fact, I would say that part of my success has been in figuring out how and when I can consume sugar without letting my overconsuming tendencies take over.
even low carbs and ketoers eat sugar....1 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »SymbolismNZ wrote: »Nothing actually wrong with someone giving up sugar in my view; if nothing else it reduces a lot of calorie dense foods that are far too easy to pick up and scoff down (chocolate, flavored milk, sodas) and forces people to be more mindful of what is going into their diets.
Giving up fruit and most dairy is fine, although I would miss them, and starches like sweet potatoes and plantains can be replaced with others, but I personally think giving up vegetables is really unhealthy (barring a rare medical issue that requires it), and there sure is something wrong with it.
I avoid or limit (or simply find unappealing) lots of high cal foods that also have sugar, but not because sugar is terrible and must be avoided. Focusing on sugar=bad leads to bad nutritional choices, IMO.
I just find the good/bad labels on foods/macros unhelpful. It led me to feeling ashamed of myself every time I ate something "bad". Changing that mindset, changed my life.8 -
goldthistime wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »SymbolismNZ wrote: »Nothing actually wrong with someone giving up sugar in my view; if nothing else it reduces a lot of calorie dense foods that are far too easy to pick up and scoff down (chocolate, flavored milk, sodas) and forces people to be more mindful of what is going into their diets.
Giving up fruit and most dairy is fine, although I would miss them, and starches like sweet potatoes and plantains can be replaced with others, but I personally think giving up vegetables is really unhealthy (barring a rare medical issue that requires it), and there sure is something wrong with it.
I avoid or limit (or simply find unappealing) lots of high cal foods that also have sugar, but not because sugar is terrible and must be avoided. Focusing on sugar=bad leads to bad nutritional choices, IMO.
I would have assumed that the poster you replied to meant foods with added sugars, not fruit, dairy and sweet potatoes.
Why would avoiding added sugar lead to bad nutritional choices?
why would you avoid added sugar and embrace "natural" sugar, when sugar = sugar?3 -
stevencloser wrote: »
Firstly, people don't overeat just on sweet foods.
Secondly, alcohol creates an actual, physical addiction to it.
Interestingly, I just read a report stating that solving this problem of "sugar addiction" (or whatever name you choose to give it) is actually more complicated than solving drug addiction.
http://news.mit.edu/2015/decoding-sugar-addiction-0129
Because it's very difficult to solve a problem that doesn't exist.8 -
Gianfranco_R wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »goldthistime wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »SymbolismNZ wrote: »Nothing actually wrong with someone giving up sugar in my view; if nothing else it reduces a lot of calorie dense foods that are far too easy to pick up and scoff down (chocolate, flavored milk, sodas) and forces people to be more mindful of what is going into their diets.
Giving up fruit and most dairy is fine, although I would miss them, and starches like sweet potatoes and plantains can be replaced with others, but I personally think giving up vegetables is really unhealthy (barring a rare medical issue that requires it), and there sure is something wrong with it.
I avoid or limit (or simply find unappealing) lots of high cal foods that also have sugar, but not because sugar is terrible and must be avoided. Focusing on sugar=bad leads to bad nutritional choices, IMO.
I would have assumed that the poster you replied to meant foods with added sugars, not fruit, dairy and sweet potatoes.
Why would avoiding added sugar lead to bad nutritional choices?
(1) The poster did not say added sugar.
(2) The sugar in fruit (for example) and added sugar (sucrose) that in other things is the same, chemically (especially when your body breaks apart the sucrose), so it doesn't even make sense to claim that "sugar" means only added sugar. The arguments about sugar hurting your body would apply to all.
(I happen to agree that we shouldn't consume excessive sugar, or excessive anything else, but that's a different discussion. Or what cwolfman said upthread.)
+1
If you're giving up sugar ... give up sugar. All sugar. Start to do some research as to what contains sugar and how the body breaks nutrients down.
