Incapable of moderating sweets

Francl27 wrote: »

tlflag1620 wrote: »

SLLRunner wrote: »

tlflag1620 wrote: »

Those who do best with moderation tend to be the "forbidden fruit" type of people - tell them not to eat something, they want it all the more and pine away for it, increasing the chances that if they do indulge, they end up over consuming it.

Um.....no

From what I've read here, learned from others in real life who choose moderation, and from what I've experienced, those who choose moderation tend to not demonize food (via "forbidden fruit" as you call it. ) and choose to eat all things in moderation. There is no food type deprivation, hence overindulgence of calories is kept to a minimum.

I think maybe you misunderstood me. I meant for some people, abstaining from certain foods would result in the "forbidden fruit" phenomenon (not everyone experiences this, btw). IOW, if they were to cut out certain foods, they would fixate on those foods and want them all the more. For those people, moderation makes sense; nothing is "forbidden" so they don't fixate on anything. For other, like myself, moderation means needing to limit portions, often to sizes that are a "tease". IOW moderation leads to feelings of deprivation. It's easier for me to skip the ice cream altogether than it is to try and be satisfied with a crummy little half cup.

For example - my youngest child's birthday was a few days ago. I made her a chocolate cake. Now I ordinarily don't eat cake (I abstain). I did decide to have a small slice on her birthday. Then I had to white knuckle it for a couple days while dealing with cravings and feeling like I wanted more, more, more. Finally that passed. I'm not in a big hurry to eat cake again. When I am abstaining, I'm not thinking about cake, even the quarter of a cake that's still in the fridge. It's only when I try to incorporate a "moderate" amount that I suffer. For me "everything in moderation" means endless suffering. Making certain foods off limits means I don't eat it, so then I don't think about it. I understand that if you are a forbidden fruit type person, you may find this very difficult to understand, just as I never understood the forbidden fruit thing very well (who are you rebelling against in that scenario, exactly?). If someone tells me not to do something, especially if *I* tell myself not to do something, it doesn't suddenly become irresistible. But I guess for some people, it does. Those people should moderate. Hope that clears it up!

Eh. I just said I couldn't have something too, and didn't for 4 months... then my sister brought me my favorite chocolates and I ate the whole box.

I can't really see how it's a long term solution for everyone. I can't imagine NEVER eating that stuff again because, well, I love food, food makes me happy, and I love sweets, and life's too short not to enjoy chocolate. And I'm definitely not one of those people who will stop thinking about cake just because I don't have any.. quite the opposite actually. I keep thinking about something, then the day I have it, the craving is gone, and I might not crave anything else sweet for a couple weeks.

So all I'm saying that this logic is not going to work for everyone. I guess people have to figure out what works for them. But I do get the 'serving size so little that it's not satisfying' thing. I laugh at people who are happy with one bite of dessert or a mini danish (seriously, WTF?). I can say though that now I'm satisfied with less too... but I'm more likely to eat less a week to fit a 600 calorie dessert than just try to fit in a 100 calorie portion, because yes, that's just sad.

Abstaining doesn't mean never ever having something again for the rest of your life. I can, and do, make exceptions for truly special occassions (see my child's birthday for instance). I just know I'm gonna pay for it with increased appetite and cravings for a few days. Oh, and I do eat chocolate, I just make it very good, very dark chocolate. Milk chocolate is off limits tho.

From what you describe, you are the classic "forbidden fruit" person - if you swear off something, you crave it until you finally cave, and then overindulge. For me, swearing off something means I don't think about it. On the rare occasion that I do decide to indulge I know that I'm going to have to be very careful that day, and for a few days after, because I will want more and be thinking about it and having cravings. I only indulge when I'm prepared to white knuckle it through the next few days to get past the desire for more.

If you read my comment I made it very clear that abstaining is NOT for everyone. As I said - there seems to be two types of people - those for whom moderation is best, and those who do better with restriction. That was my whole point, really. I've been eating what most would describe as a "restrictive" diet for three years now (LCHF). It works for me. I'm less hungry, I was able to lose the 25 lbs I wanted to lose, plus an additional 25 I never thought possible, and have kept it off ever since. I don't have cravings and uncontrolled appetite anymore, like I did when I tried to eat everything in moderation. Im not saying it will work for everyone, obviously it won't. But the OP was concerned that she "should be" moderating foods and that it is "important" to eat everything in moderation. That's not necessarily true. She may be more like myself and may find that it's easier and more enjoyable to cut out certain foods. I never implied that restricting certain foods or food groups was the right answer for everyone!

Nutella is my weakness. I gained almost 10 pounds a few years back because I kept bringing Nutella home and sneaking bites constantly. Next thing I knew the jar would be gone in 2 three days. Nope..

Granola and M&Ms are bad, too. Way too easy for me to grab handfuls each time I walk in the kitchen.
Once I removed the triggers from my site/house, I don't even miss them.