Rats chose sweet water over cocaine, but human sugar cravings are more complicated

Key takeaways

• In a 2007 French study, 94% of rats picked water sweetened with saccharin, a sweetener with no calories, over doses of cocaine, which points to sweet taste itself rather than sugar’s calories¹.
• Rats show bingeing and withdrawal-like signs with sugar mainly on a strict schedule of 12 hours without food and 12 hours of access; with sugar available all the time, those signs didn’t appear⁵⁶.
• A 2016 University of Cambridge review found little evidence that sugar is addictive in people, while a 2023 BMJ analysis, citing a review of 281 studies, put ultra-processed food addiction at about 14% of adults, a Virginia Tech release reported⁶⁷.
• The new Dietary Guidelines recommend no amount of added sugar and no more than 10 grams in a meal, while a University of Florida guide says avoiding all added sugar isn’t necessary¹⁰¹¹.
• If cravings come with secrecy, loss of control or shame, call the National Alliance for Eating Disorders helpline at 1-866-662-1235, and in a crisis call or text 988¹².

In 2007, scientists in Bordeaux, France, gave rats a choice. One lever delivered a dose of cocaine into a vein. The other delivered a sip of sweetened water¹.

The large majority, 94%, came to prefer the sweet water¹. The preference held when the team raised the cocaine dose. It held even in rats that had been taking more and more cocaine, a classic sign of addiction¹.

It’s tempting to read that as proof that sugar beats cocaine. But the sweetener in most tests was saccharin, which has no calories, and a 4% sugar solution worked the same way¹. The rats seemed to be chasing sweet taste itself.

If you have ever felt you can’t stop at one cookie, that feeling is real. The open question is what drives it: a substance that acts like a drug, a learned habit, or foods built to be hard to resist. We walk through what the evidence shows on each, and a craving plan that doesn’t run on guilt.

The short answer: probably not sugar alone, but the pull is real

Mostly no, at least not the way alcohol or nicotine is addictive. A 2016 review by researchers at the University of Cambridge found little evidence that sugar is addictive in people⁶. The authors warned against writing the idea into science and public policy too early⁶.

That review appeared in a journal supplement sponsored by Rippe Health. The authors reported no conflicts of interest and said no financial sponsorship went to them or their research; they listed funding from the Wellcome Trust and the Bernard Wolfe Health Neuroscience Fund⁶.

But that’s not the whole story. Some people do lose control around certain foods. Newer research suggests the strongest pull comes from highly processed foods that pair refined carbohydrate with fat⁶⁷⁸.

In 2014, a European research group proposed a different label: “eating addiction,” meaning the behavior of eating, rather than “food addiction,” which implies a drug-like substance³. The shift matters. It points you toward patterns you can change, not one ingredient you must fear.

What doctors mean when they diagnose an addiction

Doctors diagnose a substance use disorder using the DSM-5, the psychiatric manual published in 2013². A person needs at least 2 of 11 signs within a year, and the pattern must cause real distress or harm. Here they are, grouped in plain language²:

• Losing control: using more or longer than planned, failing to cut back, spending a lot of time on it, and strong cravings.
• Life getting smaller: falling behind at work or home, conflict with people close to you, and dropping activities you used to enjoy.
• Taking risks: using in dangerous situations, or despite knowing it is hurting your body or mind.
• Body changes: tolerance, meaning you need more for the same effect, and withdrawal when you stop.

Two or three signs count as mild, four or five as moderate, and six or more as severe².

Notice how many of these could describe a hard relationship with food. Craving, eating more than you meant to, trying and failing to cut back. That overlap is why the question keeps coming up.

Still, neither “sugar addiction” nor “food addiction” is an official diagnosis. The European group noted that the DSM-5 now has room for addictions that don’t involve a substance, and urged researchers to define criteria for eating addiction³.

Binge eating disorder is different. It is a recognized eating disorder, and the National Alliance for Eating Disorders calls it the most common one among U.S. adults, affecting an estimated 3.5% of women and 2% of men¹².

The case for sugar addiction starts with rats on a strict schedule

Much of the evidence for sugar addiction comes from Princeton University. Psychology professor Bart Hoebel and colleagues Nicole Avena and Pedro Rada ran a series of rat studies and summed them up in a 2008 review titled “Evidence for sugar addiction”⁴⁵.

The schedule was the key. Rats went 12 hours without food, through their sleep and into their waking hours. Then they got 12 hours of chow plus a sugar solution, often 10% sucrose, about as sweet as a soft drink⁵⁶. This went on for three to four weeks⁶.

The rats’ behavior looked a lot like drug use⁵:

• Bingeing: their sugar intake climbed, in a pattern the team called bingeing.
• Brain changes: sugar released dopamine, a brain chemical tied to reward, in a reward hub called the nucleus accumbens. A month in, the balance of receptors had shifted, with fewer of one dopamine type and more of the opioid type. The team likened that shift to what cocaine and heroin do.
• Withdrawal: when sugar was taken away, rats showed anxiety and chattering teeth.
• Craving: after time without sugar, they worked harder for it and drank more than before.
• Cross-over effects: cut off from sugar, they drank more alcohol than usual and became hyperactive on a small dose of amphetamine.

Naloxone, a drug that blocks opioid signals, also set off withdrawal-like shaking and anxiety in sugar-bingeing rats⁶. To anyone who feels hooked on sweets, this rings true.

The case against: the schedule, not the sugar, may do the work

The Cambridge review looked closely at those same rat studies and found important limits⁶.

• Timing mattered most. Bingeing appeared mainly under the on-off schedule. Rats with sugar available all day didn’t develop it⁶.
• The rats stayed the same weight. They ate less of their regular food to make up for the sugar calories⁶.
• Some rats were chosen for a sweet tooth. Studies often picked animals that already preferred sugar, a step drug studies usually avoid⁶.
• Taste, not calories, seemed to drive it. Saccharin brought on similar withdrawal-like signs, and rats whose sugar drained out before it could be digested still drank it eagerly⁶.
• Sugar-fed rats could stop. Once sugar was paired with a substance that made them nauseated, it lost its pull. Animals hooked on cocaine or heroin keep seeking the drug despite harm⁶.

The human evidence is thin. There are few studies on sugar itself, and food cravings tend to fade faster than drug cravings, the Cambridge team noted⁶.

The French cocaine study fits this picture. Its authors offered an idea they didn’t test: our sweet-taste sensors evolved where sugar was scarce, so modern sweetness may send an unusually strong reward signal¹.

The European group that proposed “eating addiction” reached a similar view. It judged the evidence for food as an addictive substance weak, but said eating can become addictive in some vulnerable people in certain settings³.

Highly processed foods may explain the pull better than sugar

If sugar alone isn’t the culprit, researchers have asked, what is?

To measure addiction-like eating, many studies use a research questionnaire called the Yale Food Addiction Scale. It translates the substance use criteria into questions about eating. A positive result requires symptoms plus real impairment in daily life, and the newer version grades severity as mild, moderate or severe⁶. The Cambridge team flagged weaknesses, including vague withdrawal questions⁶.

In 2023, a team led by University of Michigan psychologist Ashley Gearhardt published an analysis in the BMJ⁷. It cited a review of 281 studies from 36 countries estimating that roughly one adult in seven (14%) and 12% of children fit the pattern of ultra-processed food addiction, according to a Virginia Tech news release on the paper⁷. Its hallmarks include trouble stopping, strong cravings, withdrawal-type symptoms and eating that continues even when it causes problems⁷.

The authors also pointed to how food is built. Count only carbohydrate and fat, and an apple is nearly all carbohydrate while salmon is nearly all fat. A chocolate bar splits about evenly⁷. Co-author Alexandra DiFeliceantonio of Virginia Tech said natural or minimally processed foods usually deliver one or the other, while many ultra-processed foods pack in both⁷.

DiFeliceantonio had tested that idea years earlier. In a 2018 brain-scan study published in Cell Metabolism, with her as first author, people bid more money for foods that combined fat and carbohydrate than for foods with only one, even when the foods were equally liked and matched for calories⁸. The combination foods drove stronger activity in brain reward areas⁸. People also judged the calorie density of fatty foods more accurately than that of the combination foods⁸.

