Are there any tests being done to check flour and sugar addiction in children?

---

Request for Question Clarification by pinkfreud-ga on 02 Nov 2002 07:47 PST

Neither sugar nor flour is "addictive" in a medical sense. Could you
tell us a bit more about what you need here? Are you looking for
information about children's cravings for, or overindulgence in, these
food substances?

The more details you can give us about your exact needs, the better we
will be able to help you.

---

Clarification of Question by orice-ga on 02 Nov 2002 08:46 PST

This is the problem. Flour and Sugar are additing, just as alcohol,
cigareetes, crac, meth etc. The key factors in obesity are flour and
sugar. So if you cannot find anything in your medical search it
follows no work has been done in this area.

---

Request for Question Clarification by pinkfreud-ga on 02 Nov 2002 08:57 PST

If you are using a definition of "addiction" other than the medical
one (which would not apply to flour or sugar,) please give us more
information on your criteria. We can try to find anecdotal
information, or documentation outside the medical field.

---

Clarification of Question by orice-ga on 02 Nov 2002 09:36 PST

The medical profession has not classified flour and sugar as
addiction. The food industry would have this information in their
research. What causes Addicition? It is an allegry with an insatable
craving for that which hurts a person. Obesity is the obvious example.
What causes obesity? Flour and Sugar. If you cannot find this with all
of the Google resources then this answers my question.
Otha Rice

---

Request for Question Clarification by luciaphile-ga on 02 Nov 2002 11:39 PST

What exactly is it you're looking for? As pinkfreud-ga indicated, the
medical community doesn't define flour and/or sugar as addictive.
There are quite a few factors that contribute to obesity (e.g. lack of
physical activity, genetics, etc.).

---

Clarification of Question by orice-ga on 02 Nov 2002 15:11 PST

One of the phenoma facing eating diorders is the lack of any medical
testing for addiction to flour and sugar. This is especially true in
small children. The are tests for diabities, gall balder, glucose
tolereance etc. But there are none it seems for chldren, yet they are.

---

Clarification of Question by orice-ga on 03 Nov 2002 05:11 PST

Thank you for your information. This illustrates precisly what the
problem is. No one has studied this in a scienfific manner. That was
my question and your answers illustrate this. I am a food addict,
addicted to flour and sugar. You will find addtional information by
keying into  Food Addicts in Recovery, Overeaters anonymous, HOW, and
then comparing this to alcoholism, drugs legal and illegal. Not only
does your illustration prove the point. Obseese people tend not to get
medical treatment and diabetes, internal disorders etc. are very
prevelant.\Thank you for your answers.

According to a quick flip through a couple of my college psychology
textbooks, two important components of addiction are withdrawal
symptoms and tolerance levels.  It may be that there is little or no
research focusing on sugar and flour as addictive substances because
they do not produce withdrawal symptoms, nor can you build up a
tolerance to them.  Just a guess here.

Please note that I am not a doctor and do not have any (postgraduate)
psychology-related training.

As a public health professional I can tell you that although obesity
is certainly a very serious problem in the United States, particularly
among children, neither flour nor sugar are considered addicting. In
fact, it could be argued that the terms "flour" and "sugar" are more
like categories of food substances (flour can be made from a panoply
of foods including any grain, potatoes and even some legumes)(same
with sugars) than foods themselves. There are so many different types
of flours and sugars that to study them broadly in the sense that you
suggest would be scientifically invalid. This is not even to discuss
human metabolism - the body creates and stores simple sugars
specifically to fuel cells continuously - IF it were an addictive
substance, the body would tolerate it, crave more, make more and
eventually the pancreas would fail to be able to create enough insulin
to keep up. This is an oversimplification of typical adult-onset
diabetes but if sugar were addicting, we would all be diabetics by our
early adulthood. The same example works for starches, which are
metabolized to become sugars and metabolized or stored as fat. Fat is
another story; I would say that the amount of fat ingested on a daily
basis by Americans is at least as important to discuss as sugar or
flour.

Many people do suffer from disorders related to their intake of food.
Some examples could include coeliac disease (related to an intolerance
to gluten, which is principally ingested in the form of bread and
wheat products) and, as mentioned, diabetes. These problems are almost
never a result of the food chemicals themselves but are problems
inherent in the body of the person suffering the disorder. A possible
exception is the recent increase in diabetes found among American
children, found not to be the "juvenile onset" variety but actually a
type expected to be found in much older people. This is generally
attributed to poor diet and inactivity, but studies are ongoing. The
point is that the substances themselves are not the principal culprit
but some factor in the reality of the patient (behavior, genetic
predisposition) are generally to blame.

As many of the others who have posted comments already mentioned,
neither sugar nor flour can possibly be classified as addictive agents
according to the medical definition. Both sugars and starches (the
primary dietary component of flour) are normally present in the body
and are not associated with the internal physiological processes
necessary for addiction.

I should note, however, that there is a somewhat recently categorized
type of eating disorder that may be similar to what you refer to as
"food addition." Binge eating disorder, as it is called, is
characterized by binge eating similar to that which occurs in bulimia,
except that persons with binge eating disorder do not purge. The
disorder is commonly associated with depression as well as other
physical problems caused by the resultant obesity. Current treatments
include psychological counseling along with antidepressant and
appetite suppressant drugs. Typically 10-20% of obese persons in
weight-loss programs have this disorder.

Another, slightly rarer type of eating disorder associated with
obesity is called "night-eating syndrome", and is characterized by
morning anorexia, evening binge eating, and insomnia, but this does
not appear to be similar to what you describe.

However, these two disorders are responsible for only a fraction of
obesity cases, and much more often obesity is a consequence of a
variety of factors, including behavior and lifestyle. Certain genetic
factors can also predispose some individuals to obesity, and there are
also specific drugs, types of cancer, and endocrine disorders which
can cause obesity.

If you struggle with obesity or binge eating, I would recommend that
you visit your doctor and ask him or her about the possibility of
receiving a referal for counseling or further treatment, because
obesity can have serious health consequences and it is often very
difficult to be free of obesity and its underlying causes without
professional counseling and treatment.

Sugar is very addictive and there has been a lot of research done on
this topic. Below is an exert from the finding of one such study.

“Sugar triggers production of the brain's natural opioids. That is a
key to the addiction process. The brain is getting addicted to its own
opioids as it would to morphine or heroin. Drugs give a bigger effect,
but it is essentially the same process.

The greatest value of the research is that it provides an animal model
of sugar dependency, allowing scientists to probe more deeply the
connections between food cravings and brain physiology.

In their experiments, the researchers started rats on a pattern of
bingeing by withholding food for 12 hours when the rats were sleeping
and through breakfast time, then giving them nutritionally balanced
food plus sugar water. The animals gradually increased their daily
sugar intake until it doubled, consuming most of it in the first hour
it was available.

When the researchers suddenly removed the sugar portion of the rats'
diet, the animals exhibited teeth chattering, a common sign of
withdrawal. For some animals, the researchers removed the sugar and
also administered a dose of a drug that blocks the opioid receptors in
the brain. In addition to teeth chattering, those animals showed
anxiety and a reversal in the usual balance of neurochemicals in the
brain's motivation system.”

If you do a search for "sugar addiction" on google.com you will get
over 4000 pages returned with information about this topic.
I hope this helps.

Although I agree that there is an issue of 'substance abuse' in terms
of food, and sugar, I still disagree with the notion that sugar is an
addictive substance. Noting above comments regarding the nature of
addiction itself, and understanding that sugar is absolutely required
for cell metabolism, the notion that carbohydrates in general, as
pondered in the original question, are addictive is probably an
incorrect application of the concept of addiction, brain opioids aside
(which are triggered a by many, many substances and behaviors which,
in the vast majority of people, would not make the cut as addiction).

On the other hand, however, is the question of substance abuse which
the questioner clearly understands firsthand in terms of food and,
apparently, particularly in the case of carbohydrates which do
accumulate on the body as fats as a normal consequence of metabolic
processes.

There <is> a difference between physical addiction and psychological
addiction and the debate over this question may hinge on it. Although
neither of these substances are physically addictive, that is, don't
cause physiological symptoms or illmess if not consumed in adequate
(and ever increasing) amounts, they apparently can cause a form of
psychological dependence. There is no real phycial test for
psychological dependence - in fact, there is no test for 'addiction'
to heroin or cocaine either; we test for the substances themselves and
through talking to the patient assess the level of addiction. Testing
people for the presence of metabolized carbohydrates (sugars) would be
fairly pointless; as long as the person is living they will test
positive, and levels vary a lot individually. Assessing the patients
diet and eating habits through professionally interviewing them,
observation, and so forth would yield a lot more useful information in
diagnosis and treatment of a behavioral eating disorder.

Eating disorders are tragic, as is the ever increasing problem of
obesity in America. I believe that the answer to the question lies in
understaning what we mean by addiction in this sense and approaching
the issue, as noted above, from the standpoint of behavior and
psychology. This debate will not end with the expiration of this
question, and I hope that the the differing viewpoints presented have
been helpful.

To assume sugar and flour are addicting, in my opinion, is a way to
find an excuse for obescity. To say you are addicted to sugar and
flour, and thus am overweight, takes off personal responsibility
associated with certain behaviors, such as overeating.

FYI...It is a fact that excissive calories cause weight gain.
Carbohydrates, which are (Sugar & Flour), produce 9 calories per gram.
This is in contrast to fat, which produces only 4 calories per gram.
Perhaps the paradigm of the "fat free lifestyle" should be shifted to
a "Sugar/Flour" free or reduced lifestyle.

Thank you for your time.

The above comment is incorrect.  Carbohydrates and protein contain 4
calories per gram, whereas fats contain 9 calories per gram.  This
information is available on any nutrition site.

Although the medical community has not defined refined sugar as
addictive, I believe more and more anecdotal evidence is cropping up
(no pun intended) to point our society to look in that direction.

Refined (nutrient-devoid) carbohydrates, in fact, an overload of
carbohydrates in general have a distinct effect on the digestive
system and because they are so potent, the body develops an affinity
for them.  The insulin response and increase in onset of adult type II
diabetes should be enough for us to reduce the amount of processed
sugars and carbohydrates we and our children are eating.

Personally, I've lost 16% of my body weight (all fat) by avoiding too
many carbohydrates.  But, as I cut out sugars and carbohydrates, I
noticed that for the first two weeks, I craved them as though I were
addicted.  It was a very weird realization that my body wanted
processed sugar, crackers, potatoes, etc... even though they were
making me fat.

Now I'm back to a healthy 205 (for my height).