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.
Addicted to sugar DEBATE
System
Posts: 1,920 MFP Staff
This discussion was created from replies split from: Addicted to sugar.
0
Replies
-
You're not "addicted" to it. You like how it tastes just like many people do. There's no need to completely cut it out. The good news is is that you just have to learn how to balance out eating where you meet your daily essentials and then if you have calories left over, you can eat that amount in treats if you like.
Calories matter most in weight loss/gain/maintenance. It's not always going to be the choice of food or diet.
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
26 -
Would you steal money from your family to eat it? Or lick it off the ground if it spilled?Sisepuede422 wrote: »It feels like an addiction. I feel physically and psychologically sick if I don't eat something loaded with sugar. I'm like a junkie.
It's hyperpalatable and understand that if you're HABITUAL BEHAVIOR is to always have it and you suddenly cut it out doing a 180, you're going to resist it.
Like anything else, if you MODERATELY approach it, you'll learn a new BEHAVIOR.
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
36 -
If people can be addicted to gambling, sex, drugs, etc, why is it so hard to accept that someone can be addicted to consuming sugar? They all cause reactions inside the body that release hormones that make us feel good, therefore we keep going back to that thing that gives us that feeling. People can be addicted to sugar just like anything else.46
-
If people can be addicted to gambling, sex, drugs, etc, why is it so hard to accept that someone can be addicted to consuming sugar? They all cause reactions inside the body that release hormones that make us feel good, therefore we keep going back to that thing that gives us that feeling. People can be addicted to sugar just like anything else.
I happen to agree with you. I've been on this forum for many years though - and I know how these threads go...20 -
Because you aren't mainlining straight sugar. Hyper-palatable foods containing sugar also contain fats and sometimes protein too. Unless you are never going to have fruit, dairy, a piece of birthday cake or Thanksgiving dessert for the rest of your life, you can't cut out sugar. Instead, find your weight loss calories, eat a balanced diet of foods you enjoy, weigh and log your food and you will lose. It's a great opportunity to retrain your brain and learn moderation that you will need to maintain your weight for life. FWIW, I've lost 98 lbs having sugar every day.19
-
@cmriverside I'm glad someone has the same view on this. Having struggled with addiction (and gone to treatment), I know that denying the physiological component of these kinds of things actually makes it harder for us to consciously change our behaviors. If I hadn't been taught about the way my body physically responds when I'm actively engaging in my addiction, I would have continued to beat myself up for not having the willpower to just not give in. Knowing that, yes, there is an actual, tangible thing happening in my body when I do this, and this is why it is so hard to stop, helped me find my resolve to do whatever it takes to not give in. Now I think: "Mind Over Matter." Yes, my biology drives me to want to engage in these addictive things, BUT, I KNOW they aren't good. Maybe it just pisses me off that my body tries really hard to make me give it these things, so, knowing that, when I consciously decide not to, it's like a big f-u to the addiction.
Sorry for the long post. Hopefully the OP will find something helpful among my rambling.16 -
If people can be addicted to gambling, sex, drugs, etc, why is it so hard to accept that someone can be addicted to consuming sugar? They all cause reactions inside the body that release hormones that make us feel good, therefore we keep going back to that thing that gives us that feeling. People can be addicted to sugar just like anything else.
Because sex, drugs and gambling are clearly defined, sugary foods are not. Is it the taste? Is it the fat? Is it the texture? Is it the combination of sugar and fat? Sugar is just one ingredient out of many in these foods. Very few people who claim to be addicted to sugar mean pixie sticks, hard candy, or table sugar by that. Fewer people are "addicted" to the purest forms of sugar than sugar combined with other ingredients, so is it really sugar addiction or "addiction" to things that taste good, carry memories, easy and cheap making forming habits easy and cheap, or simply an evolutionary drive towards energy sources (fatty-sugary foods are a double whammy of both fast and slow energy).40 -
If people can be addicted to gambling, sex, drugs, etc, why is it so hard to accept that someone can be addicted to consuming sugar? They all cause reactions inside the body that release hormones that make us feel good, therefore we keep going back to that thing that gives us that feeling. People can be addicted to sugar just like anything else.
more than likely they have underlying mental disorder that makes them think that they are addicted to those things...and those things you listed are not physically addicting...13 -
Because sex, drugs and gambling are clearly defined, sugary foods are not.
Addiction is rarely clearly defined. Hence the entire premise of Addictions Counseling.19 -
@cmriverside I'm glad someone has the same view on this. Having struggled with addiction (and gone to treatment), I know that denying the physiological component of these kinds of things actually makes it harder for us to consciously change our behaviors. If I hadn't been taught about the way my body physically responds when I'm actively engaging in my addiction, I would have continued to beat myself up for not having the willpower to just not give in. Knowing that, yes, there is an actual, tangible thing happening in my body when I do this, and this is why it is so hard to stop, helped me find my resolve to do whatever it takes to not give in. Now I think: "Mind Over Matter." Yes, my biology drives me to want to engage in these addictive things, BUT, I KNOW they aren't good. Maybe it just pisses me off that my body tries really hard to make me give it these things, so, knowing that, when I consciously decide not to, it's like a big f-u to the addiction.
Sorry for the long post. Hopefully the OP will find something helpful among my rambling.
Yeah.
And those who are not believers are going to argue for many pages. I just find it easier to accept that other people (usually those who have not been addicted to some typically destructive thing like alcohol, pornography, drugs or gambling) - have different beliefs about this and I am not going to waste my day getting up in arms over it.
*cue* the hyper-palatable/fruit/vegetable arguments.13 -
@cmriverside I'm glad someone has the same view on this. Having struggled with addiction (and gone to treatment), I know that denying the physiological component of these kinds of things actually makes it harder for us to consciously change our behaviors. If I hadn't been taught about the way my body physically responds when I'm actively engaging in my addiction, I would have continued to beat myself up for not having the willpower to just not give in. Knowing that, yes, there is an actual, tangible thing happening in my body when I do this, and this is why it is so hard to stop, helped me find my resolve to do whatever it takes to not give in. Now I think: "Mind Over Matter." Yes, my biology drives me to want to engage in these addictive things, BUT, I KNOW they aren't good. Maybe it just pisses me off that my body tries really hard to make me give it these things, so, knowing that, when I consciously decide not to, it's like a big f-u to the addiction.
Sorry for the long post. Hopefully the OP will find something helpful among my rambling.
When you went to treatment, did they just suggest you use different forms of what you are addicted to, to help you out? If it was alcohol, did they say hey you're addicted to Jack Daniels, just have a couple beers instead, and you'll kick that habit? If it was drugs, did they say hey, enough with the heroin, just switch to meth, and coke. I'm guessing not. So if these people are so addicted to sugar, why do we tell them to just switch out there candy habit for foods with different types of sugar?
28 -
cmriverside wrote: »@cmriverside I'm glad someone has the same view on this. Having struggled with addiction (and gone to treatment), I know that denying the physiological component of these kinds of things actually makes it harder for us to consciously change our behaviors. If I hadn't been taught about the way my body physically responds when I'm actively engaging in my addiction, I would have continued to beat myself up for not having the willpower to just not give in. Knowing that, yes, there is an actual, tangible thing happening in my body when I do this, and this is why it is so hard to stop, helped me find my resolve to do whatever it takes to not give in. Now I think: "Mind Over Matter." Yes, my biology drives me to want to engage in these addictive things, BUT, I KNOW they aren't good. Maybe it just pisses me off that my body tries really hard to make me give it these things, so, knowing that, when I consciously decide not to, it's like a big f-u to the addiction.
Sorry for the long post. Hopefully the OP will find something helpful among my rambling.
Yeah.
And those who are not believers are going to argue for many pages. I just find it easier to accept that other people (usually those who have not been addicted to some typically destructive thing like alcohol, pornography, drugs or gambling) - have different beliefs about this and I am not going to waste my day getting up in arms over it.
*cue* the hyper-palatable/fruit/vegetable arguments.
Actually, in previous discussions on the subject, it's the people who HAVE struggled with drug and alcohol addictions that are the most offended by the idea that sugar is addictive.29 -
I think in part sugar is an "addiction" because it stimulates the reward centre of the brain - just as drugs do and it is easy to binge on it. Like overdoing say alcohol it can also have negative consequences.
It is of course massively important that food is rewarding and are "addicted" to it otherwise we wouldn't eat and we would die!
For most of human history the problem has been getting enough food (including sugar) not too much.
It is, of course, really sensible behaviour on our part to binge on sugar. It is easy to postulate that if we found a source of sugar in prehistoric times - and genetically we are the same - say fruit - it was important to gorge on it as tomorrow it may be gone.
Today we can get unlimited sugar in very, very concentrated forms, available virtually all ths time and ii often comes with fat. I get a different type of hunger after eating say chocolate than other types of hunger. And if I know there is some left then a virtually uncontrollable urge to finish the bar off!!! This is massively consistent with my caveman self!
Part of the solution is not to have it available - either not in the house or at the back of cupboard! And also to eat it when other factors help disinhibite its consumption at the end of a meal or if snacking on it - have a snack of protein and volume first or instead as it discourages binging. Vegetables as stretch of the stomach stimulates gherlin I believe which satiates one - although there are other pathways and one needs protein and may be some fat and carbs as well (I have been ravenous a few hours after a meal of just veg).
I also find that whole fruit without anything else - particularly berries - raspberries, strawberries, blueberries are a better way to get my sugar and sweet hit. They are relatively low calorie and you get fibre, volume and useful micronurtients as well.
11 -
The physical symptoms are likely due to an electrolyte balance which is quite common when an individual drastically reduces carb intake. These are not withdrawal symptoms due to a physical addiction to sugar. Sugar is not a physically addictive substance.Sisepuede422 wrote: »It feels like an addiction. I feel physically and psychologically sick if I don't eat something loaded with sugar. I'm like a junkie.
Those addictions are behavioral, not physical. I won't contest that there are behavioral addictions to eating. However, an eating addiction is no more an addiction to sugar than a gambling addiction is an addiction to poker chips. The eating/gambling behavior is where the addiction lies, not the sugar/chips.If people can be addicted to gambling, sex, drugs, etc, why is it so hard to accept that someone can be addicted to consuming sugar? They all cause reactions inside the body that release hormones that make us feel good, therefore we keep going back to that thing that gives us that feeling. People can be addicted to sugar just like anything else.29 -
I think in part sugar is an "addiction" because it stimulates the reward centre of the brain - just as drugs do and it is easy to binge on it. Like overdoing say alcohol it can also have negative consequences.
It is of course massively important that food is rewarding and are "addicted" to it otherwise we wouldn't eat and we would die!
For most of human history the problem has been getting enough food (including sugar) not too much.
It is, of course, really sensible behaviour on our part to binge on sugar. It is easy to postulate that if we found a source of sugar in prehistoric times - and genetically we are the same - say fruit - it was important to gorge on it as tomorrow it may be gone.
Today we can get unlimited sugar in very, very concentrated forms, available virtually all ths time and ii often comes with fat. I get a different type of hunger after eating say chocolate than other types of hunger. And if I know there is some left then a virtually uncontrollable urge to finish the bar off!!! This is massively consistent with my caveman self!
Part of the solution is not to have it available - either not in the house or at the back of cupboard! And also to eat it when other factors help disinhibite its consumption at the end of a meal or if snacking on it - have a snack of protein and volume first or instead as it discourages binging. Vegetables as stretch of the stomach stimulates gherlin I believe which satiates one - although there are other pathways and one needs protein and may be some fat and carbs as well (I have been ravenous a few hours after a meal of just veg).
I also find that whole fruit without anything else - particularly berries - raspberries, strawberries, blueberries are a better way to get my sugar and sweet hit. They are relatively low calorie and you get fibre, volume and useful micronurtients as well.
nope, not this at all.
You get the same stimulus to that center of the brain when you pet a puppy, so are those as addictive as drugs now too?
17 -
@cmriverside I'm glad someone has the same view on this. Having struggled with addiction (and gone to treatment), I know that denying the physiological component of these kinds of things actually makes it harder for us to consciously change our behaviors. If I hadn't been taught about the way my body physically responds when I'm actively engaging in my addiction, I would have continued to beat myself up for not having the willpower to just not give in. Knowing that, yes, there is an actual, tangible thing happening in my body when I do this, and this is why it is so hard to stop, helped me find my resolve to do whatever it takes to not give in. Now I think: "Mind Over Matter." Yes, my biology drives me to want to engage in these addictive things, BUT, I KNOW they aren't good. Maybe it just pisses me off that my body tries really hard to make me give it these things, so, knowing that, when I consciously decide not to, it's like a big f-u to the addiction.
Sorry for the long post. Hopefully the OP will find something helpful among my rambling.
When you went to treatment, did they just suggest you use different forms of what you are addicted to, to help you out? If it was alcohol, did they say hey you're addicted to Jack Daniels, just have a couple beers instead, and you'll kick that habit? If it was drugs, did they say hey, enough with the heroin, just switch to meth, and coke. I'm guessing not. So if these people are so addicted to sugar, why do we tell them to just switch out there candy habit for foods with different types of sugar?
This is the same discussion that you have to have when you're considering Overeaters Anonymous. You can't tell someone to cut out food. There are so many types of food out there that have naturally occurring sugars, and completely cutting it out could be detrimental to their health. You can't tell someone to NEVER eat fruit (hello, mother nature's best source of vitamins!), tomatoes, carrots, potatoes, celery, etc. Pretty much all fruit and vegetables have dietary sugar.
We CAN, however, suggest that you try to eliminate or moderate PROCESSED, ADDED sugar by adding more whole foods to your diet. It's more of a nicotine gum rather than cigarettes approach, if you want to be hyperbolic.10 -
@cmriverside I'm glad someone has the same view on this. Having struggled with addiction (and gone to treatment), I know that denying the physiological component of these kinds of things actually makes it harder for us to consciously change our behaviors. If I hadn't been taught about the way my body physically responds when I'm actively engaging in my addiction, I would have continued to beat myself up for not having the willpower to just not give in. Knowing that, yes, there is an actual, tangible thing happening in my body when I do this, and this is why it is so hard to stop, helped me find my resolve to do whatever it takes to not give in. Now I think: "Mind Over Matter." Yes, my biology drives me to want to engage in these addictive things, BUT, I KNOW they aren't good. Maybe it just pisses me off that my body tries really hard to make me give it these things, so, knowing that, when I consciously decide not to, it's like a big f-u to the addiction.
Sorry for the long post. Hopefully the OP will find something helpful among my rambling.
When you went to treatment, did they just suggest you use different forms of what you are addicted to, to help you out? If it was alcohol, did they say hey you're addicted to Jack Daniels, just have a couple beers instead, and you'll kick that habit? If it was drugs, did they say hey, enough with the heroin, just switch to meth, and coke. I'm guessing not. So if these people are so addicted to sugar, why do we tell them to just switch out there candy habit for foods with different types of sugar?
This is the same discussion that you have to have when you're considering Overeaters Anonymous. You can't tell someone to cut out food. There are so many types of food out there that have naturally occurring sugars, and completely cutting it out could be detrimental to their health. You can't tell someone to NEVER eat fruit (hello, mother nature's best source of vitamins!), tomatoes, carrots, potatoes, celery, etc. Pretty much all fruit and vegetables have dietary sugar.
We CAN, however, suggest that you try to eliminate or moderate PROCESSED, ADDED sugar by adding more whole foods to your diet. It's more of a nicotine gum rather than cigarettes approach, if you want to be hyperbolic.
if sugar is addictive then why would you recommend that an addict continue to consume it?8 -
Carlos_421 wrote: »
The physical symptoms are likely due to an electrolyte balance which is quite common when an individual drastically reduces carb intake. These are not withdrawal symptoms due to a physical addiction to sugar. Sugar is not a physically addictive substance.Sisepuede422 wrote: »It feels like an addiction. I feel physically and psychologically sick if I don't eat something loaded with sugar. I'm like a junkie.
Those addictions are behavioral, not physical. I won't contest that there are behavioral addictions to eating. However, an eating addiction is no more an addiction to sugar than a gambling addiction is an addiction to poker chips. The eating/gambling behavior is where the addiction lies, not the sugar/chips.If people can be addicted to gambling, sex, drugs, etc, why is it so hard to accept that someone can be addicted to consuming sugar? They all cause reactions inside the body that release hormones that make us feel good, therefore we keep going back to that thing that gives us that feeling. People can be addicted to sugar just like anything else.
Medical professionals don't all agree about sugar not being addictive. The Cleveland Clinic says it is biologically addictive. They are rated one of the best hospitals in the United States. https://health.clevelandclinic.org/2015/05/break-your-sugar-addiction-in-10-days-infographic/
Whether you want to argue about what addiction is or is not, the bottom line is sugar is a huge problem for many people -- some people more than others. Some people can eat sugary food in moderation, other people have a big struggle.17 -
@cmriverside I'm glad someone has the same view on this. Having struggled with addiction (and gone to treatment), I know that denying the physiological component of these kinds of things actually makes it harder for us to consciously change our behaviors. If I hadn't been taught about the way my body physically responds when I'm actively engaging in my addiction, I would have continued to beat myself up for not having the willpower to just not give in. Knowing that, yes, there is an actual, tangible thing happening in my body when I do this, and this is why it is so hard to stop, helped me find my resolve to do whatever it takes to not give in. Now I think: "Mind Over Matter." Yes, my biology drives me to want to engage in these addictive things, BUT, I KNOW they aren't good. Maybe it just pisses me off that my body tries really hard to make me give it these things, so, knowing that, when I consciously decide not to, it's like a big f-u to the addiction.
Sorry for the long post. Hopefully the OP will find something helpful among my rambling.
When you went to treatment, did they just suggest you use different forms of what you are addicted to, to help you out? If it was alcohol, did they say hey you're addicted to Jack Daniels, just have a couple beers instead, and you'll kick that habit? If it was drugs, did they say hey, enough with the heroin, just switch to meth, and coke. I'm guessing not. So if these people are so addicted to sugar, why do we tell them to just switch out there candy habit for foods with different types of sugar?
This is the same discussion that you have to have when you're considering Overeaters Anonymous. You can't tell someone to cut out food. There are so many types of food out there that have naturally occurring sugars, and completely cutting it out could be detrimental to their health. You can't tell someone to NEVER eat fruit (hello, mother nature's best source of vitamins!), tomatoes, carrots, potatoes, celery, etc. Pretty much all fruit and vegetables have dietary sugar.
We CAN, however, suggest that you try to eliminate or moderate PROCESSED, ADDED sugar by adding more whole foods to your diet. It's more of a nicotine gum rather than cigarettes approach, if you want to be hyperbolic.
if sugar is addictive then why would you recommend that an addict continue to consume it?
LITERALLY what's the alternative? WHAT would they eat?2 -
cmriverside wrote: »@cmriverside I'm glad someone has the same view on this. Having struggled with addiction (and gone to treatment), I know that denying the physiological component of these kinds of things actually makes it harder for us to consciously change our behaviors. If I hadn't been taught about the way my body physically responds when I'm actively engaging in my addiction, I would have continued to beat myself up for not having the willpower to just not give in. Knowing that, yes, there is an actual, tangible thing happening in my body when I do this, and this is why it is so hard to stop, helped me find my resolve to do whatever it takes to not give in. Now I think: "Mind Over Matter." Yes, my biology drives me to want to engage in these addictive things, BUT, I KNOW they aren't good. Maybe it just pisses me off that my body tries really hard to make me give it these things, so, knowing that, when I consciously decide not to, it's like a big f-u to the addiction.
Sorry for the long post. Hopefully the OP will find something helpful among my rambling.
Yeah.
And those who are not believers are going to argue for many pages. I just find it easier to accept that other people (usually those who have not been addicted to some typically destructive thing like alcohol, pornography, drugs or gambling) - have different beliefs about this and I am not going to waste my day getting up in arms over it.
*cue* the hyper-palatable/fruit/vegetable arguments.
Actually, in previous discussions on the subject, it's the people who HAVE struggled with drug and alcohol addictions that are the most offended by the idea that sugar is addictive.
Thank you!
I have a family member who is addicted to alcohol. Liking sugar too much isn't in the same league, unless I guess you happen to weigh 600+ pounds. Then it's likely a FOOD addiction......the whole pizza, the whole cake, that sort of thing.15 -
Carlos_421 wrote: »
The physical symptoms are likely due to an electrolyte balance which is quite common when an individual drastically reduces carb intake. These are not withdrawal symptoms due to a physical addiction to sugar. Sugar is not a physically addictive substance.Sisepuede422 wrote: »It feels like an addiction. I feel physically and psychologically sick if I don't eat something loaded with sugar. I'm like a junkie.
Those addictions are behavioral, not physical. I won't contest that there are behavioral addictions to eating. However, an eating addiction is no more an addiction to sugar than a gambling addiction is an addiction to poker chips. The eating/gambling behavior is where the addiction lies, not the sugar/chips.If people can be addicted to gambling, sex, drugs, etc, why is it so hard to accept that someone can be addicted to consuming sugar? They all cause reactions inside the body that release hormones that make us feel good, therefore we keep going back to that thing that gives us that feeling. People can be addicted to sugar just like anything else.
Medical professionals don't all agree about sugar not being addictive. The Cleveland Clinic says it is biologically addictive. They are rated one of the best hospitals in the United States. https://health.clevelandclinic.org/2015/05/break-your-sugar-addiction-in-10-days-infographic/
Whether you want to argue about what addiction is or is not, the bottom line is sugar is a huge problem for many people -- some people more than others. Some people can eat sugary food in moderation, other people have a big struggle.
Is that the Cleveland Clinic's official position or is that a blog entry they're hosting featuring the opinion of one of their employees, noted anti-sugar activist Mark Hyman?22 -
@cmriverside I'm glad someone has the same view on this. Having struggled with addiction (and gone to treatment), I know that denying the physiological component of these kinds of things actually makes it harder for us to consciously change our behaviors. If I hadn't been taught about the way my body physically responds when I'm actively engaging in my addiction, I would have continued to beat myself up for not having the willpower to just not give in. Knowing that, yes, there is an actual, tangible thing happening in my body when I do this, and this is why it is so hard to stop, helped me find my resolve to do whatever it takes to not give in. Now I think: "Mind Over Matter." Yes, my biology drives me to want to engage in these addictive things, BUT, I KNOW they aren't good. Maybe it just pisses me off that my body tries really hard to make me give it these things, so, knowing that, when I consciously decide not to, it's like a big f-u to the addiction.
Sorry for the long post. Hopefully the OP will find something helpful among my rambling.
When you went to treatment, did they just suggest you use different forms of what you are addicted to, to help you out? If it was alcohol, did they say hey you're addicted to Jack Daniels, just have a couple beers instead, and you'll kick that habit? If it was drugs, did they say hey, enough with the heroin, just switch to meth, and coke. I'm guessing not. So if these people are so addicted to sugar, why do we tell them to just switch out there candy habit for foods with different types of sugar?
This is the same discussion that you have to have when you're considering Overeaters Anonymous. You can't tell someone to cut out food. There are so many types of food out there that have naturally occurring sugars, and completely cutting it out could be detrimental to their health. You can't tell someone to NEVER eat fruit (hello, mother nature's best source of vitamins!), tomatoes, carrots, potatoes, celery, etc. Pretty much all fruit and vegetables have dietary sugar.
We CAN, however, suggest that you try to eliminate or moderate PROCESSED, ADDED sugar by adding more whole foods to your diet. It's more of a nicotine gum rather than cigarettes approach, if you want to be hyperbolic.
if sugar is addictive then why would you recommend that an addict continue to consume it?
LITERALLY what's the alternative? WHAT would they eat?
Hard core keto, I guess, or carnivore, LOL.
But the fact is that unlike an alcoholic, who WILL abuse other forms of alcohol when just cutting out a particular form (it is so, so common to play this game" "no more hard alcohol," or "only beer, I don't care about beer"), most of the time when someone says they are addicted to "sugar" they don't have an issue with, say, fruit. Or a plain potato, which becomes sugar in the body. And the "sugar" they have an issue with invariably is a tasty treat that more often than not also has fat. So claiming it's about "sugar addiction" seems wrong.
I think debating whether "sugar addiction" is the correct term is kind of pointless, but when people insist it IS a physical addiction exactly like, say, drugs, I think it is worth discussion, especially since the predominant model re drug addiction (and alcohol) is abstinence only. As you note, abstinence from sugar is really, really hard to impossible, but also -- as someone who has struggled with comfort eating that I think mimics addiction in some ways (but is different) -- abstinence from all sugar and everything that becomes sugar is generally completely pointless as it's NOT all things with sugar for most.
And it's often things without sugar (and the studies that push "food addiction" DON'T show a difference between sugar and fat in terms of your brain lighting up with pleasure and all that. I think pizza -- a combination of fat and carb with little sugar -- scored really high on "addictiveness," for example.)10 -
Carlos_421 wrote: »
The physical symptoms are likely due to an electrolyte balance which is quite common when an individual drastically reduces carb intake. These are not withdrawal symptoms due to a physical addiction to sugar. Sugar is not a physically addictive substance.Sisepuede422 wrote: »It feels like an addiction. I feel physically and psychologically sick if I don't eat something loaded with sugar. I'm like a junkie.
Those addictions are behavioral, not physical. I won't contest that there are behavioral addictions to eating. However, an eating addiction is no more an addiction to sugar than a gambling addiction is an addiction to poker chips. The eating/gambling behavior is where the addiction lies, not the sugar/chips.If people can be addicted to gambling, sex, drugs, etc, why is it so hard to accept that someone can be addicted to consuming sugar? They all cause reactions inside the body that release hormones that make us feel good, therefore we keep going back to that thing that gives us that feeling. People can be addicted to sugar just like anything else.
Medical professionals don't all agree about sugar not being addictive. The Cleveland Clinic says it is biologically addictive. They are rated one of the best hospitals in the United States. https://health.clevelandclinic.org/2015/05/break-your-sugar-addiction-in-10-days-infographic/
Whether you want to argue about what addiction is or is not, the bottom line is sugar is a huge problem for many people -- some people more than others. Some people can eat sugary food in moderation, other people have a big struggle.
I was going to bite until I saw "quit gluten and dairy". Then I scrolled down... Mark Hyman. Figures. An anti-vaxxer detox pusher with an agenda and books to sell, and guess what the book is called? “The Blood Sugar Solution: 10-Day Detox Diet”. Yes, I'm going to get my info elsewhere.26 -
Addicted? Not addicted?
5 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »@cmriverside I'm glad someone has the same view on this. Having struggled with addiction (and gone to treatment), I know that denying the physiological component of these kinds of things actually makes it harder for us to consciously change our behaviors. If I hadn't been taught about the way my body physically responds when I'm actively engaging in my addiction, I would have continued to beat myself up for not having the willpower to just not give in. Knowing that, yes, there is an actual, tangible thing happening in my body when I do this, and this is why it is so hard to stop, helped me find my resolve to do whatever it takes to not give in. Now I think: "Mind Over Matter." Yes, my biology drives me to want to engage in these addictive things, BUT, I KNOW they aren't good. Maybe it just pisses me off that my body tries really hard to make me give it these things, so, knowing that, when I consciously decide not to, it's like a big f-u to the addiction.
Sorry for the long post. Hopefully the OP will find something helpful among my rambling.
When you went to treatment, did they just suggest you use different forms of what you are addicted to, to help you out? If it was alcohol, did they say hey you're addicted to Jack Daniels, just have a couple beers instead, and you'll kick that habit? If it was drugs, did they say hey, enough with the heroin, just switch to meth, and coke. I'm guessing not. So if these people are so addicted to sugar, why do we tell them to just switch out there candy habit for foods with different types of sugar?
This is the same discussion that you have to have when you're considering Overeaters Anonymous. You can't tell someone to cut out food. There are so many types of food out there that have naturally occurring sugars, and completely cutting it out could be detrimental to their health. You can't tell someone to NEVER eat fruit (hello, mother nature's best source of vitamins!), tomatoes, carrots, potatoes, celery, etc. Pretty much all fruit and vegetables have dietary sugar.
We CAN, however, suggest that you try to eliminate or moderate PROCESSED, ADDED sugar by adding more whole foods to your diet. It's more of a nicotine gum rather than cigarettes approach, if you want to be hyperbolic.
if sugar is addictive then why would you recommend that an addict continue to consume it?
LITERALLY what's the alternative? WHAT would they eat?
Hard core keto, I guess, or carnivore, LOL.
But the fact is that unlike an alcoholic, who WILL abuse other forms of alcohol when just cutting out a particular form (it is so, so common to play this game" "no more hard alcohol," or "only beer, I don't care about beer"), most of the time when someone says they are addicted to "sugar" they don't have an issue with, say, fruit. Or a plain potato, which becomes sugar in the body. And the "sugar" they have an issue with invariably is a tasty treat that more often than not also has fat. So claiming it's about "sugar addiction" seems wrong.
I think debating whether "sugar addiction" is the correct term is kind of pointless, but when people insist it IS a physical addiction exactly like, say, drugs, I think it is worth discussion, especially since the predominant model re drug addiction (and alcohol) is abstinence only. As you note, abstinence from sugar is really, really hard to impossible, but also -- as someone who has struggled with comfort eating that I think mimics addiction in some ways (but is different) -- abstinence from all sugar and everything that becomes sugar is generally completely pointless as it's NOT all things with sugar for most.
And it's often things without sugar (and the studies that push "food addiction" DON'T show a difference between sugar and fat in terms of your brain lighting up with pleasure and all that. I think pizza -- a combination of fat and carb with little sugar -- scored really high on "addictiveness," for example.)
I don't know if I'm just feeding the trolls, but my teachers have always told me to reason through tough problems.
@ndj1979 says we can't tell "sugar addicts" to moderate sugar consumption. A meat and water diet is basically the only solution!
5 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »@cmriverside I'm glad someone has the same view on this. Having struggled with addiction (and gone to treatment), I know that denying the physiological component of these kinds of things actually makes it harder for us to consciously change our behaviors. If I hadn't been taught about the way my body physically responds when I'm actively engaging in my addiction, I would have continued to beat myself up for not having the willpower to just not give in. Knowing that, yes, there is an actual, tangible thing happening in my body when I do this, and this is why it is so hard to stop, helped me find my resolve to do whatever it takes to not give in. Now I think: "Mind Over Matter." Yes, my biology drives me to want to engage in these addictive things, BUT, I KNOW they aren't good. Maybe it just pisses me off that my body tries really hard to make me give it these things, so, knowing that, when I consciously decide not to, it's like a big f-u to the addiction.
Sorry for the long post. Hopefully the OP will find something helpful among my rambling.
When you went to treatment, did they just suggest you use different forms of what you are addicted to, to help you out? If it was alcohol, did they say hey you're addicted to Jack Daniels, just have a couple beers instead, and you'll kick that habit? If it was drugs, did they say hey, enough with the heroin, just switch to meth, and coke. I'm guessing not. So if these people are so addicted to sugar, why do we tell them to just switch out there candy habit for foods with different types of sugar?
This is the same discussion that you have to have when you're considering Overeaters Anonymous. You can't tell someone to cut out food. There are so many types of food out there that have naturally occurring sugars, and completely cutting it out could be detrimental to their health. You can't tell someone to NEVER eat fruit (hello, mother nature's best source of vitamins!), tomatoes, carrots, potatoes, celery, etc. Pretty much all fruit and vegetables have dietary sugar.
We CAN, however, suggest that you try to eliminate or moderate PROCESSED, ADDED sugar by adding more whole foods to your diet. It's more of a nicotine gum rather than cigarettes approach, if you want to be hyperbolic.
if sugar is addictive then why would you recommend that an addict continue to consume it?
LITERALLY what's the alternative? WHAT would they eat?
Hard core keto, I guess, or carnivore, LOL.
But the fact is that unlike an alcoholic, who WILL abuse other forms of alcohol when just cutting out a particular form (it is so, so common to play this game" "no more hard alcohol," or "only beer, I don't care about beer"), most of the time when someone says they are addicted to "sugar" they don't have an issue with, say, fruit. Or a plain potato, which becomes sugar in the body. And the "sugar" they have an issue with invariably is a tasty treat that more often than not also has fat. So claiming it's about "sugar addiction" seems wrong.
I think debating whether "sugar addiction" is the correct term is kind of pointless, but when people insist it IS a physical addiction exactly like, say, drugs, I think it is worth discussion, especially since the predominant model re drug addiction (and alcohol) is abstinence only. As you note, abstinence from sugar is really, really hard to impossible, but also -- as someone who has struggled with comfort eating that I think mimics addiction in some ways (but is different) -- abstinence from all sugar and everything that becomes sugar is generally completely pointless as it's NOT all things with sugar for most.
And it's often things without sugar (and the studies that push "food addiction" DON'T show a difference between sugar and fat in terms of your brain lighting up with pleasure and all that. I think pizza -- a combination of fat and carb with little sugar -- scored really high on "addictiveness," for example.)
Cheese also scores very high on "addictiveness", no sugar there.5 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »@cmriverside I'm glad someone has the same view on this. Having struggled with addiction (and gone to treatment), I know that denying the physiological component of these kinds of things actually makes it harder for us to consciously change our behaviors. If I hadn't been taught about the way my body physically responds when I'm actively engaging in my addiction, I would have continued to beat myself up for not having the willpower to just not give in. Knowing that, yes, there is an actual, tangible thing happening in my body when I do this, and this is why it is so hard to stop, helped me find my resolve to do whatever it takes to not give in. Now I think: "Mind Over Matter." Yes, my biology drives me to want to engage in these addictive things, BUT, I KNOW they aren't good. Maybe it just pisses me off that my body tries really hard to make me give it these things, so, knowing that, when I consciously decide not to, it's like a big f-u to the addiction.
Sorry for the long post. Hopefully the OP will find something helpful among my rambling.
When you went to treatment, did they just suggest you use different forms of what you are addicted to, to help you out? If it was alcohol, did they say hey you're addicted to Jack Daniels, just have a couple beers instead, and you'll kick that habit? If it was drugs, did they say hey, enough with the heroin, just switch to meth, and coke. I'm guessing not. So if these people are so addicted to sugar, why do we tell them to just switch out there candy habit for foods with different types of sugar?
This is the same discussion that you have to have when you're considering Overeaters Anonymous. You can't tell someone to cut out food. There are so many types of food out there that have naturally occurring sugars, and completely cutting it out could be detrimental to their health. You can't tell someone to NEVER eat fruit (hello, mother nature's best source of vitamins!), tomatoes, carrots, potatoes, celery, etc. Pretty much all fruit and vegetables have dietary sugar.
We CAN, however, suggest that you try to eliminate or moderate PROCESSED, ADDED sugar by adding more whole foods to your diet. It's more of a nicotine gum rather than cigarettes approach, if you want to be hyperbolic.
if sugar is addictive then why would you recommend that an addict continue to consume it?
LITERALLY what's the alternative? WHAT would they eat?
Hard core keto, I guess, or carnivore, LOL.
But the fact is that unlike an alcoholic, who WILL abuse other forms of alcohol when just cutting out a particular form (it is so, so common to play this game" "no more hard alcohol," or "only beer, I don't care about beer"), most of the time when someone says they are addicted to "sugar" they don't have an issue with, say, fruit. Or a plain potato, which becomes sugar in the body. And the "sugar" they have an issue with invariably is a tasty treat that more often than not also has fat. So claiming it's about "sugar addiction" seems wrong.
I think debating whether "sugar addiction" is the correct term is kind of pointless, but when people insist it IS a physical addiction exactly like, say, drugs, I think it is worth discussion, especially since the predominant model re drug addiction (and alcohol) is abstinence only. As you note, abstinence from sugar is really, really hard to impossible, but also -- as someone who has struggled with comfort eating that I think mimics addiction in some ways (but is different) -- abstinence from all sugar and everything that becomes sugar is generally completely pointless as it's NOT all things with sugar for most.
And it's often things without sugar (and the studies that push "food addiction" DON'T show a difference between sugar and fat in terms of your brain lighting up with pleasure and all that. I think pizza -- a combination of fat and carb with little sugar -- scored really high on "addictiveness," for example.)
I don't know if I'm just feeding the trolls, but my teachers have always told me to reason through tough problems.
@ndj1979 says we can't tell "sugar addicts" to moderate sugar consumption. A meat and water diet is basically the only solution!
Unless I'm misunderstanding his position, he's actually arguing that the fact that sugar consumption can and is just moderated (not eliminated) by most people claiming a sugar addiction demonstrates that sugar isn't a real addiction.6 -
amusedmonkey wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »@cmriverside I'm glad someone has the same view on this. Having struggled with addiction (and gone to treatment), I know that denying the physiological component of these kinds of things actually makes it harder for us to consciously change our behaviors. If I hadn't been taught about the way my body physically responds when I'm actively engaging in my addiction, I would have continued to beat myself up for not having the willpower to just not give in. Knowing that, yes, there is an actual, tangible thing happening in my body when I do this, and this is why it is so hard to stop, helped me find my resolve to do whatever it takes to not give in. Now I think: "Mind Over Matter." Yes, my biology drives me to want to engage in these addictive things, BUT, I KNOW they aren't good. Maybe it just pisses me off that my body tries really hard to make me give it these things, so, knowing that, when I consciously decide not to, it's like a big f-u to the addiction.
Sorry for the long post. Hopefully the OP will find something helpful among my rambling.
When you went to treatment, did they just suggest you use different forms of what you are addicted to, to help you out? If it was alcohol, did they say hey you're addicted to Jack Daniels, just have a couple beers instead, and you'll kick that habit? If it was drugs, did they say hey, enough with the heroin, just switch to meth, and coke. I'm guessing not. So if these people are so addicted to sugar, why do we tell them to just switch out there candy habit for foods with different types of sugar?
This is the same discussion that you have to have when you're considering Overeaters Anonymous. You can't tell someone to cut out food. There are so many types of food out there that have naturally occurring sugars, and completely cutting it out could be detrimental to their health. You can't tell someone to NEVER eat fruit (hello, mother nature's best source of vitamins!), tomatoes, carrots, potatoes, celery, etc. Pretty much all fruit and vegetables have dietary sugar.
We CAN, however, suggest that you try to eliminate or moderate PROCESSED, ADDED sugar by adding more whole foods to your diet. It's more of a nicotine gum rather than cigarettes approach, if you want to be hyperbolic.
if sugar is addictive then why would you recommend that an addict continue to consume it?
LITERALLY what's the alternative? WHAT would they eat?
Hard core keto, I guess, or carnivore, LOL.
But the fact is that unlike an alcoholic, who WILL abuse other forms of alcohol when just cutting out a particular form (it is so, so common to play this game" "no more hard alcohol," or "only beer, I don't care about beer"), most of the time when someone says they are addicted to "sugar" they don't have an issue with, say, fruit. Or a plain potato, which becomes sugar in the body. And the "sugar" they have an issue with invariably is a tasty treat that more often than not also has fat. So claiming it's about "sugar addiction" seems wrong.
I think debating whether "sugar addiction" is the correct term is kind of pointless, but when people insist it IS a physical addiction exactly like, say, drugs, I think it is worth discussion, especially since the predominant model re drug addiction (and alcohol) is abstinence only. As you note, abstinence from sugar is really, really hard to impossible, but also -- as someone who has struggled with comfort eating that I think mimics addiction in some ways (but is different) -- abstinence from all sugar and everything that becomes sugar is generally completely pointless as it's NOT all things with sugar for most.
And it's often things without sugar (and the studies that push "food addiction" DON'T show a difference between sugar and fat in terms of your brain lighting up with pleasure and all that. I think pizza -- a combination of fat and carb with little sugar -- scored really high on "addictiveness," for example.)
Cheese also scores very high on "addictiveness", no sugar there.
Since this appears to be a pedantic sort of discussion, doesn't lactose count as sugar?9 -
MegaMooseEsq wrote: »amusedmonkey wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »@cmriverside I'm glad someone has the same view on this. Having struggled with addiction (and gone to treatment), I know that denying the physiological component of these kinds of things actually makes it harder for us to consciously change our behaviors. If I hadn't been taught about the way my body physically responds when I'm actively engaging in my addiction, I would have continued to beat myself up for not having the willpower to just not give in. Knowing that, yes, there is an actual, tangible thing happening in my body when I do this, and this is why it is so hard to stop, helped me find my resolve to do whatever it takes to not give in. Now I think: "Mind Over Matter." Yes, my biology drives me to want to engage in these addictive things, BUT, I KNOW they aren't good. Maybe it just pisses me off that my body tries really hard to make me give it these things, so, knowing that, when I consciously decide not to, it's like a big f-u to the addiction.
Sorry for the long post. Hopefully the OP will find something helpful among my rambling.
When you went to treatment, did they just suggest you use different forms of what you are addicted to, to help you out? If it was alcohol, did they say hey you're addicted to Jack Daniels, just have a couple beers instead, and you'll kick that habit? If it was drugs, did they say hey, enough with the heroin, just switch to meth, and coke. I'm guessing not. So if these people are so addicted to sugar, why do we tell them to just switch out there candy habit for foods with different types of sugar?
This is the same discussion that you have to have when you're considering Overeaters Anonymous. You can't tell someone to cut out food. There are so many types of food out there that have naturally occurring sugars, and completely cutting it out could be detrimental to their health. You can't tell someone to NEVER eat fruit (hello, mother nature's best source of vitamins!), tomatoes, carrots, potatoes, celery, etc. Pretty much all fruit and vegetables have dietary sugar.
We CAN, however, suggest that you try to eliminate or moderate PROCESSED, ADDED sugar by adding more whole foods to your diet. It's more of a nicotine gum rather than cigarettes approach, if you want to be hyperbolic.
if sugar is addictive then why would you recommend that an addict continue to consume it?
LITERALLY what's the alternative? WHAT would they eat?
Hard core keto, I guess, or carnivore, LOL.
But the fact is that unlike an alcoholic, who WILL abuse other forms of alcohol when just cutting out a particular form (it is so, so common to play this game" "no more hard alcohol," or "only beer, I don't care about beer"), most of the time when someone says they are addicted to "sugar" they don't have an issue with, say, fruit. Or a plain potato, which becomes sugar in the body. And the "sugar" they have an issue with invariably is a tasty treat that more often than not also has fat. So claiming it's about "sugar addiction" seems wrong.
I think debating whether "sugar addiction" is the correct term is kind of pointless, but when people insist it IS a physical addiction exactly like, say, drugs, I think it is worth discussion, especially since the predominant model re drug addiction (and alcohol) is abstinence only. As you note, abstinence from sugar is really, really hard to impossible, but also -- as someone who has struggled with comfort eating that I think mimics addiction in some ways (but is different) -- abstinence from all sugar and everything that becomes sugar is generally completely pointless as it's NOT all things with sugar for most.
And it's often things without sugar (and the studies that push "food addiction" DON'T show a difference between sugar and fat in terms of your brain lighting up with pleasure and all that. I think pizza -- a combination of fat and carb with little sugar -- scored really high on "addictiveness," for example.)
Cheese also scores very high on "addictiveness", no sugar there.
Since this appears to be a pedantic sort of discussion, doesn't lactose count as sugar?
Oh yes, yes it does. But cheese has only trace amounts of it.. Ugh, nope, cheese is not good.2 -
Does it really matter whether it's a true clinical addiction or only a perceived addiction? Is all this debate over a word help anyone?13
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 176K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8.1K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.2K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions