Moderation is a basic life skill.

Logic FTW!

I don't know about any of you guys but I was NEVER taught moderation. I was brought up to 'clean' my plate. And if I was full I ate that piece of cake anyways because if I didn't my dad would eat it and I would never have an opportunity to eat any. Pretty much I was taught to get it now because if you wait then you won't get any.

I wish my family had taught me moderation. Now I am having to re-train myself.

Mmmmm smart post. Taking control and taking responsibility for food intake and my health definitely has affected other important aspects of my life.

"The middle path is the way to wisdom."

- Mevlana Rumi

In...

...because...

...just in.

I'm no scientist, and this is all anecdotal but for me personally, the initial period of restricting sugar and carbs did WONDERS for my ability to control cravings and now I CAN have everything "in moderation" pretty effortlessly (with the exception of wheat because I have digestive upset and cramps when I eat it but it's pretty easy to stay away from stuff that makes you feel sick lol). I can stop at ONE scoop of ice cream, I can have a handful of m&m's (and not the Costco size bag lol), 2 gluten free cookies etc.. I think if your eating is out of control, restriction could be helpful in the VERY short term while you work out the mental aspect of moderation. It's easier to go to moderate from nothing than it is from a free-for-all. I agree that moderation is the more sustainable approach in the long run and I'm glad I wasn't pig headed about making changes to my 'plan'

Good to think of this when raising your children.

OMFG! THANK YOU!!!!
this post rocks!

So, nice post, but I don't think it's true that moderation is equally easy to learn for everyone.

Just because it isn't easy, doesn't mean it isn't worth it.

Losing weight and getting fit isn't easy. Guess we should all just stop logging on.

I'm all for moderation, however there is research suggesting a 'nature' element may play a role along with 'nurture'. In the experiment (which I've seen replicated for different TV programmes in the UK), a group of toddlers are all fed until they say they're not hungry any more. Then they get out a colouring activity and also put more food on the tables. Some children keep eating, while others ignore the food and get on with the colouring.

That this divide exists so early on brings up two possibilities: 1) nature is partly to blame 2) very early nurture is key.

In my everyday life I have 3 examples: my friend's son and my cousin's daughter who will eat long past satiety and my son who hates to be too full. All 3 were demand breastfed, although for differing amounts of time. When solids were introduced, my son did babyled weaning, so controlled his own intake, rather than being forced to finish a jar or tub of food. Now, in both of the other households, you must finish your food, dessert is ice cream or sweets and food is used as a reward, none of which we do (dessert is sometimes ice cream and sweets, but more often, fruit). I can't say whether these 'nurture' factors have played a role, or if we're just lucky that moderation in food is in his nature.

So, nice post, but I don't think it's true that moderation is equally easy to learn for everyone. Equally, not everyone who drinks a lot becomes an alcoholic, so other, possibly genetic factors, must come into play.

I would say that nurture plays the major role, and that human brains are extremely plastic, and by the time you're a toddler the environment you were raised in has already had a major impact on shaping certain behaviours (including this). For example, some toddlers already have feeding problems, e.g. refusing to eat while an overly anxious parent tries to cajole them into eating something they don't want to eat, or it's gone beyond what the child wants to eat, and into a control issue/battle of wills between the parent and child. Toddlers who are regularly refusing food at mealtimes will snack at every opportunity, and even if they were fed beforehand as part of the experiment, I'd expect them to still eat something else offered to them after that, because that's what they're in the habit of doing.

But I think the nurture factors go back way further than that. I'd imagine that before you even get on to baby led weaning versus spoon feeding, there's questions like whether the baby was formula fed or breastfed, and whether the baby was fed on demand or to a schedule, and whether the baby was allowed to finish feeding in their own time, or were encourage to finish the bottle after they were full (i.e. expected to take a set amount of milk at each feed), or breastfeed for a fixed number of minutes rather than in their own time, and things like that.

There are studies that link formula feeding to obesity, and that's been blamed on a number of different factors (which may have nothing to do with formula milk itself, because correlation doesn't mean causation), but one interesting factor is that when breastfeeding, the foremilk (which comes first) is watery and thirst quenching, then the hindmilk (which comes later) is much richer and is more like food... but with formula milk it's all the same, so babies may take more calories in milk than they actually need, because they're trying to quench their thirst and hunger at the same time, as opposed to breastfed babies who quench their thirst first, then take as much hind milk as they need to not feel hungry, so they're provided with better tools to learn to satisfy their thirst, then hunger, in their own time, then stop feeding.

It's extremely hard to separate nature and nurture in behaviours, probably twin studies, i.e. identical twins raised in different environments, may shed light on it, e.g. if identical twins as adults both have the same level of ability at moderation regardless of the environment, that would suggest genetic factors. But in the context of the opening post, it doesn't really matter whether it's genetics or bad habits learned in childhood, because they're factors that are beyond your control. However I concur with the OP that it is something that can be learned later in life, and I agree with you (and I think the OP does too) that it is genuinely harder for some people to learn moderation than others. But his point is that it's worth putting the effort in to learn how to eat in moderation even if you find it harder than average, because the other two extremes are not conducive to happiness. And also I think that as parents we should learn how to teach our kids moderation so they don't have to deal with the misery of being stuck at one extreme or the other, or yo-yoing between the two.