Quote:
Originally Posted by nuclear500
It might not be addictive in the sense that a withdrawal episode would occur - but the ingesting of sugar can very much be habit forming to the point of people jokingly saying 'addiction.'
So it is within reason that people would swap the term without thinking "clinically."
Why do you comment on things without bothering to know anything about the subject? There are two links I've posted (one that still is only epub its so recent) that address this topic.
Yet here we are reading some inane speculation on your part. Almost everything you post is some variant of wrong or inane.
Quote:
Originally Posted by THAY3R
Something doesn't have to be clinically addictive to be disastrous to an addict, or people with mental problems that have difficulty correctly associating love and happiness. I suggest you learn more about addiction and mood disorders.
You mean like all the study I read and linked that deal with the mood effects of LC and LF diets in obese patients?
Quote:
Originally Posted by RunDownHouse.
This takes the title for most condescending, most smug three-word phrase you can offer, right? If there's something obviously wrong people will just lol, but any time someone says, "show your work," it's a guarantee they know they're right.
Its really about picking battles. Thayer is aggressively wrong and its mildly amusing to watch him attempt to backtrack on his stance and retrench to this speculation involving rat studies and non-responsive epilepsy.