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.

Giving up sugar for good

1…6791112…16

Replies

  • goldthistime
    goldthistime Posts: 3,213 Member
    chocolate_owl wrote: »
    Ty_Floyd wrote: »
    cwolfman13 wrote: »
    Ty_Floyd wrote: »
    cwolfman13 wrote: »

    There is no withdrawal...a craving is different than withdrawal symptoms...this is just perpetuating nonsense.

    Cravings are just one of the symptoms of withdrawal. People who have given up sugar also report other withdrawal symptoms, including: anger, anxiety, appetite changes, depression, dizziness, fatigue, flu-like symptoms, headaches, insomnia, irritability, mood swings, shakes, and sleep changes. Again quite similar to quitting nicotine!

    http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-edinburgh-east-fife-29126872

    It's a behavioral issue...

    Back 'atcha! (:-)
    http://abc13.com/health/study-sugar-is-as-addictive-as-cocaine/533979/

    Seriously though, I think we can agree that the medical profession is divided on the issue and there is no definitive research yet, which again is one of the points Taube's article makes...

    A 2010 metastudy concluding sugar addiction is not supported by research: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0261561409002398

    And reposting @GottaBurnEmAll 's link to the 2016 metastudy concluding sugar addiction is not supported by research:
    http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00394-016-1229-6

    Good links.

    I am not yet convinced though that there isn't some benefit for people who have trouble moderating sugar consumption in thinking that their cravings/behaviour have similarities to an addiction. There's lots of good advice out there for alcoholics dealing with cravings and stressful situations for instance that seems useful to people trying to undo the habit of overeating sweets.



  • kristikitter
    kristikitter Posts: 602 Member
    The Guardian - which I normally respect - is REALLY on a Taubes/Lustig kick recently... urgh.
  • goldthistime
    goldthistime Posts: 3,213 Member
    ndj1979 wrote: »
    Another year another sugar thread...sad part is all the folks trying to give up all sugars will probably never reach their goals as they given power to a substance that is not inherently bad, barring a medical condition..,

    The Success Forum has lots of keto and lchf success stories.

    You could say that I have "given power" to sugar by recognizing the unique difficulties I have when I consume it in certain situations. Yet I've been successful. In fact, I would say that part of my success has been in figuring out how and when I can consume sugar without letting my overconsuming tendencies take over.
  • stevencloser
    stevencloser Posts: 8,911 Member
    goldthistime wrote: »
    ndj1979 wrote: »
    Another year another sugar thread...sad part is all the folks trying to give up all sugars will probably never reach their goals as they given power to a substance that is not inherently bad, barring a medical condition..,

    The Success Forum has lots of keto and lchf success stories.

    You could say that I have "given power" to sugar by recognizing the unique difficulties I have when I consume it in certain situations. Yet I've been successful. In fact, I would say that part of my success has been in figuring out how and when I can consume sugar without letting my overconsuming tendencies take over.

    I've also seen lots of success stories of questionable nature as to the methods used to get there. The person thinking they're successful means little by itself.
  • Ty_Floyd
    Ty_Floyd Posts: 102 Member
    stevencloser wrote: »

    Firstly, people don't overeat just on sweet foods.

    Secondly, alcohol creates an actual, physical addiction to it.

    Interestingly, I just read a report stating that solving this problem of "sugar addiction" (or whatever name you choose to give it) is actually more complicated than solving drug addiction.

    http://news.mit.edu/2015/decoding-sugar-addiction-0129



  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    edited January 2017
    stevencloser wrote: »
    cupity wrote: »
    Ty_Floyd wrote: »
    Interesting long read by Gary Taubes in The Guardian today about sugar's addictive effects and the futility of trying to "moderate" its consumption. He also makes the interesting observation that people tend to define moderation as "whatever works for them". Anyway, it's all enough to convince me...
    https://www.theguardian.com/society/2017/jan/05/is-sugar-worlds-most-popular-drug

    I haven't read all the replies....some people get really upset when you ask them to give up sugar, but of course it is not addictive.

    Some people get really upset when you tell them something completely normal that millions of people do is "Just like a heroin addiction". Gee who whould've thought?

    This is true, although no one here really seemed that "upset" anyway.

    You know what would make lots of people really upset? Telling them they had to give up meat. Or on parts of MFP, only bacon. Or perhaps peanut butter!

    So can we assume those foods are all addictive?

    Er, questions addressed to Ty_Floyd, to be clear, since stevercloser is not the one saying it's so meaningful that people aren't agreeing that they should give up sugar.
  • goldthistime
    goldthistime Posts: 3,213 Member
    lemurcat12 wrote: »
    SymbolismNZ wrote: »
    Nothing actually wrong with someone giving up sugar in my view; if nothing else it reduces a lot of calorie dense foods that are far too easy to pick up and scoff down (chocolate, flavored milk, sodas) and forces people to be more mindful of what is going into their diets.

    Giving up fruit and most dairy is fine, although I would miss them, and starches like sweet potatoes and plantains can be replaced with others, but I personally think giving up vegetables is really unhealthy (barring a rare medical issue that requires it), and there sure is something wrong with it.

    I avoid or limit (or simply find unappealing) lots of high cal foods that also have sugar, but not because sugar is terrible and must be avoided. Focusing on sugar=bad leads to bad nutritional choices, IMO.

    I would have assumed that the poster you replied to meant foods with added sugars, not fruit, dairy and sweet potatoes.

    Why would avoiding added sugar lead to bad nutritional choices?

  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    goldthistime wrote: »
    chocolate_owl wrote: »
    Ty_Floyd wrote: »
    cwolfman13 wrote: »
    Ty_Floyd wrote: »
    cwolfman13 wrote: »

    There is no withdrawal...a craving is different than withdrawal symptoms...this is just perpetuating nonsense.

    Cravings are just one of the symptoms of withdrawal. People who have given up sugar also report other withdrawal symptoms, including: anger, anxiety, appetite changes, depression, dizziness, fatigue, flu-like symptoms, headaches, insomnia, irritability, mood swings, shakes, and sleep changes. Again quite similar to quitting nicotine!

    http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-edinburgh-east-fife-29126872

    It's a behavioral issue...

    Back 'atcha! (:-)
    http://abc13.com/health/study-sugar-is-as-addictive-as-cocaine/533979/

    Seriously though, I think we can agree that the medical profession is divided on the issue and there is no definitive research yet, which again is one of the points Taube's article makes...

    A 2010 metastudy concluding sugar addiction is not supported by research: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0261561409002398

    And reposting @GottaBurnEmAll 's link to the 2016 metastudy concluding sugar addiction is not supported by research:
    http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00394-016-1229-6

    Good links.

    I am not yet convinced though that there isn't some benefit for people who have trouble moderating sugar consumption in thinking that their cravings/behaviour have similarities to an addiction. There's lots of good advice out there for alcoholics dealing with cravings and stressful situations for instance that seems useful to people trying to undo the habit of overeating sweets.



    I have mixed feelings on it.

    I think some of it is helpful, actually, although I also see people who claim "sugar addiction" using that term in a very different way than anyone in an addiction program for substances would (or should, anyway, people do, because people are people). Specifically, if someone said "oh, it's not my fault that I drank too much and did X, I'm an addict," people wouldn't buy it. But the whole point of the sugar addiction thing, for many, is to claim that unlike other slobs who got fat because they were undisciplined or whatever, they were ADDICTED and it's different for them.

    Also, I bet many of the things that are in some ways analogous to that which would help addictive behaviors apply to ALL foods (certainly all highly palatable foods) and not sugar specifically. And to most humans, not just those who like the addiction label (which I think is pushed hard by people like Taubes and others on the internet).

    Anyway, the bigger issue is that I also think it can be harmful. Even with true addictive substances, like alcohol (although alcohol addiction tends to be largely behavioral too), I think deciding you cannot drink without getting totally smashed tends to have a negative effect (usually a necessary one if you believe, as I do, that an alcoholic really can't drink normally and should give it up), often causing people to basically make the decision that they are drinking to excess every time they pick up a drink, since once they do they cannot help it.

    In that there is evidence that the binge/restrict cycle plays into the development of food addictions (or whatever), so that telling yourself you cannot eat whatever (and are a bad person if you do and other such things) and then giving it up for a long time and giving in and overdoing and seeing that as confirmation, this is especially problematic. If you think just eating a bit is a failure and will make you eat a lot, that's almost always a self-confirming prophecy. So I do think it's dangerous to tell people that is true, when it probably is not, as opposed to telling them they can avoid it, but that there are behavioral triggers and work through those.

    I'd still think that for many (including me) giving it up for a while might be helpful, or being careful about some of the triggers you'd hear about in AA (which are just common sense, really), like knowing you are more likely to be tempted when hungry, angry, lonely, tired, etc.

    Oh, and finally, given that it's usually things YOU consider ultra palatable and not all sweets or everything (or only things) with sugar for most, I think it's a terrible idea to pretend it's all about sugar. Leads to people on MFP being scared of eating fruit or asking if a banana will hurt them.
  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    goldthistime wrote: »
    ndj1979 wrote: »
    Another year another sugar thread...sad part is all the folks trying to give up all sugars will probably never reach their goals as they given power to a substance that is not inherently bad, barring a medical condition..,

    The Success Forum has lots of keto and lchf success stories.

    You could say that I have "given power" to sugar by recognizing the unique difficulties I have when I consume it in certain situations. Yet I've been successful. In fact, I would say that part of my success has been in figuring out how and when I can consume sugar without letting my overconsuming tendencies take over.

    I would recommend doing that exact thing.

    Wouldn't call it "giving power" to sugar and it is the opposite of what the addiction model would demand (abstinence, the claim that you cannot figure out a way to consume it).

    I think our food environment is really hard for a lot of people to handle. Not because they are addicts, but because they are human and most of this stuff is totally natural for us (we want tasty food when it's on offer and easy, of course -- most of human history that made sense). Figuring out how to handle it is important.

    If I decided I must be an addict and avoid EVERYTHING I find tempting (or that can be bad in excess), well, I wouldn't have much to eat. So instead I figure out the structure that allows me to eat without overdoing, and to maintain a healthful diet.

    That for you it seems to be especially some foods with sugar may be what you ate when growing up, may be a difference in natural preferences, who knows, but this idea that if one is more inclined to french fries when overdoing it or even cheese that it's totally different, that makes no sense. (For me, I can overdo on a wide variety of foods, macros irrelevant.)
  • goldthistime
    goldthistime Posts: 3,213 Member
    lemurcat12 wrote: »
    goldthistime wrote: »
    lemurcat12 wrote: »
    SymbolismNZ wrote: »
    Nothing actually wrong with someone giving up sugar in my view; if nothing else it reduces a lot of calorie dense foods that are far too easy to pick up and scoff down (chocolate, flavored milk, sodas) and forces people to be more mindful of what is going into their diets.

    Giving up fruit and most dairy is fine, although I would miss them, and starches like sweet potatoes and plantains can be replaced with others, but I personally think giving up vegetables is really unhealthy (barring a rare medical issue that requires it), and there sure is something wrong with it.

    I avoid or limit (or simply find unappealing) lots of high cal foods that also have sugar, but not because sugar is terrible and must be avoided. Focusing on sugar=bad leads to bad nutritional choices, IMO.

    I would have assumed that the poster you replied to meant foods with added sugars, not fruit, dairy and sweet potatoes.

    Why would avoiding added sugar lead to bad nutritional choices?

    (1) The poster did not say added sugar.

    (2) The sugar in fruit (for example) and added sugar (sucrose) that in other things is the same, chemically (especially when your body breaks apart the sucrose), so it doesn't even make sense to claim that "sugar" means only added sugar. The arguments about sugar hurting your body would apply to all.

    (I happen to agree that we shouldn't consume excessive sugar, or excessive anything else, but that's a different discussion. Or what cwolfman said upthread.)

    I agree that sugar is sugar whether in fruit or a candy bar, but the fact that the sugar in fruit is packaged with nutrients and fibre makes a difference. Unless someone is talking about giving up carbs, I assume that they are talking about added sugar. The person we quoted gave three examples that each contain added sugar.

    I make the argument not to pick on you lemurcat, (especially given that you are far better at the art of debate than I am), but to defend people thinking that they want to reduce added sugar in their lives as not being extremists. I would consider giving up fruit and dairy as an extreme practice.
  • goldthistime
    goldthistime Posts: 3,213 Member
    lemurcat12 wrote: »
    goldthistime wrote: »
    chocolate_owl wrote: »
    Ty_Floyd wrote: »
    cwolfman13 wrote: »
    Ty_Floyd wrote: »
    cwolfman13 wrote: »

    There is no withdrawal...a craving is different than withdrawal symptoms...this is just perpetuating nonsense.

    Cravings are just one of the symptoms of withdrawal. People who have given up sugar also report other withdrawal symptoms, including: anger, anxiety, appetite changes, depression, dizziness, fatigue, flu-like symptoms, headaches, insomnia, irritability, mood swings, shakes, and sleep changes. Again quite similar to quitting nicotine!

    http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-edinburgh-east-fife-29126872

    It's a behavioral issue...

    Back 'atcha! (:-)
    http://abc13.com/health/study-sugar-is-as-addictive-as-cocaine/533979/

    Seriously though, I think we can agree that the medical profession is divided on the issue and there is no definitive research yet, which again is one of the points Taube's article makes...

    A 2010 metastudy concluding sugar addiction is not supported by research: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0261561409002398

    And reposting @GottaBurnEmAll 's link to the 2016 metastudy concluding sugar addiction is not supported by research:
    http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00394-016-1229-6

    Good links.

    I am not yet convinced though that there isn't some benefit for people who have trouble moderating sugar consumption in thinking that their cravings/behaviour have similarities to an addiction. There's lots of good advice out there for alcoholics dealing with cravings and stressful situations for instance that seems useful to people trying to undo the habit of overeating sweets.



    I have mixed feelings on it.

    I think some of it is helpful, actually, although I also see people who claim "sugar addiction" using that term in a very different way than anyone in an addiction program for substances would (or should, anyway, people do, because people are people). Specifically, if someone said "oh, it's not my fault that I drank too much and did X, I'm an addict," people wouldn't buy it. But the whole point of the sugar addiction thing, for many, is to claim that unlike other slobs who got fat because they were undisciplined or whatever, they were ADDICTED and it's different for them.

    Also, I bet many of the things that are in some ways analogous to that which would help addictive behaviors apply to ALL foods (certainly all highly palatable foods) and not sugar specifically. And to most humans, not just those who like the addiction label (which I think is pushed hard by people like Taubes and others on the internet).

    Anyway, the bigger issue is that I also think it can be harmful. Even with true addictive substances, like alcohol (although alcohol addiction tends to be largely behavioral too), I think deciding you cannot drink without getting totally smashed tends to have a negative effect (usually a necessary one if you believe, as I do, that an alcoholic really can't drink normally and should give it up), often causing people to basically make the decision that they are drinking to excess every time they pick up a drink, since once they do they cannot help it.

    In that there is evidence that the binge/restrict cycle plays into the development of food addictions (or whatever), so that telling yourself you cannot eat whatever (and are a bad person if you do and other such things) and then giving it up for a long time and giving in and overdoing and seeing that as confirmation, this is especially problematic. If you think just eating a bit is a failure and will make you eat a lot, that's almost always a self-confirming prophecy. So I do think it's dangerous to tell people that is true, when it probably is not, as opposed to telling them they can avoid it, but that there are behavioral triggers and work through those.

    I'd still think that for many (including me) giving it up for a while might be helpful, or being careful about some of the triggers you'd hear about in AA (which are just common sense, really), like knowing you are more likely to be tempted when hungry, angry, lonely, tired, etc.

