Why “Everything in Moderation” Isn’t the Answer—and Never Has Been

The Myth of "Moderation" is a Health Nightmare—and It’s Coming for Your Kids Next

Let me be real here—I was never a fan of “everything in moderation.” I spent years with a disciplined, often rigid approach to nutrition. I was all about elimination diets, removing what didn’t serve me, and I still am. For me, saying "everything in moderation" is like saying, “just a little bit of chaos.” Imagine suggesting hookers and cocaine “in moderation” (I know, shock value). It’s laughable—some things just don’t belong in our lives at all, or at least not in ways we try to manage or control.

But I get it. We’re not here to debate open marriages or what’s worse for you—sugar or cocaine (although, let’s be honest, some foods are engineered to hijack our brains in disturbingly similar ways). Let’s stay in the world of nutrition, where we’re constantly being told that balance is the answer, and “moderation” is the golden ticket to health.

Why I Never Bought Into “Everything in Moderation”

If “everything in moderation” truly worked, then why is it that so many people struggle with overconsumption, especially in a food landscape saturated with hyper-palatable, ultra-processed options? Foods high in sugar, salt, and fat are created to mess with your ability to stop after just one bite. They’re engineered to make you crave more, not to fuel you.

It’s like trying to intuitively eat your way through a bag of chips that are literally designed to keep you reaching back in. How can you apply moderation to something that was crafted specifically to be irresistible? Spoiler alert: you can’t—not in any lasting way.

My Battle with the Intuitive Eating Movement

A quick note here: I've also had my issues with the “intuitive eating” movement, especially as it’s been applied in our modern food environment. The idea of eating intuitively sounds nice, but if you’re applying it to foods engineered to hack your cravings, it’s not “intuition” anymore—it’s biology working against you. You can’t just willpower your way through a mountain of hyper-processed snacks and come out the other side feeling balanced.

And then there’s the research. A recent study found that 14% of adults and 12% of children show signs of addiction to ultra-processed foods. Yes, children—kids who are growing up in a world where food addiction is a very real, documented issue. For a child to be addicted to a food? That’s new, and it’s not a stretch to say we’re raising the first generation of people who may have to confront food addiction before they’re even in high school. This is unprecedented, and it’s not because today’s kids lack willpower. It’s because the food environment they’re navigating is unlike anything our grandparents or great-grandparents faced.

Ultra-Processed Foods and the Myth of Moderation

Here’s the truth that food companies don’t want us to know: ultra-processed foods aren’t just foods. They’re products, scientifically designed to keep you hooked. Imagine an entire industry, filled with highly-paid researchers, figuring out the exact balance of sugar, salt, and fat to make sure you “can’t eat just one.” These aren’t just snacks—they’re products built to sell, and they’re crafted to be addictive.

Think about it. What’s something that, when consumed, dumps massive amounts of dopamine into your brain, creating cravings and reliance? Is it cocaine or Oreos? The comparison sounds extreme, but it’s shockingly close to reality. Ultra-processed foods affect our brain chemistry in ways that make “moderation” feel impossible for many people.

So, when someone tells me, “just eat it in moderation,” it doesn’t sit well. Some things aren’t meant to be consumed “in moderation.” In fact, they aren’t meant to be in our diet at all.

Restraint, Not Restriction

Instead of relying on “moderation,” I coach my clients to focus on restraint, not restriction. Restraint can be a powerful container—a way to create structure that actually rewards us. When we delay gratification, our brains release dopamine in response to doing something challenging, which can feel even better than caving to a craving. Think of it like this: when we choose restraint, we get a “good” kind of dopamine boost—the kind that comes from building resilience rather than giving in. It’s the same principle behind why we feel good after accomplishing a tough task.

Not every craving or desire needs to be satisfied, especially when it comes to ultra-processed foods designed to hijack our biology. Practicing restraint in these moments can create a sense of control and even pleasure from knowing we’re choosing what’s best for us.

This concept of restraint is something I cover deeply in my Nutrition Course, where I help people explore foods that truly nourish versus those that derail health goals. For a taste of what I teach, check out my free masterclass. Link to course or masterclass.

A Case for Restriction Over Moderation

Now, before I get labeled the anti-cake police, let’s clear something up: I’m not saying everyone needs to avoid their favorite foods forever. But for many people, a diet with boundaries around ultra-processed foods is far more effective than hoping moderation will work. Some people find freedom in eliminating certain foods—not out of deprivation, but by setting boundaries that help them thrive.

For those who struggle with food addiction, treating certain foods like any other addiction can be life-changing. It’s not about a “no-fun” rule; it’s about creating an environment where they feel in control, energized, and empowered.

Redefining What’s Normal in Food Culture

The food environment we live in today is unlike anything our grandparents or great-grandparents experienced. They weren’t surrounded by products engineered to bypass natural satiety mechanisms and push us into constant consumption. If “everything in moderation” worked back then, it’s because food wasn’t designed to be addictive.

But things have changed, and maybe our approach to food should, too. Instead of clinging to the moderation mantra, let’s question what works best for each of us. For some, redefining moderation or even letting go of it completely may be the healthiest choice.

Shifting Focus: What You Can Eat

Rather than obsessing over what you can’t eat, focus on what you can. Most of us have a trigger food—the one we go all-in on without stopping. Start with that one. Take it out for a while and observe the changes. You might experience mood shifts or a sense of withdrawal, which is completely normal and something I help my clients manage in my course. The goal is to build resilience and awareness around the foods that either serve or sabotage our health.

Rethinking “Balance” in a World Designed for Overconsumption

There’s a reason I lean toward boundaries with certain foods, even when I teach a balanced approach to nutrition. I’m not telling people they can never enjoy a treat. I’m saying we need to be realistic about what hyper-palatable foods do to our brains and bodies. Sometimes, the healthiest choice is to say “no,” and that’s okay.

Because, at the end of the day, “everything in moderation” sounds nice, but in our current food landscape, it’s often a myth. Let’s redefine health on a personal level, one that accounts for today’s reality.

If you’re interested in learning more, check out my course or sign up for my free masterclass. Let’s start creating boundaries that work for you and support true health—no moderation required.