It's the MFP paradox: high carbers push people to embrace no-carb/carnivorism. I would say they are also pretty successful...
I don't know any high carbers...if anything, I'd say most of the people posting eat high protein diets or moderate amounts of all three macros. I'm pretty balanced myself as I see no need for extremes...4 -
@lyn_glenmont Buying a sack of sugar to add to cakes and pies and homemade treats is very different from having sugar added to almost everything you buy in a grocery store filled with processed food. Are you really arguing that people today eat in the same way they did 50 years ago--or in the 19th century?2
-
cwolfman13 wrote: »
Nobody is "singing the praises" of sugar...we are simply pointing out that it's not crack...it's not addictive. I eat very little added sugar as I eat a primarily whole foods diet...that doesn't mean I buy into a bunch of BS about something we've been consuming forever being the equivalent to crack cocaine...it's stupid.
You may also notice that the people "singing the praises" as you say...well...don't tell anyone...but most of us have been around the block a few times and had a lot of success and are pretty healthy and fit...shhhh....don't tell anyone.
Yup
This is the biggest reason why I hang out on MFP vs other weight/fitness sites. MFP has a very large group of people who are successfully maintaining weight losses long term, and are also very successful in their health and fitness goals. You'd think more people would want to tap into that and actually pay attention to what these people are saying and learn a few things from them.
Mods-there should be Jedi Knight badges or something for us 'old timers' We're like thin Yodas
9 -
crzycatlady1 wrote: »http://www.rense.com/general50/killer.htm
a really good read. I just know if I have anything with aspartame in it. I'm too sick to do anything. I stopped getting severe migraines.
You're projecting your own issues here though-many people, including myself, can consume aspartame with no problems at all. My daughter is lactose intolerant and cannot handle most dairy products. She'd never go around telling people that dairy is bad though because it's not. Her body just doesn't handle it very well. Same with my sister-in-law who's allergic to all sorts of foods, including 'good' ones like tomatoes and cruciferous vegetables. Just because her body can't deal with them doesn't mean we should all cut out tomatoes and broccoli.
Someone else already posted this but seriously-it's worth the time to read through it
http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/1308408/why-aspartame-isnt-scary/p1
The same way they projected their issues over the peanut allergy forcing companies to go peanut free. What about the people who are not allergic to peanuts?? Was it fair to them or are people that lazy in not reading the packages?
I can't chew gum anymore, I can't even enjoy certain foods anymore because the way aspartame makes me feel, headache, nausea, dizzy, so sick that I can't eat anything and I'm practically in a coma for fourteen hours.
They should deprive the world of aspartame like they deprived the world of peanut butter products.
The reason I can't give up sugar completely is because my blood sugar drops to dangerous levels without it.
So your reaction to aspartame is the same as anaphylactic shock that peanuts can cause? Um OK. Plus peanuts aren't banned. You can still buy plenty of peanut products. Also it isn't about being lazy or reading labels. There are tons of issues with cross contamination so that even foods made without peanuts on the label can be contaminated with peanuts.
4 -
Do you even know what the chemical make up of aspartame is? If so, explain how it's derived from weed killer? Consequently cancer may be higher for a couple of reasons: Weight related issues and an aging population being kept alive longer due to medical technology.
if that's true then why wasn't cancer higher 300 years a go verses now?masterscallit wrote: »We're all gonna die. I read this article and it scared the *kitten* out of me. Apparently there was a lot of resistance from the medical community in the past about the destruction and cancer-causing effects sugar creates in the body. I NEED HELP kicking sugar. It's so hard man.
Too much of one thing is not good for you. Moderation is okay. In the last twenty years cancer is up, so is the amount of aspartame (derived from weed killer. And you wonder why people are realizing its not such a good idea to consume it after all), preservatives in the food to make it last longer on the shelves. The amount of chemicals found in our water that causes people to get sick. May I go on?
If you're really worried about it, drink more tea, put lemon in your water. It's been known to help your body become an inhospitable environment for cancer cells to grow. (Doctors don't want their patients to know that. Otherwise they would be out of a job.)
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
3 -
stevencloser wrote: »
Firstly, people don't overeat just on sweet foods.
Secondly, alcohol creates an actual, physical addiction to it.
Interestingly, I just read a report stating that solving this problem of "sugar addiction" (or whatever name you choose to give it) is actually more complicated than solving drug addiction.
http://news.mit.edu/2015/decoding-sugar-addiction-0129
You obviously did not read the whole piece and are twisting what it meant to say.
8 -
Hmmm. It all comes down to gluttony and sloth then? And a fat enough wallet to afford you or some other sort of support?
No they can control it IF THEY REALLY WANT TO. There really aren't any "sugar/carb addicts". There are people who like it more than they like eating other stuff because it tastes good.OP---you are correct and so is Gary Taubes---fully half of people in the US (and some other places) are obese or overweight, they can not control the intake of sugar/carbs and they are having negative health impacts.
Here at MFP, we hear from many who can eat sugar/carbs within CiCo and those ppl refuse to believe that this does not work for sugar/carb addicts.
And as a professional in the business, I'm sure I've dealt personally with more overweight/obese people than many of the posters and can tell you emphatically that BEHAVIOR can be altered with consistency and support.
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
2 -
@lyn_glenmont Buying a sack of sugar to add to cakes and pies and homemade treats is very different from having sugar added to almost everything you buy in a grocery store filled with processed food. Are you really arguing that people today eat in the same way they did 50 years ago--or in the 19th century?
So sugar isn't really the issue then...it's the prevalence and reliance of many on processed food goods that is a bigger issue. Perhaps more education on the awesomeness of more whole foods and less demonizing sugar is in order...perhaps educating people to move away from the SAD is in order...you don't have to equate sugar with crack cocaine to have that discussion...
I eat the same way people ate 50 years ago...actually, I probably eat better.
4 -
So did you know methanol exists in citrus fruits? Truth. The issue is DOSAGE. And the amount in aspartame is insignificant in moderate dosages.http://www.rense.com/general50/killer.htm
a really good read. I just know if I have anything with aspartame in it. I'm too sick to do anything. I stopped getting severe migraines.
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
5 -
Hmmm. It all comes down to gluttony and sloth then? And a fat enough wallet to afford you or some other sort of support?
No they can control it IF THEY REALLY WANT TO. There really aren't any "sugar/carb addicts". There are people who like it more than they like eating other stuff because it tastes good.OP---you are correct and so is Gary Taubes---fully half of people in the US (and some other places) are obese or overweight, they can not control the intake of sugar/carbs and they are having negative health impacts.
Here at MFP, we hear from many who can eat sugar/carbs within CiCo and those ppl refuse to believe that this does not work for sugar/carb addicts.
And as a professional in the business, I'm sure I've dealt personally with more overweight/obese people than many of the posters and can tell you emphatically that BEHAVIOR can be altered with consistency and support.
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
No but there are people who blame their overeating/weight on food instead of dealing with the real issue that caused them to develop those habits. The "it's not my fault, it's sugar that made me fat" attitude is not helpful at all. How do you change behaviours if you can't even acknowledge why you have them and act helpless.7 -
Hmmm. It all comes down to gluttony and sloth then? And a fat enough wallet to afford you or some other sort of support?
No they can control it IF THEY REALLY WANT TO. There really aren't any "sugar/carb addicts". There are people who like it more than they like eating other stuff because it tastes good.OP---you are correct and so is Gary Taubes---fully half of people in the US (and some other places) are obese or overweight, they can not control the intake of sugar/carbs and they are having negative health impacts.
Here at MFP, we hear from many who can eat sugar/carbs within CiCo and those ppl refuse to believe that this does not work for sugar/carb addicts.
And as a professional in the business, I'm sure I've dealt personally with more overweight/obese people than many of the posters and can tell you emphatically that BEHAVIOR can be altered with consistency and support.
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
Pretty much. Sugar didn't get me to 330 lbs. Food (including sugar) and laziness did. I'm just not relying on a fat enough wallet to fix the issue.5 -
Do you even know what the chemical make up of aspartame is? If so, explain how it's derived from weed killer? Consequently cancer may be higher for a couple of reasons: Weight related issues and an aging population being kept alive longer due to medical technology.
if that's true then why wasn't cancer higher 300 years a go verses now?masterscallit wrote: »We're all gonna die. I read this article and it scared the *kitten* out of me. Apparently there was a lot of resistance from the medical community in the past about the destruction and cancer-causing effects sugar creates in the body. I NEED HELP kicking sugar. It's so hard man.
Too much of one thing is not good for you. Moderation is okay. In the last twenty years cancer is up, so is the amount of aspartame (derived from weed killer. And you wonder why people are realizing its not such a good idea to consume it after all), preservatives in the food to make it last longer on the shelves. The amount of chemicals found in our water that causes people to get sick. May I go on?
If you're really worried about it, drink more tea, put lemon in your water. It's been known to help your body become an inhospitable environment for cancer cells to grow. (Doctors don't want their patients to know that. Otherwise they would be out of a job.)
So much this.
Simply living longer increases the chances of anyone developing cancer in their lifetime.
Or kidney issues. Or heart disease. Or respiratory/circulatory problems. Or....
7 -
GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »You obviously did not read the whole piece and are twisting what it meant to say.
I'm not twisting anything; those words were a direct quote from the article:
"Together, obesity and Type 2 diabetes rank among our nation’s greatest health problem, and they largely result from what many call an “addiction” to sugar. But solving this problem is more complicated than solving drug addiction, because it requires reducing the drive to eat unhealthy foods without affecting the desire to eat healthy foods when hungry."
Did *you* read the whole piece?1 -
snickerscharlie wrote: »
Do you even know what the chemical make up of aspartame is? If so, explain how it's derived from weed killer? Consequently cancer may be higher for a couple of reasons: Weight related issues and an aging population being kept alive longer due to medical technology.
if that's true then why wasn't cancer higher 300 years a go verses now?masterscallit wrote: »We're all gonna die. I read this article and it scared the *kitten* out of me. Apparently there was a lot of resistance from the medical community in the past about the destruction and cancer-causing effects sugar creates in the body. I NEED HELP kicking sugar. It's so hard man.
Too much of one thing is not good for you. Moderation is okay. In the last twenty years cancer is up, so is the amount of aspartame (derived from weed killer. And you wonder why people are realizing its not such a good idea to consume it after all), preservatives in the food to make it last longer on the shelves. The amount of chemicals found in our water that causes people to get sick. May I go on?
If you're really worried about it, drink more tea, put lemon in your water. It's been known to help your body become an inhospitable environment for cancer cells to grow. (Doctors don't want their patients to know that. Otherwise they would be out of a job.)
So much this.
Simply living longer increases the chances of anyone developing cancer in their lifetime.
Or kidney issues. Or heart disease. Or respiratory/circulatory problems. Or....
This. Better treatments of diseases, etc make people live long enough to develop cancer when they wouldn't have otherwise as their disease would have killed them before that point2 -
GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »You obviously did not read the whole piece and are twisting what it meant to say.
I'm not twisting anything; those words were a direct quote from the article:
"Together, obesity and Type 2 diabetes rank among our nation’s greatest health problem, and they largely result from what many call an “addiction” to sugar. But solving this problem is more complicated than solving drug addiction, because it requires reducing the drive to eat unhealthy foods without affecting the desire to eat healthy foods when hungry."
Did *you* read the whole piece?
But sugar doesn't cause diabetes.....7 -
http://healthdefine.com/medical-advice/what-is-aspartame-and-the-aspartame-side-effects
maybe the fact that the company that produces aspartame also produces herbicides should raise a red flag.1 -
GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »You obviously did not read the whole piece and are twisting what it meant to say.
I'm not twisting anything; those words were a direct quote from the article:
"Together, obesity and Type 2 diabetes rank among our nation’s greatest health problem, and they largely result from what many call an “addiction” to sugar. But solving this problem is more complicated than solving drug addiction, because it requires reducing the drive to eat unhealthy foods without affecting the desire to eat healthy foods when hungry."
Did *you* read the whole piece?
It was half the quote, taken out of context to further your agenda in this thread.
Yes, I read this whole piece, and their study is weak and preliminary, because it's based on animal findings and presumes an addiction to soda consumption in humans.
Silliness.
With the exception of sugar sweetened beverages and things like hard candy, most "sugary" are more than just sugar.
Editing to add:
I really don't care if someone wants to give up sugar. I'd just like them to acknowledge that it's their own personal behavior that's at fault, not the substance.
Every one of you looking for a scapegoat is never going to achieve long term success until you face the facts that it's YOU who is lacking control.
I will freely admit that I have trouble moderating when it comes to some things. The problem is all me. I don't buy the foods which cause me issues, because I've taken control of my behavior.
Furthermore, since I know it's me and not the substance, I know there are foods that I'm just fine moderating and I don't feel deprived controlling my weight through calorie management. There will never be a point where my will snaps and I give in because I miss a food too much.7 -
http://healthdefine.com/medical-advice/what-is-aspartame-and-the-aspartame-side-effects
maybe the fact that the company that produces aspartame also produces herbicides should raise a red flag.
You know, there are sources on the internet that aren't fearmongering pieces of trash. Switching out your normal searching for scholar.google.com might be a good place to start.8 -
GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »
Yes, I read this whole piece, and their study is weak and preliminary, because it's based on animal findings and presumes an addiction to soda consumption in humans.
Silliness.
Others would disagree with your assessment:
“This study represents, in my opinion, an outstanding step forward in understanding the many intricate aspects of feeding behaviors,” says Antonello Bonci, scientific director at the National Institute on Drug Abuse, who was not involved with the research. “While there have been many excellent studies in the past, looking at the compulsive drive of substance-use disorders, this is the first time that a study goes very deeply and comprehensively into the same aspects for compulsive feeding behavior. From a translational perspective, the extraordinary multidisciplinary approach used in this study produced a very exciting finding: that compulsive sugar consumption is mediated by a different neural circuit than physiological, healthy eating.”
But anyway, I'm sure those who are interested will read the report for themselves.
2 -
Gianfranco_R wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »goldthistime wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »SymbolismNZ wrote: »Nothing actually wrong with someone giving up sugar in my view; if nothing else it reduces a lot of calorie dense foods that are far too easy to pick up and scoff down (chocolate, flavored milk, sodas) and forces people to be more mindful of what is going into their diets.
Giving up fruit and most dairy is fine, although I would miss them, and starches like sweet potatoes and plantains can be replaced with others, but I personally think giving up vegetables is really unhealthy (barring a rare medical issue that requires it), and there sure is something wrong with it.
I avoid or limit (or simply find unappealing) lots of high cal foods that also have sugar, but not because sugar is terrible and must be avoided. Focusing on sugar=bad leads to bad nutritional choices, IMO.
I would have assumed that the poster you replied to meant foods with added sugars, not fruit, dairy and sweet potatoes.
Why would avoiding added sugar lead to bad nutritional choices?
(1) The poster did not say added sugar.
(2) The sugar in fruit (for example) and added sugar (sucrose) that in other things is the same, chemically (especially when your body breaks apart the sucrose), so it doesn't even make sense to claim that "sugar" means only added sugar. The arguments about sugar hurting your body would apply to all.
(I happen to agree that we shouldn't consume excessive sugar, or excessive anything else, but that's a different discussion. Or what cwolfman said upthread.)
+1
If you're giving up sugar ... give up sugar. All sugar. Start to do some research as to what contains sugar and how the body breaks nutrients down.
It's the MFP paradox: high carbers push people to embrace no-carb/carnivorism. I would say they are also pretty successful...
I tend to think most of us are moderate carbers with an evenly distributed macro mix as we're pretty well aware of the benefits of a decent protein intake while dieting. I wouldn't call most of us high carbers unless it's relative to keto consumption.
In some discussions, low carbing folks would have everyone thinking that we're all low carbers because they compare our intakes against SAD, and most of us do consume less carbs than that.5 -
GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »
Yes, I read this whole piece, and their study is weak and preliminary, because it's based on animal findings and presumes an addiction to soda consumption in humans.
Silliness.
Others would disagree with your assessment:
“This study represents, in my opinion, an outstanding step forward in understanding the many intricate aspects of feeding behaviors,” says Antonello Bonci, scientific director at the National Institute on Drug Abuse, who was not involved with the research. “While there have been many excellent studies in the past, looking at the compulsive drive of substance-use disorders, this is the first time that a study goes very deeply and comprehensively into the same aspects for compulsive feeding behavior. From a translational perspective, the extraordinary multidisciplinary approach used in this study produced a very exciting finding: that compulsive sugar consumption is mediated by a different neural circuit than physiological, healthy eating.”
But anyway, I'm sure those who are interested will read the report for themselves.
Mice. compulsively. ate. sugar.
Find me people who are tipping back bags of sugar.
Now, if they did a study where they found a drug that did something to filter out compulsive eating behavior from healthy eating behavior? That would be helpful.
In other words, we don't have an obesity crisis simply because people are compulsively consuming sugar.
The study has limited usefulness potential.
6 -
@chocolate_owl "Switching out your normal searching for scholar.google.com might be a good place to start."
This is awesome I never knew this was available!2 -
Our body has absolutely no use of sugar. None! -we eat it because it tastes good. It's a treat. And we like to treat ourselves,even if it's good or bad. Some people are more likely to get addicted to "treats", (in some forms), than others Salt is something the body needs, BUT not much-just enough! Happy New year
Not true at all. Our bodies and brains do need sugar to function.
4 -
snickerscharlie wrote: »kshama2001 wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »@Ty_Floyd I find it frankly amazing how angrily people are reacting to the information you presented quite neutrally.
For me, sugar may not have been as addicting as cocaine, but since reducing it drastically from my diet (going from a ridiculous 125g or something per day!) to a more sensible 24g per day has made a world of difference in my cravings. I think there are other people for whom that is also true. Do I believe that sugar is a drug? Nah. Do I think trying to avoid it as much as possible is very beneficial *for some people* in controlling cravings? Absolutely. I'm glad I discovered people like Taubes because it helped me think hard about what sugar does to my body and make thoughtful choices about how much of it I want to consume. Maybe the article you shared will have the same impact on others. Thanks for posting it.
Because some of us have actually had friends and family members who were actually addicted to drugs...calling sugar an "addiction" and making cocaine references is pretty much just insulting to people who actually have problems that go beyond some mere cravings...
I used to self-medicate with alcohol, and other substances and behaviors, and the cravings I felt for food felt exactly the same.
They may well have felt very similar, but food cravings and true physical substance addiction aren't the same thing. That's the distinction being made here. You may well have been 'addicted' to the behavior of eating, which is a psychological issue and not a physical one.
Yes, I'm not claiming that sugar (or food) is physically addicting like crack is. I've mentioned behavioral addiction earlier in this thread. Gambling is a behavioral addiction. There are drugs to help with physical withdrawal, but other than that, both types of addictions can be treated similarly.2
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 426 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions