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
-
Tacklewasher wrote: »kshama2001 wrote: »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.
I'm curious if there isn't something to this. Is it possible that sugar, while not physically addicting, might be emotionally addicting to some people? Is there a difference between "needing" to gamble and "needing" comfort foods? And is this the type of addiction Taubes is (poorly) talking about?
Gambling isn't bad and many can enjoy a night out playing poker, slots etc. without spending the last of their food and rent money, but to some they can't stop.
I'm firmly in the "sugar is not evil and Taubes is and idiot" camp, but am curious about the implication for some.
As a behavioral addiction, I wouldn't limit it to just sugar...going back to 600# life...I'd wager there is a behavioral addiction there...but it's food in general, not just sugar. The binging and overeating is the disordered behavioral issue, and it involves a variety of food...I'd wager that a whole mess of people who have "eating addiction" in the behavioral sense are eating just as much, if not more dietary fat as they are sugar...but singling out fat is so 80s/90s, so sugar is the new scapegoat.5 -
[/quote] A Klondike Bar has never entered this equation.[/quote]
LOL!
0 -
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 
You may want to brush up on your physiology a bit. The human brain relies on glucose (that's a sugar, in case you didn't know) as its main source of energy. The brain accounts for 2% of your body weight, but consumes about 20% of your glucose-derived energy. (All of which may actually help explain some of the posts in this thread.)
As for the whole addiction BS - I've seen alcoholics who will drink mouthwash for its alcohol content when they don't have access to booze. I've seen plenty of heroin and meth addicts who will commit burglaries or steal from their own families to support their habits. Show me a "sugar addict" who will grab a spoon and start shoveling down sugar from a bag when their usual treats aren't available if you want to talk about sugar truly being addictive. Or maybe one who goes and breaks into other people's houses to eat their sugary treats. The addiction hypothesis is nothing more than a) fearmongering and b) an attempt to absolve people of personal responsibility.
I have heard of people doing weird things like stealing co-workers sugary treats.3 -
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
You may want to brush up on your physiology a bit. The human brain relies on glucose (that's a sugar, in case you didn't know) as its main source of energy. The brain accounts for 2% of your body weight, but consumes about 20% of your glucose-derived energy. (All of which may actually help explain some of the posts in this thread.)
As for the whole addiction BS - I've seen alcoholics who will drink mouthwash for its alcohol content when they don't have access to booze. I've seen plenty of heroin and meth addicts who will commit burglaries or steal from their own families to support their habits. Show me a "sugar addict" who will grab a spoon and start shoveling down sugar from a bag when their usual treats aren't available if you want to talk about sugar truly being addictive. Or maybe one who goes and breaks into other people's houses to eat their sugary treats. The addiction hypothesis is nothing more than a) fearmongering and b) an attempt to absolve people of personal responsibility.
I have heard of people doing weird things like stealing co-workers sugary treats.
I've heard of people doing weird things like stealing co-workers' pens and pencils too. Does that mean they're addicted to pens and pencils?9 -
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
You may want to brush up on your physiology a bit. The human brain relies on glucose (that's a sugar, in case you didn't know) as its main source of energy. The brain accounts for 2% of your body weight, but consumes about 20% of your glucose-derived energy. (All of which may actually help explain some of the posts in this thread.)
As for the whole addiction BS - I've seen alcoholics who will drink mouthwash for its alcohol content when they don't have access to booze. I've seen plenty of heroin and meth addicts who will commit burglaries or steal from their own families to support their habits. Show me a "sugar addict" who will grab a spoon and start shoveling down sugar from a bag when their usual treats aren't available if you want to talk about sugar truly being addictive. Or maybe one who goes and breaks into other people's houses to eat their sugary treats. The addiction hypothesis is nothing more than a) fearmongering and b) an attempt to absolve people of personal responsibility.
I have heard of people doing weird things like stealing co-workers sugary treats.
That's just d-baggery, not addiction.6 -
Tacklewasher wrote: »snickerscharlie wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »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
You may want to brush up on your physiology a bit. The human brain relies on glucose (that's a sugar, in case you didn't know) as its main source of energy. The brain accounts for 2% of your body weight, but consumes about 20% of your glucose-derived energy. (All of which may actually help explain some of the posts in this thread.)
As for the whole addiction BS - I've seen alcoholics who will drink mouthwash for its alcohol content when they don't have access to booze. I've seen plenty of heroin and meth addicts who will commit burglaries or steal from their own families to support their habits. Show me a "sugar addict" who will grab a spoon and start shoveling down sugar from a bag when their usual treats aren't available if you want to talk about sugar truly being addictive. Or maybe one who goes and breaks into other people's houses to eat their sugary treats. The addiction hypothesis is nothing more than a) fearmongering and b) an attempt to absolve people of personal responsibility.
Don't forget whoring yourself out...
That too. I have yet to ever hear of a prostitute exchanging their services for sugar.
Can confirm.
In my line of work, I see a lot of young women in the sex trade industry whose pimps deliberately get them addicted to drugs in order to keep them dependent, compliant and trapped.
A Klondike Bar has never entered this equation.
But is that just a narrow view of addiction? Pot isn't physically addictive, but there are people addicted to it emotionally.
The drugs of choice in the sex trade industry do not include pot, so I cannot comment on that within the realm of my professional experience.
The 'escorts' are given hardcore drugs by their pimps in order to keep them working impossible hours and to desensitize them to what they are actually doing. Pot would just make most of them either sleepy or hungry, both of which would be counterproductive to the pimps ulterior motives. 4 -
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.)
And now we have an "aspartame is evil" post.
Man, this thread has it all. I appreciate this entertainment.6 -
cwolfman13 wrote: »LeileiNadine wrote: »Too much sugar makes me feel rubbish, takes my weight up (whether it's in outright sugar form or too many carbs causing my blood sugar to go cray cray) I kind of wonder if those that are singing the praises of sugar don't want to admit that they are a lil addicted, just sayin ;-)
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.
Quoting this from cwolfman for emphasis. It is interesting on these threads how many people think the folks who are saying sugar isn't addictive are defensive or afraid to look in the own mirror. Many of us were in the same position as so many claiming sugar is inherently bad. We were looking for something to blame for our weight problems, our health issues, etc. we came to this site and started reading and learning and many of us got into arguments just like this one when our beliefs were challenged. The fact is that until people look at the big picture and understand that there is not one single food or ingredient or macro to blame for the host of medical issues related to obesity, etc that the primary cause is in fact TOO MANY CALORIES.
And the reasons we eat too many calories vary from person to person. There are eating disorders there are compulsions there are emotional issues there is just straight up lack of willpower, complacency, enjoyment, etc. But the bottom line is that until people understand that a single item isn't to blame and find their own reasons and a pragmatic, logic based approach to addressing those reasons, they are going to continue to struggle.
Take a step back and read what people are really saying. When they say "sugar isn't addictive, but sure many people might benefit from reducing added sugar if it helps reduce total calories", why do you only read the first part and argue that? Do you ever look at how long these people have been here? How successful they are? How they stick around to try to help other new people understand how to be successful too, by stopping demonizing foods and coming up with a plan that will really work for the long term? Do you ever look at their diaries to see what they eat? I bet you think it's nothing but poptarts, cookies, and ketchup (since people weirdly fixate on sugar in ketchup); when in fact it's actually usually filled with a variety of nutrient dense foods with some treats mixed in. Most people saying sugar isn't addictive are actually under the national guidelines for sugar consumption I would wager.
I just don't understand why people don't take time to really read and try to understand what helpful people like @cwolfman13 and @lemurcat12 and @GottaBurnEmAll and so many others are saying. You jump to "hey maybe they are afraid to admit they too are addicted".
Happy New Year!11 -
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
You may want to brush up on your physiology a bit. The human brain relies on glucose (that's a sugar, in case you didn't know) as its main source of energy. The brain accounts for 2% of your body weight, but consumes about 20% of your glucose-derived energy. (All of which may actually help explain some of the posts in this thread.)
As for the whole addiction BS - I've seen alcoholics who will drink mouthwash for its alcohol content when they don't have access to booze. I've seen plenty of heroin and meth addicts who will commit burglaries or steal from their own families to support their habits. Show me a "sugar addict" who will grab a spoon and start shoveling down sugar from a bag when their usual treats aren't available if you want to talk about sugar truly being addictive. Or maybe one who goes and breaks into other people's houses to eat their sugary treats. The addiction hypothesis is nothing more than a) fearmongering and b) an attempt to absolve people of personal responsibility.
I have heard of people doing weird things like stealing co-workers sugary treats.
I've heard of people doing weird things like stealing co-workers' pens and pencils too. Does that mean they're addicted to pens and pencils?
No, they may just be a klepto or have a need of a pen. Do they have a need of the co-workers sweets?2 -
snickerscharlie wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »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
You may want to brush up on your physiology a bit. The human brain relies on glucose (that's a sugar, in case you didn't know) as its main source of energy. The brain accounts for 2% of your body weight, but consumes about 20% of your glucose-derived energy. (All of which may actually help explain some of the posts in this thread.)
As for the whole addiction BS - I've seen alcoholics who will drink mouthwash for its alcohol content when they don't have access to booze. I've seen plenty of heroin and meth addicts who will commit burglaries or steal from their own families to support their habits. Show me a "sugar addict" who will grab a spoon and start shoveling down sugar from a bag when their usual treats aren't available if you want to talk about sugar truly being addictive. Or maybe one who goes and breaks into other people's houses to eat their sugary treats. The addiction hypothesis is nothing more than a) fearmongering and b) an attempt to absolve people of personal responsibility.
Don't forget whoring yourself out...
That too. I have yet to ever hear of a prostitute exchanging their services for sugar.
Can confirm.
In my line of work, I see a lot of young women in the sex trade industry whose pimps deliberately get them addicted to drugs in order to keep them dependent, compliant and trapped.
A Klondike Bar has never entered this equation.
What would you do-oo-oo for a Klondike Bar?
Not prostitute oneself. Of that I am certain. 4 -
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.)
And now we have an "aspartame is evil" post.
Man, this thread has it all. I appreciate this entertainment.
I have so many things I'm supposed to be doing right now (including eating lunch), that have totally gone to the wayside due to this thread lol.2 -
cwolfman13 wrote: »Tacklewasher wrote: »kshama2001 wrote: »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.
I'm curious if there isn't something to this. Is it possible that sugar, while not physically addicting, might be emotionally addicting to some people? Is there a difference between "needing" to gamble and "needing" comfort foods? And is this the type of addiction Taubes is (poorly) talking about?
Gambling isn't bad and many can enjoy a night out playing poker, slots etc. without spending the last of their food and rent money, but to some they can't stop.
I'm firmly in the "sugar is not evil and Taubes is and idiot" camp, but am curious about the implication for some.
As a behavioral addiction, I wouldn't limit it to just sugar...going back to 600# life...I'd wager there is a behavioral addiction there...but it's food in general, not just sugar. The binging and overeating is the disordered behavioral issue, and it involves a variety of food...I'd wager that a whole mess of people who have "eating addiction" in the behavioral sense are eating just as much, if not more dietary fat as they are sugar...but singling out fat is so 80s/90s, so sugar is the new scapegoat.
Understood.0 -
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
You may want to brush up on your physiology a bit. The human brain relies on glucose (that's a sugar, in case you didn't know) as its main source of energy. The brain accounts for 2% of your body weight, but consumes about 20% of your glucose-derived energy. (All of which may actually help explain some of the posts in this thread.)
As for the whole addiction BS - I've seen alcoholics who will drink mouthwash for its alcohol content when they don't have access to booze. I've seen plenty of heroin and meth addicts who will commit burglaries or steal from their own families to support their habits. Show me a "sugar addict" who will grab a spoon and start shoveling down sugar from a bag when their usual treats aren't available if you want to talk about sugar truly being addictive. Or maybe one who goes and breaks into other people's houses to eat their sugary treats. The addiction hypothesis is nothing more than a) fearmongering and b) an attempt to absolve people of personal responsibility.
I have heard of people doing weird things like stealing co-workers sugary treats.
I've heard of people doing weird things like stealing co-workers' pens and pencils too. Does that mean they're addicted to pens and pencils?
No, they may just be a klepto or have a need of a pen. Do they have a need of the co-workers sweets?
A lot of people are just motivated by the something-for-nothing appeal. Just the same as pinching a coworker's ham sandwich and dill pickle out of the fridge in the break room. 3 -
snickerscharlie wrote: »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
You may want to brush up on your physiology a bit. The human brain relies on glucose (that's a sugar, in case you didn't know) as its main source of energy. The brain accounts for 2% of your body weight, but consumes about 20% of your glucose-derived energy. (All of which may actually help explain some of the posts in this thread.)
As for the whole addiction BS - I've seen alcoholics who will drink mouthwash for its alcohol content when they don't have access to booze. I've seen plenty of heroin and meth addicts who will commit burglaries or steal from their own families to support their habits. Show me a "sugar addict" who will grab a spoon and start shoveling down sugar from a bag when their usual treats aren't available if you want to talk about sugar truly being addictive. Or maybe one who goes and breaks into other people's houses to eat their sugary treats. The addiction hypothesis is nothing more than a) fearmongering and b) an attempt to absolve people of personal responsibility.
I have heard of people doing weird things like stealing co-workers sugary treats.
I've heard of people doing weird things like stealing co-workers' pens and pencils too. Does that mean they're addicted to pens and pencils?
No, they may just be a klepto or have a need of a pen. Do they have a need of the co-workers sweets?
A lot of people are just motivated by the something-for-nothing appeal. Just the same as pinching a coworker's ham sandwich and dill pickle out of the fridge in the break room.
Curses! I was convinced nobody saw me.3 -
crzycatlady1 wrote: »
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.)
And now we have an "aspartame is evil" post.
Man, this thread has it all. I appreciate this entertainment.
I have so many things I'm supposed to be doing right now (including eating lunch), that have totally gone to the wayside due to this thread lol.
I couldn't go in to my lab because of the weather. This will help pass the time.1 -
BruinsGal_91 wrote: »snickerscharlie wrote: »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
You may want to brush up on your physiology a bit. The human brain relies on glucose (that's a sugar, in case you didn't know) as its main source of energy. The brain accounts for 2% of your body weight, but consumes about 20% of your glucose-derived energy. (All of which may actually help explain some of the posts in this thread.)
As for the whole addiction BS - I've seen alcoholics who will drink mouthwash for its alcohol content when they don't have access to booze. I've seen plenty of heroin and meth addicts who will commit burglaries or steal from their own families to support their habits. Show me a "sugar addict" who will grab a spoon and start shoveling down sugar from a bag when their usual treats aren't available if you want to talk about sugar truly being addictive. Or maybe one who goes and breaks into other people's houses to eat their sugary treats. The addiction hypothesis is nothing more than a) fearmongering and b) an attempt to absolve people of personal responsibility.
I have heard of people doing weird things like stealing co-workers sugary treats.
I've heard of people doing weird things like stealing co-workers' pens and pencils too. Does that mean they're addicted to pens and pencils?
No, they may just be a klepto or have a need of a pen. Do they have a need of the co-workers sweets?
A lot of people are just motivated by the something-for-nothing appeal. Just the same as pinching a coworker's ham sandwich and dill pickle out of the fridge in the break room.
Curses! I was convinced nobody saw me.
Surveillance video sees all. <Nods>2 -
You may want to brush up on your physiology a bit. The human brain relies on glucose (that's a sugar, in case you didn't know) as its main source of energy. The brain accounts for 2% of your body weight, but consumes about 20% of your glucose-derived energy. (All of which may actually help explain some of the posts in this thread.)
I believe the body can produce glycogen from dietary protein as well in the absence of carbohydrates, is that not correct?As for the whole addiction BS - I've seen alcoholics who will drink mouthwash for its alcohol content when they don't have access to booze. I've seen plenty of heroin and meth addicts who will commit burglaries or steal from their own families to support their habits. Show me a "sugar addict" who will grab a spoon and start shoveling down sugar from a bag when their usual treats aren't available if you want to talk about sugar truly being addictive. Or maybe one who goes and breaks into other people's houses to eat their sugary treats.
Well the truth is that there is rarely a place/time when one doesn't have access to sugary treats (at least in the West).
But yes there are many documented cases of people who sneak/steal food, or go out in the middle of the night to a 24-hr convenience store to get it.
1 -
I used to be a huge proponent of giving up sugar. But just like giving up any other food group it becomes an exercise if futility. Plus after becoming familiar with the work of Dr. Ray Peat I feel that long term sugar avoidance is detrimental to the metabolism which has a whole host of bad ramifications. I added some sugar back in (mostly OJ, fruits, honey...and I just started putting some of the white stuff in my coffee GASP!) and I feel much better. My body temps are up and I'm feeling more alive.
Most of the studies referenced by Dr. Lustig and others are on rats and cannot be taken at face value as this does not always apply the same to humans. If you want to avoid something avoid food additives, artificial sweeteners, etc.2 -
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.)
And now we have an "aspartame is evil" post.
Man, this thread has it all. I appreciate this entertainment.
Get your bingo card out...
This thread could give birth to a "mean people" thread and you have to be ready...
5 -
You may want to brush up on your physiology a bit. The human brain relies on glucose (that's a sugar, in case you didn't know) as its main source of energy. The brain accounts for 2% of your body weight, but consumes about 20% of your glucose-derived energy. (All of which may actually help explain some of the posts in this thread.)
I believe the body can produce glycogen from dietary protein as well in the absence of carbohydrates, is that not correct?As for the whole addiction BS - I've seen alcoholics who will drink mouthwash for its alcohol content when they don't have access to booze. I've seen plenty of heroin and meth addicts who will commit burglaries or steal from their own families to support their habits. Show me a "sugar addict" who will grab a spoon and start shoveling down sugar from a bag when their usual treats aren't available if you want to talk about sugar truly being addictive. Or maybe one who goes and breaks into other people's houses to eat their sugary treats.
Well the truth is that there is rarely a place/time when one doesn't have access to sugary treats (at least in the West).
But yes there are many documented cases of people who sneak/steal food, or go out in the middle of the night to a 24-hr convenience store to get it.
But if this was a true physical addiction, it would stand to reason that these people swing by their local 7-11 for a 5lb bag of refined sugar, since that would be the purest form of their "drug" of choice. That, however, isn't the case.8 -
Well the truth is that there is rarely a place/time when one doesn't have access to sugary treats (at least in the West).
But yes there are many documented cases of people who sneak/steal food, or go out in the middle of the night to a 24-hr convenience store to get it.
Yes, there are people who have disordered/compulsive eating patterns. I believe that's pretty well documented and accepted as fact. There are also people who compulsively and irrationally exclude foods or entire food groups/macronutrients from their diets.6 -
@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?
wait, so it is OK to have added sugar if you add it when baking, but if you add sugar via some kind of processing method then the sugar becomes magically worse for you?
You do realize that baking is a form of processing, right?7 -
snickerscharlie wrote: »
But if this was a true physical addiction, it would stand to reason that these people swing by their local 7-11 for a 5lb bag of refined sugar, since that would be the purest form of their "drug" of choice. That, however, isn't the case.
Well, not really. To draw one parallel, most of the alcoholics I know drink wine, rather than hard spirits or indeed 100-proof pure alcohol.
1 -
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.
find me a study on humans that says that and we can talk ..
big deal, they trained a bunch of mice to go to the substance that tasted better...5 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »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.
P&G produces toothpaste and dishwashing detergent. What's your point?
Well, back in the '80s I believe there was a rumor spread that P&G was promoting Satan.
Maybe it's because of the diversity of product lines?
everyone knows that sugar is the antichrist....
to break the seven seals of the apocalypse you have to sprinkle sugar on them ...little known fact...6 -
hollyrayburn wrote: »Good luck eliminating sugar completely, as it is in everything.
It is possible to go without consuming added sugar. I've done it. It's a lot of work and label reading and takes a lot of planning, but you can do it.
I have done this in the past. Why? Because I wanted to throw myself back into cooking, because I was trying to eat fewer processed foods, because I eat my feelings, and I never seem to be able to control myself and only eat one piece of candy. Do I eat added sugar now? Yes. I just eat less of it.1 -
Sorry - I lost interest when he calls sugar a drug. It's not a drug and it's not addictive. People may LIKE the taste of sugar and thus want to consume more but it's no more addictive than cheese is (which is something I have problems moderating but I'm not addicted to it).
