Is 'addiction' an excuse to overeat?

[Demi]

From BBC News Magazine
London, UK
7 October, 2013

Is 'addiction' an excuse to overeat?

By Prof John Blundell
University of Leeds

"Food addiction" is becoming a popular term to explain overeating. But in this Scrubbing Up, Professor John Blundell from the Institute of Psychological Sciences at the University of Leeds warns the term is being used far too freely.

Some have likened food addiction to drug addiction, and then used this term to associate it with overeating, and as a clinical explanation for the obesity epidemic, implicating millions of people.

The use of the term food addiction is a step towards medicalisation and implies that normal human social behaviour is pathological.

Forms of eating therefore become an illness. This attitude is not helpful and has huge implications for the way in which people view their own behaviour and their lives.

The concept of food addiction comes from a combination of experimental data, anecdotal observations, scientific claims, personal opinions, deductions and beliefs.

It is an over-simplification of a very complex set of behaviours.

The existing evidence fails to define the precise characteristics of the actual foods concerned or the eating environment that underlies the assumed addiction risk.

This is in contrast to drug addiction, where the molecule is identified and its pharmacological effect on the brain is characterised.

Animal studies have shown changes to specific brain regions in those given a sugary diet - and human brain scans show activation of reward systems in the same part of the brain when sweet tastes are consumed.

Therefore, it is not surprising that reward centres are activated when sweet foods are consumed, as we know that the reward circuits in the brain have been established through evolution as signalling systems that control our appetite.

Many stimuli influence these areas of the brain and, in addition, there is an intrinsic drive to consume carbohydrate-rich foods to satisfy a basic metabolic need of the brain.

Sweetness is a major signal for such foods but the science has not yet assessed this fully and much more work is needed before we could say that food is addictive.

'Just an excuse'

Attributing food addiction as the single cause underlying the development of obesity, despite the existence of numerous other very plausible explanations, is unhelpful, particularly for those trying to live more healthy lives.

I am concerned that many people may potentially latch on to the concept of food addiction as an excuse to explain their overeating - the premise that it's "not my fault" and therefore, "I can't help it".

This removes the personal responsibility they should feel and could act on - and they infer that their eating is a form of disease.

Food addiction may offer an appealing explanation for some people but the concept could seriously hinder an individual's capacity for personal control.

Binge eating disorder does exist - but it is a rare clinical condition affecting fewer than 3% of obese people.

Sufferers have a strong compulsion to eat, which persists alongside the sense of a loss of control.

Addiction-like food behaviour may be a component of the severe and compulsive form of binge eating disorder.

But this condition does not explain the huge rise in obesity we have seen across the population.

Binge eating is not a key cause of obesity and, therefore, in the context of mass public health, is not a major concern.

What we need is a calm and composed analysis of what the words food addiction really mean so that people can make informed deductions about the causes of their own behaviour.http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-24402163

[ParisMama]

I've never been a big believer in the addiction talk around food for myself, nor "cravings" as an excuse.

But...

Going low carb had such an incredible impact on my hunger that I just felt like I was no longer struggling to limit food and choose well.

Intuitive eating concepts are workable now because I'm not obsessed with food the way I am when I eat low fat.

I wonder how many of the adherents of over eaters anonymous and other food addiction models would find they don't have a food addiction as much as a disregulated appetite due to excessive carbs....

[Kristine]

...and it's not just the carbs. Very few of us have an out-of-control appetite because of potato soup or peas. Junk food is engineered to be over-consumed. Prof Blundell seems to casually ignore this fact. Perhaps he grew up in a home and community devoid of such foods, or he's one of those rare people who seem to be completely indifferent to those addictive effects. Good for him, but it's pretty insulting and unfair to those of us whose brains would light up an MRI like a Christmas tree if we were part of the brain studies that have looked at reactions to such foods.

I've spent an awful lot of time in desperate search of that blissful disinterest in food and it has all too often eluded me. When I capture it, it's precarious. There are way too many of us with this problem to dismiss it as an excuse to overeat.

[teaser]

This is in contrast to drug addiction, where the molecule is identified and its pharmacological effect on the brain is characterised.

This could be said of gambling. There are people who put that down to moral failure, and little else. And they're wrong. By narrowing the definition of addiction to what happens with cocaine, or heroin--you knock out quite a bit of stuff that belongs somewhere on the spectrum. This is the same problem as the definition of hunger. It's easy to get in trouble with abstract terms. We have a term "chemical addiction"--this is necessary, because we use the word addiction in other places--and I think the broader term "food addiction" is used just fine, thank you. The three percent, the Jimmy Moores of the world, who end up shaking and sweating on the couch when they give up sugar--this is obviously something different, something more intense. But the existence of heroin doesn't make marijuana any less addictive.

The question of personal responsibility is a valid one. But what is our responsibility? To control what we can control. A person who gets drunk, and then gets into a fight at a bar--at the point where the actual violence started, they really might not have what it takes to avoid getting into the brawl. Maybe they are a person who could have said "no" to that third drink in the bar, and kept their wits about them. No brawl. Before that, maybe they could have not gone to the bar in the first place.

This person might not even be an alcoholic. There are people who can't refuse that third drink--but don't always spend that much time in bars. You can do quite a bit of damage with just weekend binge-drinking. Hard to call that addiction in the classic sense, if you can go a week, or weeks, without drinking. Would it be helpful to tell these people that they're not addicted? That they can moderate their drinking?

[lovinita]

I will say thinking about it I would view it as a food sensitivity issue.

However, I think in certain terms it meets with addiction. Just from my own experience. I spent better part of a decade trying to get off the crap I got my body addicted to. And I had detoxing symptoms.

And if you ask the people who make the processed, junk food or drinks. They absolutely work on getting you hooked on craving their items.

Many years, I struggled with what I call automated response. I get up to do something winde up in front of the refrigerator for no reason and would have to stop myself.

When I went LC, low and behold all this behavior stopped. Now, I experience my hunger. And the only time it is worse is during TOM.

I have also experienced what eating the wrong "good" food does to hunger. I can eat snow peas or broccoli and it will absolutely send me into a ravenous hunger that just won't abate unless I sleep and wait it out.

trying to stop eating when you feel so hungry is like trying to constantly control how many times your eye blinks or how many breathes of air you taken in for 24 hours a day. you may want to do it more but you try to control and limit those functions. There is no way.

So, many years I blamed myself, my lack of control, emotional eating. Don't get me wrong there was some of that but I would say 80% had nothing to do with me and everything to do with the food I was eating.

And worse yet being told to eat that stuff by the medical and nutritional fields!

I went to a group meet up 2 times in the last 3 days. They had chocolate candy each time.

Mostly the overweight people where eating it. Some skinnier people.

Had I not changed my way of eating to LC. I would have struggled all night not to eat.

But now it was like it wasn't even there. There was no hook, no craving, no calling for me to eat it.

I was perfectly fine.

But I can guarantee that if I had eaten I would have set up another cycle of craving it that would have needed to be broken.

[M Levac]

Very interesting article. I like it. A priori, if food was not addictive, we wouldn't be here. So, there is a mechanism that makes sure we eat, and it's possible to disrupt this mechanism. On the other hand, there is another mechanism that makes sure we eat what we need and not more, and it's just as possible to disrupt that mechanism too. We got anorexia and Prader-Willi syndrome as obvious proofs that those systems can be disrupted and cause both under- and overeating.

I like the reference to addictive drugs, where the molecule is identified, as well as the physiological pathway on which this molecule acts. We discussed a few studies about opiod receptor antagonists like naltrexone for example, in the context of overeating and obesity. Dr Davis argues wheat makes us overeat by a similar pathway. A little is too much in that context. Amylophagia is one form of food addiction where the molecule is identified. Rather, we believe starch is food, and that's the only reason it falls into the food addiction category. If we believed starch was not food, we wouldn't be confused. The Wikipedia page on amylophagia says it's a form of pica, where one has the compulsion to eat stuff, some of it obviously not food like chalk and dirt for example.

Food addiction? Yes. But is it really food we're eating?

[Judynyc]

Your experience with the chocolates, Lovinta, explains this so well. :thup:

Yes, doing the things that allow us to alleviate our stress, are our addictions. Some of us are more prone to these addictions than others. I know that I am a very addicted type of person and absolutely have used certain foods as my drug of choice for a very long time.
There is huge stigma attached to being able to admit this in and to ourselves and therefore the denial sets in. It took me a very long time to be able to see this in myself and accept that I needed to take certain actions to help myself.

So for me, going to FAA and OA meetings, way back in 1996-1998, helped me to accept this in myself and gave me a way out. It was not until 6 yrs later(2004) that I was able to put it all into action.

Professor Blundell reminds me of a member here, who hasn't been around in a while, who was also of this mind. He attempted to explain to me just how intellectual he was in the way he eats and could not wrap his brain around it being any other way( emotional) for another person. Does this mean, in his mind, that there is something wrong with me? Yes, he probably does think that. But it doesn't matter what he thinks because he doesn't live in my head or know that things that I face on a daily basis.

The best thing for me was to follow the FAA food plan which does not allow any sugar, flour(all flour) or wheat. This really helped me to get things under a semblance of control. The next step was to go low carb and get it done that way.

[Nancy LC]

Is 'addiction' an excuse to overeat?
How could you even know? Leaping to one conclusion or the other is just as likely to be wrong.

And the entire argument is just wrong. We don't tell smokers, junkies, or alcoholics they're not addicted, they're just using an excuse to justify their behavior. We give them help to beat their addiction. We study it and try to learn from their successes and failures and see if we can help the next person better.

Sheesh, the moralizing over obesity never stops, does it?

[leemack]

I'm someone who has binge eating disorder, which I suppose is one way to experience food addiction. Although my preferred binge food is sugary food, when the compulsion to eat hits me, I've been known to eat barely edible things like dried pasta or suet mix. I've had this problem for as long as I can remember - until recently I had thought it had started when I was around 10 years old, but have been told of being found hoarding food as a very young child (I don't remember all of it, but do remember being discovered with a bowl of apples under my bed, I must have been around 5 years old). I was a skinny kid up till the age of 17.

I have severe PCOS, which is now known to be a metabolic disorder, beginning with insulin resistance which I developed symptoms of as a child, so possibly have some kind of genetic issue causing this state in the absence of much processed foods/sugars, which I had very little access to as a child (or maybe a hypersensitivity to what I was exposed to). Once I could measure my own blood glucose, I found I had reactive hypoglycaemia, and that some of my urges to eat tied in with low blood glucose.

My theory is that having a metabolic disorder (plus having food restricted for part of my childhood) caused me to develop a behaviour of binge eating when I could. The binges would have been having an effect on the chemistry of my brain, especially when they became mostly sugar based. I would then crave the 'highs' that binge eating gave me, thus taking my behaviour into an addiction.

People can begin binge eating/compulsive eating for all sorts of reasons, but if they are someone who is susceptible to addictions, then the behaviour can turn from a choice to a compulsion which is very hard to control.

Is addiction responsible for all obesity? I don't think so. I still believe that insulin resistance, fructose and processed carbs are major players, and can work their damage in the absence of addictive behaviours.

What I do know, is that when you suffer with this awful compulsion, as Kristine said, control is precarious. I've had control for 33 days now (no sugar, no grains, no processed carbs, no binges) and I know that the control I feel is balanced on a knife's edge. In fact just reading the comments to this article on the BBC website, made me feel like I might lose that control, so I had to stop.

I do know the things that help with control, though. No sugar or wheat has meant I've become more leptin sensitive and now can voluntarily stop eating due to 'feeling full', which doesn't happen for me normally. And recent problems with my health have given me something, psychologically to 'hold on to', an answer to the compulsion.......for now. Like many addicts, I can't say that I can control this tomorrow or even this evening, but I feel control now.

[leemack]

Sheesh, the moralizing over obesity never stops, does it?

So true - if someone is slim and eats a lot and does no exercise, their behaviour isn't condemned, and isn't seen as gluttony - in fact the person is often envied. But, if you're obese, then regardless of how much you eat, it is assumed that you must be greedy, lazy and gluttonous.

[WereBear]

So does this dude ever explain WHY people might overeat?

I used to starve myself for days at a time, just to stay in my clothes! Oh, I was indulging myself, all right!

[leemack]

So does this dude ever explain WHY people might overeat?

I used to starve myself for days at a time, just to stay in my clothes! Oh, I was indulging myself, all right!

Yes, I do wonder about the people we see on TV weight loss shows, and whether they're encouraged to exaggerate the amount they eat. I'm 385lbs, right now, and even while having a massive binge, couldn't pack away the food that weight loss candidates on TV shows claim to eat every day. This gives slim people a really exaggerated view of what obese people eat - I once got a comment by a client, after he saw my size, about how much I must eat to be this size, as he'd seen someone on TV who was obese, but slimmer than me and ate tonnes - he assumed that weight was proportional to the amount of food taken, and that if I was 100lbs more than the person he saw on TV, then I must be eating way more than them. he obviously didn't believe me when I explained (after telling him it was none of his business) that actually I didn't eat any more than anyone else.

While the fiction that simple gluttony is the cause of obesity, is prevalent in society, I don't expect fat prejudice to diminish. I don't eat in public at all any more if I can in any way help it.

[M Levac]

I think this is his explanation:
Many stimuli influence these areas of the brain and, in addition, there is an intrinsic drive to consume carbohydrate-rich foods to satisfy a basic metabolic need of the brain.
It just doesn't jive. If this metabolic need is so basic, the implication is that not satisfying it every day through dietary means would promptly result in deficiency. The other implication is that only the brain has the capacity to detect its own metabolic needs because it's the only organ with the capacity to do anything about it through behavior modification. In other words, the brain is incapable of detecting other organs' metabolic needs. Doesn't jive.

A better explanation is that the things that we are driven to eat have adapted to drive us to eat them for their own survival, not for ours. However, we have no data on this since there is an aura of healthiness to those things like fruits and veggies, so nobody ever thinks to question this aura by testing the assumptions. Those fruits and veggies that have adapted to drive us to eat them for their own survival, only need us to do this so they can reproduce, not all year long. So, if eating them all year long kills us, it makes no difference to them: They've reproduced. They haven't adapted to keep us safe. Even the assumption that we are adapted to eat those things safely hasn't been tested experimentally.

[rightnow]

I once got a comment by a client, after he saw my size, about how much I must eat to be this size
Yeah, it's actually kind of funny, over the years every time I would end up with someone staying with me (or me with them) for any period of time, they would end up freaking out about me not eating (often at all let alone what they expected). Usually I would just eat whatever they did since that is convenient. They would end up getting actually upset about it, that this was just wrong-wrong-wrong that I was 3x their size and eating what they did or less and not losing weight, though I wasn't trying, as I knew better. I think our society really has no idea about the eating thing.

I also can never believe what I see in the media. Seriously, I see people talking about eating 6 double cheese burgers plus a large pizza and several 2-litres of soda and a couple bags of candy in a day and "that's why I was so fat." No shit, sherlock! But also, I would suspect, that their body is totally NOT giving them enough of the energy from food to use as motive in the bloodstream, which is driving that massive more-energy-more-food intake, which of course drives more fat -- because anybody with an even fractionally normal metabolism is going to eat a fraction of that food and be absolutely stuffed and not feel like eating again for quite awhile. (Of course, all the carbs mean megainsulin stuffing it into fat cells asap.) Anyway, I am always baffled by the media.

I have occasional periods of eating a lot, including bad foods, but they usually follow on going too long eating far too little, and I see them as a "reaction" -- not a binge from emotion but a desperate body-reaction to starvation. If I can get myself to butter and cheese fast, that heads it off, I guess all that fat and protein.

*

Everything is chemical and I don't see how we can say food isn't just as chemical as anything else. I could program myself to eat like a rabid hyena all day with nothing more than half a slice of wheat toast with jam and about 2 Tbsp of milk. (There are some 'healthy yogurts' which fill this need all on their own. Great diet food, not.) If I'm not eating wheat gluten, let alone gluten with fructose, let alone gluten with fructose with dairy, then I have no urge to eat at all (which is a problem in the opposite direction). Clearly it's chemical, and it's easily reproducible for me.

*

Martin your point about veggies and what plants really do for our chemistry is really fascinating. I had never even thought about that before.

*

I think anybody can misuse words including 'addiction.' We misuse words in every other element of society, so why not this one. And I think it's a given that every chemical has its own context, but as Teaser pointed out, just because one thing is more harshly and immediately addicting than another, doesn't mean the other isn't or can't be; these things fall on a spectrum.

Mostly, people publicly opining like this guy just serve as a leverage platform for a lot of volume about how if fat people would just quit making up lame excuses to eat pie the whole world would be lean.

PJ

[M Levac]

Well, it's a basic principle of evolution. All living things are driven to survive, at the expense of all other living things. This is the predator/prey relationship. However, if doing so does not lead to survival, then the next best thing is to enlist other living things, but still at their expense. This is the parasite/host relationship. If that doesn't work either, then we get into symbiosis. This is the mutual benefit relationship. Our relationship with the stuff we eat falls somewhere in there, but mostly predator/prey. With fruits, they most likely have adapted to drive us to eat them, but also developed protection for the seed itself, so that we eat the pulp, but discard the seed, which then takes root elsewhere, ensuring the plant's survival, but not necessarily our own, since whatever benefit we can extract from fruits is seasonal and short-lived. We could argue that we do benefit from eating the fruit's pulp, but then it would only be a small benefit and not essential to our survival, not immediately anyway. In the grand scheme of things, it's a bit different, I think. Fruits come from trees, trees give us oxygen and feed animals we eat, and so forth. However, all this is driven by the single drive to survive of each and every species.

Here's an interesting point about all this. The most successful symbiotic event was the combination of the mitochondria with an amoeba. This is such a powerful adaptation that it resulted in an explosion of evolution, of course at the expense of all those living things that did not have this advantage. As far as I can figure out, there is not a single higher life form that does not have mitochondria. On the other hand, we've become the most successful predator such that we have extinguished the cave bear, and probably other species as well.

But I digress. His point about the brain's metabolic need is the only thing I really disagree with.

[teaser]

I think there's a more recent "natural selection" in that the producers of junk food that we are least able to resist eating more of tend to sell more of their product and thrive.

With the reality shows--well, they do have auditions for many of those. I think it's likely that while there probably is bullying going on, to get people to say they're eating more (likely in guise of Dr Phil-esque "get real"-ism), they look for people who will be interesting--and somebody whose problem is more like Jimmy Moore, with his old "sixteen cokes a day and two boxes of little debbie cakes," habits makes for more popular television. Which also gives a subject, going in, who is more likely to respond to a hypocaloric diet.

Shows like Biggest Loser where people who fail to lose weight get sent home--almost any weight loss intervention is going to look pretty good by the end of the season, since all you'll have left on the show is people who respond well to it.

[rightnow]

I think there's a more recent "natural selection" in that the producers of junk food that we are least able to resist eating more of tend to sell more of their product and thrive.

Spiritually and esoterically, because corporations operate as complex inorganics, in the Casteneda model.
{/end woo}

Good point about the Biggest Loser.

PJ

[s-piper]

Yes, because I actually WANTED to be the person who ate candy from the trashbin. I just needed an excuse!

Two middle fingers up to that article!

[msmum1977]

They would end up getting actually upset about it, that this was just wrong-wrong-wrong that I was 3x their size and eating what they did or less and not losing weight, though I wasn't trying, as I knew better. I think our society really has no idea about the eating thing.
PJ

THIS!!! OMG, if I had a dollar for everytime someone said to me "wow, you don't really eat that much and/or that unhealthy. I don't get why you are so overweight"

Of course I'm paraphrasing a lot of the comments here as people struggled to be politically correct in asking me how I could be soooo fat without actually saying I was fat or offending me. LOL.

Nonetheless, would be at least 5k richer I think :lol:

[Bonnie OFS]

So true - if someone is slim and eats a lot and does no exercise, their behaviour isn't condemned, and isn't seen as gluttony - in fact the person is often envied. But, if you're obese, then regardless of how much you eat, it is assumed that you must be greedy, lazy and gluttonous.

The shame of being obese was as debilitating to me as the obesity and unhealthy eating patterns - binging, overeating, and eating really unhealthy foods. If I had a craving for sugar I'd eat lumps of brown sugar. Wheat cravings would end up with me eating anything from dried pasta (a favorite from childhood) to a whole package of tortillas, 1/2 a loaf of bread (or more), and all sorts of weird stuff from the freezer.

I have since learned that it's not just gluten, but wheat that isn't good for me, as well as sugar. Being diabetic I've finally dropped all grains. (I do miss my tasty brown rice with my breakfast egg - maybe someday I'll be able to tolerate it).

Attending OA meetings and actually doing the Steps has helped me understand my compulsive thoughts and eating behaviors.

All the exhortations from doctors who counseled me to "just eat less food" or "eat healthy foods" didn't help me. But being wheat free, low carb, and OA have.

I'm still considered obese, but the pounds are coming off now! And best of all, I feel good and not like I'm starving myself. :Party:

[s-piper]

The shame of being obese was as debilitating to me as the obesity and unhealthy eating patterns - binging, overeating, and eating really unhealthy foods. If I had a craving for sugar I'd eat lumps of brown sugar. Wheat cravings would end up with me eating anything from dried pasta (a favorite from childhood) to a whole package of tortillas, 1/2 a loaf of bread (or more), and all sorts of weird stuff from the freezer.

I have since learned that it's not just gluten, but wheat that isn't good for me, as well as sugar. Being diabetic I've finally dropped all grains. (I do miss my tasty brown rice with my breakfast egg - maybe someday I'll be able to tolerate it).

Attending OA meetings and actually doing the Steps has helped me understand my compulsive thoughts and eating behaviors.

All the exhortations from doctors who counseled me to "just eat less food" or "eat healthy foods" didn't help me. But being wheat free, low carb, and OA have.

I'm still considered obese, but the pounds are coming off now! And best of all, I feel good and not like I'm starving myself. :Party:

Yep same here. That's the thing, not all overweight people are compulsive overeaters/food addicts but, for those of us who are, saying that no overweight people are addicts they just want an excuse to overeat is insane considering the weird sh!t we sometimes end up eating, stuff no one would want to eat.

[WereBear]

That's the thing, not all overweight people are compulsive overeaters/food addicts but, for those of us who are, saying that no overweight people are addicts they just want an excuse to overeat is insane considering the weird sh!t we sometimes end up eating, stuff no one would want to eat.

In the grips of binging there were times I would eat a bunch of saltines. That's a sprinkle of salt away from wallpaper paste. That makes no sense on any level; unless we look at wheat the way we look at heroin or meth.

I got a grip on my disordered eating on an emotional basis years before I solved it on a physical basis. I was tormented by the fact that I would have that "healthy" meal of pasta and salad, all low fat, only to be driven back into the kitchen with crazy hunger. I thought I was insane.

I was told my hunger was all in my mind.

Now, I know that every time in the past that I gorged myself, it was because I was, in reality, so freakin' hungry. Every bite of pure carbs would lead to two or three or more bites, later.

That's not me making excuses for wanting to eat. Many many times I would go to bed hungry, and cry into my pillow. I was so tired of BEING OVERWEIGHT. I was so tired of EATING TOO MUCH. I was so tired of EATING.

And yet, thanks to advice from "experts" on what to eat, I was doomed to suffer this way for years. Excuse me while I no longer consider them very expert at all!

[Whofan]

So this guy is a professor at Leeds University. Professor of what? Does he have to publish stuff to keep his job or did he just wake up one morning and think it'd be cool to let the world know his personal opinion on this subject? What are his credentials and research that so impressed the editors that they published it?

I guess that tossing and turning until 3AM, unable to sleep because there is no bread in the house, and finally getting out of bed and driving to an all night deli to buy some is not addictive behavior. Then stuffing the first slice into my mouth as quickly as possible and toasting the rest one piece at a time until the loaf was gone is also not addictive behavior and bread is not an addictive substance. So glad to know I wasn't an addict after all.

[Judynyc]

So this guy is a professor at Leeds University. Professor of what? Does he have to publish stuff to keep his job or did he just wake up one morning and think it'd be cool to let the world know his personal opinion on this subject? What are his credentials and research that so impressed the editors that they published it?

I guess that tossing and turning until 3AM, unable to sleep because there is no bread in the house, and finally getting out of bed and driving to an all night deli to buy some is not addictive behavior. Then stuffing the first slice into my mouth as quickly as possible and toasting the rest one piece at a time until the loaf was gone is also not addictive behavior and the bread is not an addictive substance. So glad to know I wasn't an addict after all.

I'm glad to know that! :lol: I've done similar at times in my life.

One thing that I've come to realize about certain types of people (not meaning to generalize but they do.... so :p ), I see them as intellectual academics. They do not have a clue about being an addictive personality type. Because they can't relate to it in any way, they think that its an easy fix...just do what they do. :rolleyes:
My father was this type of person. He was never able to get it about my addictive issues. I've found that there are many people like this. I see this as the more cerebral they are, the more they are unable to relate. :)

[teaser]

http://www.foodmanufacture.co.uk/Food-Safety/Food-addiction-a-flawed-excuse-for-overeating

Blundell will be chairing a conference 'Food Addiction--what is the evidence?'........The event is being organised by the British Nutrition Foundation (BNF).

http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/food-and-drink/news/is-the-british-nutrition-foundation-having-its-cake-and-eating-it-too-1925034.html



Is the British Nutrition Foundation having its cake and eating it too?
Group dedicated to healthy eating is partly funded by the food industry
...............
However, the organisation's 39 members, which contribute to its funding, include – beside the Government, the EU – Cadbury, Kellogg's, Northern Foods, McDonald's, PizzaExpress, the main supermarket chains except Tesco, and producer bodies such as the Potato Council. The chairman of its board of trustees, Paul Hebblethwaite, is also chairman of the Biscuit, Cake, Chocolate and Confectionery Trade Association.


Now, I've watched videos sponsored by egg marketing boards with people like Jeff Volek... I don't really hold this against anybody--I believe Dr. Volek is sincere in his views--the egg people just happen to have a vested interest in making sure his views are heard. Same applies here... except that in my opinion, these people just happen to be wrong... :lol: That's my nice opinion. I also hold in parallel the opinion that bad men are trying to get us to eat crap to their profit at the expense of our health.

They also have more money to funnel into research. The glycemic index studies in Australia were heavily funded by Kellogg's.

I think it's the same Blundell listed as a co-author in papers like this one;

CNS regulation of appetite.
Harrold JA, Dovey TM, Blundell JE, Halford JC.
Source
Human Ingestive Behaviour Laboratory, Department of Experimental Psychology, University of Liverpool, Eleanor Rathbone Building, Bedford Street South, Liverpool L69 7ZA, UK. harrold~liverpool.ac.uk
Abstract
This article reviews the regulation of appetite from a biopsychological perspective. It considers psychological experiences and peripheral nutritional systems (both episodic and tonic) and addresses their relationship with the CNS networks that process and integrate their input. Whilst such regulatory aspects of obesity focus on homeostatic control mechanisms, in the modern environment hedonic aspects of appetite are also critical. Enhanced knowledge of the complexity of appetite regulation and the mechanisms that sustain obesity indicate the challenge presented by management of the obesity epidemic. Nonetheless, effective control of appetite expression remains a critical therapeutic target for weight management. Currently, strategies which utilise a combination of agents to target both homeostatic and hedonic control mechanisms represent the most promising approaches. This article is part of a Special Issue entitled 'Central Control of Food Intake'.

[Seejay]

Seems to me it's in the best interest of Big Food to be the go-to experts on CNS aspects of food. It's a way to shape the conversation and keep away from what happened with Big Tobacco.

We know that the food technologists have already talked with the people at the tobacco companies who carefully adjust the delivery mechanisms of their addictive products. To keep the stream of business at its healthiest.

Since the science is increasingly pointing to similar involvement with addiction brain pathways, there will be crafting of the science and messaging to maintain the "in moderation" message more like beer companies and less like tobacco companies.

[rightnow]

I actually believe that there is a fundamental drive on the part of the megacorps to push as a marketing concept the idea that obesity is driven by human failing.

As long as it is operator error, it is not 'food' to blame. Not even the specially chemically modified to affect the brain better than most drugs 'food.'

PJ

[Seejay]

That makes super sense to me too PJ! thanks for that one.

That also plays into our cultural meme that the brain is always subordinate to our thinking or our willpower. No such thing as a physical brain getting in the driver's seat.

[SRabbit]

I am a big boned girl who grew up being called chubby and all sorts of things...I remember starving myself to try to get down to the same sizes my tiny bones friends were wearing---not eating for days--I would weigh less than them on the scale but still wear a bigger size....and of course no one explained to me that I was not overweight, just had a different body structure.

I have fought sugar addiction all my life and sometimes I give in and sometimes I overcome, and it is a very real thing for me. Trying to tell me that it is not real, that it is just me failing, doesn't accomplish anything for me. Telling me that it is real but with help and/or eating the right foods that will calm it down (such as high protein/low carb) does accomplish something for me.

But accomplishing something for me does not fuel the fast food/snack food/candy industry or sell its products so why even hope they would care?

[Judynyc]

I actually believe that there is a fundamental drive on the part of the megacorps to push as a marketing concept the idea that obesity is driven by human failing.

As long as it is operator error, it is not 'food' to blame. Not even the specially chemically modified to affect the brain better than most drugs 'food.'

PJ
Yes, Yes and YES! :agree: :thup:

[s-piper]

In the grips of binging there were times I would eat a bunch of saltines. That's a sprinkle of salt away from wallpaper paste. That makes no sense on any level; unless we look at wheat the way we look at heroin or meth.

I got a grip on my disordered eating on an emotional basis years before I solved it on a physical basis. I was tormented by the fact that I would have that "healthy" meal of pasta and salad, all low fat, only to be driven back into the kitchen with crazy hunger. I thought I was insane.

I was told my hunger was all in my mind.

Now, I know that every time in the past that I gorged myself, it was because I was, in reality, so freakin' hungry. Every bite of pure carbs would lead to two or three or more bites, later.

That's not me making excuses for wanting to eat. Many many times I would go to bed hungry, and cry into my pillow. I was so tired of BEING OVERWEIGHT. I was so tired of EATING TOO MUCH. I was so tired of EATING.

And yet, thanks to advice from "experts" on what to eat, I was doomed to suffer this way for years. Excuse me while I no longer consider them very expert at all!

For me it wasn't hunger that stood out most. Hunger I can tolerate. The cravings, though, are much stronger than real hunger.

What stands out most other than the aforementioned Twizzlers from the trash incident (they were in a bag!), is that when going to buy something to binge on I really felt (feel...I haven't totally conquered it yet) like a junkie going to score. Keyed up as I'd walk into the 7-11 near my apartment, grab what I wanted and wait impatiently in line on the people buying cigarettes, annoyed with the ones who wanted to chit-chat with the clerk, at the register I'd avoid eye contact with the clerk fearing that they'd comment on my purchase...not even necessarily that they'd say something bad, just that they'd say anything at all. Sometimes they'd say "ooh, these are yummy!" but I hated that just as much as if they'd said "do you really need these, fatass?"
Actually, I might have preferred if they'd said the latter because I would have had an excuse to blow up at them and vent my frustration.

[Bonnie OFS]

For me it wasn't hunger that stood out most. Hunger I can tolerate. The cravings, though, are much stronger than real hunger...I'd avoid eye contact with the clerk fearing that they'd comment on my purchase...not even necessarily that they'd say something bad, just that they'd say anything at all. Sometimes they'd say "ooh, these are yummy!" but I hated that just as much as if they'd said "do you really need these, fatass?"


Oh, can I ever relate to this! Tho it came to the point where I couldn't differentiate between hunger and cravings. I can remember slinking to the dessert section of the HS cafeteria (tho my problems with food started long before high school) to get one of the scrumptious, huge cinnamon rolls. I would pray that no one would see me! And at the same time I'd want to buy a bunch and eat them in the comfort of my bedroom.

And looking at old pictures, I can see that I wasn't fat. A bit chubby at times, but I thought I was huge. (That was in the era of Twiggy, so I suppose a lot of normal-sized people felt fat.) The reality of being huge came years later.

My daughter abused both alcohol and drugs. When she got off them (thank you God & AA!) she found out that food cravings were no different!

[HappyLC]

There must be some reason I have never been able to stop eating anything made from wheat once I get started. I can remember eating an entire loaf of bread at one sitting when I was a skinny little seven year old (it was at a neighbor's house, much to my mother's chagrin!). Growing up it got worse. I would get up in the middle of the night and pick at a tray of cold, leftover ziti or lasagna until there was almost nothing left and then spend the rest of the night worrying that someone would notice. I would eat entire Entenmann's cakes when I was alone in the house and hide the evidence in the garbage can outside. And now, even after years of avoidance, I still think about bread almost every day.

If that's not addiction, I don't know what is.

[JEY100]

Kris Gunnars has written a number of good posts on food addiction, and since he has some personal experience with addictions, is a bit more sympathetic than Dr. Blundell.
His most recent post is: Why Everything in Moderation is Killing People: http://authoritynutrition.com/why-everything-in-moderation-is-killing-people/
Clicking on the hyperlinks in the article will bring you back to his previous posts on the topic, and his free .pdf
Viscious Eating: The Food Addict's Guide to Redemption
http://authoritynutrition.com/viciouseating.pdf