You said what I have been thinking about this thread. Whatever you label it, addiction or not, I and many other people had an unhealthy relationship with certain kinds of foods and need to avoid them in order to restore and maintain our health. What others choose to call it and why doesn't effect how I act.
Agreed, however I do think more people could be helped (and we could push back against the fat-shamers) IF it were universally recognized that "certain kinds of foods" are addictive to certain people. I mean, imagine how little progress would have been made in understanding alcohol addiction if it had been labeled "bevarage addiction" instead of ALCOHOL addiction.
Anyone trying to claim that they have a beverage addiction would be laughed at because we ALL have to drink to live!
Alcohol (ethanol) is just ONE component of SOME beverages...and, ethanol is actually a relatively small component of most of the various beverages that do contain it! Beer is typically only about 4% to 5% ethanol. Wine ranges from about 10% to 15% ethanol and hard liquor is about 30% to 40% ethanol. Remove the ethanol portion from any of these beverages and an alcoholic could safely consume the rest without being triggered. So, it's not an addiction to "beverages." It's an addiction to a particular component found in SOME but not all beverages! We all understand that as long as alcoholics stick to beverages that contain little or no alcohol, their alcoholism can be controlled.
Let's stop referring to the problem as a "food addiction" and call it what it is. It's NOT food addiction. It's SUGAR addiction. When addicts stick with foods that contain little or no sugar (or the precursors to sugar: simple carbs) their addiction can be controlled!
I'm ready to suggest a brand new term. Since chemists use the suffix -ose to name sugars (sucrose, fructose, galactose, dextrose, lactose, maltose), maybe we could start referring to the problem as Ose-addiction and to the sufferers as ose-aholics.
Maybe with a brand new term, we could start recognizing that Ose-addiction is a real thing; that one's susceptibility to ose-addiction depends in large part upon one's genetic makeup. We could begin to accept the physical results of uncontrolled ose-addiction ARE not signs that the sufferer is lazy or lacks self-discipline or is otherwise morally deficient. But, neither should the physical symptoms of ose-addiction be considered "beautiful" or something to be "celebrated." The survival of the human race depends on people generally considering signs of good health in potential mates to be attractive and signs of poor health to be unattractive. Excess fat is a sign of poor health. Of course it is unattractive to most people! And all the PC pressure in the world is not going to change that fact.
Just like with alcohol, while ose-addiction is a disease that one should NOT be blamed nor shamed for having, the sufferer IS the only one who CAN bring their disease under control. But to do that, they do need appropriate guidance and support.