Because I hurt I eat – the truth of an emotional diet

Shares
|ShareTweet

We live in a culture where food is closely tied to feelings and circumstances. Because we are happy, we are sad, so we get bored and eat. When we want to celebrate, we will go to eat. When we were mourning the romantic collapse, we felt sick with ice cream. When someone becomes sick or someone dies, food becomes a way for us to show sorrow and support. You will eat a large amount of casseroles, cakes and salads.

Food has its own restrictions to meet our emotional needs, but the emotional connection with food is part of normal healthy relationship with food. Food can bring us joy and comfort. The feeling of "home" you feel when you feel the scent of cinnamon and vanilla, the feeling of safety provided by meatloaf and mashed potato dinner. When Thanksgiving your sister makes your grandma's famous broccoli casserole, you will get a feeling of admiration.

However, too many people have come to see food as a package of our emotions, but when we look at food to provide the love and comfort we desire, They are paralyzed. Food is reward, friend, love, support. It is not because we are hungry but we eat because it is sad, guilty, boring, frustrated, lonely, angry. By doing so, we ignore the internally wired hunger and satiety signal. And since there is no way for food to actually tackle our emotions, we eat, eat and eat, but we are never satisfied.

Unfortunately, most people are stuck at this point. We recognize the short-term comfort and pleasure we get from food and, unless we have other skills to take care of ourselves, rely on it to make you feel better instantly. Then, we sticked to the downward spiral. Meals that make you feel better will not help you feel better in the long run. Instead, it adds guilt and anger on our diet and our weight impact. In fact, research may be subject to emotional comfort as soon as you eat, but the associated guilt indicates that you overwhelm the emotional support you receive.

The fact that food does not correct emotions may comfort us in a short period of time, or distract us from our pain, but in the long run it exacerbates the problem, with greater achievement and more Do not cause substantial changes leading to healthy living.

If you feel that you were moved to eat for emotional reasons, you have no problem in eating. No. There is a problem in your care. You are not taking care of yourself properly. Since I used to be an emotional associate, I know that this is correct. I had something I wanted, so I ate it, but something was not food. To eat protected ourselves from lonely feelings, we had a tough time, and unlike people, they were always there for me.

However, obsession with my weight came up. And suddenly the food did not do that trick. Instead of long-term comfort, I will receive a short-term amendment, a stronger and longer lasting guilt continues. The more I gained, the more evidence of my failure. The more I felt like a failure, I ate more. Where did you come up with such a way of thinking?

From the way I grew up.

I will remember shortly after my son was born. When I was hungry, he wept. He nursed until he was full and then fell asleep and breathed. Only when his stomach was emptied again (typically several hours later) he cried for food again. He was fully touching his hunger / fullness signal

But when he took years and moved to solid food, things changed. Not for the way he approached the food, but for us (for my mother, one person) he taught me how to see the food. I remember when Isaac was one year old and my mother was eating carnivorous for him. He fortunately ate some Saji, then kept his mouth open. The message is clear, "No more!"

But my mother ignored the message. "Now, Isaac," she chewed badly. She had a spoon seductively in front of his mouth. When it did not work, she pressed it against her lips. I have not lucked yet. She became more creative. "An airplane will come to the hanger," she swiveled the fork near the mouth and attempted to attract the airplane. "Open hanger, Isaac"

He will not have it. Isaac was full and I was no longer interested in food. He was a smart child, and he knew what he needed. My mother informed him that he was not, in essence, a reliable judge – he knew how to manage his own food intake rather than he. So I understood what started!

But I will not blame my mother. My mother was not intentionally trying to do this. She unconsciously conveyed the attitude that we are eating into our culture. If Isaac (and I) did not take her away from her, we would certainly bring them from somewhere else.

Our culture teaches that there is an appropriate time and place for food. There is hunger and satiety in our body. Let's consider the message we got. "I am in trouble with cooking, are not you going to eat?" "I am not hungry, I just ate dinner!" "It is not time to eat" "Clean up your dishes and keep your kids Are you starving in India. "" Do you have A? Let's bake some cookies for celebration. "Was bad you dropped from the bike? Some ice creams Does it help to make it better? "

These external clues tell you to eat the bulk of our lives. As a result, we stop listening to internal clues about hunger and satiety. Instead, we eat as we think we should. To fill the feelings that we think do not have. Mark important moments in our lives.

After changing into food for physical reasons for many years, the ability to perceive internal signals is weakening, like the leg muscles of bedridden legs. Then we think we want to take away our motivation and reduce appetite when we are losing weight.

Scientists have this phrase. "Restrained eaters" are people who often regulate their meals using external cues to manage their own weight. Conversely, "people who are not restrained" are those who depend on clues in the body to decide when and how much to eat.

Restrained food is not more sensitive to hunger or satiety than discreet eating people 25. Compared to unlimited eating people, more food shortages are needed to become hungry or to feel full of food.


Healthy Eating Tips

Facebook Comments