Earlier human studies point the same way. Food-addiction scores tracked with high-calorie, low-nutrient foods, while sugar intake by itself didn’t⁶. In another study, two traits best predicted which foods people rated as problems: how much fat they held and their glycemic load, a measure of how much a serving raises blood sugar⁶.

Our article on ultra-processed food covers the “hyper-palatable” research on fat, sugar and salt combinations.

“Sugar withdrawal” has thin evidence in people

Online, people describe headaches and mood swings when they quit sugar. Is that withdrawal?

Researchers from UC Davis and UC Berkeley put that to a small test, published in the journal Appetite in 2018⁹. They recruited 25 teens who were used to three or more sugary drinks a day. After five days of drinking as usual, the teens spent three days on water or plain milk alone⁹.

Off sugary drinks, the teens reported more headaches and cravings and less motivation, focus and contentment⁹. After a statistical check for testing many things at once, only motivation, craving and well-being stayed significant⁹. Saliva tests suggested most teens weren’t heavy caffeine users, which makes caffeine withdrawal a weaker explanation⁹.

But it’s one small, short study with no separate comparison group, and the authors called it exploratory⁹. In rats, clear withdrawal signs showed up mostly when sugar was cut off after a binge schedule or after an opioid-blocking drug⁵⁶.

So if you feel rough for a few days after dropping soda, you’re not imagining it. The evidence just doesn’t show a drug-like withdrawal that requires a special detox.

How strong is the evidence?

Claim	Evidence level	What the research shows
Sugar is addictive in people the way drugs are	Not enough evidence	Few human studies; a major review found little support6
Sugar can trigger drug-like changes in brain and behavior	Promising but early	Shown in rats, mostly under on-off access; little human data456
Sweet taste, more than calories, drives the reward	Promising but early	Saccharin worked like sugar in rat studies16
Some people show addiction-like eating with ultra-processed foods	Promising but early	Estimated at about 14% of adults across 281 studies; the main measuring tool has critics67
Foods combining fat and carbohydrate are extra rewarding	Promising but early	One brain-scan study, plus food-addiction surveys68
Quitting sugary drinks brings withdrawal-like symptoms	Promising but early	One 25-teen study without a comparison group9
Sugary drinks harm health	Strong evidence	Trials and long-term studies agree on weight gain, cavities and type 2 diabetes13

A craving plan that works with your body

The 2025–2030 Dietary Guidelines, released in January 2026, say no amount of added sugar is recommended¹⁰. They advise no more than 10 grams of added sugar in one meal and avoiding sodas, fruit drinks and energy drinks¹⁰.

Honey and molasses count as added sugar; the sugar in whole fruit and plain milk does not¹⁰. Our carbs and blood sugar article covers the limits in detail.

Not every expert source is that strict. A University of Florida extension guide, revised in January 2026, advises limiting added sugar, especially in drinks, but says avoiding all of it isn’t necessary¹¹.

The goal is a calmer relationship with sweets, not a war. This plan is our own, built from the research above.

Step	What to do	Why it helps
1. Notice	When a craving hits, name it: hungry, tired, stressed, bored, or a time-and-place habit? Rate it from 1 to 10.	Helps you see what you need, which may not be sugar
2. Delay	Wait 10 minutes. Drink water, take a short walk or finish a task, then rate the craving again.	Food cravings tend to fade faster than drug cravings6
3. Swap or pair	If you’re hungry, eat a real snack: an apple with peanut butter, plain yogurt with berries, or a handful of nuts.	Fruit and plain milk sugars don’t count as added sugar10
4. Plan treats on purpose	Choose a treat you love, decide the amount ahead, sit down and enjoy it without rushing.	Aims to break the cycle of “forbidden, then binge”
5. Look for patterns	Once a week, check when cravings were strongest and change one cue, such as the candy dish on your desk.	Aims to weaken habit cues; our article on surroundings and habits explains how

Two tips make the plan easier. If you’re cutting sugary drinks, expect a few rough days and plan easy replacements, such as sparkling water with citrus⁹. And don’t count a slip as failure. One cookie is information, not a verdict.

Cravings are signals worth listening to

Many people in natural-health circles cut back on sugar to feel clear, steady and in charge of their bodies. That instinct is sound: trials and long-term studies agree that sugary drinks do harm, the federal science report found¹³.

But calling sugar a drug can turn a healthy goal into fear. If every craving feels like a relapse, you may swing between strict rules and guilty binges. The research supports a kinder view: much of the pull seems to come from on-and-off eating and from highly processed foods that are hard to stop eating⁶⁷.

Regular meals built from whole foods, and a treat you plan and enjoy, fit natural-health values well. So does skepticism. Bring the same doubt to a paid “sugar detox” program that you’d bring to a soda ad. We found no trials testing such programs.

Questions readers ask

The bottom line

The evidence doesn’t show that sugar works like a drug in people. Rats show addiction-like behavior mainly on a feast-and-famine schedule, and the pull seems to come from sweet taste more than from sugar’s calories. Highly processed foods that mix fat and refined carbohydrate may explain addiction-like eating better.

Your cravings are still real, and the case for cutting sugary drinks is strong. Use a plan that notices, delays, swaps and schedules treats, and reach out for support if eating feels out of control.

Related reading

• Fiber, form and a short walk shape how carbs affect your blood sugar
• The case against ultra-processed food keeps growing, though defining it is harder
• Your surroundings shape your habits, even though the famous small-plate trick didn’t hold up
• Fear of every slip, more than high standards, is usually the problem
• Lentils and lollipops are both carbs, and only one earned the bad reputation

Sources

1. Lenoir M, Serre F, Cantin L, Ahmed SH. “Intense Sweetness Surpasses Cocaine Reward.” PLoS ONE, 2007 (Bordeaux Neurocampus record; full text mirror). bordeaux-neurocampus.fr and pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
2. University of Florida College of Medicine, Department of Psychiatry. “Substance Use Disorders vs. Substance Abuse and Dependence: DSM-5 Changes.” UF Health, accessed October 2026; and Shulman & Associates. “Navigating the New DSM-5” (training slides). Mass.gov, 2019. addiction-certificate.psychiatry.ufl.edu and mass.gov
3. Hebebrand J, Albayrak O, Adan R, et al. “‘Eating addiction’, rather than ‘food addiction’, better captures addictive-like eating behavior.” Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 2014 (University of Aberdeen record). abdn.elsevierpure.com
4. Avena NM, Rada P, Hoebel BG. “Evidence for sugar addiction: Behavioral and neurochemical effects of intermittent, excessive sugar intake.” Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 2008 (Duke Scholars record). scholars.duke.edu
5. MacPherson K. “Sugar can be addictive, Princeton scientist says.” Princeton University, December 10, 2008. princeton.edu
6. Westwater ML, Fletcher PC, Ziauddeen H. “Sugar addiction: the state of the science.” European Journal of Nutrition, 2016. pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
7. Virginia Tech (via ScienceDaily). “Scientists says identifying some foods as addictive could shift attitudes, stimulate research” (on Gearhardt AN, DiFeliceantonio AG, et al., “Social, clinical, and policy implications of ultra-processed food addiction,” BMJ, 2023). October 10, 2023. sciencedaily.com
8. DiFeliceantonio AG, Coppin G, Rigoux L, et al. “Supra-Additive Effects of Combining Fat and Carbohydrate on Food Reward.” Cell Metabolism, 2018 (University of Geneva archive). archive-ouverte.unige.ch
9. Falbe J, Thompson HR, Patel A, Madsen KA. “Potentially addictive properties of sugar-sweetened beverages among adolescents.” Appetite, 2018 (UC Davis news release, November 19, 2018, and abstract via Neuroscience News). ucdavis.edu and neurosciencenews.com
10. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and U.S. Department of Agriculture. “Dietary Guidelines for Americans, 2025–2030.” January 2026. cdn.realfood.gov
11. Gal NJ, Ford AL, Dahl W. “Facts about Carbohydrate” (FSHN14-03). UF/IFAS Extension, revised January 2026. ask.ifas.ufl.edu
12. National Alliance for Eating Disorders. “What Is an Eating Disorder Helpline?” and “Binge Eating Disorder.” Accessed October 2026. allianceforeatingdisorders.com and allianceforeatingdisorders.com
13. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and U.S. Department of Agriculture. “The Scientific Foundation for the Dietary Guidelines for Americans, 2025–2030.” 2026. cdn.realfood.gov