    Oh, and finally, given that it's usually things YOU consider ultra palatable and not all sweets or everything (or only things) with sugar for most, I think it's a terrible idea to pretend it's all about sugar. Leads to people on MFP being scared of eating fruit or asking if a banana will hurt them.

    I can't stay to continue the discussion, but I wanted to comment on the binge/restrict cycle. I have been thinking lately that my own binge/restrict cycles might have had more to do with underconsuming calories in general rather than not eating dessert. I'm not so sure that eating fewer or no sweet treats (but still eating plenty of calories, hopefully nutrient packed) will be more likely to cause me to eat sweet treats in great quantity at some point in time in the future. I think it may be the opposite.
  • Gianfranco_R
    Gianfranco_R Posts: 1,297 Member
    Machka9 wrote: »
    lemurcat12 wrote: »
    goldthistime wrote: »
    lemurcat12 wrote: »
    SymbolismNZ wrote: »
    Nothing actually wrong with someone giving up sugar in my view; if nothing else it reduces a lot of calorie dense foods that are far too easy to pick up and scoff down (chocolate, flavored milk, sodas) and forces people to be more mindful of what is going into their diets.

    Giving up fruit and most dairy is fine, although I would miss them, and starches like sweet potatoes and plantains can be replaced with others, but I personally think giving up vegetables is really unhealthy (barring a rare medical issue that requires it), and there sure is something wrong with it.

    I avoid or limit (or simply find unappealing) lots of high cal foods that also have sugar, but not because sugar is terrible and must be avoided. Focusing on sugar=bad leads to bad nutritional choices, IMO.

    I would have assumed that the poster you replied to meant foods with added sugars, not fruit, dairy and sweet potatoes.

    Why would avoiding added sugar lead to bad nutritional choices?

    (1) The poster did not say added sugar.

    (2) The sugar in fruit (for example) and added sugar (sucrose) that in other things is the same, chemically (especially when your body breaks apart the sucrose), so it doesn't even make sense to claim that "sugar" means only added sugar. The arguments about sugar hurting your body would apply to all.

    (I happen to agree that we shouldn't consume excessive sugar, or excessive anything else, but that's a different discussion. Or what cwolfman said upthread.)

    +1

    If you're giving up sugar ... give up sugar. All sugar. Start to do some research as to what contains sugar and how the body breaks nutrients down.

    It's the MFP paradox: high carbers push people to embrace no-carb/carnivorism. I would say they are also pretty successful...

  • Falcon
    Falcon Posts: 853 Member
    edited January 2017
    crzycatlady1 wrote: »
    Falcon wrote: »
    http://www.rense.com/general50/killer.htm

    a really good read. I just know if I have anything with aspartame in it. I'm too sick to do anything. I stopped getting severe migraines.

    You're projecting your own issues here though-many people, including myself, can consume aspartame with no problems at all. My daughter is lactose intolerant and cannot handle most dairy products. She'd never go around telling people that dairy is bad though because it's not. Her body just doesn't handle it very well. Same with my sister-in-law who's allergic to all sorts of foods, including 'good' ones like tomatoes and cruciferous vegetables. Just because her body can't deal with them doesn't mean we should all cut out tomatoes and broccoli.

    Someone else already posted this but seriously-it's worth the time to read through it
    http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/1308408/why-aspartame-isnt-scary/p1

    The same way they projected their issues over the peanut allergy forcing companies to go peanut free. What about the people who are not allergic to peanuts?? Was it fair to them or are people that lazy in not reading the packages?

    I can't chew gum anymore, I can't even enjoy certain foods anymore because the way aspartame makes me feel, headache, nausea, dizzy, so sick that I can't eat anything and I'm practically in a coma for fourteen hours.

    They should deprive the world of aspartame like they deprived the world of peanut butter products.


    The reason I can't give up sugar completely is because my blood sugar drops to dangerous levels without it.
This discussion has been closed.

Categories