Thursday, August 14, 2014

Relationship between Palatability, Satiation and Cravings

It seams that for some people, there is a relationship between the palatability of foods, the satiation provided and cravings or irrational or unwanted desire for foods.  I think I have spoken of this before, but, OH well, one more time.

Now the tabular way I see this relationship is:


Palatablity
Satiation
Cravings or desires
Hyper Palatablity
Very low, More please
More please
High Palatablity
Low, more
Could eat
Medium Palatablity
enough
enough
Low Palatablity
Enough already
No Thanks
Un Palatablity
No thanks
No way


 So what does all this mean? Well it does suggests that one should stay away from high and hyper palatable foods. It also suggest that anything that we do where food is available will raise cravings. This we know.

It also suggest that being a foodie is not good for the weight, nor is associating in any way with foodies. They are dangerous to my health.

Who was the old Greek, Epicurus perhaps but no, that talked about a nation destroyed with too much good food, that gave rise to Spartism. Barley porridge, with a an few weed from the ditch (herbs, spices, vegetables), occasionally a dead fish or dead animal on feast days, or a bit of cheese was a feast (the excretions of one animal fermented in the gut of another dead animal). Hunger was and is the best appetizer. 

Or is this all just hedonistic adaptation?
































Tuesday, August 12, 2014

The Key revisited with cravings

There are five groups of reasons that cause overeating:


  1. willful overeating, as in Newfie,   I wants________.
  2. cravings - started with physical causes
  3. Cravings - started with environment and temptations
  4. CRAvings - made worse by maladaptive behavior
  5. CRAVINGS - Started and continued with - food addiction
Hypothesis: Cravings can be moderated with placebos (fact); therefore they can be moderated by cognitive processes and removal of precursors and chemicals from the food we consume.

Monday, August 11, 2014

Cravings research yeilds

It seems we have three "circuits" involved. Dopamine, serotonin, end-opioid. Pre-components, Production, receptors, re-uptake. And there is where agreement ends. Something is not quite right, and cravings are the default occurrence.

Well, also the placebo effect also utilizes these same three circuits; we naturally make and our mind, body emotions all effect the amount we produce.

Seems that some foods disrupt equilibrium, wheat and dairy fats by providing exopioids peptides, sugar by flushing the  serotonin from the gut to blood and hence to brain, and any anticipation screws with dopamine. Stress or emotional issue make thing more confusing by also using the same circuits. No shit, bat man. It is so interrelated, it might as well be the Yokums or the Weises, to which, I can say, are in my ancestral bush (more diverse than a tree).

So if we eat anything we like, (high palatable),  desire, or look forward too, we may be causing it through the placebo effect, or we could be ingesting the building blocks to push production of one hormone up or down, turning a sensor or receptor on or off, or speeding or slowing uptake. It will be a while before anyone gets a handle on this stuff.

I guess the only think is to keep reading.

Tuesday, August 5, 2014

More on Cravings Research.

There is much confusion about cravings, it is time to do some reading and clipping.

http://science.howstuffworks.com/innovation/edible-innovations/food-craving.htm   says  most revolve around the hedonic, or pleasurable, aspects of dining [source: Hill] so off I go to Hill.
Hill, Andrew J. "The psychology of food craving.

http://journals.cambridge.org/download.php?file=%2FPNS%2FPNS66_02%2FS0029665107005502a.pdf

Hill does not accept food addiction. OK. Hill goes on to suggest that cravings are cognitive / emotional, not physical / chemical. He suggests that it is craving mainly are for highly palatable foods. Boredom and stress make cravings worse. OK.

Does this mean that cravings would reduce if I only ate palatable food. We would need a palatablity scale, un, low, medium, high, hyper. So no high or hyper palatable foods. Is satiation related to palatablity in an inverse fashion? No, enough, enough, more, please more, for a direct inverse related satiety scale. So if cravings are hedonic, if I only east low and medium palatable food I will not crave or crave less? Is that what you are suggesting, Hill?  I will need to test that a bit before I swallow that. It could be all shit.

Experts believe that cravings occur for a variety of reasons. They attribute them to evolution, psychological factors such as stress and unhappiness, and  -  sometimes  -  a genuine need for certain foods.

from source noted below
'It's crucial to remember that a food craving is not simply hunger,' says Professor Andrew Hill, Head of the Academic Unit of Psychiatry and Behavioural Sciences at Leeds University.
Hunger is the body's way of making sure it is provided with energy, in the form of nutrients from food. When the stomach is empty, it releases the hormone ghrelin, which communicates with the brain's command centre, the hypothalamus. This creates the feeling of hunger and is how we know when to eat.
Satiation is signalled by the release of the hormones leptin by fat cells, and insulin by the pancreas, in response to increased blood sugar.
Cravings, however, are much more complex.
'Those who are starving will eat literally anything  -  even foods they do not enjoy  -  to stay alive,' says psychologist Dr Leigh Gibson, Reader in Biopsychology at Roehampton University.
'Cravings, on the other hand, are an overwhelming sensation of desire for a certain food. There are a number of chemicals in the brain that are associated with this.
'First, there is dopamine, a brain chemical that is involved in learning and concentration. When we see or experience something new, dopamine is released in the brain.
'This works in tandem with other brain chemicals called opioids, which give us feelings of enjoyment and pleasure. The combination of these two factors mean that the brain associates certain activities with pleasure, and it teaches us to do them again and again.
'From an evolutionary point of view, junk food cravings are linked to prehistoric times when the brain's opioids and dopamine reacted to the benefit of high-calorie food as a survival mechanism.
'We are programmed to enjoy eating fatty and sugary substances, and our brains tell us to seek them out.
'Today, we still have the same chemical reactions to these so-called hyper-palatable foods, causing an unignorable desire  -  despite there being less of a nutritional need for them.' 

Also note that when insulin is high, we cannot see leptin. Lustig says it is insulin molecule blocks the leptin receptor. 
Also note that sugar and fat we needed to survive better long term. Those who ate sugar and fat stored a bit more energy for the lean time. Those of us that fatten easily and have those cravings had a better chance of survival... but not in time of plenty. We just crave and get fat, fast or eat only low palatability foods for a while, and the excess should go away, as long as we can avoid the cravings.

more from above


The body produces a hormone called cortisol in response to stress,' explains Dr Gibson.
'Its primary functions are to increase sugar in the blood to be used up as energy by the body's cells, suppress the immune system and aid in fat, protein and carbohydrate metabolism. It also blocks the release of leptin and insulin, increasing hunger.
'This is why studies have shown that when we're stressed, we're more likely drawn towards high-energy foods, such as cakes and sweets. Stress in response to danger used to mean energy was burned up. Stress down to today's lifestyle may have the same effect, though these days we are less likely to actually burn off the calories.'
Then there are the psychological components to cravings.
'Mood is unquestionably a potent context  -  especially negative mood,' says Prof Hill.
'We crave reward foods. The pattern for this is partially set in childhood when parents give us sweet food to show love or reward.'
Anna Raymond, of the British Dietetic Association, agrees.
'Cravings are a psychological need for high-fat and high-sugar foods which taste pleasant  -  but which should, of course, form only a small part of our daily intake.'
Dr Gibson points out that sweet food can actively alleviate pain by releasing opioids, thus excusing us for giving sweets to a hurt child. Researchers at the University of Michigan found that chocolate causes the brain to release these euphoria-inducing chemicals.
Unsurprisingly, more than 50 per cent of reported cravings are for chocolate and most others are for highly palatable foods such as sweets or biscuits.
'Chocolate melts at body temperature which gives a pleasant sensation, and fat and sugar further increase the sensory appeal,' says Prof Hill.
Gender can influence the nature of cravings. According to Prof Hill, studies show that women predominantly crave sweet, fatty and energy-dense food and men have more savoury cravings, although it is not yet understood why. 

So what does all this mean? We have a number of potential cause of cravings:
  • Cognitive 
  • Physical
  • Environmental
  • Maladaptive or emotional, stress
  • food addiction - food chemical induce
And after the craving is a space, where it should be forced through the cognitive processes before we react to any craving.  
In the words of Victor Frankl: "between stimulus and response there is a space. In that space is our power to choose our own personal response and in that response lies our growth and freedom."  




Thursday, July 31, 2014

cravings

Cravings the bane of any dieter. These are the problem. What causes them? Are these carvings just irrational desires stimulated by willful thinking, physical processes, environmental situations, maladaptive behaviors in response to some emotion, or food addiction like stimulus?

Any ideas?

Wednesday, July 23, 2014

Monday, July 21, 2014

Cabbage Leaves, another green

“Nothing is enough for the man to whom enough is too little.” —Epicurus

This is similar to AA's "one drink is to many and a 1000 is not enough"

One of the common problems of overeating is alining our will with our needs. It is desire that drives much overeating, desire for more, desire for tasty food, the desire to try some tasty piece of non food.
Learning to control our desire and our wants, and limit them to our needs is a big issue in weight loss.

W5 ran a show that showed this issue very well. http://www.ctvnews.ca/video?binId=1.811589




Carbohydrate intolerance, a phrase coined, I believe, by Phil Maffetone, is an apt descriptor of one of the physical problems. This is a insulin/adrenaline/dopamine/serotonin  issue that creates a urge to eat when we overeat on carbohydrates. Phil talks about it here. He provides a method of determining how much carbohydrates are required to provide the effect here.

So how sensitive to carbohydrates am I? Well if I eat only greens, I still crave often. So if it is insulin, proteins can also produce insulin. Protein are digested into peptides, and some peptides are processed further in the liver through glyconeogenesis into glucose. So some meats, pork, especially any processed meats, even sausages, produce insulin. Too much beef or bison, and I am into a craving situation. That is what I live with. Craving is almost impossible to avoid, so how does one live?

This suggests recovery should include at least three separate study areas:
1. Desire adjustment, to moderate our desires. This may be separate or part of belief change, our expectations, our will and wants. Recovery dose not include eating what we want to eat, but rather eating and only wanting what little we should eat.
2. Expanded food and physiological need understanding including concepts like carbohydrate intolerance, food addiction, maladaptive eating, correcting environmental driven cueing, priming, bating and temptation, and understanding the physical food drive issues.
3.  Correction of our own thinking to get rid of self bating, and similar cognitive dissonance with recovery.

But what do I know? 




Saturday, July 19, 2014

Expansion of the Lettuce effect

In an earlier post I proposed four groups of the causes of overeating as follow:

Physical Problem: genetic or unknown physical,  hyperinsulinemia or insulin resistance, thyroid issues, adrenalin issues, some thing that produces excess hunger or appetite. These require some sort of physical intervention or extended mental effort to overcome what is a physical problem being overcome by mental/ behavioral effort.

Environmental: Near normal people in food rich environment, where there is continuous temptation. These people must learn to adapt to their environment, or change their environment to recover.

Maladaptive: May be emotional eating, compulsive eating, obsession driven, stress, boredom, lonely, tired, whatever. We need to learn real coping methods for situations, escape from that situation, recognizing there is no real solution for the situation, (learn acceptance of bullshit produced by others), whatever. Recovery requires a major change in our belief structure, and attitude change or other psychic adjustment. This could also include the attitude issue, wanting to eat. Desires must be adjusted to match our needs.

Addicts and addiction like issues: There are chemicals within the food that cause a addiction like behavior, craving, desire, and withdrawal. This addiction may be behavioral in addition or instead of chemical. Addiction like behavior may also be a food triggering a desire to eat, not specifically the trigger food. Potatoes seem to triggering a craving for more food, likely through insulin overshot, but not specifically potatoes, in my case. Is that physical, or addiction substitution?

Now the reason I bring this up is obesity is the least understood and most common modern condition brought about by development. It need understanding of the overall problem, not just parts. That has been the problem so far in findings a solution. It is not diet, not the cause of overeating, not hyperpalatable refined carbohydrates, but a combination of all things that lead to the problem.

Currently I am reading Food and Addiction (Brownell and Gold). It clearly shows much understanding in many areas but a clear lack of understanding in what is necessary for recovery.
It is not one problem but at least four groups of problems, that I am dealing with, and much misinformation and shotgun solutions to the wrong problems. At the same time, all these issues are so interrelated that it become difficult to separate them out.

I have no food, nutritional, psychological, philosophical, medical, or other related credentials; but then neither do many living with these overeating issues. Some of us seem to recover. Can we produce enough logic to rationally lead ourselves out of the quagmire that we find ourselves in?

Rumination on the causes overeating

The four groups of causes of overeating, Physical, environmental, maladaptive, or addiction, are useful to understand an event. Yesterday, I ate new potatoes from the garden, perhaps 200 grams. Fresh, boiled, little red, robbed from the hills. My god, they tasted good. That should have been the first sign. All evening I craved. This I believe is the physical cause of overeating, likely a insulin short in to my naturally anxiousness body, or is it an adrenalin shot, I do not know. Either way, I have a choice: quit eating potatoes - or - keep on experiencing these eating rushes. So which is it going to be, go against my heritage, and a food that grows well here, or longer life? It should be a simple choice.

But is it only physical caused. I ate a potato. That is food induced change, so it might be grouped as food addiction cause, but the craving was not for more potatoes, it was for food in general. I did not have any "high fat" food available, but I guess I could have made a salad with a manufactured oil dressing. Oh well, it is morning of a new day, the cravings are gone, slept off, I guess. 

Friday, July 4, 2014

Is it too much adrenaline? or to little endorphins? or the sensors?

http://www.todaysdietitian.com/newarchives/111609p38.shtml

Which come first: obesity or high adrenaline/cortisol?

http://www.adrenalineaddicts.org/docs/4.pdf

Is it over production, or just production of unnecessary, which results in refeeding?

Eating carbohydrates, food in general produces endorphins which, through sensor cells regulate our eating. Which is my issue? To much adrenaline? Too few endorphins? Or a problem seeing the endorphins? As Steve Parker has suggested, D2 sensor issue.

Caffeine, sugar and alcohol drive endorphins up, but adaption makes us require more to have the same effect.

I do not know, and if anyone knows, they are not telling.   

Thursday, July 3, 2014

Pole of public opinion

In reading old Roman philosophy, there are warning that seeking pleasure from food, eating leads to ruin (which rune I am not sure) due to soft living. Is that part of today's obesity problem? Is it the pleasure seeking that is one of the roots of the problem?

Ideally food is just energy, required by the body. Epecurious noted that hunger is the best sauce, that even barley porridge tastes wonderful after a fast.

How many time have I heard " I don't want that ___________ for lunch." Perhaps hunger would change attitudes?


Tuesday, July 1, 2014

Victors Views

History is written by the survivors, and usually by the victors. This puts a biases on everything.  In talking to the other archery groundhog day coaches last night, it became apparent that there are those high school students that learn and those that game the system. This two separate learning philosophy require different styles of presentation; well suggest that there should be two separate styles. Is the same true of life and weight loss? I am not talking about the fat vs carbohydrates issue... that now is a non issue, but rather in learning style. Do we heavy people learn better in a literary/numerical style than the typical social interaction that we were raised in? I grew up in an obese family, and never learned good eating habits, just habits. Are these deeply intrenched habits that are causing me the issues that I have today? Is it a trained in belief of what is food, and how much? Is it a trained in concept that I should eat when hungry? Or that I should eat at least three time each day? Perhaps the default condition of humans at constant weight is to be hungry to give us motivation. Polyphagia is a bitch.

The objective of the two groups of students are quite different. One group is there to soak up knowledge, the marks are secondary. The other group is there to get the best mark with the least amount of work. OK, those guys make better marketers, salesman, scam artists, even executives, sight shooters, compound junkies, while the information collecting types become the engineers, medical types, the technical people and instinctive or barebow shooters. Do we have the same split in our population with respect to adopting a diet system strategy? If this is true the wordy people, those that know less hard information, are likely being heard the loudest. If this is correct, it is no wonder that weight loss is so difficult, and maintenance even harder.

The philosophy of going our own way, vs going along with the population or culture, family, becomes important. I never was much for following directions anyway, and when the direction are not clear, all I want is an address. In my previous life, I just hated people who will not give an address to job sites, just directions. Not only are most direction crap, those people are either control freaked or instinctual types, who give thing like "just before the red house turn left" land marks, and when I see the red house, I am past the corner, or there are multiple red houses.  They also cannot accept that their direction are poor, but it is all my fault as I am male and fat.

Now what does this all to do with the views of the victor? Well I have noticed that along with weight loss comes an attitude change. It is that attitude change that is being kept secret, not talked about, ignored. It is that attitude change that is critical to success in maintenance. What exactly that attitude change is is not necessarily apparent, but it must include some form of fixity of food philosophy, else we get pushed back into our old ways. One way to not be pushed around is to get out of the herd of humans. What interests the mob does not interest me, and what interest me does not interest the mob. We have too many choices, I think. History is always written by the survivors.

I do not care what the mob think and I know nothing.


Monday, June 30, 2014

The root of the obesity problem

The root of the obesity problem, as I see it, is that no one is willing to put in simple and direct terms, that we need to change our behavior and our thinking in a major way, to correct the problem.

Modern processed food is not fit for this humans consumption. Yous all just gonna have to suck it up buttercup. I am done holding back. Processed food includes anything that I could not make in my kitchen with little effort; 12 minutes, door to plate with George Foreman, or cast iron, more like 15 with the gas grill.

It is change: our judgement need to change, our sacred culture and belief system must also change or be changed. It is in realizing that much of what has been pushed as good nutrition is marketing based, not good nutrition. It is in recognizing that fat, per calorie, will keep hunger away longer than a calorie of carbohydrate. Calories are not equal in terms of satiation, nor in time to hunger, the satiety effect.  It is in recognizing that only eating fat only is the only way to accustom the body to burn fat.  Carbohydrates are not burned preferentially but out of defense against blood sugar. 

Once we become accustom to eating and burning fat, hunger is much less of a problem. That fat does not fix the munchies of food addiction, nor the munchies of maladaptive behavior, nor the munchies of some unknown physical or mental cause. Many of these are physical, and we just need to learn to live with these problems. Busy with other enjoyable activities is one of the methods to overcome the munchies. You cannot sit in front of the TV or computer and watch or do something that you would not do, if you had a choice.

The study of philosophy, instinctive barebow archery, cutting grass,  anything can be distraction. But how much distraction from life can we do?

It is obvious that the experts in any field think their field has the answers, but it is obvious that few understand all the different issues well enough to sort out the causes. Until the causes are understood, and corrections made, the problem will continue.

Our sacred culture and belief system may require to be brutally sacrificed. A major upheaval and rebuilding may be simpler than trying to fix a poor culture and belief system. Screw it, I am going to make waves within my fellows.
  

Tuesday, June 24, 2014

The realization, this is for life

About 30 years ago, when I had to stop doing physical work due to a back injury, I recognized that this is for the remainder of my life. I had lost a good tool in fighting overeating, that was physical work. Few ever agreed that one could have a real physical caused issue who's main symptom is wanting to much food. "It was all just willpower." Bullshit. The only thing we have control over is our judgement, our ability to agree or disagree with a proposition, and the few things that depend directly and solely on that ability to accept or reject a concept. Actions also depend on our ability to sell a call for action to the body, so we do not have absolute control over our actions.

Now I know that some of you will disagree, but that is your problem. Until you accept that you do not have absolute control over you actions, you are just deluding yourself. The degree of control of your actions that you have is dependent on your belief system, and your body, your desire, and many other factors, but the fact remains that no mind has absolute control over the body. Influences yes, but control, no.

The desire to overeat, in my case is physical. I accept that. If I, the mind, consciousness, allowed myself to respond as the body wished, I would be dead. I would gain weight at about a pound a day until death. That is my reality and has been for the last 60 years. I liken it to mild Pander-Willie; I only need a locked ward some of the time. No doctor has ever given me a diagnosis but I have never jumped through the hoops to find out either. As the GP said, we could spend a lot in trying to figure out the cause, but there is still no treatment. Learn to live with it.

Asshole that say "suck it up" just piss me off. They have no concept of the issue. Most of the people that I have met with this problem are dead, cremated, or burred. Gone on to nothing or a new posting, it does not mater. A few have lost much weight and like me, struggle to keep it off. Some have lost faith in the battle, and given up the struggle. These usually end up in wheel chairs before death or with major surgery on their digestive tracks or both, and still only a few keep their weight down. Death comes to all of us, but it is in the quality of life before death that we must explore solutions to this issue.

Most people know nothing of this problem, not even it's existence. That is your problem. I have chosen to explore the problem, looking for a solution. I have been lead down many blind allies, learning, but finding that there is no solution there. Some allies do help, some do not, so what. In the end I have the peace of death to look forward to. When life exists, death does not. When death exists, life does not. These are not in conflict, there is only a short transition.

I choose to hang out with those few, who like myself, know that we can manage better by altering our beliefs. Why does this work? I am not sure, but it seems that our beliefs have more influence over our body's action that our conscious mind does. That is not what popular media would suggest, but that is their problem. Ignorance is everywhere. We start out totally ignorant, and learn, one fact, one truth at a time. Some thing we learn wrong. Oh well. It is when these things cause us problems that we need to look at them and make changes, corrections. It is up to us to test for correctness. Many common beliefs are wrong. Accept that there is more wrong that right, as we can be wrong many ways and right only one.

Enough. What do I know anyway? 

By the way, I have been exposed to this shit all my life. http://www.drperlmutter.com/study/glyphosate-pathways-modern-diseases-ii-celiac-sprue-gluten-intolerance/

Monday, June 23, 2014

The Lettuce Effect

So why should a small butter lettuces plant cause hunger when eaten in the middle of the afternoon, while picking weeds? Valerie got me needing to explain.

It is not the carbohydrate, nor insulin reaction. The only thing that could happen that fast is some psychological or appetite signal, which is psychosomatic,not physical. OK, that type of hunger is totally psychological.

In dealing with obesity, there are four groups of problem, at least. These could be further divided, and some people (Phil Werdell) say three groups.

The first group have some physical problem that drives them to eat: hyperinsulinemia or insulin resistance, thyroid issues, adrenalin issues, some thing that produces excess hunger or appetite. These require some sort of physical intervention or extended mental effort to overcome what is a physical problem being overcome by mental/ behavioral effort. Think gay man behaving straight effort, long term, struggle.

The second group are normal people who are in a food rich environment, where there is continuous temptation. These people must learn to adapt to their environment, or change their environment to recover.

The third group, I will call maladaptive behavior, and may be emotional eating, compulsive eating, obsession driven, stress, boredom, lonely, tired, whatever. We need to learn real coping methods for situations, escape from that situation, recognizing there is no real solution for the situation, (learn acceptance of bullshit produced by others), whatever.

The fourth group that are defined as food addicts; there are chemicals within the food that cause a addiction like behavior, craving, desire, and withdrawal. This addiction may be behavioral in addition or instead of chemical.

Now there are a few of us that have all four described conditions. Food was plentiful, growing up in a big farm kitchen environment. Food was pushed and became a maladaptive behavior. Along the way I became dependent on food, addicted. Insulin resistance, at least, is physical. Recovery is a ongoing physical struggle of doling out suitable amounts of food to the body, all the while the body is desiring more food. Stewardship over the body, is the best term. Some of the time the body wins, some of the time the mind wins. Life is a bitch.

It is not a food - no food decision, for the body must also be distracted away from the food. Not a east proposition 24/7.         

Saturday, June 21, 2014

does satiety exist

Does satiety signal really exist or is it just the absence of hunger?

When we eat, hunger, that gnawing gut feeling, 4 to many hours after we last ate is real. It does not take much food to relieve it a bit. Is satiety a feeling or the absence of one? I do not I have ever felt anything that I would call satiety after a moderate meal. I ate enough to be able to stop, yes, but I still want more, is my normal reaction. That is not satiety as defined. So the new mental message must be just that, satiety is eating enough to be able to not get more food, a negative  sort definition.

This reminds me of Epicurious's definition of pleasure, the absence of physical or mental, pain, torpor, angst, fear, despair, grief.

So is satiety just the absence of acute hunger?

Any opinions on the subject?

What do I know about this anyway?

Why would a few leaves of fresh lettuce,  eaten in the garden, make me hungry?