"The problem with sugar is your problem with sugar"
Options
Replies
-
here's the thing - ingesting heroin all day is bad for your body. Ingesting carbs is not.
By your definition, the affects of taking anything out of your system is 'withdrawl' Dehydrated ? Nah, you're just going through "water withdrawl". Diabetic coma? "Insulin withdrawl".
The only reason you want to classify it as withdrawl is because you are hell-bent on classifying carbs/sugar as 'bad'. But I do not expect you to see the point.
Where in this thread did I ever blanket classify carbs/sugar as "bad"?
I didn't, because I don't believe that. I do believe that the amount that is ingested in the standard American diet is far too much (and that is bad), and that a low carb diet can help people who are overweight and/or dealing with metabolic issues. However, manipulating one's carb levels to help them achieve a particular goal is a tool, just like any other.
That doesn't change the fact that people commonly experience symptoms that overlap with withdrawal from other substances when they drop their carb intake. It doesn't really make it "good" or "bad," it just "is."
Also, if my analogy with known addictive substances is flawed, so is yours. Just like taking heroine all day, every day is bad for you, so is being dehydrated (and technically, so is eating too much sugar, it's just that the threshold for "too much" is far higher than that of heroine). Also, a diabetic coma is caused by both too much glucose in the blood (in this case, sugar is actually very bad), or too little glucose in the blood (in this case, sugar is very good), not by the amount of insulin in the blood, and while the symptoms do share some similarities to withdrawal (most notably, shaking, when blood sugar gets too low), the cause of the symptoms is not the body adjusting to the removal of a substance, but rather the deficiency or overabundance of one that is required at a certain level (ie - not too high, not too low). Additionally, water is an essential "nutrient," carbs are not (the body can manufacture glucose from fat and protein when it needs to).0 -
here's the thing - ingesting heroin all day is bad for your body. Ingesting carbs is not.
By your definition, the affects of taking anything out of your system is 'withdrawl' Dehydrated ? Nah, you're just going through "water withdrawl". Diabetic coma? "Insulin withdrawl".
The only reason you want to classify it as withdrawl is because you are hell-bent on classifying carbs/sugar as 'bad'. But I do not expect you to see the point.
Where in this thread did I ever blanket classify carbs/sugar as "bad"?
I didn't, because I don't believe that. I do believe that the amount that is ingested in the standard American diet is far too much (and that is bad), and that a low carb diet can help people who are overweight and/or dealing with metabolic issues. However, manipulating one's carb levels to help them achieve a particular goal is a tool, just like any other.
That doesn't change the fact that people commonly experience symptoms that overlap with withdrawal from other substances when they drop their carb intake. It doesn't really make it "good" or "bad," it just "is."
Also, if my analogy with known addictive substances is flawed, so is yours. Just like taking heroine all day, every day is bad for you, so is being dehydrated (and technically, so is eating too much sugar, it's just that the threshold for "too much" is far higher than that of heroine). Also, a diabetic coma is caused by both too much glucose in the blood (in this case, sugar is actually very bad), or too little glucose in the blood (in this case, sugar is very good), not by the amount of insulin in the blood, and while the symptoms do share some similarities to withdrawal (most notably, shaking, when blood sugar gets too low), the cause of the symptoms is not the body adjusting to the removal of a substance, but rather the deficiency or overabundance of one that is required at a certain level (ie - not too high, not too low). Additionally, water is an essential "nutrient," carbs are not (the body can manufacture glucose from fat and protein when it needs to).
yup, missed the point completely.0 -
0 -
You hit on the point but completely glossed over it. The important part is that the ingredients they use:
1- are cheaper
2- taste better
Nowhere in that equation is there any evidence of engineering anything to be "addictive" or control the behavior of consumers.
Any business that uses "equivalent but more expensive" ingredients, or ones that don't taste as good isn't going to survive competition. This hardly constitutes a mind-control conspiracy.
palatable: verb. pleasant to taste
A food is palatable, or "tastes good," because it stimulates the release of dopamine. Highly palatable foods stimulate larger releases. If you want to get technical, it's the dopamine that people get addicted to. The external thing is just a means by which to get that high.
Everything a business does is for the purpose of controlling the behavior of consumers, but it's not "mind control," it's influence. That's the whole point of marketing, and that's also the point of making foods that are highly palatable - they influence you to buy more. Does it work for everything on everyone? No. Do people still have free will? Yes. Does it work some of the time? Yes, and the company's goal is to make it work more. Is it "evil"? Meh, not really. Again, it is what it is, and what it is is a good way to increase revenue.0 -
"Food addiction" is not found in any diagnostic criteria for issues with food. Binge Eating Disorder was recently added to the DSM-V, however food addiction (or sugar addiction) is not recognized as a diagnosis because additional research needs to be completed before criteria could be formulated for future diagnostic purposes.
Ah, so it has to be in the DSM-V for it to exist. Got it. If I ever get a time machine, I'll be sure to tell that to Robert Gallo.0 -
yup, missed the point completely.
Enlighten me, then.0 -
yup, missed the point completely.
Enlighten me, then.
You are not 'addicted' to something just because removing it from your body makes you feel like *kitten*, If that's the criteria, then I am addicted to water and diabetics are addicted to insulin.0 -
"Food addiction" is not found in any diagnostic criteria for issues with food. Binge Eating Disorder was recently added to the DSM-V, however food addiction (or sugar addiction) is not recognized as a diagnosis because additional research needs to be completed before criteria could be formulated for future diagnostic purposes.
Ah, so it has to be in the DSM-V for it to exist. Got it. If I ever get a time machine, I'll be sure to tell that to Robert Gallo.
The article you linked to was a good review of the topic and seems to settle the matter.
http://www.karger.com/Article/FullText/338310
From the conclusion:
"Because of the current rather limited evidence of the addictive behavior of specific food ingredients or additives, we currently conclude that food addiction can best be classified as a behavioral addiction at this time...We argue that, because most types of obesity are based on a slight degree of overeating and thus evolve slowly over time, only the combination of clinically significant and regular overeating such as within the context of abnormal eating behavior (currently classified in the category eating disorders) warrants consideration as food addiction...We conclude that overeating may be viewed as food addiction in a small subgroup of obese individuals."
What are we arguing about?0 -
cause it's not :blushing:I'm so confused as to why this is an important argument.
hey look! a squirrel!
0 -
"Food addiction" is not found in any diagnostic criteria for issues with food. Binge Eating Disorder was recently added to the DSM-V, however food addiction (or sugar addiction) is not recognized as a diagnosis because additional research needs to be completed before criteria could be formulated for future diagnostic purposes.
Ah, so it has to be in the DSM-V for it to exist. Got it. If I ever get a time machine, I'll be sure to tell that to Robert Gallo.
The study that you posted up thread recommended that food addiction not be included in the DSM-V because "there is not sufficient (i.e., reliable and valid) data on its diagnostic criteria, we would not recommend adding "food addiction" as a diagnostic entity in DSM-V." There are too many variables. In order for people to receive any type of treatment for specific disorders it must be included in diagnostic manuals. (In the U.S., behavioral health uses the DSM-V and medical health uses the ICD)0 -
You hit on the point but completely glossed over it. The important part is that the ingredients they use:
1- are cheaper
2- taste better
Nowhere in that equation is there any evidence of engineering anything to be "addictive" or control the behavior of consumers.
Any business that uses "equivalent but more expensive" ingredients, or ones that don't taste as good isn't going to survive competition. This hardly constitutes a mind-control conspiracy.
palatable: verb. pleasant to taste
A food is palatable, or "tastes good," because it stimulates the release of dopamine. Highly palatable foods stimulate larger releases. If you want to get technical, it's the dopamine that people get addicted to. The external thing is just a means by which to get that high.
Everything a business does is for the purpose of controlling the behavior of consumers, but it's not "mind control," it's influence. That's the whole point of marketing, and that's also the point of making foods that are highly palatable - they influence you to buy more. Does it work for everything on everyone? No. Do people still have free will? Yes. Does it work some of the time? Yes, and the company's goal is to make it work more. Is it "evil"? Meh, not really. Again, it is what it is, and what it is is a good way to increase revenue.
it amuses me that you think businesses are these nefarious entities engaged in all sorts of secretive and dastardly enterprises...
...the businesses in my world simply try to bring better products to the market, cheaper and faster than their competitors, in order to meet customer demand. perhaps they are doing it wrong.
0 -
"Food addiction" is not found in any diagnostic criteria for issues with food. Binge Eating Disorder was recently added to the DSM-V, however food addiction (or sugar addiction) is not recognized as a diagnosis because additional research needs to be completed before criteria could be formulated for future diagnostic purposes.
Ah, so it has to be in the DSM-V for it to exist. Got it. If I ever get a time machine, I'll be sure to tell that to Robert Gallo.
While I was already aware of food addiction not being included in the DSM-V, the study that you posted up thread recommended that food addiction not be included in the DSM-V because "there is not sufficient (i.e., reliable and valid) data on its diagnostic criteria, we would not recommend adding "food addiction" as a diagnostic entity in DSM-V." There are too many variables. In order for people to receive any type of treatment for specific disorders it must be included in diagnostic manuals. (In the U.S., behavioral health uses the DSM-V and medical health uses the ICD)
What I understood from that paper is that "behavioral addiction" is not an officially recognized category of disease. Pathological gambling is the only behavior disorder to be categorized in the new category "Addiction and Related Disorders".
"The DSM-V Substance Use Disorders Workgroup [8] has recently proposed that the diagnosis of Pathological (Disordered) Gambling (table 6) be reclassified from Impulse-Control Disorders Not Elsewhere Classified’ to the novel category Addiction and Related Disorders [13]. Pathological (Disordered) Gambling was judged as having commonalities in clinical expression, etiology (including genetics), comorbidity, physiology, and treatment with Substance Use Disorders, thus warranting this reclassification [e.g. [14,15]. This proposal indicates a crucial turning point in the official psychiatric conceptualization of this disorder, which is additionally accompanied by the renaming of the diagnostic category. Currently, pathological gambling is to be the only behavioral addictive disorder within the novel DSM V diagnostic category ‘Addiction and Related Disorders’. However, this re-classification will undoubtedly boost research and discussions as to the delineation of additional behavioral addictions within this diagnostic category."0 -
"Food addiction" is not found in any diagnostic criteria for issues with food. Binge Eating Disorder was recently added to the DSM-V, however food addiction (or sugar addiction) is not recognized as a diagnosis because additional research needs to be completed before criteria could be formulated for future diagnostic purposes.
Ah, so it has to be in the DSM-V for it to exist. Got it. If I ever get a time machine, I'll be sure to tell that to Robert Gallo.
While I was already aware of food addiction not being included in the DSM-V, the study that you posted up thread recommended that food addiction not be included in the DSM-V because "there is not sufficient (i.e., reliable and valid) data on its diagnostic criteria, we would not recommend adding "food addiction" as a diagnostic entity in DSM-V." There are too many variables. In order for people to receive any type of treatment for specific disorders it must be included in diagnostic manuals. (In the U.S., behavioral health uses the DSM-V and medical health uses the ICD)
What I understood from that paper is that "behavioral addiction" is not an officially recognized category of disease. Pathological gambling is the only behavior disorder to be categorized in the new category "Addiction and Related Disorders".
"The DSM-V Substance Use Disorders Workgroup [8] has recently proposed that the diagnosis of Pathological (Disordered) Gambling (table 6) be reclassified from Impulse-Control Disorders Not Elsewhere Classified’ to the novel category Addiction and Related Disorders [13]. Pathological (Disordered) Gambling was judged as having commonalities in clinical expression, etiology (including genetics), comorbidity, physiology, and treatment with Substance Use Disorders, thus warranting this reclassification [e.g. [14,15]. This proposal indicates a crucial turning point in the official psychiatric conceptualization of this disorder, which is additionally accompanied by the renaming of the diagnostic category. Currently, pathological gambling is to be the only behavioral addictive disorder within the novel DSM V diagnostic category ‘Addiction and Related Disorders’. However, this re-classification will undoubtedly boost research and discussions as to the delineation of additional behavioral addictions within this diagnostic category."
