Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-vfjqv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T13:22:07.429Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

If Sugar is Addictive… What Does it Mean for the Law?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2021

Ashley Gearhardt ,
Michael Roberts  and
Marice Ashe
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Sugar consumption has long been linked with a host of chronic health problems, including obesity, diabetes, and cardiovascular disease. To reduce Americans’ intake, many have called for taxing sugary products or limiting access in certain environments like schools and workplaces. These sometimes controversial calls for new public policy to curb consumption may soon be eclipsed by newly emerging links between sugar and addiction.

Attaching the label “addictive” to a substance like sugar, which is necessary for human life, challenges widely held beliefs about addiction. But the extraordinary increase in sugar consumption during the past century, with related tripling of chronic diseases like obesity and diabetes, means our common understandings may be outdated.

Part I of this paper will define “addiction” — especially as it relates to what was once a naturally occurring food nutrient and now is a highly concentrated food additive — and present evidence of the addictive potential of sugar.

Type
Supplement
Information
Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics , Volume 41 , Issue S1 , Spring 2013 , pp. 46 - 49
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of Law, Medicine and Ethics 2013

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Mokdad, A. H. Marks, J. S. Stroup, M. F. and Gerberding, J. L. “Actual Causes of Death in the United States” JAMA 291, no. 10(2004): 1238–1245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stolerman, I. P. and Jarvis, J. J. “The Scientific Case That Nicotine Is Addictive” Psychopharmacology 117, no. 1(1995): 2–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Potenza, M. N. “Should Addictive Disorders Include Non-Substance-Related Conditions?” Addiction 101, Supp. 1 (2006): 142–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Verebey, K. and Gold, M. S. “From Coca Leaves to Crack: The Effects of Dose and Routes of Administration in Abuse Liability” Psychiatric Annals 18, no. 9(1988): 513–520.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eaton, S. B. “The Ancestral Diet: What Was It and Should It Be a Paradigm for Contemporary Nutrition?” Proceedings of the Nutrition Society 65, no. 1(2006): 1–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gearhardt, A. N. et al., “The Addiction Potential of Hyperpalatable Foods” Current Drug Abuse Reviews 4, no. 3(2011): 140–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ziauddeen, H. Farooqi, S. and Fletcher, P.C. “Obesity and the Brain: How Convincing Is the Addiction Model?” Nature Reviews Neuroscience 13, no. 4(2012):279–286; Avena, N. M. Rada, P. and Hoebel, B. G. “Evidence for Sugar Addiction: Behavioral and Neurochemical Effects of Intermittent, Excessive Sugar Intake” Neuroscience Biobehavioral Review 32, no. 1(2008): 20–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lenoir, M. et al., “Intense Sweetness Surpasses Cocaine Reward” PLoS ONE 2, no. 8(2007): E698.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, P. M. and Kenny, P. J. “Dopamine D2 Receptors in Addiction-Like Reward Dysfunction and Compulsive Eating in Obese Rats” Nature Neuroscience 13, no. 5(2010): 635–641.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Id.Google Scholar
Volkow, N. D. et al., “Overlapping Neuronal Circuits in Addiction and Obesity: Evidence of Systems Pathology” Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society 363, no. 1507(2008): 3191–3200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tang, D. W. et al., “Food and Drug Cues Activate Similar Brain Regions: A Meta-Analysis of Functional MRI Studies” Physiology & Behavior 106, no. 3(2012): 317–324.Google Scholar
Stice, E. et al., “Relation of Obesity to Consummatory and Anticipatory Food Reward” Physiology & Behavior 97, no. 5(2009): 551–560.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gold, M. S. Frost-Pineda, K. and Jacobs, W. S. “Overeating, Binge Eating, and Eating Disorders as Addictions” Psychiatric Annals 33, no. 2(2003): 117–12215.Google Scholar
Friedman, L. M., A History of American Law: Third Edition (New York: Touchtone, 2005): at XII.Google Scholar
Ludwig, D. Peterson, K. and Gortmaker, S. “Relation between Consumption of Sugar Sweetened Drinks and Childhood Obesity: A Prospective, Observational Study” The Lancet 357, no. 9255(2001): 505–508.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Murphy, J. “FDA's Added Sugars Study Prompts Complaints from Food Industry” Food Chemical News (London), August 10, 2012, at 1.Google Scholar
Strom, S. “Pepsi and Coke to Post Calories of Drinks Sold in Vending Machines” New York Times, October 8, 2012.Google Scholar
Kysar, D. A. “Preferences for Processes: The Process/Product Distinction and the Regulations of Consumer Choice” Harvard Law Review 118, no. 2(2004):525–529. 20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Babor, T. et al., Alcohol: No Ordinary Commodity Research and Public Policy (New York: Oxford University Press, 2010): at 5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mena, F. and Hobbs, R. “Narcophobia: Drugs Prohibition and the Generation of Human Rights Abuses” Trends in Organized Crime 13, no. 1(2010):60–74; Smith, P. “Drugs, Morality, and the Law” Journal of Applied Philosophy 19, no. 3(2002):233–244. 22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brownell, K. et al., “Personal Responsibility and Obesity: A Constructive Approach to a Controversial Issue” Health Affairs 29, no. 3(2010):3379–387. 23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Daum, M. “A Feeding Frenzy” Los Angeles Times, March 3, 2011.Google Scholar
Lustig, R. H. et al., “Public Health: The Toxic Truth about Sugar” Nature 482, no. 7383(2012):27–29; FTC CDC FDA and USDA, Interagency Working Group on Food Marketed to Children: Proposed Nutrition Principles, to Guide Industry Self-Regulatory Efforts, Project No. P094513; Silverglade, B. and Heller, I. R., Food Labeling Chaos the Case for Reform, (Washington, D.C.: Center for Science in the Public Interest: March 2010); see Cal. Educ. Code § 49431.5 (2006); and also Ackerman v. The Coca-Cola Co., No. 09-cv-0395, 2010 WL 2925955 (E.D.N.Y. Jul. 21, 2010).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
See Sullivan, K. M., The Interagency Working Group's Preliminary Proposed Nutrition Principles to Guide Industry Self-Regulatory Efforts: Constitutional Issues, Appendix A in: Comments of Viacom before the Federal Trade Commission (July 14, 2011), available at <http://www.ftc.gov/os/comments/foodmarketedchildren/07884-80045.pdf> (last visited January 3, 2013) (First Amendment concerns “would unquestionably invalidate” mandatory government restrictions on food marketing to children); but cf., Allison, G. D. et al., Open Letter on the First Amendment and the Interagency Working Group Principles to FTC, CDC, FDA, USDA, and the White House, September 6, 2011, available at <http://changelabsolutions.org/sites/changelabsolutions.org/files/IWG_1ALawProfLetter_20111012.pdf> (last visited January 3, 2013) (Nutrition principles, which are designed to guide industry self-regulatory efforts, do not restrain or compel anyone's speech.) (last visited January 3, 2013) (First Amendment concerns “would unquestionably invalidate” mandatory government restrictions on food marketing to children); but cf., Allison, G. D. et al., Open Letter on the First Amendment and the Interagency Working Group Principles to FTC, CDC, FDA, USDA, and the White House, September 6, 2011, available at (last visited January 3, 2013) (Nutrition principles, which are designed to guide industry self-regulatory efforts, do not restrain or compel anyone's speech.)' href=https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=See+Sullivan,+K.+M.,+The+Interagency+Working+Group's+Preliminary+Proposed+Nutrition+Principles+to+Guide+Industry+Self-Regulatory+Efforts:+Constitutional+Issues,+Appendix+A+in:+Comments+of+Viacom+before+the+Federal+Trade+Commission+(July+14,+2011),+available+at++(last+visited+January+3,+2013)+(First+Amendment+concerns+“would+unquestionably+invalidate”+mandatory+government+restrictions+on+food+marketing+to+children);+but+cf.,+Allison,+G.+D.+et+al.,+Open+Letter+on+the+First+Amendment+and+the+Interagency+Working+Group+Principles+to+FTC,+CDC,+FDA,+USDA,+and+the+White+House,+September+6,+2011,+available+at++(last+visited+January+3,+2013)+(Nutrition+principles,+which+are+designed+to+guide+industry+self-regulatory+efforts,+do+not+restrain+or+compel+anyone's+speech.)>Google Scholar