The Extraordinary Science of Junk Food

sunsnstatheart

A New York Times article on why food companies are evil? I'm shocked! Of course, any excuse someone wants to use for lacking self control is fine with me. It's their life.

Food conglomerates are purposely addicting people to substances that will destroy their health. Why should we blame their victims? Shouldn't we blame drug peddlers who set out to addict children to street drugs? The food processors are taking advantage of the ignorance of people who eat their crap. That is why we need to help people to understand the deadly nature of junk food.

We can only be victims if we accept it. I for one isn't going to blame junk food for being fat. I did this to my self and I am taking action to rectify it.

I grew up being addicted to sugar and wheat. Does everyone get addicted? No--no more than others get addicted to street drugs or alcohol. But enough do that we need to take a close hard look at how we can educate children to avoid the addictive traps (and there are MANY). I am no longer addicted and I have been able to lose 51 pounds more or less effortlessly, once I learned the truth about sugar and its role in the promotion of food addiction. Here is an article that some of you may find interesting about the role of sugar (and specifically the fructose portion of it--sucrose is 50% fructose) that is instrumental in food addiction: http://www.foodaddictionsummit.org/docs/johnson-359fructoseindex.pdf

I see fewer alcoholics raging against alcohol than I see supposed "sugar addicts" railing again sugar and "junk food." It's an excuse pure and simple. Either one takes responsibility for his/her own life or not. Blaming others is a symptom of a lack of self control.

It is much easier to avoid alcohol than it is to avoid junk food. Everyone must eat to live---no one needs to drink alcohol to live. You missed my point. I am not longer addicted to sugar and wheat because I simply don't eat them--just like an alcoholic understands that he can't "drink in moderation". I am free of all inclination to eat them. And I have NO problem staying within my calorie allotment. It is a simple matter of avoiding sugar and wheat for me.

If you are free of all inclination to eat sugar and wheat as you say, then that seems to fly in the face of your addiction argument.

sunsnstatheart

A New York Times article on why food companies are evil? I'm shocked! Of course, any excuse someone wants to use for lacking self control is fine with me. It's their life.

Food conglomerates are purposely addicting people to substances that will destroy their health. Why should we blame their victims? Shouldn't we blame drug peddlers who set out to addict children to street drugs? The food processors are taking advantage of the ignorance of people who eat their crap. That is why we need to help people to understand the deadly nature of junk food.

Sure. Keep playing victim and encouraging others to do the same. Those of us leading healthy lives will continue to look on in utter amazement at the self delusion.

Perhaps you should read the article before dissing the source. Just an idea.

I did. All the more reason to be "dissing the source" of this particular article.

SanteMulberry

A New York Times article on why food companies are evil? I'm shocked! Of course, any excuse someone wants to use for lacking self control is fine with me. It's their life.

Food conglomerates are purposely addicting people to substances that will destroy their health. Why should we blame their victims? Shouldn't we blame drug peddlers who set out to addict children to street drugs? The food processors are taking advantage of the ignorance of people who eat their crap. That is why we need to help people to understand the deadly nature of junk food.

We can only be victims if we accept it. I for one isn't going to blame junk food for being fat. I did this to my self and I am taking action to rectify it.

I grew up being addicted to sugar and wheat. Does everyone get addicted? No--no more than others get addicted to street drugs or alcohol. But enough do that we need to take a close hard look at how we can educate children to avoid the addictive traps (and there are MANY). I am no longer addicted and I have been able to lose 51 pounds more or less effortlessly, once I learned the truth about sugar and its role in the promotion of food addiction. Here is an article that some of you may find interesting about the role of sugar (and specifically the fructose portion of it--sucrose is 50% fructose) that is instrumental in food addiction: http://www.foodaddictionsummit.org/docs/johnson-359fructoseindex.pdf

I see fewer alcoholics raging against alcohol than I see supposed "sugar addicts" railing again sugar and "junk food." It's an excuse pure and simple. Either one takes responsibility for his/her own life or not. Blaming others is a symptom of a lack of self control.

It is much easier to avoid alcohol than it is to avoid junk food. Everyone must eat to live---no one needs to drink alcohol to live. You missed my point. I am not longer addicted to sugar and wheat because I simply don't eat them--just like an alcoholic understands that he can't "drink in moderation". I am free of all inclination to eat them. And I have NO problem staying within my calorie allotment. It is a simple matter of avoiding sugar and wheat for me.

If you are free of all inclination to eat sugar and wheat as you say, then that seems to fly in the face of your addiction argument.

It's not my argument---there are medical researchers who think that way too---thus the Food Addiction Summit that I cited. I am free of an inclination to eat sugar and wheat in the same way that alcoholics are disinclined to drink alcoholic beverages--their lives are just a lot simpler if they avoid it, so they don't even go there, rather than relying on "self-discipline" once they are there.

sunsnstatheart

A New York Times article on why food companies are evil? I'm shocked! Of course, any excuse someone wants to use for lacking self control is fine with me. It's their life.

Food conglomerates are purposely addicting people to substances that will destroy their health. Why should we blame their victims? Shouldn't we blame drug peddlers who set out to addict children to street drugs? The food processors are taking advantage of the ignorance of people who eat their crap. That is why we need to help people to understand the deadly nature of junk food.

We can only be victims if we accept it. I for one isn't going to blame junk food for being fat. I did this to my self and I am taking action to rectify it.

I grew up being addicted to sugar and wheat. Does everyone get addicted? No--no more than others get addicted to street drugs or alcohol. But enough do that we need to take a close hard look at how we can educate children to avoid the addictive traps (and there are MANY). I am no longer addicted and I have been able to lose 51 pounds more or less effortlessly, once I learned the truth about sugar and its role in the promotion of food addiction. Here is an article that some of you may find interesting about the role of sugar (and specifically the fructose portion of it--sucrose is 50% fructose) that is instrumental in food addiction: http://www.foodaddictionsummit.org/docs/johnson-359fructoseindex.pdf

I see fewer alcoholics raging against alcohol than I see supposed "sugar addicts" railing again sugar and "junk food." It's an excuse pure and simple. Either one takes responsibility for his/her own life or not. Blaming others is a symptom of a lack of self control.

It is much easier to avoid alcohol than it is to avoid junk food. Everyone must eat to live---no one needs to drink alcohol to live. You missed my point. I am not longer addicted to sugar and wheat because I simply don't eat them--just like an alcoholic understands that he can't "drink in moderation". I am free of all inclination to eat them. And I have NO problem staying within my calorie allotment. It is a simple matter of avoiding sugar and wheat for me.

If you are free of all inclination to eat sugar and wheat as you say, then that seems to fly in the face of your addiction argument.

It's not my argument---there are medical researchers who think that way too---thus the Food Addiction Summit that I cited. I am free of an inclination to eat sugar and wheat in the same way that alcoholics are disinclined to drink alcoholic beverages--their lives are just a lot simpler if they avoid it, so they don't even go there, rather than relying on "self-discipline" once they are there.

The alcoholics I've known never completely lost the desire for alcohol, and I know many smokers who have quit for a decade or more and still have the craving. They stay away from their addiction through hard work and by exercising something called self control. I say again, your claim to be free of all inclination to eat sugar and wheat is clearly at odds with your addiction argument.

SanteMulberry

"...The alcoholics I've known never completely lost the desire for alcohol, and I know many smokers who have quit for a decade or more and still have the craving. They stay away from their addiction through hard work and by exercising called self control. I say again, your claim to be free of all inclination to eat sugar and wheat is clearly at odds with your addiction argument...."

Okay, professor, you tell me (and the docs) what you see happening here. I didn't say that I didn't sometimes consider returning to my old eating habits---I just said that I don't do so, and it is because I don't want to. Yes, I am exercising self-control, just like every other former addict. Do I ever get a twinge when a see a dessert table? Of course. Am I inclined to partake? NO.

jonnythan

Read it a few days ago. It's a good article with a lot of great info and insights.

Of course, I still eat what most people would call "junk food" as long as it fits my macros. See no compelling reason to change. The thrust of the article is that these companies make their food so yummy and desirable that it makes people eat too much. If you don't eat too much there's not much to worry about.

Jimaudit

bump for later reading!

SherryTeach

didnt read the article but sure why not they need to pay their bills too

I suppose you think it's okay for cigarette companies to add chemicals to their products to increase the likelihood that a user would become highly addicted. After all, they need to pay their bills too.

It was a great article. All companies have social responsibility.

Mandigormas

Bump

vashnic

Very interesting. I do feel that food companies need to be more upfront about the contents of their foods. That example from Finland was great--

"Every grocery item that was heavy in salt would come to be marked prominently with the warning “High Salt Content.” By 2007, Finland’s per capita consumption of salt had dropped by a third, and this shift — along with improved medical care — was accompanied by a 75 percent to 80 percent decline in the number of deaths from strokes and heart disease."

--and I think a nice balance to allow salty (and tasty!) food while helping educate consumers on the ridiculous levels of sodium.

Oishii

I enjoyed this article. For me, the human, individual side is very interesting. A handful of (mainly) men have so much power, and a handful of scientists have the knowledge, skills and desire to change the status quo. I don't think anyone is presented as the 'bogey man' here, rather it is in an interesting article going beyond statistics an into the human stories behind them.

It's fascinating to think that reducing the sodium content might make people eat more sodium too :laugh:

jhc7324

I read this article and was a little startled. Perhaps I should have known food companies were aggressively creating very unhealthy products but I was surprised at the aggressive push to create very unhealthy junky foods for children.

The article made me very sad but I am glad I read it. As a mom, I need to continue to be vigilant of the foods my children get.

I'm not sure that they are "pushing to create unhealthy junky foods for children" as much as they are aggressively pushing to market foods that children will eat to children.

This is a very interesting issue since, it isn’t all that difficult for any individual to go out, find the information regarding how to eat healthier and then go and do it, but when the problems comes from millions and millions of unhealthy diets across society I don’t think we can just sit back and say “well, it’s your responsibility to eat healthier.” Yes, it would be great if that approach would work, but we’ve more or less done that for years and the obesity rates are getting worse.

A decent portion of the reason healthcare costs are so high here is due to the terrible diet the average American eats. Healthcare costs impact everyone, so standing by and saying that a healthy diet is everyone’s responsibility 1. Won’t work, and 2. Will continue to cost you more in the long run as healthcare costs keep going up.

I don’t know what the answer to the problem is, but it clearly isn’t just hoping that millions of unhealthy eaters will have an epiphany that their poor diet is the root cause of their weight/health problems.