The study was based off of the proposed changes to the DSM-V and Gambling Disorder is classified under Substance-Related and Addictive Disorders. While there is no "behavioral addiction" section, many behaviors can be classified in other sections as appropriate.0 -
Lol love this! Me too!0
-
I'm so confused...
Is or is not sugar da debil?
Please answer soon as it's almost time for dinner.0 -
I'm so confused...
Is or is not sugar da debil?
Please answer soon as it's almost time for dinner.
Just LOOK at the heinous atrocity which sugar has perpetrated on these innocent insects!
If you eat sugar, your insides will turn green!!11!two!!0 -
There's a difference between a teaspoon of honey (5g of sugar if we're nit-picking) and the sacred oreo (6g of sugar per cookie if we're nitpicking.)
For one, I can't put oreos in my tea.
Also, oreos don't help my seasonal allergies.
Since we're nitpicking here, neither does the honey.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11868925
http://www.webmd.com/allergies/features/does-honey-help-prevent-allergies0 -
"Food addiction" is not found in any diagnostic criteria for issues with food. Binge Eating Disorder was recently added to the DSM-V, however food addiction (or sugar addiction) is not recognized as a diagnosis because additional research needs to be completed before criteria could be formulated for future diagnostic purposes.
Ah, so it has to be in the DSM-V for it to exist. Got it. If I ever get a time machine, I'll be sure to tell that to Robert Gallo.
While I was already aware of food addiction not being included in the DSM-V, the study that you posted up thread recommended that food addiction not be included in the DSM-V because "there is not sufficient (i.e., reliable and valid) data on its diagnostic criteria, we would not recommend adding "food addiction" as a diagnostic entity in DSM-V." There are too many variables. In order for people to receive any type of treatment for specific disorders it must be included in diagnostic manuals. (In the U.S., behavioral health uses the DSM-V and medical health uses the ICD)
What I understood from that paper is that "behavioral addiction" is not an officially recognized category of disease. Pathological gambling is the only behavior disorder to be categorized in the new category "Addiction and Related Disorders".
"The DSM-V Substance Use Disorders Workgroup [8] has recently proposed that the diagnosis of Pathological (Disordered) Gambling (table 6) be reclassified from Impulse-Control Disorders Not Elsewhere Classified’ to the novel category Addiction and Related Disorders [13]. Pathological (Disordered) Gambling was judged as having commonalities in clinical expression, etiology (including genetics), comorbidity, physiology, and treatment with Substance Use Disorders, thus warranting this reclassification [e.g. [14,15]. This proposal indicates a crucial turning point in the official psychiatric conceptualization of this disorder, which is additionally accompanied by the renaming of the diagnostic category. Currently, pathological gambling is to be the only behavioral addictive disorder within the novel DSM V diagnostic category ‘Addiction and Related Disorders’. However, this re-classification will undoubtedly boost research and discussions as to the delineation of additional behavioral addictions within this diagnostic category."
The study was based off of the proposed changes to the DSM-V and Gambling Disorder is classified under Substance-Related and Addictive Disorders. While there is no "behavioral addiction" section, many behaviors can be classified in other sections as appropriate.
Are you in the mental health field? You seem very knowledgeable.0 -
Interesting article even though it took the author a long while to GET TO THE POINT. Nice to know I can still have my cupcake in moderation of course, within my daily calorie limit. Also nice to know that sugar isn't some sort of "evil addiction" - I guess it is my mind and my taste buds that are addicted to sugar (sorry, no time to read the whole article right now, just skimmed through it). Thank you, what you have posted is helpful. 0
-
I heard that tubgirl can also be used for time travel."Food addiction" is not found in any diagnostic criteria for issues with food. Binge Eating Disorder was recently added to the DSM-V, however food addiction (or sugar addiction) is not recognized as a diagnosis because additional research needs to be completed before criteria could be formulated for future diagnostic purposes.
Ah, so it has to be in the DSM-V for it to exist. Got it. If I ever get a time machine, I'll be sure to tell that to Robert Gallo.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 392K Introduce Yourself
- 43.6K Getting Started
- 259.8K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.7K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 402 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.8K Motivation and Support
- 7.9K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.4K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 998 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.4K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions