Can You Be Addicted to Food?

Clearly, food is something that most people really cannot go without. For some, it is the casual craving for carbohydrate-rich food after a long, frustrating day, while others just enjoy Schnitzel too much. But in recent years, a growing controversy has developed from the question of whether there is a darker, more sinister side to the pleasure of eating. As an old Jewish proverb has it, "worries go down better with soup". But can drowning your sorrows in soup become a problem someday?

The concept of “food addiction” has been around for significantly longer than current debates may make you believe (nearly 60 years, to be precise) [1]. Conceptually, its location on the etiological food chain ranks it somewhere between substance (e.g. alcohol) and behavioral addictions (e.g. gambling). One reason why food addiction offers such an intuitive appeal is its seamless correlation with the global rise in obesity levels. Additionally, it offers a psychological remedy (a sugar-coating, if you excuse the pun) that relieves the consumer from the responsibility to choose: who could be blamed for overeating if all those companies sell food that has been carefully developed to maximize palatability and reward? However, the story may not be that straightforward.

Source: Bay Hippisley

As always when in doubt, a look at animal models proves instructive. And indeed, there is a plethora of studies indicating that animals often fall prey to developing addiction-like behavioral phenotypes when offered access to food. However, not all foods are created equal. More specifically, it has been shown that highly palatable foodstuff (so, the goodies that you should be careful with... you know, the ones with health warnings on them) including a high proportion of processed sugar, fat or salt, are especially attractive.

While it is generally appreciated that eating highly toothsome food activates reward areas and neurochemical paths that are notorious for their implication in addiction, it has remained significantly less clear whether this follows the act of eating per se, or depends on food content (i.e. certain ingredients). For instance, while there is evidence to suggest that lab rodents may show withdrawal-like symptoms when going cold turkey on sugar [2], such behaviors have generally not been described in humans (except in a single case study) [3]. For fat and salt, results have even been less clear.

Fast food is equivalent to pornography

Besides, there are some semantic problems that the term “food addiction” has difficulties digesting. Essentially, while no one debates the existence of problematic eating behavior, for instance, during binge eating attacks, the concept of addiction implies that there is something in the food that gets people hooked. However, humans who overeat tend not to be picky about a particular nutrient, but rather binge on a wide range of available toothsome foodstuff. And normally, there is very little evidence to suggest that humans ingest specific food to satisfy their craving for specific ingredients, like sugar or fat, or that these chemicals are consumed in isolation [4].

Eating addiction may be more appropriate than food addiction

From this perspective, ”addictive eating behavior” may be a better term. What is more, at this point, it has become challenging to tell apart people with increased appetite/reduced satiety from people with real “eating addiction” [4]. Overeating may, therefore, be something that is the consequence of high and readily availability of food paired with a certain vulnerability, such as negative effect, emotion dysregulation, and stress susceptibility [5]. To satisfy criteria for an addiction, rather than a maladaptive, potentially harmful behavior per se, science still has to carry forward the necessary proof. In any case, medicalizing such behavior may have its benefits, as has been the case for smoking, which today receives undivided medical/therapeutic attention. 

And while “food addicts” have been able to exchange their experiences among peers in Food Addicts Anonymous since 1987, they might have been the victims of a simple misnomer. For all those in doubt, better try the quiz at http://www.foodaddicts.org/am-i-a-food-addict.


[1] Randolph, Q J Stud Alcohol, 1956
[2] Colantuoni et al, Obes Res, 2002
[3] Thornley and McRobbie, N Z Med J, 2009
[4] Hebebrand et al, Neurosci Biobehav Rev, 2014
[5] Gearhardt et al, J Law Med Ethics, 2013

By Helge Hasselmann, PhD Student AG Otte

This article originally appeared September 2015 in Volume 08 Issue 02 "Food for Thought"

Are Oreos the New Cocaine?

We have all found ourselves reaching for that second delicious, crunchy Oreo (or maybe the German variant, Neo) after we finished the first one all too soon. But just because we do not stop with one cookie, does this mean we are addicted to them? Can Oreos be compared to drugs of abuse? Maybe. At least in rats.  

Source

Researchers at the University of Connecticut made headlines with their discovery that rats spent as much time in a chamber where they got Oreos as in one where they got a shot of cocaine or morphine. In other words, when rats had to pick between two chambers – one with a boring, bland, rice cake and one with an Oreo cookie – they preferred the Oreo chamber. And when given the choice between a shot of saline and a shot of morphine, they picked the morphine chamber. The researchers also found that eating cookies activated more neurons in the brain's nucleus accumbens than exposure to drugs of abuse [1]. 

EATING AN OREO GIVES US PLEASURE

Can we conclude that Oreos are as addictive as drugs of abuse? No! Here is a fatal flaw in the experiment: the researchers never directly compared Oreos to cocaine. They performed two independent experiments in two different groups of animals comparing rice cakes to Oreos and cocaine to saline. What the study does show is that eating an Oreo produces pleasure. But this is nothing new! In order to really find out if Oreos are as addictive as cocaine, we have to compare how hard a rat will work (for example, how often they press a lever) to get either an Oreo or a dose of cocaine [2]. Junk foods can create addictive-like tendencies [4] – this idea is neither new nor wrong. But the conclusions of this particular study certainly are [3].

How addictive are high fat/high sugar foods? Read the upcoming article to find the answer before checking into the treatment center for your addiction just yet!

[1] http://bit.ly/1KrTRTG
[2] http://bit.ly/1er5Fdp
[3] http://bit.ly/1MuWaIS
[4] Avena et al., Method Mol Biol, 2012


by Apoorva Rajiv Madipakkam
This article originally appeared 2015 in CNS Volume 8, Issue 3, Food for Thought.

Money, Money, Money

Is there a word for being addicted to money? Something like 'moneyholic', maybe? Being addicted to money and the urge for more prosperity than we need is a delicate topic because money operates on so many levels in our lives that are emotional, unspoken, and even subconscious.
Money addiction is not very well defined but is much more complex than shopping or gambling addictions, other common disorders related to money that are hot topics for neuroscientists.

Money Just Never Seems Enough
In the 1930s, Professor Jellinek described the steps of becoming an alcoholic. Even today, the 'Jellinek Curve' can be used as an instrument for self-diagnosis of alcohol addiction [1]. Maybe this scheme could also help identify people having unhealthy relationships with money. Let’s give it a try:
In the pre-‘moneyholic’ phase, the individual is motivated by self-preservation. The more money that is gathered, the more their income tolerance increases. This initial phase starts with memory gaps, especially on tax declarations. A critical phase is entered, as in all kinds of addictions, if loss of control is prevalent. The strong urge for more cannot be resisted and this mostly results in social isolation, which is compensated by an inflated self-confidence. In the chronic phase, the affected persons degrade their own ethical values in order to meet their strong desires for more.
Piff and colleagues revealed through several different studies that upper-class individuals behave more unethically than lower-class individuals [2]. At this point, there is only two ways forward; either the individual decides to ‘exit’ the desire for more money, or the damage becomes irreversible, when even having more money does not bring any relief.

By Frits, hikingartist.com 

Is Money Addiction Hereditary?
Assuming money has the same potential as that of a drug, being addicted to it can be defined as ‘‘the loss of control over [money] use, or the compulsive seeking of [money] despite adverse consequences” [3]. Researchers believe that genetics contribute to 40-60% of the susceptibility of drug addiction and the remainder is due to environmental factors [4].
Kuhnen and colleagues hypothesized that genetic predispositions exist for money addiction,  or, as they call it, financial risk taking [5]. They showed that variants of two genes that regulate the neurotransmitters dopamine and serotonin are significant determinants of financial risk taking. Dopamine and serotonin play a role in a plethora of different brain circuits and emotional behaviors, such as anxiety, addiction, novelty seeking, and extroversion.
It is unsurprising that the sight of money activates the brain’s reward system in a very similar way as the sight of cocaine [6]. Money determines – whether we want it or not – our existence.

Consequences of 'Moneyholics' for Society
The most difficult thing after diagnosing someone as a 'moneyholic' is how one should deal with this problem. This is especially important if the person in question is in a position of power, such as directors and investors, whose decisions affect not only their own but also other people’s lives.
So what if researchers find a causal link between a gene and the greed for money? Does this matter when a money-related crime has been committed? Similar to the big discussion of genetic predeterminants for any sort of criminal behavior, several questions arise. One of the most fundamental is how we reconcile a legal system that is based on the concept of culpability with findings from behavioral genetics.

Personally, I wonder if the study by Kuhnen and colleagues can be seen as an artful attempt to justify things that go wrong, as in a financial crisis or when billions are made at the cost of other people’s lives. For instance, one could well say that when weapons are exported to war zones in exchange for money, it’s not the seller's fault, it’s their genes'! 

[1] Leggio et al., Neuropsychol Rev, 2009

[2] Piff et al., PNAS, 2012

[3] Nestler, Nat Rev Neurosci, 2001

[4] Uhl, Neuropharmacology, 2004

[5] Kuhnen and Chiao, PLoS One, 2009

[6] Fliessbach et al., Science, 2007

by Anahita Poshtiban, PhD Student AG Plested

this article originally appeared in 2015, CNS Volume 8, Issue 4, Money on My Mind.

Like, Dislike, or Disregard?

Facebook and Mental Health
You probably reached us via facebook, we are glad you did! Many of us use it several times a day to see what our friends are doing.

Source: Wikimedia Commons

Facebook can be both a blessing and a curse. While it can be a lot of fun to see what acquaintances are doing, scroll through pictures, or just laugh about cat videos, sometimes one can log off feeling unhappy. In the past few years, the social media site has truly become a force of nature, with more than 1.3 billion subscribers reported in 2014 [1]. Unsurprisingly, researchers have begun to study the site with intensity, looking for the ways in which it may change the way we see ourselves and others.
The field is still young, but for mental health, there have already been several interesting findings. Firstly, as any user will tell you, the site can be highly addictive. So much so, in fact, that a specialized scale has been developed to monitor Facebook addiction [2]. A recent meta-analysis demonstrated that lonely or bored users may start logging in with maladaptive frequency and giving up other worldly pleasures [3]. Other work has shown that use of the site can foster intense anxiety and feelings of social inadequacy [4].

As any user will tell you, it’s highly addictive

But what about all the positive benefits of seeing friends or loved ones? A recent study has shown that Facebook may actually provide huge benefits to individuals suffering from depression [5]. Other studies have found similar effects in non-clinical populations, with Facebook having positive effects on social esteem and communication skills [6]. Thus, it appears that the jury is still out on social networking sites. We just need to always remember to treat Facebook as a tool of fun and casual social interaction, not a place for comparing ourselves with others or feeding ravenous egos.
But please, if you’re reading this article online, don’t forget to “like” it!

[1] http://bit.ly/1uZUCLf
[2] Andreassen et al, Psychol Rep, 2012
[3] Ryan et al, J Behav Addict, 2014
[4] http://bit.ly/1DCJOWj
[5] Mota Pereira, Scientific World Journal, 2014
[6] Pantic, Cyberpsychol Behav Soc Netw, 2014

Constance Holman, PhD student AG Schmitz
This article originally appeared in CNS Volume 7, Issue 4, Communication and Social Media  

Caught in the Web

Over the past few decades, computers and the internet have infiltrated every facet of our lives. Which is why it is somewhat difficult to process the concept of the internet as being addictive; if we’re all online almost all of the time, is everyone an addict? Or is there a line between useful from harmful internet use?

 Internet Overuse as a Psychiatric Disorder
Ivan Goldberg first coined the term ‘Internet addiction disorder’ in 1995 [1]. At the time, Goldberg didn’t actually believe that such a thing existed. On his website, he parodied the diagnosis of pathological gambling, replacing gambling with internet use, using it as an example of how human behavior was becoming increasingly medicalized.
Twenty years later, the disorder is far more than just a satirical joke. Although it hasn’t made it into the latest version of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), many experts believe it to be a legitimate condition.

Source: Sam Wolff, Flickr

Seeking Socialization or Solace?
The most addictive aspects of the internet seem to be those that involve contact with others. So-called ‘interactive real-time services’, which include online chatrooms and web conferencing, seem to be particularly reinforcing. One study found that dependent internet users spent most of their online time in chatrooms and online multiplayer games or virtual worlds. Non-dependent users on the other hand spent most of their online time using email [2].

Socializing online is a strong reinforcer

Online gaming can be very entertaining, and studies have consistently shown that its most reinforcing aspect is the ability to interact with other people. The more interactive a game is, the higher the likelihood that players become addicted [3]. Massively multiplayer online role-playing games (MMORPGs) involve a large number of players taking the role of a character and interacting with each other. World of Warcraft, a MMORPG, is one of the most widely played games in the world with almost 8 million currently active subscribers [4].
Interestingly, internet use can also be a powerful negative reinforcer. Dependent users often view the internet as a means of escaping from stressful interpersonal relationships and their negative consequences [5].

A Social Paradox
From a social point of view, internet overuse is an intriguing phenomenon. The main reason why most people spend so much time online is due to the internet’s inherently abundant opportunities for socialization [6]. Why then does internet addiction cause social isolation and loneliness?
It may be that people who are predisposed to internet addiction have a generally different perception of social life. In fact, most frequent internet users are somewhat introverted and lonely, and tend to consider their online interactions as important and real as face-to-face relationships [7]. They may prefer to spend the time they have dedicated to socialization in an online game rather than out in the real world, resulting in a vicious cycle that leads to more loneliness [8].

Source: lechenie-narkomanii,  pixabay

Far-Reaching Repercussions
The sheer magnitude of internet overuse has resulted in a major public health problem in a number of countries. The prevalence of the condition has reached alarming levels in China (11%) and South Korea (18%) [9,10]. For individuals, the consequences of overusing the internet range from mildly discomforting to seriously debilitating and share remarkable similarities to the consequences of substance abuse.
In terms of mental health, internet addiction is associated with increased hostility and aggression in real-life [11,12]. People who overuse the internet are also more than twice as likely as others to be depressed [13]. They are also more likely to suffer from insomnia and to abuse alcohol and tobacco [14].

Internet overuse can be detrimental to health

In addition, MMORPGs are known to precipitate seizures. Evidence suggests that these fits differ considerably from classical video game-induced seizures [12], which were first described in the early ‘80s. Their pathogenesis is multifactorial, involving photosensitivity, anxiety, emotional excitement, and fatigue.
While non-dependent internet users perceive the internet as having a productive, positive effect on their personal and professional or academic lives, dependent users perceive the opposite [15]. Time disruption seems to be the key factor in causing dependent users to perceive their use of the internet as having a negative impact on their lives.

All In Good Time
Experts believe that, when treating internet addiction, advocating complete abstinence is best avoided. Instead, they recommend using certain time management strategies to help achieve a ‘normal’ level of productive internet use [16]. Overall, a combination of cognitive behavior and motivational enhancement therapies seems to be the most effective strategy.
Internet addiction research is plagued by methodological issues that need to be addressed [17]. One particularly unsettling notion is that internet overuse itself may not be the problem. We may need to focus instead on treating the psychiatric conditions that are masked by the long hours spent online.

[1] http://tinyurl.com/3fm67w 
[2] Young, Cyberpsychol Behav, 1998
[3] Ng, Cyberpsychol Behav, 2005
[4] http://tinyurl.com/wowsubscr
[5] Ng and Wiemer-Hastings, Cyberpsych Behav, 2005
[6] http://tinyurl.com/nwtmeld
[7] Peris, Cyberpsychol Behav, 2002
[8] Morahan-Martin, Cyberpsychol Behav, 1999
[9] Lam et al, Cyberpsychol Behav, 2009
[10] Ko et al, J Adolesc Health, 2009
[11] Yen et al, Cyberpsychol Behav Soc Netw, 2011
[12] Chuang, Cyberpsych Behav, 2006
[13] Lam and Peng, Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med, 2010
[14] Kim et al, Nutr Res Pract, 2010
[15] Chou and Hsiao, Comput Educ, 2000
[16] Young, Innovations in Clinical Practice: A Source Book, 1999
[17] Byun et al, Cyberpsychol Behav, 2009

by Ahmed Khalil, PhD Student AG Fiebach
This article originally appeared in CNS Volume 7, Issue 4, Communication and Social Media