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.

Why do people overeat and/or become obese? Is it harder than average for some to lose weight?

Options
1121315171830

Replies

  • blukitten
    blukitten Posts: 922 Member
    Options
    Awesome! thank you, these two answers make sense! Thanks!

    @lexbubbles and @gothchiq
  • BillMcKay1
    BillMcKay1 Posts: 315 Member
    edited June 2016
    Options
    lemurcat12 wrote: »
    I don't see anyone here saying that anyone should eat foods they prefer not to eat or ignore things like satiety. That seems like a strawman. If someone said "I do better eating low carb, because I'm less hungry," I'd say great. But I have been in numerous threads where OP asks a question and posters drop in and say "you should keep carbs under 50 g (or 100 or whatever)" or "cut out processed foods" (always from people who actually eat processed foods, of course) or "no white foods" or "cut out processed sugar."

    (Maybe I'm reading it wrong, but I'm reading the "thank you" as a statement that Bill is standing up against something going on here that I don't see at all and would never do, personally. I tell people they don't NEED to do certain things to lose, but only when they seem to think it's necessary ("I know I should not eat this but sometimes I slip"). If someone says "I'm trying this modification to my diet," their business.)

    But again, this all stems from Bill's apparent misreading of my post, as I was responding to his suggestion that it's somehow bad to say "calories are what matter for weight loss" without presuming to advice someone on how to eat. I think assuming -- without a specific question -- that someone else is clueless about nutrition and needs my advice is rude and condescending.

    I feel the misunderstanding is your overemphasis on the twinkie analogy. I honestly doubt anyone is going to go on a 1500kcal twinkie diet, but it is an example used frequently on these boards as the example you can lose weight eating anything as long as you are in a deficit. I never said it was bad, I said it is incomplete information.

  • DebSozo
    DebSozo Posts: 2,578 Member
    Options
    No. The thank you is based on Bill's post independently of the other posts. I just feel like he "gets it" -- and that is a relief
  • lisahebert186
    lisahebert186 Posts: 736 Member
    Options
    My issue is I'm an emotional eater. I have been since I was younger. Its a coping mechanism for me. I have "daddy issues" and I'm trying to this day to deal with them. I'm learning to not to rely on food to comfort me. It's very hard to do at least for me.
  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    Options
    DebSozo wrote: »
    No. The thank you is based on Bill's post independently of the other posts. I just feel like he "gets it" -- and that is a relief

    I guess I'm not sure what he's "getting" that the rest of us do not, in that a lot of people have talked about the importance of satiety and every single thread in which someone asks "can you eat whatever" almost everyone responding says food choice matters for nutrition and satiety. tlflag and I have chatted a lot about how low carb works for her because of satiety and many of us who don't do low carb suggest trying it or playing with macros and food choice if you struggle with hunger issues.

    When I lowered calories I naturally focused much more on protein and filled up with vegetables and cut back on foods I find not sating (sadly for me that includes fat, but also refined carbs, of course). Before MFP, I kind of assumed that's what most do, without needing to be told, as it just seemed like common sense.

    I also get (and think most do) not eating foods that cause added hunger (although that doesn't happen to me) or cravings. I kind of think those things were discussed at length on a number of recent threads with quite a bit of understanding and agreement. I honestly don't see anyone denying the importance of satiety or saying that eating a healthful diet doesn't matter for lots of different reasons.

    Ah, well, I suppose this is kind of off-topic. Sorry.
  • pudadough
    pudadough Posts: 1,271 Member
    Options
    MissusMoon wrote: »
    Honestly, after taking a suggestion on a thread this morning, I've spent more time than I should have watching episodes of "Secret Eaters" on YouTube. I have to tell you, I think most people are in total denial. I thought so before, but this reaffirmation and evidence that people sincerely believe they eat well but are gaining weight is pretty straightforward. I see some of a past version of myself in these people, I see people I know. They have no idea how much they are eating and drinking and honesty don't understand what is happening.

    I'm watching Secret Eaters right now because of your mention of it. I have a feeling I will be watching it for a while...
  • DebSozo
    DebSozo Posts: 2,578 Member
    edited June 2016
    Options
    Bill mentioned that some people find satiety by not eating certain foods. I was trying to explain this with my description of how sugar consumption and refined flour cause cravings for me soon after eating so I try to avoid them. People overreacted and said various things that I did not mean at all. I explained that I couldn't come up with a term that is stronger than craving but not as "loaded" as an addiction to sugar and white flour.

    Bill summed up what I was trying to say about macros as well. I can eat certain carbs and not others and not get the uncomfortable crash afterward. (Some people were saying that there is no difference between simple carbs and complex carbs whereas low glycemic choices do not increase sugar cravings for me.) I can eat a potato along with a protein and feel satiety afterward but want more Ritz crackers if I eat them for instance. So I don't keep Ritz crackers in the house.

    I don't think Bill was referring specifically to me at all, and I wasn't thanking him exclusively by my response. Its just that he said what I was trying to explain better than I did. This thread is asking what we personally think causes overeating. For me it is sugar and simple carbs.
  • DebSozo
    DebSozo Posts: 2,578 Member
    edited June 2016
    Options
    pudadough wrote: »
    MissusMoon wrote: »
    Honestly, after taking a suggestion on a thread this morning, I've spent more time than I should have watching episodes of "Secret Eaters" on YouTube. I have to tell you, I think most people are in total denial. I thought so before, but this reaffirmation and evidence that people sincerely believe they eat well but are gaining weight is pretty straightforward. I see some of a past version of myself in these people, I see people I know. They have no idea how much they are eating and drinking and honesty don't understand what is happening.

    I'm watching Secret Eaters right now because of your mention of it. I have a feeling I will be watching it for a while...

    I've never seen that show. I'll go look at YouTube.
  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    Options
    Secret Eaters is crazy. Some people are in unbelievable denial.
    DebSozo wrote: »
    Bill mentioned that some people find satiety by not eating certain foods. I was trying to explain this with my description of how sugar consumption and refined flour cause cravings for me soon after eating so I try to avoid them. People overreacted and said various things that I did not mean at all. I explained that I couldn't come up with a term that is stronger than craving but not as "loaded" as an addiction to sugar and white flour.

    You didn't respond to my comment on this, but I think it's not uncommon that refined carbs cause cravings (especially in conjunction with fat). I really don't recall people overreacting, except obviously you have a different understanding of what "addiction" means than many of us (which is why I think it's generally not a helpful term).
    Bill summed up what I was trying to say about macros as well. I can eat certain carbs and not others and not get the uncomfortable crash afterward. (Some people were saying that there is no difference between simple carbs and complex carbs whereas low glycemic choices do not increase sugar cravings for me.) I can eat a potato along with a protein and feel satiety afterward but want more Ritz crackers if I eat them for instance. So I don't keep Ritz crackers in the house.

    Hmm. Again I wonder if you are referring to me. I suggested that it wasn't actually "carbs" because I do not think all carbs are the same. It was you who claimed "carb addiction," which would suggest it was the whole macro that was the issue, and me who pointed out that people weirdly ignore that vegetables are primarily carbs and call foods (like cake or chips) that are half carb/half fat "carbs."

    I'd never overeat Ritz crackers personally, as they bore me, but it's worth noting that they are 40 calories from carbs, 45 from fat in one serving. So more fat than carbs. (I can eat, and love, potatoes with a bit of olive oil, no problem. I will struggle not to overeat if given a large quantity of fries. Part of this is portion size, part is the delicious fat, carb, salt combo. Mostly I think it's portion size.)
    I don't think Bill was referring specifically to me at all, and I wasn't thanking him exclusively by my response. Its just that he said what I was trying to explain better than I did. This thread is asking what we personally think causes overeating. For me it is sugar and simple carbs.

    Okay. For me it is a prevalence of tasty food around me with no obvious limits.
  • DebSozo
    DebSozo Posts: 2,578 Member
    Options
    gothchiq wrote: »
    Complex carbs are digested more slowly, thus keeping your blood sugar more stable and keeping you satisfied longer. Say, a sweet potato. Refined carbs such as white flour and sugar are quickly digested and have a high glycemic index. You eat that without a protein and soon, you're hungry again, craving more. And the palatability increases the effect. This is a thing that a lot of people out there in general don't actually know. When doctors are counseling patients on weight control and blood sugar control, it should be explained. I think the general population currently knows more about which fats are healthier than they know about their carb choices.

    This is what I find to be true.
  • DebSozo
    DebSozo Posts: 2,578 Member
    Options
    lemurcat12 wrote: »
    Secret Eaters is crazy. Some people are in unbelievable denial.
    DebSozo wrote: »
    Bill mentioned that some people find satiety by not eating certain foods. I was trying to explain this with my description of how sugar consumption and refined flour cause cravings for me soon after eating so I try to avoid them. People overreacted and said various things that I did not mean at all. I explained that I couldn't come up with a term that is stronger than craving but not as "loaded" as an addiction to sugar and white flour.

    You didn't respond to my comment on this, but I think it's not uncommon that refined carbs cause cravings (especially in conjunction with fat). I really don't recall people overreacting, except obviously you have a different understanding of what "addiction" means than many of us (which is why I think it's generally not a helpful term)...

    I did explain why I used that term. If anyone can come up with a more appropriate word to describe the craving for more sugar when I eat sugar please help me out. If I don't eat sugar for instance I don't start the crave, crash, crave cycle.

  • SezxyStef
    SezxyStef Posts: 15,268 Member
    Options
    gothchiq wrote: »
    Complex carbs are digested more slowly, thus keeping your blood sugar more stable and keeping you satisfied longer. Say, a sweet potato. Refined carbs such as white flour and sugar are quickly digested and have a high glycemic index. You eat that without a protein and soon, you're hungry again, craving more. And the palatability increases the effect. This is a thing that a lot of people out there in general don't actually know. When doctors are counseling patients on weight control and blood sugar control, it should be explained. I think the general population currently knows more about which fats are healthier than they know about their carb choices.

    See I don't find this to be true for me personally.

    If I eat an apple or oatmeal (serving) as an example I am hungry within about 10min for an apple and the oatmeal in no way gets me to lunch without be so hungry that I have to eat more food.

  • SezxyStef
    SezxyStef Posts: 15,268 Member
    Options
    DebSozo wrote: »
    lemurcat12 wrote: »
    Secret Eaters is crazy. Some people are in unbelievable denial.
    DebSozo wrote: »
    Bill mentioned that some people find satiety by not eating certain foods. I was trying to explain this with my description of how sugar consumption and refined flour cause cravings for me soon after eating so I try to avoid them. People overreacted and said various things that I did not mean at all. I explained that I couldn't come up with a term that is stronger than craving but not as "loaded" as an addiction to sugar and white flour.

    You didn't respond to my comment on this, but I think it's not uncommon that refined carbs cause cravings (especially in conjunction with fat). I really don't recall people overreacting, except obviously you have a different understanding of what "addiction" means than many of us (which is why I think it's generally not a helpful term)...

    I did explain why I used that term. If anyone can come up with a more appropriate word to describe the craving for more sugar when I eat sugar please help me out. If I don't eat sugar for instance I don't start the crave, crash, crave cycle.

    why does it have to be stronger than Crave...so what if it was said we all get cravings...we do.

    I crave salt some days like no one's business...I crave beef and I have to eat it (I assume my iron is getting low)...or that's all I think about.

    Cravings are real and valid...so what is wrong with that term?
  • DebSozo
    DebSozo Posts: 2,578 Member
    Options
    SezxyStef wrote: »
    DebSozo wrote: »
    lemurcat12 wrote: »
    Secret Eaters is crazy. Some people are in unbelievable denial.
    DebSozo wrote: »
    Bill mentioned that some people find satiety by not eating certain foods. I was trying to explain this with my description of how sugar consumption and refined flour cause cravings for me soon after eating so I try to avoid them. People overreacted and said various things that I did not mean at all. I explained that I couldn't come up with a term that is stronger than craving but not as "loaded" as an addiction to sugar and white flour.

    You didn't respond to my comment on this, but I think it's not uncommon that refined carbs cause cravings (especially in conjunction with fat). I really don't recall people overreacting, except obviously you have a different understanding of what "addiction" means than many of us (which is why I think it's generally not a helpful term)...

    I did explain why I used that term. If anyone can come up with a more appropriate word to describe the craving for more sugar when I eat sugar please help me out. If I don't eat sugar for instance I don't start the crave, crash, crave cycle.

    why does it have to be stronger than Crave...so what if it was said we all get cravings...we do.

    I crave salt some days like no one's business...I crave beef and I have to eat it (I assume my iron is getting low)...or that's all I think about.

    Cravings are real and valid...so what is wrong with that term?

    Nothing. There's nothing wrong with the word addiction either. Addiction is a real and valid word also. They are just words. I think that you mentioned that in your opinion you don't believe people can become addicted to certain foods. I disagree because I am addicted to sugar, IMO. I don't understand all the touchiness regarding this subject. If someone told me that they are addicted to cigarettes, then I wouldn't say I don't believe people really can get addicted to them and tell them to call it "craving cigarettes" instead. I think you have an idea that an addiction has to be uncontrollable and at the point of destroying lives which isn't so.
  • stevencloser
    stevencloser Posts: 8,911 Member
    Options
    gothchiq wrote: »
    Complex carbs are digested more slowly, thus keeping your blood sugar more stable and keeping you satisfied longer. Say, a sweet potato. Refined carbs such as white flour and sugar are quickly digested and have a high glycemic index. You eat that without a protein and soon, you're hungry again, craving more. And the palatability increases the effect. This is a thing that a lot of people out there in general don't actually know. When doctors are counseling patients on weight control and blood sugar control, it should be explained. I think the general population currently knows more about which fats are healthier than they know about their carb choices.

    Flour is still a complex carb, all starches are.
  • SezxyStef
    SezxyStef Posts: 15,268 Member
    Options
    DebSozo wrote: »
    SezxyStef wrote: »
    DebSozo wrote: »
    lemurcat12 wrote: »
    Secret Eaters is crazy. Some people are in unbelievable denial.
    DebSozo wrote: »
    Bill mentioned that some people find satiety by not eating certain foods. I was trying to explain this with my description of how sugar consumption and refined flour cause cravings for me soon after eating so I try to avoid them. People overreacted and said various things that I did not mean at all. I explained that I couldn't come up with a term that is stronger than craving but not as "loaded" as an addiction to sugar and white flour.

    You didn't respond to my comment on this, but I think it's not uncommon that refined carbs cause cravings (especially in conjunction with fat). I really don't recall people overreacting, except obviously you have a different understanding of what "addiction" means than many of us (which is why I think it's generally not a helpful term)...

    I did explain why I used that term. If anyone can come up with a more appropriate word to describe the craving for more sugar when I eat sugar please help me out. If I don't eat sugar for instance I don't start the crave, crash, crave cycle.

    why does it have to be stronger than Crave...so what if it was said we all get cravings...we do.

    I crave salt some days like no one's business...I crave beef and I have to eat it (I assume my iron is getting low)...or that's all I think about.

    Cravings are real and valid...so what is wrong with that term?

    Nothing. There's nothing wrong with the word addiction either. Addiction is a real and valid word also. They are just words. I think that you mentioned that in your opinion you don't believe people can become addicted to certain foods. I disagree because I am addicted to sugar, IMO. I don't understand all the touchiness regarding this subject. If someone told me that they are addicted to cigarettes, then I wouldn't say I don't believe people really can get addicted to them and tell them to call it "craving cigarettes" instead. I think you have an idea that an addiction has to be uncontrollable and at the point of destroying lives which isn't so.

    Totally up to you...if you want to run around these boards saying you are an addict go ahead...

    I said I don't believe that people can be addicted to food...esp those who say carb or sugar...why because those people give up certain types of carbs but eat others or give up one type of sugar but eat other types...as I suspect you still have milk and fruit in your diet.

    and as an ex smoker yes it was a craving for that smoke...a physical dependency on something is different than being an addict. And since the advent of E cigs they have done studies on the addictive properties of nicotine and found that it was difficult to get mice addicted to just nicotine...it's more of a mental/emotional thing that smokers get into...habits when they smoke etc....because if it was the actual cigarette they were addicted to...there would be no cravings after the chemicals were out of the body but there are.

    dependency, habit forming, cravings but not addiction.

  • stevencloser
    stevencloser Posts: 8,911 Member
    Options
    gothchiq wrote: »
    BillMcKay1 wrote: »
    lemurcat12 wrote: »

    I just think it's rude and wrong to assume that anyone WOULD do something akin to eating only Twinkies or needs to be informed how to eat healthfully or to assume he or she would not have the common sense to experiment with diet to eat in a more sating way if struggling with hunger. If someone asks for advice on nutrition or how to avoid hunger, I give it, but mostly I think figuring out how to spend your 1500 calories is something YOU are the expert on. I would find it really condescending and offensive if someone else went out of their way to tell me not to eat only Twinkies (or, as often happens here, that I must cut out "white foods" or some nonsense). I know what a healthful diet is, and I expect other adults do too, unless they tell me otherwise. It's not nearly as complicated as we sometimes try to make it.

    For most people I think learning the nutrition side or the satiety side is the easy part (I know there are exceptions). For me, at least, the issue is never hunger or not knowing how to eat properly. It's that I like eating, on the one hand, and use food inappropriately, on the other.

    See, I don't see that, What I often see on the boards here someone state for them, they find they can achieve their satiety and maintain their caloric goals by not eating "white foods" or cutting out sweets or going low carb or whatever it is they find works for them, and without fail someone shows up to tell them they are wrong and it's all and only CICO blah blah blah. That is the CICO talk I see on here daily I think is very unhelpful.


    Yes it's CICO, but they find it easier to achieve CICO balance by not eating those foods, more power to them.

    The scenario you lined out literally does not happen ever.

    It has happened over and over and over. The people who were doing this most bombastically seem to have created another board on which to do it, thank heavens.

    Again, difference between telling someone who thinks they have to cut out X that they don't have to or telling someone who says everyone needs to do that or else they'll be unhealthy or are not serious about their goals or stay fat or whatever else they got into their little brains after watching "documentaries" online that they're wrong and what Bill and you claim.
  • DebSozo
    DebSozo Posts: 2,578 Member
    Options
    gothchiq wrote: »
    Complex carbs are digested more slowly, thus keeping your blood sugar more stable and keeping you satisfied longer. Say, a sweet potato. Refined carbs such as white flour and sugar are quickly digested and have a high glycemic index. You eat that without a protein and soon, you're hungry again, craving more. And the palatability increases the effect. This is a thing that a lot of people out there in general don't actually know. When doctors are counseling patients on weight control and blood sugar control, it should be explained. I think the general population currently knows more about which fats are healthier than they know about their carb choices.

    Flour is still a complex carb, all starches are.

    Sorry. I meant white flour. Low glycemic flour doesn't have as strong of an effect.