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.
Arguing Semantics - sugar addiction
Options
Replies
-
WinoGelato wrote: »missblondi2u wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »singingflutelady wrote: »Another word that gets misused is binge. I see non ed people using it interchangeably with overeat. They say they binged but they mean they overate. As someone who is a recovering anorexic binge/purge subtype binge means something else. It typically is in the order of thousands of calories. I have known bulimics who would eat approximately 5000 calories in one sitting, get rid of it, eat 5000 more, get rid of it over and over. In my head a binge is also a total lack of control and stuffing food down quickly and without really tasting it. It doesn't mean that you overate during your Christmas dinner or cheat meal or whatever.
As someone with a history of binges, I cringe when I see "binge" used that way. I understand the events being described are usually upsetting to the posters who are writing, so I try to be mindful of their experience and not project my past on to them, but really -- seeing it used to describe eating an box of crackers or some pizza . . . no.
Ok, so I'm confused. I haven't read further to see if it's already been addressed, but the actual definition of binge is "a short period devoted to indulging in an activity to excess, especially drinking alcohol or eating." To me, this includes the occasional overindulgence.
I can see how people with an eating disorder may put another connotation to the term, but why is it not ok to use the dictionary definition of a word, and how the heck is someone supposed to know that connotation if they don't have that experience? To me, this is putting a particular person's feelings (in this case, feelings related to eating disorders) over facts (like what an actual word is defined).
I have seen several posts when it stays out as "I binged" and turns into "I ate two cookies and they didn't fit within my goal".
Compare to: "I'm psychotic, someone help me work on my psychosis" when they actually mean: "life is hectic right now and I feel like things are crazy".
Yes it is annoying when someone used a medical term to mean something completely different, especially on a forum where there's a high chance of a fair number of members would have said medical condition.
Oh you mean like someone uses the term addicted and turns out, they just like to eat XX food
I'm confused. It almost sounds like you are saying that the meaning of the word "addiction" matters and that we should try to understand what a person means when they use that word because their casual usage of the word may not mean the same as the clinical definition...
I believe it is important....what we call something and why. It's one of the many reasons why I put this article in the thread a couple days back.
http://www.vice.com/read/language-of-catastrophe-why-we-need-to-stop-saying-were-mental?utm_source=vicefbus
But instead we get a mocking statement followed by a winky face...in the face of the discussion. Never change MFP, never change.
Since most words have various definitions, like binge, it's can be difficult. This doesn't even consider the language barrier.
And yet another complication of that the definition of a word changes over time according to usage. Take the word decimate. It's original meaning was just "a tenth" but it was used to describe the Roman practice of killing 1/10 men after a mutiny. Now decimate has another, no less valid definition (to kill or destroy), which you can find in the dictionary.
This is why terms like binge or mental don't bother me, because the meaning of a word changes according to common usage, and most people realize that saying "you're mental" is not the same as saying the person has an actual mental disorder.0 -
This discussion has sharked jumped several times so I wanted to reiterate that this discussion is not the place to share your feelings or your concerns over MFP and/or the moderation team or employees of MFP or the purpose of this category. If this discussion can't stay mostly focused on the topic at hand then it will be closed.0
-
missblondi2u wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »missblondi2u wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »singingflutelady wrote: »Another word that gets misused is binge. I see non ed people using it interchangeably with overeat. They say they binged but they mean they overate. As someone who is a recovering anorexic binge/purge subtype binge means something else. It typically is in the order of thousands of calories. I have known bulimics who would eat approximately 5000 calories in one sitting, get rid of it, eat 5000 more, get rid of it over and over. In my head a binge is also a total lack of control and stuffing food down quickly and without really tasting it. It doesn't mean that you overate during your Christmas dinner or cheat meal or whatever.
As someone with a history of binges, I cringe when I see "binge" used that way. I understand the events being described are usually upsetting to the posters who are writing, so I try to be mindful of their experience and not project my past on to them, but really -- seeing it used to describe eating an box of crackers or some pizza . . . no.
Ok, so I'm confused. I haven't read further to see if it's already been addressed, but the actual definition of binge is "a short period devoted to indulging in an activity to excess, especially drinking alcohol or eating." To me, this includes the occasional overindulgence.
I can see how people with an eating disorder may put another connotation to the term, but why is it not ok to use the dictionary definition of a word, and how the heck is someone supposed to know that connotation if they don't have that experience? To me, this is putting a particular person's feelings (in this case, feelings related to eating disorders) over facts (like what an actual word is defined).
I have seen several posts when it stays out as "I binged" and turns into "I ate two cookies and they didn't fit within my goal".
Compare to: "I'm psychotic, someone help me work on my psychosis" when they actually mean: "life is hectic right now and I feel like things are crazy".
Yes it is annoying when someone used a medical term to mean something completely different, especially on a forum where there's a high chance of a fair number of members would have said medical condition.
Oh you mean like someone uses the term addicted and turns out, they just like to eat XX food
I'm confused. It almost sounds like you are saying that the meaning of the word "addiction" matters and that we should try to understand what a person means when they use that word because their casual usage of the word may not mean the same as the clinical definition...
I believe it is important....what we call something and why. It's one of the many reasons why I put this article in the thread a couple days back.
http://www.vice.com/read/language-of-catastrophe-why-we-need-to-stop-saying-were-mental?utm_source=vicefbus
But instead we get a mocking statement followed by a winky face...in the face of the discussion. Never change MFP, never change.
Since most words have various definitions, like binge, it's can be difficult. This doesn't even consider the language barrier.
And yet another complication of that the definition of a word changes over time according to usage. Take the word decimate. It's original meaning was just "a tenth" but it was used to describe the Roman practice of killing 1/10 men after a mutiny. Now decimate has another, no less valid definition (to kill or destroy), which you can find in the dictionary.
This is why terms like binge or mental don't bother me, because the meaning of a word changes according to common usage, and most people realize that saying "you're mental" is not the same as saying the person has an actual mental disorder.
Except when a person is claiming an addiction to a substance and actively argues against logic and reason when it comes to eating. One of the threads that saw posts split into this new subforum had a member claiming an addiction to sugar ... but only sugar in a narrow range of foods that they found particularly tasty ... not sugars in beets, broccoli, dairy, bananas. If one is truly addicted to sugar, they would seek it out wherever they can find it. One having a lack of willpower around certain foods they find tasty is not an addiction.0 -
When someone says they are addicted to a substance (usually sugar)...there is such value and IMO important to challenging that misnomer. It doesn't mean getting into a tit for tat argument with someone about it, but it also doesn't mean sharing truth and knowledge is being mean or unsupportive (which is how it is often tagged). I've also almost universally seen that challenging of misinformation coupled with strategies to handle problem eating when it comes to sugar. I know I used to post along those lines pretty regularly. It was my way of paying it forward for people challenging the mistruths and wrong assumptions I believed. Unfortunately, I no longer do that since I just don't see it valued much anymore in these parts.
I also fundamentally believe that you can answer the OP while not actually answering the question asked. I know I personally felt that way. If I only got the specific information asked...and never got my beliefs challenged, I am pretty sure I would still be lost on the path to wellness. I was challenged. I grew. I learned. I benefited from it. I am a much more well rounded, healthy human being for it. So, I am thankful that I grew up MFP style in an environment where it flourished and was allowed to exist.
The part in bold goes back to earlier parts of the discussion. Sometimes what a person needs is the base fallacy challenged ... not an answer to specifics based on those fallacies. Now, those types of response get culled from the thread and the person only gets reinforcement of their flawed position.
0 -
brianpperkins wrote: »When someone says they are addicted to a substance (usually sugar)...there is such value and IMO important to challenging that misnomer. It doesn't mean getting into a tit for tat argument with someone about it, but it also doesn't mean sharing truth and knowledge is being mean or unsupportive (which is how it is often tagged). I've also almost universally seen that challenging of misinformation coupled with strategies to handle problem eating when it comes to sugar. I know I used to post along those lines pretty regularly. It was my way of paying it forward for people challenging the mistruths and wrong assumptions I believed. Unfortunately, I no longer do that since I just don't see it valued much anymore in these parts.
I also fundamentally believe that you can answer the OP while not actually answering the question asked. I know I personally felt that way. If I only got the specific information asked...and never got my beliefs challenged, I am pretty sure I would still be lost on the path to wellness. I was challenged. I grew. I learned. I benefited from it. I am a much more well rounded, healthy human being for it. So, I am thankful that I grew up MFP style in an environment where it flourished and was allowed to exist.
The part in bold goes back to earlier parts of the discussion. Sometimes what a person needs is the base fallacy challenged ... not an answer to specifics based on those fallacies. Now, those types of response get culled from the thread and the person only gets reinforcement of their flawed position.
Or sometimes the OP's request suffers from over constraint - "Can you tell me how to fix my problem, but do it without denying I'm sugar addict, but also without telling me to treat my addiction as an addiction (seek counseling, completely abstain from the substance" or " tell me what fruit I can eat so that I can avoid sugar", or "tell me how I can fix my sugar withdrawal - don't say it is keto flu or that I can't withdraw from sugar because I can feel it happening." All of these requests are demanding to find a way to 2+2 and get 5 (and this is base 10 before someone thinks they're going to be clever in relaxing the constraints by changing bases or converting symbols).0 -
I wanted to take a minute to touch on a particular semantic that was addressed by @missblondi2u . The meaning of words and what the actually means. Sorry if this seems like beating a dead horse, but I think it's highly important given the discussions at hand. To keep it as short as possible, I will concentrate on the word addiction.
Merriam-Webster defines addiction as:- the quality or state of being addicted <addiction to reading>
- compulsive need for and use of a habit-forming substance (as heroin, nicotine, or alcohol) characterized by tolerance and by well-defined physiological symptoms upon withdrawal; broadly : persistent compulsive use of a substance known by the user to be harmful
The American Society for Addictive Medicine defines addiction as:- Addiction is characterized by inability to consistently abstain, impairment in behavioral control, craving, diminished recognition of significant problems with one’s behaviors and interpersonal relationships, and a dysfunctional emotional response. Like other chronic diseases, addiction often involves cycles of relapse and remission. Without treatment or engagement in recovery activities, addiction is progressive and can result in disability or premature death.
- Addiction is a primary, chronic disease of brain reward, motivation, memory and related circuitry. Addiction affects neurotransmission and interactions within reward structures of the brain, including the nucleus accumbens, anterior cingulate cortex, basal forebrain and amygdala, such that motivational hierarchies are altered and addictive behaviors, which may or may not include alcohol and other drug use, supplant healthy, self-care related behaviors. Addiction also affects neurotransmission and interactions between cortical and hippocampal circuits and brain reward structures, such that the memory of previous exposures to rewards (such as food, sex, alcohol and other drugs) leads to a biological and behavioral response to external cues, in turn triggering craving and/or engagement in addictive behaviors.
And finally DSM V- Addiction (termed substance dependence by the American Psychiatric Association) is defined as a maladaptive pattern of substance use leading to clinically significant impairment or distress
As you can clearly see, there is NOT one specific definition and why this can be so confusing for many. And this was only 3 sources and DSM wasn't even on the first page of google when I searched for the definition. I had to add DSM to the search. So while many of you may have clear definitions in your head (which I get, some of your have degrees in psychology and work in the field), it doesn't mean everyone else does.
side note - not arguing for sugar addiction. Again, food addiction would be more likely but even then, I personally think its more of an eating disorder.0 -
The American Society for Addictive Medicine's second definition is somewhat self contradicting. It gives food as an example, but says addiction requires reorienting the motivational hierarchies - well outside of air, you can't really move air up any higher on the hierarchy of motivation.I wanted to take a minute to touch on a particular semantic that was addressed by @missblondi2u . The meaning of words and what the actually means. Sorry if this seems like beating a dead horse, but I think it's highly important given the discussions at hand. To keep it as short as possible, I will concentrate on the word addiction.
Merriam-Webster defines addiction as:- the quality or state of being addicted <addiction to reading>
- compulsive need for and use of a habit-forming substance (as heroin, nicotine, or alcohol) characterized by tolerance and by well-defined physiological symptoms upon withdrawal; broadly : persistent compulsive use of a substance known by the user to be harmful
The American Society for Addictive Medicine defines addiction as:- Addiction is characterized by inability to consistently abstain, impairment in behavioral control, craving, diminished recognition of significant problems with one’s behaviors and interpersonal relationships, and a dysfunctional emotional response. Like other chronic diseases, addiction often involves cycles of relapse and remission. Without treatment or engagement in recovery activities, addiction is progressive and can result in disability or premature death.
- Addiction is a primary, chronic disease of brain reward, motivation, memory and related circuitry. Addiction affects neurotransmission and interactions within reward structures of the brain, including the nucleus accumbens, anterior cingulate cortex, basal forebrain and amygdala, such that motivational hierarchies are altered and addictive behaviors, which may or may not include alcohol and other drug use, supplant healthy, self-care related behaviors. Addiction also affects neurotransmission and interactions between cortical and hippocampal circuits and brain reward structures, such that the memory of previous exposures to rewards (such as food, sex, alcohol and other drugs) leads to a biological and behavioral response to external cues, in turn triggering craving and/or engagement in addictive behaviors.
And finally DSM V- Addiction (termed substance dependence by the American Psychiatric Association) is defined as a maladaptive pattern of substance use leading to clinically significant impairment or distress
As you can clearly see, there is NOT one specific definition and why this can be so confusing for many. And this was only 3 sources and DSM wasn't even on the first page of google when I searched for the definition. I had to add DSM to the search. So while many of you may have clear definitions in your head (which I get, some of your have degrees in psychology and work in the field), it doesn't mean everyone else does.
side note - not arguing for sugar addiction. Again, food addiction would be more likely but even then, I personally think its more of an eating disorder.
I'll also give my stock problem with trying to use a dictionary as proof - you can probably add 2+2 together, which according to the dictionary makes you a computer. I'd be asinine to try to cram a USB stick in you and get upset that you won't boot up WIndows 10 just because you're a computer. It requires context, and often when teasing out context, the threads get shut down, or we do get OP's that insist that they meet the DSM concept of substance dependence, and then the thread gets shut down.
As far as food addiction, again no. The concept being put around for possible future DSM's is eating addiction. There is nothing in the substance of food that is addictive, it is behavioral - closer to gambling addiction than cocaine.0 -
The American Society for Addictive Medicine's second definition is somewhat self contradicting. It gives food as an example, but says addiction requires reorienting the motivational hierarchies - well outside of air, you can't really move air up any higher on the hierarchy of motivation.I wanted to take a minute to touch on a particular semantic that was addressed by @missblondi2u . The meaning of words and what the actually means. Sorry if this seems like beating a dead horse, but I think it's highly important given the discussions at hand. To keep it as short as possible, I will concentrate on the word addiction.
Merriam-Webster defines addiction as:- the quality or state of being addicted <addiction to reading>
- compulsive need for and use of a habit-forming substance (as heroin, nicotine, or alcohol) characterized by tolerance and by well-defined physiological symptoms upon withdrawal; broadly : persistent compulsive use of a substance known by the user to be harmful
The American Society for Addictive Medicine defines addiction as:- Addiction is characterized by inability to consistently abstain, impairment in behavioral control, craving, diminished recognition of significant problems with one’s behaviors and interpersonal relationships, and a dysfunctional emotional response. Like other chronic diseases, addiction often involves cycles of relapse and remission. Without treatment or engagement in recovery activities, addiction is progressive and can result in disability or premature death.
- Addiction is a primary, chronic disease of brain reward, motivation, memory and related circuitry. Addiction affects neurotransmission and interactions within reward structures of the brain, including the nucleus accumbens, anterior cingulate cortex, basal forebrain and amygdala, such that motivational hierarchies are altered and addictive behaviors, which may or may not include alcohol and other drug use, supplant healthy, self-care related behaviors. Addiction also affects neurotransmission and interactions between cortical and hippocampal circuits and brain reward structures, such that the memory of previous exposures to rewards (such as food, sex, alcohol and other drugs) leads to a biological and behavioral response to external cues, in turn triggering craving and/or engagement in addictive behaviors.
And finally DSM V- Addiction (termed substance dependence by the American Psychiatric Association) is defined as a maladaptive pattern of substance use leading to clinically significant impairment or distress
As you can clearly see, there is NOT one specific definition and why this can be so confusing for many. And this was only 3 sources and DSM wasn't even on the first page of google when I searched for the definition. I had to add DSM to the search. So while many of you may have clear definitions in your head (which I get, some of your have degrees in psychology and work in the field), it doesn't mean everyone else does.
side note - not arguing for sugar addiction. Again, food addiction would be more likely but even then, I personally think its more of an eating disorder.
I'll also give my stock problem with trying to use a dictionary as proof - you can probably add 2+2 together, which according to the dictionary makes you a computer. I'd be asinine to try to cram a USB stick in you and get upset that you won't boot up WIndows 10 just because you're a computer. It requires context, and often when teasing out context, the threads get shut down, or we do get OP's that insist that they meet the DSM concept of substance dependence, and then the thread gets shut down.
As far as food addiction, again no. The concept being put around for possible future DSM's is eating addiction. There is nothing in the substance of food that is addictive, it is behavioral - closer to gambling addiction than cocaine.
The main point was, that we argue for semantics and definitions but we can't find one set of definitions... we can easily apply this same concept, as already demonstrated, to binging.
And trust me, words have meaning, unfortunately those meanings vary a lot by organization.0 -
As far as food addiction, again no. The concept being put around for possible future DSM's is eating addiction. There is nothing in the substance of food that is addictive, it is behavioral - closer to gambling addiction than cocaine.
+1.
Eating addiction, not food addiction. It's the behavior, not the substance. The substance that is known as food is not addictive. The behavior and the use of food as a coping mechanism can become problematic to one's life and functioning.
Is that semantics?? I say not.
Look at my lastest reply. Wasn't arguing that point but rather definitions.0 -
Semantics are almost always debatable. I work in a field where we argue about what the definition of "is" is.0
-
It needs to be pointed out that 2+2 = 5 for sufficiently large values of 2.0
-
missblondi2u wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »singingflutelady wrote: »Another word that gets misused is binge. I see non ed people using it interchangeably with overeat. They say they binged but they mean they overate. As someone who is a recovering anorexic binge/purge subtype binge means something else. It typically is in the order of thousands of calories. I have known bulimics who would eat approximately 5000 calories in one sitting, get rid of it, eat 5000 more, get rid of it over and over. In my head a binge is also a total lack of control and stuffing food down quickly and without really tasting it. It doesn't mean that you overate during your Christmas dinner or cheat meal or whatever.
As someone with a history of binges, I cringe when I see "binge" used that way. I understand the events being described are usually upsetting to the posters who are writing, so I try to be mindful of their experience and not project my past on to them, but really -- seeing it used to describe eating an box of crackers or some pizza . . . no.
Ok, so I'm confused. I haven't read further to see if it's already been addressed, but the actual definition of binge is "a short period devoted to indulging in an activity to excess, especially drinking alcohol or eating." To me, this includes the occasional overindulgence.
I can see how people with an eating disorder may put another connotation to the term, but why is it not ok to use the dictionary definition of a word, and how the heck is someone supposed to know that connotation if they don't have that experience? To me, this is putting a particular person's feelings (in this case, feelings related to eating disorders) over facts (like what an actual word is defined).
I can understand your point of view.
To me, "binge" has a specific meaning, as a manifestation of BED. Do my feelings have priority over how the word is commonly used? Nope. But that doesn't mean I don't have feelings on the matter.0 -
janejellyroll wrote: »missblondi2u wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »singingflutelady wrote: »Another word that gets misused is binge. I see non ed people using it interchangeably with overeat. They say they binged but they mean they overate. As someone who is a recovering anorexic binge/purge subtype binge means something else. It typically is in the order of thousands of calories. I have known bulimics who would eat approximately 5000 calories in one sitting, get rid of it, eat 5000 more, get rid of it over and over. In my head a binge is also a total lack of control and stuffing food down quickly and without really tasting it. It doesn't mean that you overate during your Christmas dinner or cheat meal or whatever.
As someone with a history of binges, I cringe when I see "binge" used that way. I understand the events being described are usually upsetting to the posters who are writing, so I try to be mindful of their experience and not project my past on to them, but really -- seeing it used to describe eating an box of crackers or some pizza . . . no.
Ok, so I'm confused. I haven't read further to see if it's already been addressed, but the actual definition of binge is "a short period devoted to indulging in an activity to excess, especially drinking alcohol or eating." To me, this includes the occasional overindulgence.
I can see how people with an eating disorder may put another connotation to the term, but why is it not ok to use the dictionary definition of a word, and how the heck is someone supposed to know that connotation if they don't have that experience? To me, this is putting a particular person's feelings (in this case, feelings related to eating disorders) over facts (like what an actual word is defined).
I can understand your point of view.
To me, "binge" has a specific meaning, as a manifestation of BED. Do my feelings have priority over how the word is commonly used? Nope. But that doesn't mean I don't have feelings on the matter.
Fair enough. I just wanted to clarify that people using the term probably aren't trying to be insensitive. They just have a different, and no less valid, meaning of the word.0 -
janejellyroll wrote: »missblondi2u wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »singingflutelady wrote: »Another word that gets misused is binge. I see non ed people using it interchangeably with overeat. They say they binged but they mean they overate. As someone who is a recovering anorexic binge/purge subtype binge means something else. It typically is in the order of thousands of calories. I have known bulimics who would eat approximately 5000 calories in one sitting, get rid of it, eat 5000 more, get rid of it over and over. In my head a binge is also a total lack of control and stuffing food down quickly and without really tasting it. It doesn't mean that you overate during your Christmas dinner or cheat meal or whatever.
As someone with a history of binges, I cringe when I see "binge" used that way. I understand the events being described are usually upsetting to the posters who are writing, so I try to be mindful of their experience and not project my past on to them, but really -- seeing it used to describe eating an box of crackers or some pizza . . . no.
Ok, so I'm confused. I haven't read further to see if it's already been addressed, but the actual definition of binge is "a short period devoted to indulging in an activity to excess, especially drinking alcohol or eating." To me, this includes the occasional overindulgence.
I can see how people with an eating disorder may put another connotation to the term, but why is it not ok to use the dictionary definition of a word, and how the heck is someone supposed to know that connotation if they don't have that experience? To me, this is putting a particular person's feelings (in this case, feelings related to eating disorders) over facts (like what an actual word is defined).
I can understand your point of view.
To me, "binge" has a specific meaning, as a manifestation of BED. Do my feelings have priority over how the word is commonly used? Nope. But that doesn't mean I don't have feelings on the matter.
True, which is exactly why I don't open those threads. I've learned exactly what my reaction will be, and it won't be helpful to anyone.0 -
The American Society for Addictive Medicine's second definition is somewhat self contradicting. It gives food as an example, but says addiction requires reorienting the motivational hierarchies - well outside of air, you can't really move air up any higher on the hierarchy of motivation.I wanted to take a minute to touch on a particular semantic that was addressed by @missblondi2u . The meaning of words and what the actually means. Sorry if this seems like beating a dead horse, but I think it's highly important given the discussions at hand. To keep it as short as possible, I will concentrate on the word addiction.
Merriam-Webster defines addiction as:- the quality or state of being addicted <addiction to reading>
- compulsive need for and use of a habit-forming substance (as heroin, nicotine, or alcohol) characterized by tolerance and by well-defined physiological symptoms upon withdrawal; broadly : persistent compulsive use of a substance known by the user to be harmful
The American Society for Addictive Medicine defines addiction as:- Addiction is characterized by inability to consistently abstain, impairment in behavioral control, craving, diminished recognition of significant problems with one’s behaviors and interpersonal relationships, and a dysfunctional emotional response. Like other chronic diseases, addiction often involves cycles of relapse and remission. Without treatment or engagement in recovery activities, addiction is progressive and can result in disability or premature death.
- Addiction is a primary, chronic disease of brain reward, motivation, memory and related circuitry. Addiction affects neurotransmission and interactions within reward structures of the brain, including the nucleus accumbens, anterior cingulate cortex, basal forebrain and amygdala, such that motivational hierarchies are altered and addictive behaviors, which may or may not include alcohol and other drug use, supplant healthy, self-care related behaviors. Addiction also affects neurotransmission and interactions between cortical and hippocampal circuits and brain reward structures, such that the memory of previous exposures to rewards (such as food, sex, alcohol and other drugs) leads to a biological and behavioral response to external cues, in turn triggering craving and/or engagement in addictive behaviors.
And finally DSM V- Addiction (termed substance dependence by the American Psychiatric Association) is defined as a maladaptive pattern of substance use leading to clinically significant impairment or distress
As you can clearly see, there is NOT one specific definition and why this can be so confusing for many. And this was only 3 sources and DSM wasn't even on the first page of google when I searched for the definition. I had to add DSM to the search. So while many of you may have clear definitions in your head (which I get, some of your have degrees in psychology and work in the field), it doesn't mean everyone else does.
side note - not arguing for sugar addiction. Again, food addiction would be more likely but even then, I personally think its more of an eating disorder.
I'll also give my stock problem with trying to use a dictionary as proof - you can probably add 2+2 together, which according to the dictionary makes you a computer. I'd be asinine to try to cram a USB stick in you and get upset that you won't boot up WIndows 10 just because you're a computer. It requires context, and often when teasing out context, the threads get shut down, or we do get OP's that insist that they meet the DSM concept of substance dependence, and then the thread gets shut down.
As far as food addiction, again no. The concept being put around for possible future DSM's is eating addiction. There is nothing in the substance of food that is addictive, it is behavioral - closer to gambling addiction than cocaine.
I really like this explanation. Thanks Senecarr.0 -
The American Society for Addictive Medicine's second definition is somewhat self contradicting. It gives food as an example, but says addiction requires reorienting the motivational hierarchies - well outside of air, you can't really move air up any higher on the hierarchy of motivation.I wanted to take a minute to touch on a particular semantic that was addressed by @missblondi2u . The meaning of words and what the actually means. Sorry if this seems like beating a dead horse, but I think it's highly important given the discussions at hand. To keep it as short as possible, I will concentrate on the word addiction.
Merriam-Webster defines addiction as:- the quality or state of being addicted <addiction to reading>
- compulsive need for and use of a habit-forming substance (as heroin, nicotine, or alcohol) characterized by tolerance and by well-defined physiological symptoms upon withdrawal; broadly : persistent compulsive use of a substance known by the user to be harmful
The American Society for Addictive Medicine defines addiction as:- Addiction is characterized by inability to consistently abstain, impairment in behavioral control, craving, diminished recognition of significant problems with one’s behaviors and interpersonal relationships, and a dysfunctional emotional response. Like other chronic diseases, addiction often involves cycles of relapse and remission. Without treatment or engagement in recovery activities, addiction is progressive and can result in disability or premature death.
- Addiction is a primary, chronic disease of brain reward, motivation, memory and related circuitry. Addiction affects neurotransmission and interactions within reward structures of the brain, including the nucleus accumbens, anterior cingulate cortex, basal forebrain and amygdala, such that motivational hierarchies are altered and addictive behaviors, which may or may not include alcohol and other drug use, supplant healthy, self-care related behaviors. Addiction also affects neurotransmission and interactions between cortical and hippocampal circuits and brain reward structures, such that the memory of previous exposures to rewards (such as food, sex, alcohol and other drugs) leads to a biological and behavioral response to external cues, in turn triggering craving and/or engagement in addictive behaviors.
And finally DSM V- Addiction (termed substance dependence by the American Psychiatric Association) is defined as a maladaptive pattern of substance use leading to clinically significant impairment or distress
As you can clearly see, there is NOT one specific definition and why this can be so confusing for many. And this was only 3 sources and DSM wasn't even on the first page of google when I searched for the definition. I had to add DSM to the search. So while many of you may have clear definitions in your head (which I get, some of your have degrees in psychology and work in the field), it doesn't mean everyone else does.
side note - not arguing for sugar addiction. Again, food addiction would be more likely but even then, I personally think its more of an eating disorder.
I'll also give my stock problem with trying to use a dictionary as proof - you can probably add 2+2 together, which according to the dictionary makes you a computer. I'd be asinine to try to cram a USB stick in you and get upset that you won't boot up WIndows 10 just because you're a computer. It requires context, and often when teasing out context, the threads get shut down, or we do get OP's that insist that they meet the DSM concept of substance dependence, and then the thread gets shut down.
As far as food addiction, again no. The concept being put around for possible future DSM's is eating addiction. There is nothing in the substance of food that is addictive, it is behavioral - closer to gambling addiction than cocaine.
The main point was, that we argue for semantics and definitions but we can't find one set of definitions... we can easily apply this same concept, as already demonstrated, to binging.
And trust me, words have meaning, unfortunately those meanings vary a lot by organization.
While they were all worded differently, they did all say very similar things.
They all have a point saying it's a medical condition, which is characterized by substance abuse or disordered behaviour and psychological and physiological problems relating to it. One of them outright says therapy is needed, the third also says it's clinically significant (= treatment should be expected).
Merriam Webster also includes the hyperbole definition "addicted to x" where their example for x is reading. But that's not what people start threads about here. You don't see people asking how to kick their reading habit on book forums either.0 -
stevencloser wrote: »
The American Society for Addictive Medicine's second definition is somewhat self contradicting. It gives food as an example, but says addiction requires reorienting the motivational hierarchies - well outside of air, you can't really move air up any higher on the hierarchy of motivation.I wanted to take a minute to touch on a particular semantic that was addressed by @missblondi2u . The meaning of words and what the actually means. Sorry if this seems like beating a dead horse, but I think it's highly important given the discussions at hand. To keep it as short as possible, I will concentrate on the word addiction.
Merriam-Webster defines addiction as:- the quality or state of being addicted <addiction to reading>
- compulsive need for and use of a habit-forming substance (as heroin, nicotine, or alcohol) characterized by tolerance and by well-defined physiological symptoms upon withdrawal; broadly : persistent compulsive use of a substance known by the user to be harmful
The American Society for Addictive Medicine defines addiction as:- Addiction is characterized by inability to consistently abstain, impairment in behavioral control, craving, diminished recognition of significant problems with one’s behaviors and interpersonal relationships, and a dysfunctional emotional response. Like other chronic diseases, addiction often involves cycles of relapse and remission. Without treatment or engagement in recovery activities, addiction is progressive and can result in disability or premature death.
- Addiction is a primary, chronic disease of brain reward, motivation, memory and related circuitry. Addiction affects neurotransmission and interactions within reward structures of the brain, including the nucleus accumbens, anterior cingulate cortex, basal forebrain and amygdala, such that motivational hierarchies are altered and addictive behaviors, which may or may not include alcohol and other drug use, supplant healthy, self-care related behaviors. Addiction also affects neurotransmission and interactions between cortical and hippocampal circuits and brain reward structures, such that the memory of previous exposures to rewards (such as food, sex, alcohol and other drugs) leads to a biological and behavioral response to external cues, in turn triggering craving and/or engagement in addictive behaviors.
And finally DSM V- Addiction (termed substance dependence by the American Psychiatric Association) is defined as a maladaptive pattern of substance use leading to clinically significant impairment or distress
As you can clearly see, there is NOT one specific definition and why this can be so confusing for many. And this was only 3 sources and DSM wasn't even on the first page of google when I searched for the definition. I had to add DSM to the search. So while many of you may have clear definitions in your head (which I get, some of your have degrees in psychology and work in the field), it doesn't mean everyone else does.
side note - not arguing for sugar addiction. Again, food addiction would be more likely but even then, I personally think its more of an eating disorder.
I'll also give my stock problem with trying to use a dictionary as proof - you can probably add 2+2 together, which according to the dictionary makes you a computer. I'd be asinine to try to cram a USB stick in you and get upset that you won't boot up WIndows 10 just because you're a computer. It requires context, and often when teasing out context, the threads get shut down, or we do get OP's that insist that they meet the DSM concept of substance dependence, and then the thread gets shut down.
As far as food addiction, again no. The concept being put around for possible future DSM's is eating addiction. There is nothing in the substance of food that is addictive, it is behavioral - closer to gambling addiction than cocaine.
The main point was, that we argue for semantics and definitions but we can't find one set of definitions... we can easily apply this same concept, as already demonstrated, to binging.
And trust me, words have meaning, unfortunately those meanings vary a lot by organization.
While they were all worded differently, they did all say very similar things.
They all have a point saying it's a medical condition, which is characterized by substance abuse or disordered behaviour and psychological and physiological problems relating to it. One of them outright says therapy is needed, the third also says it's clinically significant (= treatment should be expected).
Merriam Webster also includes the hyperbole definition "addicted to x" where their example for x is reading. But that's not what people start threads about here. You don't see people asking how to kick their reading habit on book forums either.
My argument was simple. Words don't purely have one single mean like others would prefer. I only used addiction as an examplar to that. It could have easily been binge or any other words. So arguing that words have means, while true, is not really a good arguing so their mean can changed based on the source of that definition. And who is the source that one should believe or utilize. The fact is, while you or I might have a specific definition in our head, it doesn't mean everyone else on this forum has the same corresponding definition. And like said earlier, this doesn't even address the language barrier.. perfect example of that is the word "bonk". The mean is vastly different in the US, than it is in the UK. Just ask rabbit.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 389 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 918 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions