Forgive me, MFP for i have sinned

Options
124

Replies

  • KrysKiss87
    KrysKiss87 Posts: 124 Member
    Options
    Life's not worth living without chocolate. Let yourself love the things you love. Just don't love them too much. It's ok to indulge the bulge every now and then, just don't make it a habit. Restricting yourself from having the foods you really want will kick in your fight or flight instinct regarding your diet, and if you are rebel like me, you will want to run away and eat a whole case of chocolate instead of avoiding it. SO let yourself have a few bites of a chocolate bar every now and then, just don't overindulge. Keep working on things and you will do great!
  • Ninkyou
    Ninkyou Posts: 6,666 Member
    Options
    We don't turn away the chocolate. We eat it. Just not in mass quantity. Instead of 2 bars, we only have 1. Except on... you know... Halloween, Easter, etc. Then it's gloves off.
  • DerekVTX
    DerekVTX Posts: 287 Member
    Options
    Liftng4Lis wrote: »
    There is nothing wrong with chocolate, in moderation. What's the problem?

    The problem is she ate 360 grams of the stuff, about 2000 calories.
  • DerekVTX
    DerekVTX Posts: 287 Member
    Options
    jgnatca wrote: »
    Also try storing individually wrapped chocolates in the freezer. To help slow you down.

    Its great to have some self control, but it also helps not to have something so calorie dense in your house if you don't have the self control.
  • Aviva92
    Aviva92 Posts: 2,333 Member
    Options
    laurielima wrote: »
    "For some people, it would almost be comparable to telling an alcoholic it's all right to have one drink"


    My gosh keep it in your pants its an analogy that makes sense to people WHO CANNOT EAT ANY CHOCOLATE...BECAUSE THEY HAVE A CHOCOLATE OR SUGAR ADDICTION.

    Addiction is addiction.

    yep, not sure why people have such a problem with this analogy. seems fine to me.

    i don't have a food addiction and can easily moderate, but i feel for people who struggle with it.
  • SLLRunner
    SLLRunner Posts: 12,943 Member
    edited March 2015
    Options
    laurielima wrote: »
    "For some people, it would almost be comparable to telling an alcoholic it's all right to have one drink"


    My gosh keep it in your pants its an analogy that makes sense to people WHO CANNOT EAT ANY CHOCOLATE...BECAUSE THEY HAVE A CHOCOLATE OR SUGAR ADDICTION.

    Addiction is addiction.

    Keep what in whose pants? :D

    No need to shout. ;)

    If one were really addicted to sugar and chocolate, that would mean total abstinence or it could cause healthy problems, possibly even death. That would mean absolutely no sugar of any kind, which is impossible, and no chocolate of any kind, ever again because then it would be a relapse.

    Not being able to control oneself around sugar and chocolate is not a mark of addiction, it's a lack of self-control. I know because I used to buy into that whole sugar addiction (thought chocolate was okay if it was sugar free. Ick!), until I figured out my body does not really know the difference between a sugar in fruit or chocolate or cookies

    Everything in moderation. :)
  • SLLRunner
    SLLRunner Posts: 12,943 Member
    Options
    Aviva92 wrote: »
    laurielima wrote: »
    "For some people, it would almost be comparable to telling an alcoholic it's all right to have one drink"


    My gosh keep it in your pants its an analogy that makes sense to people WHO CANNOT EAT ANY CHOCOLATE...BECAUSE THEY HAVE A CHOCOLATE OR SUGAR ADDICTION.

    Addiction is addiction.

    yep, not sure why people have such a problem with this analogy. seems fine to me.

    i don't have a food addiction and can easily moderate, but i feel for people who struggle with it.

    But, it's not an actual addiction to the food itself. Maybe it's the need for a certain feeling certain food provides, or the fulfillment of some emotional need, but it's not a true blue addiction.
  • Aviva92
    Aviva92 Posts: 2,333 Member
    Options
    SLLRunner wrote: »
    Aviva92 wrote: »
    laurielima wrote: »
    "For some people, it would almost be comparable to telling an alcoholic it's all right to have one drink"


    My gosh keep it in your pants its an analogy that makes sense to people WHO CANNOT EAT ANY CHOCOLATE...BECAUSE THEY HAVE A CHOCOLATE OR SUGAR ADDICTION.

    Addiction is addiction.

    yep, not sure why people have such a problem with this analogy. seems fine to me.

    i don't have a food addiction and can easily moderate, but i feel for people who struggle with it.

    But, it's not an actual addiction to the food itself. Maybe it's the need for a certain feeling certain food provides, or the fulfillment of some emotional need, but it's not a true blue addiction.

    maybe not, but i think the word is used because they don't have a better one. not a reason for people to get offended. it's not as though it's a competition for who has it harder, a person with food issues vs an alcoholic.
  • HildieMe
    HildieMe Posts: 41 Member
    Options
    Amen to all the good advice! By all means, be honest with yourself. Nobody is calling you on the mat and punching you; it's between you and MFP. ---
    "I'm not even going to log my food for today because it's a joke. I wouldn't even eat that much chocolate before. Why now?
    ---
    Seems to me, your body is telling you that you deprived yourself a little too much. You were probably very hungry... forgive yourself, allow yourself a little more food in the future, and by all means, move on! If we could swing all that weight loss easily and without setbacks, hey, we wouldn't even be here and read your entry...
  • SLLRunner
    SLLRunner Posts: 12,943 Member
    Options
    Aviva92 wrote: »
    SLLRunner wrote: »
    Aviva92 wrote: »
    laurielima wrote: »
    "For some people, it would almost be comparable to telling an alcoholic it's all right to have one drink"


    My gosh keep it in your pants its an analogy that makes sense to people WHO CANNOT EAT ANY CHOCOLATE...BECAUSE THEY HAVE A CHOCOLATE OR SUGAR ADDICTION.

    Addiction is addiction.

    yep, not sure why people have such a problem with this analogy. seems fine to me.

    i don't have a food addiction and can easily moderate, but i feel for people who struggle with it.

    But, it's not an actual addiction to the food itself. Maybe it's the need for a certain feeling certain food provides, or the fulfillment of some emotional need, but it's not a true blue addiction.

    maybe not, but i think the word is used because they don't have a better one. not a reason for people to get offended. it's not as though it's a competition for who has it harder, a person with food issues vs an alcoholic.

    Uh, oh, you're throwing in a sweeping generalization that makes no sense (see bold part). That statement is odd.

    Alcoholism is a true addiction and disease, I've had family and friend die from it. Never saw anyone diet from a sugar and/or chocolate addiction, or go through withdrawals and have to go into a treatment center.

    In communication, we must use the correct words for the affliction we are talking about. Addiction is not the correct one here.
  • Aviva92
    Aviva92 Posts: 2,333 Member
    Options
    SLLRunner wrote: »
    Aviva92 wrote: »
    SLLRunner wrote: »
    Aviva92 wrote: »
    laurielima wrote: »
    "For some people, it would almost be comparable to telling an alcoholic it's all right to have one drink"


    My gosh keep it in your pants its an analogy that makes sense to people WHO CANNOT EAT ANY CHOCOLATE...BECAUSE THEY HAVE A CHOCOLATE OR SUGAR ADDICTION.

    Addiction is addiction.

    yep, not sure why people have such a problem with this analogy. seems fine to me.

    i don't have a food addiction and can easily moderate, but i feel for people who struggle with it.

    But, it's not an actual addiction to the food itself. Maybe it's the need for a certain feeling certain food provides, or the fulfillment of some emotional need, but it's not a true blue addiction.

    maybe not, but i think the word is used because they don't have a better one. not a reason for people to get offended. it's not as though it's a competition for who has it harder, a person with food issues vs an alcoholic.

    Uh, oh, you're throwing in a sweeping generalization that makes no sense (see bold part). That statement is odd.

    Alcoholism is a true addiction and disease, I've had family and friend die from it. Never saw anyone diet from a sugar and/or chocolate addiction, or go through withdrawals and have to go into a treatment center.

    In communication, we must use the correct words for the affliction we are talking about. Addiction is not the correct one here.

    what word would you suggest replace it?
  • WinoGelato
    WinoGelato Posts: 13,454 Member
    Options
    Aviva92 wrote: »
    SLLRunner wrote: »
    Aviva92 wrote: »
    SLLRunner wrote: »
    Aviva92 wrote: »
    laurielima wrote: »
    "For some people, it would almost be comparable to telling an alcoholic it's all right to have one drink"


    My gosh keep it in your pants its an analogy that makes sense to people WHO CANNOT EAT ANY CHOCOLATE...BECAUSE THEY HAVE A CHOCOLATE OR SUGAR ADDICTION.

    Addiction is addiction.

    yep, not sure why people have such a problem with this analogy. seems fine to me.

    i don't have a food addiction and can easily moderate, but i feel for people who struggle with it.

    But, it's not an actual addiction to the food itself. Maybe it's the need for a certain feeling certain food provides, or the fulfillment of some emotional need, but it's not a true blue addiction.

    maybe not, but i think the word is used because they don't have a better one. not a reason for people to get offended. it's not as though it's a competition for who has it harder, a person with food issues vs an alcoholic.

    Uh, oh, you're throwing in a sweeping generalization that makes no sense (see bold part). That statement is odd.

    Alcoholism is a true addiction and disease, I've had family and friend die from it. Never saw anyone diet from a sugar and/or chocolate addiction, or go through withdrawals and have to go into a treatment center.

    In communication, we must use the correct words for the affliction we are talking about. Addiction is not the correct one here.

    what word would you suggest replace it?

    Off the top of my head, I would say, "I have challenges in moderating XYZ foods", not "I am addicted to XYZ food or the components of said XYZ food". I agree that using the word addiction is not physiologically correct or psychologically appropriate.



  • cwolfman13
    cwolfman13 Posts: 41,874 Member
    edited March 2015
    Options
    mayawalz wrote: »
    I recently began my weight loss endeavour. Today I walked into a grocery store to buy a head of lettuce. I picked the lettuce. Then walked to the till. That's when I saw it. The biggest, shiniest bar of chocolate you've ever seen. I must mention at this point that chocolate has always been my weakness. I looked at the lettuce in my hand, I thought of all the things it represented. I tried to reason with myself, and I failed. I didn't buy a chocolate bar. I bought TWO. 180g each. Went home and devoured as much of them as I could. And I feel absolutely sick. Not physically but emotionally. Why would I buy two? Why would I buy one? I feel like all my hardwork thus far has been for nothing. I feel like a failure. A loser who lacks self control. I'm not even going to log my food for today because it's a joke. I wouldn't even eat that much chocolate before. Why now? Please, to all you superstars who have won and are still winning the battle of the flab, where do you get the self control to just turn away from all the sweet and unhealthy goodies in life? How do you just not eat them? Sorry for the rant

    I have desert pretty much every night...usually dark chocolate. There's nothing inherently wrong with that...I usually eat a serving and call it a day.
  • HeySwoleSister
    HeySwoleSister Posts: 1,938 Member
    Options
    Aviva92 wrote: »
    SLLRunner wrote: »
    Aviva92 wrote: »
    SLLRunner wrote: »
    Aviva92 wrote: »
    laurielima wrote: »
    "For some people, it would almost be comparable to telling an alcoholic it's all right to have one drink"


    My gosh keep it in your pants its an analogy that makes sense to people WHO CANNOT EAT ANY CHOCOLATE...BECAUSE THEY HAVE A CHOCOLATE OR SUGAR ADDICTION.

    Addiction is addiction.

    yep, not sure why people have such a problem with this analogy. seems fine to me.

    i don't have a food addiction and can easily moderate, but i feel for people who struggle with it.

    But, it's not an actual addiction to the food itself. Maybe it's the need for a certain feeling certain food provides, or the fulfillment of some emotional need, but it's not a true blue addiction.

    maybe not, but i think the word is used because they don't have a better one. not a reason for people to get offended. it's not as though it's a competition for who has it harder, a person with food issues vs an alcoholic.

    Uh, oh, you're throwing in a sweeping generalization that makes no sense (see bold part). That statement is odd.

    Alcoholism is a true addiction and disease, I've had family and friend die from it. Never saw anyone diet from a sugar and/or chocolate addiction, or go through withdrawals and have to go into a treatment center.

    In communication, we must use the correct words for the affliction we are talking about. Addiction is not the correct one here.

    what word would you suggest replace it?

    A bad habit coupled with poor willpower.

    I know and love people who have had legit addictions...I also know and love people who have legit binge eating disorders.

    "I can't contain myself to just one cookie" is a lack of willpower. Nothing more. It's a JERK maneuver to claim 'addiction" just because you can't contain your portion control.


    Talk to me when you wake up from a blackout binge covered in vomit with wrappers stuffed in your own orifices and we can talk addiction. Until then, it's just a bad habit.
  • KnM0107
    KnM0107 Posts: 355 Member
    Options
    Aviva92 wrote: »
    SLLRunner wrote: »
    Aviva92 wrote: »
    laurielima wrote: »
    "For some people, it would almost be comparable to telling an alcoholic it's all right to have one drink"


    My gosh keep it in your pants its an analogy that makes sense to people WHO CANNOT EAT ANY CHOCOLATE...BECAUSE THEY HAVE A CHOCOLATE OR SUGAR ADDICTION.

    Addiction is addiction.

    yep, not sure why people have such a problem with this analogy. seems fine to me.

    i don't have a food addiction and can easily moderate, but i feel for people who struggle with it.

    But, it's not an actual addiction to the food itself. Maybe it's the need for a certain feeling certain food provides, or the fulfillment of some emotional need, but it's not a true blue addiction.

    maybe not, but i think the word is used because they don't have a better one. not a reason for people to get offended. it's not as though it's a competition for who has it harder, a person with food issues vs an alcoholic.


    Aviva92 wrote: »
    SLLRunner wrote: »
    Aviva92 wrote: »
    SLLRunner wrote: »
    Aviva92 wrote: »
    laurielima wrote: »
    "For some people, it would almost be comparable to telling an alcoholic it's all right to have one drink"


    My gosh keep it in your pants its an analogy that makes sense to people WHO CANNOT EAT ANY CHOCOLATE...BECAUSE THEY HAVE A CHOCOLATE OR SUGAR ADDICTION.

    Addiction is addiction.

    yep, not sure why people have such a problem with this analogy. seems fine to me.

    i don't have a food addiction and can easily moderate, but i feel for people who struggle with it.

    But, it's not an actual addiction to the food itself. Maybe it's the need for a certain feeling certain food provides, or the fulfillment of some emotional need, but it's not a true blue addiction.

    maybe not, but i think the word is used because they don't have a better one. not a reason for people to get offended. it's not as though it's a competition for who has it harder, a person with food issues vs an alcoholic.

    Uh, oh, you're throwing in a sweeping generalization that makes no sense (see bold part). That statement is odd.

    Alcoholism is a true addiction and disease, I've had family and friend die from it. Never saw anyone diet from a sugar and/or chocolate addiction, or go through withdrawals and have to go into a treatment center.

    In communication, we must use the correct words for the affliction we are talking about. Addiction is not the correct one here.

    what word would you suggest replace it?


    Lack of self control
  • acjmomma
    acjmomma Posts: 16 Member
    Options
    using the word "addiction" in regards to food is just another way of putting the "blame" off onto someone or something else instead of evaluating yourself and your habits. It allows people to feel like their lack of control is not their fault, it is their "addiction" and cannot possibly be controlled by simply making different choices.
  • ndj1979
    ndj1979 Posts: 29,139 Member
    Options
    Aviva92 wrote: »
    laurielima wrote: »
    "For some people, it would almost be comparable to telling an alcoholic it's all right to have one drink"


    My gosh keep it in your pants its an analogy that makes sense to people WHO CANNOT EAT ANY CHOCOLATE...BECAUSE THEY HAVE A CHOCOLATE OR SUGAR ADDICTION.

    Addiction is addiction.

    yep, not sure why people have such a problem with this analogy. seems fine to me.

    i don't have a food addiction and can easily moderate, but i feel for people who struggle with it.

    so equating chocolate with alcoholism is a legit comparison in your world?
  • Mr_Knight
    Mr_Knight Posts: 9,532 Member
    Options
    laurielima wrote: »
    Addiction is addiction.

    Sure. Because, just like with heroin and alcohol, chocolate addicts resort to property crime to fuel their addictions, and disappear for days or weeks at a time due to their binges.

    Get serious...
  • Aviva92
    Aviva92 Posts: 2,333 Member
    Options
    ndj1979 wrote: »
    Aviva92 wrote: »
    laurielima wrote: »
    "For some people, it would almost be comparable to telling an alcoholic it's all right to have one drink"


    My gosh keep it in your pants its an analogy that makes sense to people WHO CANNOT EAT ANY CHOCOLATE...BECAUSE THEY HAVE A CHOCOLATE OR SUGAR ADDICTION.

    Addiction is addiction.

    yep, not sure why people have such a problem with this analogy. seems fine to me.

    i don't have a food addiction and can easily moderate, but i feel for people who struggle with it.

    so equating chocolate with alcoholism is a legit comparison in your world?

    I don't have anything close to an addiction to either, so no idea. It doesn't bother me though when people say it.