[quote]MODOK wrote:
[quote]facko wrote:
What bothers me about this board (lately) is the group think that goes on. I post a rather conservative statement on the topic of moderation and I get blasted. People assuming I’m an “ectomorph”…that I eat whatever the fuck I want all the time in whatever quantities I want. Then, the vindictive nature of the “lolz I love when people pick science fights with MODOK” …I’m not picking science fights with anyone. I don’t pick fights. I’m deciding to remain calm and try to explain my previous statements in hope that they will be received by you guys with some level of sanity and logic.
Firstly, I’ll address what I meant by “moderation” in the context of this topic. Perhaps I’ll explain it in terms of how I eat. That way you will understand what I mean and realize at the same time that I don’t eat poptarts for the entirety of my carbohydrate consumption. Maybe this will HELP clear up some vast misconceptions of what if it fits your macros is or flexible eating is about. There seems to be a ton of miscommunication between the camps of those who are more on the IIFYM side and those who are basically complete “bro/clean” eaters. This is how I set it up for me and how it SHOULD be set up: In terms of macronutrients…I account for protein first at around 1g of protein per lb of BW at least (this is the minimum, sometimes I exceed this)…I then account for me EFAs at around 0.45g per lb of BW at least. Now I fill in the rest of my calorie needs with carbs for the most part OR sometimes a mixture of more fat/carbs/protein depending on the day etc. But, I stay within my caloric needs for my goals…I never go under my EFA or protein needs. Even more important: I ALWAYS ACCOUNT FOR MY MICRONUTRIENTS…DAILY. I make sure on a daily basis that my micronutrients are being met through my food intake.
Looking at the above, we must realize that it would be pretty difficult for me, if not impossible, to meet my micronutrient needs by eating only cereal and protein powder. Therefore, you must deduce that a majority of my food consumption is by way of what I would consider whole food sources i.e. animal meats (lean and fatty depending on the day), copious amounts of fibrous green veg, some fruit, starch based carbohydrates such as white rice, white potatoes, sweet potatoes, oats. That makes up about 80% of my overall caloric consumption…the remainder after my needs are addressed MAY be in the form of “non-typical bodybuilding foods” i.e. poptarts etc.
If you read the above two paragraphs and still cannot see the sanity in such and what I mean by “moderation”, then I believe our differences in perception are too vast for us to ever see eye to eye on the subject. I read the above two paragraphs and see nutritional responsibility as well as a more psychologically healthy/less stressful approach to diet.
In regards to the 60 minutes special. I’m referring to the study that was MENTIONED in the program. They basically took a bunch of college kids, kept them in a hospital and controlled what they consumed over some weeks. Firstly, for a period of time they made sure there was no sugar within their diets. Then they increased sugar intake to 25% of their daily total calorie intake. Problem 1: completely sedentary. No this is not a cop out…frequent weight training and/or athletics does make a rather large difference. Problem 2: 25% of their daily totals - sugar…50% of their total carbohydrate intake -sugar. Come on…this should be completely unrealistic in regards to ANY of US on this board or involved in a bodybuilding lifestyle. This type of nutrition behavior only applies to those who don’t give 1 single FUCK about what they consume on a daily basis. This does NOT apply to us. At least it shouldn’t apply to us. I count my macros every single day to as much of an exact that I can manage in real terms, therefore I KNOW it doesn’t apply to me.
So…what does this tell me: When you are fed a STANDARD American diet and you don’t exercise/are entirely sedentary, then you are far greater risk for heart disease, diabetes, obesity, and cancer. Common sense. Perhaps, you hate the term “common sense” as much as you hate the term “moderation”?
I feel that the overarching attitude amongst those within the fitness community as shifted towards or at least is nearing orthorexic eating behavior. Fervent, over-zealous opposition and irrational avoidance of certain foods as if they will immediately make you fat and kill you if they hit your lips. From my perception, this does not seem sane, nor psychologically healthy, nor logical. [/quote]
I am confused about how your post on moderation fits in with the discussion on the physiological addictive properties of sugar? I think that we all would agree that moderation is ok in nearly anything in life. Well, at least it won’t get you into too much trouble one way or another. But the premise of addiction is that moderation cannot be attained. The substance is addictive and therefore causes you to exceed moderate behavior. If you would stop and look at your own behaviors in a critical manner, you would see the addictive properties of the food you are eating. In fact, I remember you asking a question in my thread about your cheat weekends where you were eating 9-10k a day of this addictive food, saying you can’t wait until your weekend so you can pig out, and feeling bad the day after your binge for eating so much, etc.(Hardly moderation) If you would look at food as a pharmaceutical agent (which it is) you would see that this type of behavior is no different than an alcoholic weekend binge or a binge on narcotics.
The physiological effects are the SAME. Dopamine is over-secreted in the nucleus accumbens when exposed to opiates, cocaine, alcohol, or SUGAR. The brain activity scans look identical. If you think about it further it will hit you that we are hard-wired by nature to be addicted to sugar. It was selected for many years ago to give us a taste for rapid energy sources, and plants exploited that fact by making little goodies with their seeds in them for us to seek out called fruit. So what happens when you take the small amount of an addictive substance out of its natural environment (fruit, poppy seed, coca leaf) and distill it down to its most pure form ( sugar, opium, cocaine)? Activity at the nucleus accumbens and amygdala explodes, dopamine surges, and you have your feeling of well-being aka addiction trigger. Its pretty simple.
Evidence for sugaraddiction: Behavioral and neurochemical effects of intermittent, excessive sugar intake
Nicole M. Avena, Pedro Rada, Bartley G. Hoebel,
Department of Psychology, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ 08540, USA
Received 14 September 2006. Revised 19 April 2007. Accepted 28 April 2007. Available online 18 May 2007.
Abstract
[Avena, N.M., Rada, P., Hoebel B.G., 2007. Evidence for sugaraddiction: Behavioral and neurochemical effects of intermittent, excessive sugar intake. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews XX(X), XXXâ??XXX]. The experimental question is whether or not sugar can be a substance of abuse and lead to a natural form of addiction. â??Food addictionâ?? seems plausible because brain pathways that evolved to respond to natural rewards are also activated by addictive drugs. Sugar is noteworthy as a substance that releases opioids and dopamine and thus might be expected to have addictive potential. This review summarizes evidence of sugar dependence in an animal model. Four components of addiction are analyzed. â??Bingeing,â?? â??withdrawal,â?? â??cravingâ?? and â??cross-sensitizationâ?? are each given operational definitions and demonstrated behaviorally with sugar bingeing as the reinforcer. These behaviors are then related to neurochemical changes in the brain that also occur with addictive drugs. Neural adaptations include changes in dopamine and opioid receptor binding, enkephalin mRNA expression and dopamine and acetylcholine release in the nucleus accumbens. The evidence supports the hypothesis that under certain circumstances rats can become sugar dependent. This may translate to some human conditions as suggested by the literature on eating disorders and obesity.
Implications of an animal model of sugar addiction, withdrawal and relapse for human health
Authors: Wideman, C. H.; Nadzam, G. R.; Murphy, H. M.
Source: Nutritional Neuroscience, Volume 8, Numbers 5-6, -6/October-December 2005 , pp. 269-276(8)
Abstract:
The effect of intermittent glucose administration on the circadian rhythm of body temperature was studied in rats to provide evidence of sugar addiction, withdrawal and relapse. Metabolic and behavioral phenomena were also observed. Biotelemetry transmitters recorded body temperature for the duration of the 4-week experiment. Rats were divided into an experimental and a control group, which were maintained on the same habituation conditions for the duration of the experiment, with the exception of weeks 2 and 4, when the experimental group was presented with a 25% glucose solution. Experimental animals displayed a precipitous drop in body temperature and behavioral changes associated with withdrawal during week 3, when sugar was removed. There was an increase in kilocalories (kcal) consumed during weeks 2 and 4 by experimental animals and, by the end of the experiment, these animals showed a greater percent increase in body weight. Elevated blood glucose levels were found in experimental animals. The study demonstrates that the effects of sugar addiction, withdrawal and relapse are similar to those of drugs of abuse. Implications of the rewarding and addicting effects of sugar are related to weight gain, obesity and Type II diabetes. Furthermore, pitfalls related to dieting are elucidated.
Obesity Research (2002) 10, 478â??488; doi: 10.1038/oby.2002.66
Evidence That Intermittent, Excessive Sugar Intake Causes Endogenous Opioid Dependence
Carlo Colantuoni*, Pedro Rada*,â? , Joseph McCarthy*, Caroline Patten*, Nicole M. Avena*, Andrew Chadeayne* and Bartley G. Hoebel*
*Department of Psychology, Princeton University, Princeton, New Jersey
â? Department of Physiology, University of Los Andes, Merida, Venezuela
Objective: The goal was to determine whether withdrawal from sugar can cause signs of opioid dependence. Because palatable food stimulates neural systems that are implicated in drug addiction, it was hypothesized that intermittent, excessive sugar intake might create dependency, as indicated by withdrawal signs.
Research Methods and Procedures: Male rats were food-deprived for 12 hours daily, including 4 hours in the early dark, and then offered highly palatable 25% glucose in addition to chow for the next 12 hours. Withdrawal was induced by naloxone or food deprivation. Withdrawal signs were measured by observation, ultrasonic recordings, elevated plus maze tests, and in vivo microdialysis.
Results: Naloxone (20 mg/kg intraperitoneally) caused somatic signs, such as teeth chattering, forepaw tremor, and head shakes. Food deprivation for 24 hours caused spontaneous withdrawal signs, such as teeth chattering. Naloxone (3 mg/kg subcutaneously) caused reduced time on the exposed arm of an elevated plus maze, where again significant teeth chattering was recorded. The plus maze anxiety effect was replicated with four control groups for comparison. Accumbens microdialysis revealed that naloxone (10 and 20 mg/kg intraperitoneally) decreased extracellular dopamine (DA), while dose-dependently increasing acetylcholine (ACh). The naloxone-induced DA/ACh imbalance was replicated with 10% sucrose and 3 mg/kg naloxone subcutaneously.
Discussion: Repeated, excessive intake of sugar created a state in which an opioid antagonist caused behavioral and neurochemical signs of opioid withdrawal. The indices of anxiety and DA/ACh imbalance were qualitatively similar to withdrawal from morphine or nicotine, suggesting that the rats had become sugar-dependent.
[/quote]
You’ve made my point for me in terms of moderation vs excess. When I completely avoided said “bad” foods over the entirety of the week…I binge ate them in complete excess in one day. I would rack up large amounts of calories because I knew I wouldn’t be experiencing these flavors for a whole week to come.
I’m sure you know where I’m going to go with this…When I started FITTING these said “bad” foods into my macros on a more daily basis IN MODERATION…meaning the vast majority i.e. 80% of my foods still being whole food sources…I no longer have a need for nor engage in large, planned cheat days. Every day is business as usual and I don’t feel the urge to absolutely kill these foods without abandon on one given day. Because I know I can experience these foods here and there over the course of the week…
I’m being truthful.
Now…in terms of studies: please don’t show me rat studies anymore. Especially when dealing with carbohydrates/glucose…thanks.
You know that I respect you a great deal and you’re on record saying that I’m a bright kid. I’d like to keep the respect between us.
Some foods absolutely have no business ever passing your lips. I can think of quite a few examples. And honestly, it would be better for the vast majority of Americans if they didn’t try to eat foods like doughnuts or Doritos in moderation. Common sense and moderation seem to fail a lot of people.