I really wish people would stop listening to this kind of low intellect fear-mongering.
/rantRepeat after me:
Sugar is not a drug.
Sugar is not addictive.
Sugar does not cause weight gain unless eaten in excess.
There is nothing wrong with sugar.
Sorry, just becuase you repeat it over and over again doesn't make it true.
Exhibits A, B, C, D, E, and F.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2235907/
http://news.mit.edu/2015/decoding-sugar-addiction-0129
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17668074
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17668074
The definition of addiction:
ad·dic·tion
əˈdikSH(ə)n/
noun
the fact or condition of being addicted to a particular substance, thing, or activity.
"he committed the theft to finance his drug addiction"
synonyms: dependency, dependence, habit, problem
The definition of a drug:
drug
drəɡ/
noun
1.
a medicine or other substance which has a physiological effect when ingested or otherwise introduced into the body.
"a new drug aimed at sufferers from Parkinson's disease"
synonyms: medicine, medication, medicament, pharmaceutical;
Sorry - Sugar does has a physiological effect, a release of dopamine in the brain.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lEXBxijQREo
(See minutes 2:30 - 4:45 specifically)
Dopamine makes a person feel good. If they happen to be someone who suffers from depression, that little dopamine kick feels great. You want to feel it again, so you go back to the sugary foods again. Sure they taste good, but it's not just taste. There's a biochemical effect going on in a persons brain as well. Just like some can do crystal meth for a bunch of times and never be addicted, there's always someone who gets hooked the first time. Just because you are perhaps one that doesn't struggle with a compulsion to consume sugary foods - doesn't mean that's the facts.
Science is only beginning to understand what the food companies have known for a long time. If you dump boatloads of sugar into your foods - people will become hooked. Honestly - it's criminal when you look at obesity rates and diabetes rates particularly in children.
So. Yes, sugar is a drug since when ingested it has a physiological effect on the body, releasing dopamine, just like heroin and other opiates. Because dopamine is part of the reward system, sugar (due to its release of dopamine) can become addictive. Just like heroin, meth, or other psychological addictions like pornography and sex addition.
I am addicted to sugar. I can absolutely assure you - when I'm having a crappy day, I find myself continually gravitating to garbage sugary foods. Cakes, pies, candy, snacks... and after I eat them, I feel good. When I stop eating them, I go through withdrawals. Literally. That is the classic scenario of addiction.
Dealing with pain through a substance, which is what I have done for the majority of my life.
2 -
benjaminlight wrote: »...So. Yes, sugar is a drug since when ingested it has a physiological effect on the body, releasing dopamine, just like heroin and other opiates. Because dopamine is part of the reward system, sugar (due to its release of dopamine) can become addictive. Just like heroin, meth, or other psychological addictions like pornography and sex addition...
I think we've already covered the heroin, meth, etc. rhetoric several times over in this thread.
The answer is still no.8 -
benjaminlight wrote: »Sorry - I lost interest when he calls sugar a drug. It's not a drug and it's not addictive. People may LIKE the taste of sugar and thus want to consume more but it's no more addictive than cheese is (which is something I have problems moderating but I'm not addicted to it).
I really wish people would stop listening to this kind of low intellect fear-mongering.
/rantRepeat after me:
Sugar is not a drug.
Sugar is not addictive.
Sugar does not cause weight gain unless eaten in excess.
There is nothing wrong with sugar.
Sorry, just becuase you repeat it over and over again doesn't make it true.
Exhibits A, B, C, D, E, and F.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2235907/
http://news.mit.edu/2015/decoding-sugar-addiction-0129
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17668074
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17668074
Your rat studies do not bear out against human studies and metastudies for the case of sugar addiction. Way to not read ANYTHING in this thread that has already addressed studies, dopamine release, or behavioral disorders surrounding food.
7 -
It feels like I'm witnessing a discussion on a religious topic, its sooo long.
So far I've learned that:
1. everyone who decides to give up sugar believes that they should because it is as addictive as heroin.
2. all mfp longtimers are really healthy and they all eat sugar 'in moderation'.
3. *kitten* don't eat sugary foods, especially candy bars and their pimps never buy those things for them.
IDK2
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