Sugar is one of the most demonized carbohydrates in the modern diet. The consumption of sugar is often compared to the addictive nature of illicit drug use. This bold claim over such a commonly-used household ingredient poses the question: “Is sugar really as addictive as they say?”
by: Sarah Mandel
Background
Studies have revealed that sugar lights up the same areas of the brain as addictive substances such as cocaine. These findings have been sensationalized in the media and wellness community, resulting in the myth of “sugar addiction.” However, a deeper look at the research shows little evidence for the concept. In fact, a comprehensive 2016 review article declared the current evidence on sugar addiction “far from convincing.”
The pleasure centers in our brain also light up when we see friends, a loved one, or listen to our favorite song. Perhaps most importantly, sugar consumption does not lead to the same lasting neural changes seen in drug addicts, who need increasingly more of a substance to elicit the same high.[1] Simply put, there is no good evidence that sugar causes substance addiction.
Response to Restriction
Interestingly, multiple studies in rats show that the reward response to sugar is heightened following a period of food deprivation. When given consistent access to sugar, the rats’ reward response was blunted. Similarly, bingeing behaviors were only seen in the rats whose sugar intake had been previously restricted. It appears that deprivation, rather than sugar itself, is the driver of the heightened pleasure response.[1]
Though research in humans is limited, the Minnesota Starvation Study showed similar patterns in behavior following restriction. After a period of semi-starvation, the subjects developed obsessive food thoughts, dreams, and binge eating. Though these behaviors may appear similar to those of an addict, they emerged only after a period of extreme deprivation.[2]
Similarly, studies in humans with binge eating behaviors have shown that consistent exposure to highly palatable “forbidden” foods results in significant decreases in bingeing. In the case of addiction, the opposite would be true: exposure would result in increased use and dose-dependence over time.[3]
Survival Mechanism
Sugar isn’t the only substance in food that elicits a brain response. Studies have shown that our pleasure centers light up more heavily in response to energy-dense foods, regardless of their sugar content.[4] This response makes sense from an evolutionary perspective: our bodies developed to protect us from famine. Unlike illicit substances, food is required for survival, so this reward response ensures adequate intake and sustains life. Food is meant to be rewarding because we need it to survive.
Chemically Modified Foods
Food companies have begun manipulating this innate pleasure response to boost profits. Food scientists are able to engineer their products to increase palatability and override our natural hunger and fullness hormones.[5] These changes increase consumption and, ultimately, the company’s bottom line. Despite these sneaky manufacturing practices, there is still no scientific evidence that we can become physiologically addicted to highly palatable ingredients like sugar. In fact, demonization of these foods can lead to feelings of deprivation that elicit the heightened reward response outlined above.
Why The Food Addiction Model is Harmful
Much of the current research on food addiction in humans utilizes the “Yale Food Addiction Scale” (YFAS), a questionnaire designed to capture addictive-like food behaviors. However, researchers have found that a significant number of subjects with “food addiction,” as defined by the scale, actually have an eating disorder, typically binge-eating disorder or bulimia nervosa.[1] While some argue that food addiction may be its own unique diagnosis, these results suggest that the YFAS does not identify a distinct disorder; rather, it is a misguided screener for eating disorders. In this case, the food addiction model becomes particularly harmful because abstinence (what one would recommend for an addict) is the exact opposite of evidence-based treatment for eating disorders. Not only does the addiction model “pathologize pleasure,”[6] it actively works against proper treatment.
This post was written by BALANCE Dietetic Intern, Sarah Mandel.
Sarah Mandel, BA is a Dietetic Intern and graduate student in Clinical Nutrition at New York University. Before her graduate studies, she worked in communications for multiple non-profit organizations, where she helped promote initiatives on sustainable food practices. She holds a BA in Sociology from Hamilton College. After completing her dietetic internship, Sarah plans to work in the eating disorder field as a Registered Dietitian, helping clients achieve full recovery.
References
1. Westwater ML, Fletcher PC, Ziauddeen H. Sugar addiction: The state of the science. Eur J Nutr. 2016;55(2):55-69. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00394-016-1229-6. doi: 10.1007/s00394-016-1229-6.
2. Kalm LM, Semba RD. They starved so that others be better fed: Remembering ancel keys and the minnesota experiment. J Nutr. 2005;135(6):1347-1352. https://doi.org/10.1093/jn/135.6.1347. Accessed 7/26/2020. doi: 10.1093/jn/135.6.1347.
3. Kristeller J, Wolever RQ, Sheets V. Mindfulness-based eating awareness training (MB-EAT) for binge eating: A randomized clinical trial. Mindfulness. 2014;5(3):282-297. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12671-012-0179-1. doi: 10.1007/s12671-012-0179-1.
4. Kringelbach ML, O’Doherty J, Rolls ET, Andrews C. Activation of the human orbitofrontal cortex to a liquid food stimulus is correlated with its subjective pleasantness. Cereb Cortex. 2003;13(10):1064-1071. https://doi.org/10.1093/cercor/13.10.1064. Accessed 7/26/2020. doi: 10.1093/cercor/13.10.1064.
5. Moss, Michael. “Salt, Sugar, Fat. How the Food Giants Hooked Us” Random House © 2013
6. Miller A. Sugar is addictive? BS, these health pros say. November 16, 2018. Available from: https://health.usnews.com/wellness/food/articles/2018-11-16/sugar-is-addictive-bs-these-health-pros-say.
