Fight the Sugar Addiction

Options
«13

Replies

  • albertabeefy
    albertabeefy Posts: 1,169 Member
    Options
    While I'd also never consider the huff-post the bastion of sound-science ... It's important to remember that 2500 years ago they said the world was flat. 40 years ago they claimed nicotine wasn't addictive.

    It's only been a couple decades that we've really researched food or sugar addictions. Especially with sugar the research is in its infancy.

    And yes, although there's not yet what we'd call a preponderance of undeniable evidence as to sugar or carbohydrate addiction, there's enough evidence that the DSM-V now recognizes food as addictive, has a heading on 'binge-eating disorder', includes new behavioural disorders it didn't previously, etc. This was because more-and-more research is showing support for the idea, as well as many, many people in the addictions-counseling field pushing for the discussion and inclusion.

    I'd technically classify it as a behavioural addiction rather than a substance-use one - and there certainly seems to be an individual component that doesn't seem to fit everyone ... but to completely deny it's existence in the face of more and more research that supports and an expert consensus (DSM-V) doesn't make much sense.

    There's a couple excellent reviews an discussions here:

    http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0149763414002140
    http://www.mdpi.com/2072-6643/6/9/3653
  • cerise_noir
    cerise_noir Posts: 5,468 Member
    Options
    Mycophilia wrote: »
    Unless you've given a handy for some candy, you aren't addicted to sugar.

    :laugh:
  • stephmph16
    stephmph16 Posts: 114 Member
    Options
    Bear in mind I'm a newb when it comes to nutrition, but not a moron, can someone explain how sugar isn't addictive? Most the articles I'm seeing online say in big bold letters "sugar is addictive", but here people are scoffing at that idea. I just want to know where I'm getting information from.
  • leanjogreen18
    leanjogreen18 Posts: 2,492 Member
    edited January 2017
    Options
    stephmph16 wrote: »
    Bear in mind I'm a newb when it comes to nutrition, but not a moron, can someone explain how sugar isn't addictive? Most the articles I'm seeing online say in big bold letters "sugar is addictive", but here people are scoffing at that idea. I just want to know where I'm getting information from.

    I just wanted to say there is so much misinformation out there even among experts. Keep an open mind and consider the sources of your reading along with your own experience.

    While I don't think sugar is addictive as studies show its not, it is something that is pleasurable and in that sense people can go overboard because the initial reward is, well yummy:).
  • nutmegoreo
    nutmegoreo Posts: 15,532 Member
    Options
    Mycophilia wrote: »
    Unless you've given a handy for some candy, you aren't addicted to sugar.

    I thought I had asked you to stop following me around. :rage:
  • stephmph16
    stephmph16 Posts: 114 Member
    Options
    Thanks all for your thoughts!
  • crzycatlady1
    crzycatlady1 Posts: 1,930 Member
    Options
    cwolfman13 wrote: »
    stephmph16 wrote: »
    Bear in mind I'm a newb when it comes to nutrition, but not a moron, can someone explain how sugar isn't addictive? Most the articles I'm seeing online say in big bold letters "sugar is addictive", but here people are scoffing at that idea. I just want to know where I'm getting information from.

    I sugar is addictive, we've been addicted since the dawn of time...sugar is nothing new...humans have been consuming sugar in various forms since the dawn of time.

    As articles, magazines, documentaries, and other media goes...they have to sell...SUGAR ADDICTION makes for a great headline and click bait. Also, most articles and other media misinterpret data at minimum...but most have a bias and they cherry pick things from various studies and neglect to tell the whole story.

    Beyond that, most of the things people claim to be addicted to in regards to sugar are actually a highly palatable and pleasing combination of sugar and fat...but nobody ever mentions the fat...just the sugar...because fat scaring is out and sugar scaring is in.

    That said, most people who eat the SAD could stand to reduce their consumption...sugar in and of itself isn't an issue...over consumption is, regardless of sourcing. Over consumption of sugar is fairly rampant and is an issue, particularly if one isn't particularly active.

    This is spot on.
  • albertabeefy
    albertabeefy Posts: 1,169 Member
    Options
    astrampe wrote: »
    Beyond that, most of the things people claim to be addicted to in regards to sugar are actually a highly palatable and pleasing combination of sugar and fat...but nobody ever mentions the fat...just the sugar...because fat scaring is out and sugar scaring is in.
    This is mostly true. There are also studies which show that fat intake alone elicits the same responses in the pleasure centers of the brain, as well as sugar alone.

    This is why I think the focus is moving (at-least in scientific circles) to "food addiction" rather than "sugar addiction" or "carbohydrate addiction". While certain people may have a food addiction that is centered in sugar, others may find it's fat, and others may find it's a combination of the two. Or whatever.

    So yes, sugar isn't addictive in the same way cocaine is addictive. But it's addictive TO SOME PEOPLE (by stimulating reward/pleasure centere in the brain) in the same way gambling is addictive TO SOME PEOPLE. Behaviourally. As such, the more general term "food addiction" is what has become accepted by addictions professionals as well as meeting the addiction criteria specified in the DSM-V.

  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    Options
    stephmph16 wrote: »
    Bear in mind I'm a newb when it comes to nutrition, but not a moron, can someone explain how sugar isn't addictive? Most the articles I'm seeing online say in big bold letters "sugar is addictive", but here people are scoffing at that idea. I just want to know where I'm getting information from.

    Usually "sugar is addictive" means "our body responds positively to consuming sugar, which is true. We respond similarly to consuming fat, btw, and most of all to combinations of the two (or fat, carbs, and salt).

    Sometimes it means people can begin eating in a dysfunctional or hedonistic way, to stifle feelings or just for fun, basically detached for the purpose of fulfilling hunger, which is also true, but that again is not just sugar (more highly palatable foods that are a combination of ingredients, like sugar and fat, again) and also behavioral, not physical.

    What strikes me about the claim is that it is, first, not necessary to explain what people are trying to explain (why people eat more than they need to maintain a healthy weight). We evolved in an environment where food was more scarce than not and we had to be able to go without eating for a period of time (which tends to make us feel hunger less, counter-intuitively) and to eat when food is available, not only if we happen to be particularly hungry. Later in our history we tended to have cultural restrictions on eating. The current environment is rare, and liking food is not the same thing as addiction.

    Second, and even more significantly, people who claim to be "addicted" to sugar usually couldn't care less about that white stuff on its own. I personally managed to get quite fat (although I lost it) while thinking the idea of eating sugar out of the jar seemed disgusting. What seems delicious and hard to resist for me are specific sugary treats (again, that all have fat in them, as well as other ingredients), and yet different sugary treats that are chemically basically the same interest me not at all and I wouldn't want to eat more even if I ate one. That's nothing like addiction, IME -- it's akin to claiming to be addicted to wine but not gin, or even cabernet but not syrah.

Categories