posted
Lately I've been hearing a lot of people talk about sugar addiction. I joined a weight loss yahoo group and lots of the people there claim they were addicted to sugar which caused a variety of symptoms which were cured by low carbing and have also seen a couple of magazine articles on the same subject.
Can people be truly addicted to sugar or is it just junk science?
-------------------- I tried to get in touch with my inner child, but she isn't allowed to talk to strangers. Posts: 674 | From: Scotland | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged |
This is just not true. An addictive substance is one that causes the body to require more and more of it to satisfy its needs and that leads to unpleasant symptoms of withdrawal when it is not available. While people may enjoy and want sweet foods, it is unlikely that you actually need bigger and bigger portions to meet needs and will suffer real physical withdrawal if they become unavailable. The body is not actually able to tell the difference between sugar in a piece of fruit, such as an apple, or table sugar. It is unlikely that people would ever believe they were addicted to, or suffering withdrawal symptoms from, apples should their daily serving be withdrawn.
Sugar can cause arthritis?? asthma?? multiple sclerosis?? hemorrhoids?? varicose veins???
Jesus christ, there are 124 of them! No known substance has that many side effects!
Somebody care to put them together in song, to the tune of "these are a few of my favourite things" maybe?
What else is there? Let's see....
Dizziness and Kidney Stones and Cancer... oh my! Headaches and Learning Disorders and Alzheimer’s... Oh My!! Depresssion and Cataracts and Emphysema.... OH MY!!!!!!!!!
LOL - I'm surprised they haven't accused it of kicking puppies and supporting terrorism.
I don't have time to do any research right now, but I'd like to hear from people who have done research and want to debunk some of these claims.
Posts: 84 | From: Canada | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
But it sure tastes good when I pour a tablespoon of it into my double-strength coffee... Which really is addictive...
Posts: 127 | From: Over the hill and through the woods... | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
finine
The Red and the Green Stamps
posted
I do believe sugar has an effect on the body, whether it is addiction, per se, is probably not so. Although some people might claim to be "addicted" to sugar, I wouldn't view that the same as some type of substance abuse, nicotine, or caffeine addiction (which all have proven physical withdrawal symptoms).
I joined Weight Watchers last August when they released their newest plan, CORE. The premise of CORE is to eat healthy, whole grains, low fat meats, fruits, and vegetables (i.e. unprocessed foods). Many of the people I see chatting on the WW message board claim this same "sugar addiction" when they first start on CORE. I would disagree that it is an addiction, I view it more as a blood sugar imbalance. I used to eat a lot of processed foods, including those made with sugar and white flour (chips, whiteb bread, pretzels, etc). When I would get hungry, it would be that type of hunger that makes a person feel almost physically ill, like, "If I don't eat soon I am going to be sick..." Once I cut the processed foods out of my diet and balanced my blood sugar, I found the hunger spikes went away. I now eat less, and I make healthier food choices (fruit instead of pretzels for a snack, for instance.
Let me say also, the blood sugar imbalance is not something suggested by WW (nor do they make claims that CORE will regulate blood sugar), this is just an observation on my own body and how I react to processed foods. Don't want anyone to think that WW is preaching about blood sugar regulation in any of their food plans.
IP: Logged |
posted
Sugar addictive? Not medically so. However, it is a hard habit to break. When you first start doing away with pop, candy, sweets and the such, it seems like that's all you crave...for a while.
Labeling an uncontrolled fondness for sugar as an addiction seems to relieve the "victim" of responsibility for failing to exercise self control.
law "don't use sugar, so the sweetness is all me" guy
-------------------- "I've argued in front of every judge in this state, often as a lawyer." Posts: 1021 | From: Northwest Indiana | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged |
ranran yousei
The Red and the Green Stamps
posted
quote:Originally posted by Parrot: Depresssion and Cataracts and Emphysema.... OH MY!!!!!!!!!
Actually, we've been able to control a lot of my husband's severe depression by (almost) eliminating his sugar junk food habit. Ok, "reducing" is a more apt term. Instead of eating crap all day, everyday, he has 'treats' now and then, and eats rather well all other times. (Ok, he still drinks way too much soda for his dentist's liking, but it's not his exclusive drink anymore.)
Now, before anyone jumps down my throat, I am not saying sugar caused it. Not directly, like a bee sting causes pain. But what happens is, empty caloric foods, like say a Jolly Rancher, provides squat for nutrition that the body needs, but it also replaces something healthy that could have been eaten. Doing this all day long, the body starts lacking everything it needs to work at it's best.
He does crave empty foods. He's gotten much better at not giving in to just having plain pasta (seriously, just noodles, with nothing on/next to it) and candy. We still battle over the abundance of soda in the house, since I'd rather the kids drank juice and water all day, not Pepsi, but I give him credit he's improved his diet dramatically over the years, and sodas seem to be his last "vice".
Basically, I wouldn't say that sugar causes disease and such, but I can see a connection to a decline in health if a person almost exclusively eats junk, and not enough healthy foods.
I don't think that sugar is addictive in the same sense as, say, cigarettes, but I don't doubt people feel a... shift... when they switch to a healthier diet. Finine, I think, has a very good theory, at least for some instances, on this phenomenon.
ranran "out of time, but wasn't done posting " yousei
IP: Logged |
posted
It's true, everything in moderation. Sugar contains a lot of calories and very little nutritional benefit. I HAVE heard that vitamin imbalances can have a negative effect on your mood, especially B vitamins.
I've switched to diet soda myself. It's not a hard switch, tastes just fine to me. Some people don't like it though, I don't get that.
I've found that I even like diet soda better than regular soda. Regular soda seems to leave a bit of a tart taste at the back of my mouth which, while not completely unpleasant, is something I'd rather do without.
Posts: 84 | From: Canada | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by lawguy: Labeling an uncontrolled fondness for sugar as an addiction seems to relieve the "victim" of responsibility for failing to exercise self control.
i agree with you 100% lawguy, especially since the OP said she heard it in a weight loss group!
-------------------- On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero. Posts: 119 | From: always a coast | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Dr. Phil has described "sugar addiction." I don't buy it; I think it's more of a habit. I haven't read his book; maybe someone can explain all this to us, since he did clarify that it wasn't a physiological addiction.
For what it's worth, when I was suddenly put on an extremely restrictive diet for medical reasons which was meant to SLOW DOWN my weight loss (among other things), I didn't miss sugar, but I missed cheese so much it invaded my dreams.
Avril
-------------------- There is no failure unless one stops. --Ray Bradbury Posts: 2115 | From: Oklahoma | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged |
Saraquill
The Red and the Green Stamps
posted
I'm examining Parrot's second link. This woman is so bloody repetitive:
1. Sugar can suppress the immune system. 5. Sugar contributes to the reduction in defense against bacterial infection (infectious diseases).
13. Sugar can weaken eyesight. 54. Sugar can cause cataracts. 68. Sugar can cause myopia (nearsightedness).
73. Sugar can adversely affect school children's grades and cause learning disorders.. 81 High refined sugar diet reduces learning capacity.
93. High sugar consumption of pregnant adolescents is associated with a twofold increased risk for delivering a small-for-gestational-age (SGA) infant. 94. High sugar consumption can lead to substantial decrease in gestation duration among adolescents. 124. Sugar can cause low birth-weight babies.
Here are some other gems from her list:
3. Sugar can cause hyperactivity, anxiety, difficulty concentrating, and crankiness in children. 43. Sugar can cause drowsiness and decreased activity in children.
15. Sugar can cause hypoglycemia.
Getting past her list, she's simply not reliable. She's not a docter, nor a registered dietitian. Even worse, on the top of the page, she's plugging a book titled "Lick the Sugar Habit."
quote:Originally posted by Saraquill: ... she's plugging a book titled "Lick the Sugar Habit."
Sara Quill
Am I the only one who thinks that's a good title for a...film, shall we say....about a nun fetish?
-------------------- "I've argued in front of every judge in this state, often as a lawyer." Posts: 1021 | From: Northwest Indiana | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Speaking of that list, I gave it a second look. I kind of got a chuckle out of this one:
67. Sugar is enemy #1 of the bowel movement.
The bowel movement! If you're not with us, you're against us! We're holding a protest next Tuesday, come join us! We'll be burning Sugar Bear in effigy!!
Posts: 84 | From: Canada | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
When I got a blood test for the first time in ages, my triglycerides were WAY high. On the advice of my doctor, I cut WAY back on sugars and some on carbs (mainly just trying to substitute with high-fiber breads). When I see something sweet, I have my usual "Hrmn, that looks pretty good" response, but never "I'm DYING for some sugar". I've suffered no noticable symptoms and I find it no more difficult now to refuse sugar than I did on day one (yesterday I even said no to some homemade rice crispy treats during the Super Bowl).
Posts: 257 | From: In front of a computer | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Saraquill: 15. Sugar can cause hypoglycemia.
Now this one is a gem. According to Appleton, eating lots of sugar can cause low blood sugar. One might think that she's just spouting off terms without knowing what the hell she's talking about . (Edit: I assume it's the Nancy Appleton link; my campus network filter won't let the links through. Blessedly so, in retrospect.)
-------------------- "Of all the Daliesque tourist traps in the world, we had to walk into this one." Posts: 1186 | From: Columbus, OH | Registered: Jul 2000
| IP: Logged |
ranran yousei
The Red and the Green Stamps
posted
quote:Originally posted by Parrot: It's true, everything in moderation. Sugar contains a lot of calories and very little nutritional benefit.
Very litle nutritional benefit, yes. Refined sugar = zero benefit. A lot of calories, no. Four calories a gram, just like protein. Fat has nine calories a gram. Add too much empty calories from sugar, which leaves you hungrier sooner and with no nutritional benefit for the effort, and yes, now you have too many calories. It's a balancing act. There are carbohydrates that are good for us, and we need to ingest for proper health, just as there are "good" fats and proteins as well. But there's a flip side, and there are "bad" fats, carbohydrates and protein sources.
Diet sodas, other than fewer calories, are no better than regular. You are still replacing a nutritive drink (like juice) which can also satiate hunger a bit, with an 'empty' drink. Water is still the optimal drink, however. At least for hydration purposes.
And yes, nutritional imbalances can affect mood, and overall health as well. Not just vitamins, but everything. Replacing nutritive foods with junk, whether it's sugary junk, artifically sweetened junk, transfatty junk, or whatnot, causes nutritional imbalances when done in extremes. The occasional soda is no biggie, but there are people who drink nothing else, and that's a disservice to the body really.
Nope, eating sugar doesn't cause it. However, being as accustomed as I am to people misconstruing information on health matters just to sell their product, I can guess how this person will explain it:
"Eating too much sugar causes your body to produce more and more insulin in response. The body acclimates to this increased insulin response, and does it's job too well. When you eat less sugar, your insulin response remains the same, causing you to now suffer hypoglycemia."
Which of course, would be inaccurate. In a healthy person, decreasing glucose in the blood by whatever means, also decreases the insulin response.
IP: Logged |
posted
I hope you don't mind, but I have a couple of concerns about some of the information you gave.
quote:Very litle nutritional benefit, yes. Refined sugar = zero benefit.
I'm not sure that's entirely true. According to this, sugar does have some benefit, just not an abundance of it. Example:
"Sugar (sucrose) is an important source of carbohydrate, the body’s primary energy source. Dietary surveys indicate that we are eating more than enough protein and probably too much fat. Carbohydrates are the only calorie source in which an increase in consumption is recommended. Nutrition guidelines often suggest emphasizing foods rich in starches and/or fiber because they usually are low in fat and are good sources of vitamins and minerals.
Planning a low-fat diet is made easier by using a little sugar to add taste appeal to low-fat foods, such as grains, grapefruit or yogurt."
quote:A lot of calories, no. Four calories a gram, just like protein. Fat has nine calories a gram. Add too much empty calories from sugar, which leaves you hungrier sooner and with no nutritional benefit for the effort, and yes, now you have too many calories.
Considering how much more prevalent sugar is in foods than protein, it really does add up to a lot of calories, which is what I was getting at. They add a whole heap of sugar to items these days to get them to taste good.
quote:Diet sodas, other than fewer calories, are no better than regular. You are still replacing a nutritive drink (like juice) which can also satiate hunger a bit, with an 'empty' drink. Water is still the optimal drink, however. At least for hydration purposes.
I'm not quite sure about your choice of words here. You said diet sodas have "fewer" calories. "Fewer" doesn't seem to be an appropriate word. Diet sodas, in fact, have no calories.
Nutritionally, diet sodas are the equivalent of water. That's why I find it strange that you're advocating water over diet sodas. Both drinks are just as 'empty'.
It's worth noting that if you're watching your calories, that fruit juices often have as many or more calories than regular soda. Since diet soda has no calories, it can be a tasty alternative to water if you're trying to lose weight.
Posts: 84 | From: Canada | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Avril: Dr. Phil has described "sugar addiction." I don't buy it; I think it's more of a habit. I haven't read his book; maybe someone can explain all this to us, since he did clarify that it wasn't a physiological addiction.[/QB]
Therein lies a plausible answer. A number of things are not "physically" addictive, but "emotionally" addictive. Sugar could conceivably be one of them.
-------------------- "Well, it looks we're on our own ... again."--Rev. Lovejoy Posts: 3572 | From: St. Louis, MO | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
ranran yousei
The Red and the Green Stamps
posted
quote:Originally posted by Parrot: I'm not sure that's entirely true. According to this, sugar does have some benefit, just not an abundance of it. Example:
"Sugar (sucrose) is an important source of carbohydrate, the body’s primary energy source. Dietary surveys indicate that we are eating more than enough protein and probably too much fat. Carbohydrates are the only calorie source in which an increase in consumption is recommended. Nutrition guidelines often suggest emphasizing foods rich in starches and/or fiber because they usually are low in fat and are good sources of vitamins and minerals.
Planning a low-fat diet is made easier by using a little sugar to add taste appeal to low-fat foods, such as grains, grapefruit or yogurt."
Refined sugar is a type of carbohydrate. Carbohydrates are important. Refined suager does not conatin the same benefits as a complex or unadulterated carbohydrate. It has no fiber, vitamins, or minerals. You can still get sucrose from other carbohydrate sources, and not get the empty calories of table sugar.
Perhaps I am not explaining this correctly. However, I'm leery of information that comes from a site called "sugar.org" on this matter. From their "Who We Are" page.
I am an advocate for a balanced diet, with plenty of carbohydrates for energy and nutrition and fiber. Proteins and fats play their roles as well. Do not confuse regular white refined sugar for a healthy whole grain bread or bowl of oatmeal.
quote:Considering how much more prevalent sugar is in foods than protein, it really does add up to a lot of calories, which is what I was getting at. They add a whole heap of sugar to items these days to get them to taste good.
Depends on what you eat. Processed foods have a lot of additives... such as sodium, sugar and fats.
If you steer away from processed foods, you wind up with a better balance in your diet.
quote:I'm not quite sure about your choice of words here. You said diet sodas have "fewer" calories. "Fewer" doesn't seem to be an appropriate word. Diet sodas, in fact, have no calories.
Nutritionally, diet sodas are the equivalent of water. That's why I find it strange that you're advocating water over diet sodas. Both drinks are just as 'empty'.
Some diet sodas are "reduced" calories, I wasn't going to lump them all under "no calories" since I knew I'd get someone saying "that's incorrect". I consider "C2" to be diet. "Fewer" can also, in this sense, at least as I was grouping it, "zero", since "zero" is less than everything.
Nutritionally, diet sodas with no calories are not the same as water. Calorically, they are, but not nutritionally. Some sodas contain sodium in higher amounts than most drinking water, for instance. Plus, if it's a cola, there's concerns of interference with calcium and bone health, some researchers link phosphoric acid as the possiblitilty. Other researchers suggest it's because people are replacing nutritive drinks with sodas. (Example. Another example. These are but two, there's plenty more out there). There's concerns about carbonated beverages in general, but colas specifically.
quote:It's worth noting that if you're watching your calories, that fruit juices often have as many or more calories than regular soda. Since diet soda has no calories, it can be a tasty alternative to water if you're trying to lose weight.
It can be, yes. But it's not advisable to replace every drink with it. It's not equivalent to water for hydration, nor is it advantageous to the body, such as juices can be. Juices contain, basically a concentration of the parent fruit, less most of the fiber. Not only do they provide carbohydrate feul and vitamins, but also other nutrient factors that are showing promise for heart health and other health concerns.
The body uses nutrients as they come, micronutrients, if you will. The full RDA is a total for the day, not an "all at once" sum. People who take 1,500mg of supplemental calcium at one sitting, for example, will not get as much benefit as if they had broken it up into 3 seperate 500mg dosages over the day. The body can only handle about 500mg at a time. The body (to simplify) says "I need this much of X right now" and it's not much. It will need it again later, but giving it a power dose once a day only really makes your urine nutritious. So, point being, missing an oppurtunity to give what your body needs, as it needs it, periodically through out the day, by substituting with a man-made non-caloric alternative, really does not do you any good. Once in a while, it's no biggie. All the time, it adds up...or should I say, it minuses up.
IP: Logged |
posted
Wow, that's alot of imformation. This is why I, never wanting to burden myself with too much thinking, have gone to water for all my drinking, and the occasional diet soda (once or twice a week).
I get my dairy from yogurt (no sugar added) and cheese. I eat whole fruits rather than juices because juices, while tasty, eliminate most to all of the fiber. Also, ingesting the natural fiber slows down the absorbtion of the sugar a bit.
-------------------- "I've argued in front of every judge in this state, often as a lawyer." Posts: 1021 | From: Northwest Indiana | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Refined sugar is a type of carbohydrate. Carbohydrates are important. Refined suager does not conatin the same benefits as a complex or unadulterated carbohydrate. It has no fiber, vitamins, or minerals. You can still get sucrose from other carbohydrate sources, and not get the empty calories of table sugar.
Well, I may be nitpicking here - but being a source of carbohydrate energy is a nutritional benefit, therefore you can't say it has zero benefits.
However, you can say that it has very little benefit.
quote:Some diet sodas are "reduced" calories, I wasn't going to lump them all under "no calories" since I knew I'd get someone saying "that's incorrect". I consider "C2" to be diet.
Perhaps, but what I mean by "diet soda" is soda that's actually labelled as diet: Diet Coke, Diet Pepsi, Diet Sprite....
quote:Some sodas contain sodium in higher amounts than most drinking water
Sodium in diet sodas range from 20mg - 70mg. That's hardly a significant drop in the bucket. At most it's 3% of your recommended daily intake. Most sodas hover around 35mg(1%) to 50mg(2%). (This is based on information for 12 oz serving sizes)
quote:Plus, if it's a cola, there's concerns of interference with calcium and bone health, some researchers link phosphoric acid as the possiblitilty. Other researchers suggest it's because people are replacing nutritive drinks with sodas.(Example. Another example. These are but two, there's plenty more out there). There's concerns about carbonated beverages in general, but colas specifically.
I've read about that study. It's been very heavily criticized. For instance,it makes no attempt to measure bone density or to try and ascertain precisely how much soda the subjects drink.
Grace Wyshak, who authored the study, even said herself: "the (study) design is cross-sectional and causality cannot be inferred from the data."
quote:It's not equivalent to water for hydration
Are you talking just about the ones with sodium in them? Because I haven't heard of any other factors that would interfere with hydration.
Posts: 84 | From: Canada | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
ranran yousei
The Red and the Green Stamps
posted
quote:Originally posted by lawguy: Also, ingesting the natural fiber slows down the absorbtion of the sugar a bit.
Exactly, hence why water is optimal to drink.
Don't worry lawguy, thinking of legal matters gives me a headache.
quote:Originally posted by Parrot: Well, I may be nitpicking here - but being a source of carbohydrate energy is a nutritional benefit, therefore you can't say it has zero benefits.
However, you can say that it has very little benefit.
Ok. But compared to other sources of the same benefit, which, as pointed out in the above quote, have fiber, slowing down the absorption, and therefore not causing a spike in blood glucose, it's 'benefit' diminishes. Refined sugar compared to, say, brown rice, suddenly has zero extra benefits to it.
quote:Perhaps, but what I mean by "diet soda" is soda that's actually labelled as diet: Diet Coke, Diet Pepsi, Diet Sprite....
Perhaps you meant those, but anything that advertises "half the calories" can be seen as "diet". I remember drinking Diet Pepsi long ago. It had one calorie back then (I don't know about now, since I haven't looked at one in over a decade). That may be a nitpick as well, but it's still more than zero. (Maybe it's "Pepsi One", but I only ever remember drinking Diet Pepsi so...)
quote:Sodium in diet sodas range from 20mg - 70mg. That's hardly a significant drop in the bucket. At most it's 3% of your recommended daily intake. Most sodas hover around 35mg(1%) to 50mg(2%). (This is based on information for 12 oz serving sizes)
That's still more than water. Are these sodas the only source of sodium in the diet? No, they're an added source. And without a balance of potassium to help regulate the sodium. That 20mg doesn't seem like a heck of a lot, but adding it up with all other sources, plus probably drinking it several times a day, adds up.
The upper limit for sodium per day is 2,400mg (although it's recommended to stay well below that if possible). Sounds like a lot compared to 20mg, huh? Well, yes, but consider this: one teaspoon (not tablespoon) of salt contains 2,300mg. Oh my, now that 20mg looks a little more important, doesn't it? (Mayoclinic on sodium, as one source for those numbers.) Luckily, one teaspoon of salt is more than most palates can handle in one sitting (at least for my household), but over the course of a day, you might be surprised how much salt/sodium is in things, and how fast it adds up.
quote:I've read about that study. It's been very heavily criticized. For instance,it makes no attempt to measure bone density or to try and ascertain precisely how much soda the subjects drink.
Grace Wyshak, who authored the study, even said herself: "the (study) design is cross-sectional and causality cannot be inferred from the data."
The second link wasn't Wyshak's. There's more than one study on this.
quote:Are you talking just about the ones with sodium in them? Because I haven't heard of any other factors that would interfere with hydration.
Water is almost exclusively water. Some are mineral waters, some are electrolyte waters... some are.. fancier. Per 12oz serving of water you get more water than you do per 12oz of anything else.
Sodium actually retains water. It can be useful for hydration purposes, but an imbalance of it as an electrolyte can be less beneficial overall. Different mineral salts, such as calcium, magnesium, sodium and potassium are all important for proper hydration of the cells.
Mayoclinic, about water. "Alcohol — such as beer and wine — and caffeinated beverages — such as coffee, tea or soda — can contribute to your total fluid intake. But your best beverage is still water."
Sodas can contribute, but don't beat water when it comes to rehydration.
By the way, back on target for the thread: Carbohydrate addiction. Just putting this out there.
((Edited to clarify something, and add something my brain dropped while trying to stay oraganized))
IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
" yousei
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
