Guilt creates a cycle that only more eating seems to interrupt
In the long human struggle between desire and discipline, nutritionist Pablo Ojeda offers a quieter path: not the suppression of craving, but its conscious examination. Speaking on the Spanish program La Roca, Ojeda argued that the real harm in eating sweets lies not in the sugar itself, but in the guilt that follows — a guilt that breeds restriction, then excess, then more guilt. His counsel is ancient in spirit if modern in form: know thyself before you reach for the chocolate.
- Millions caught in cycles of craving, shame, and bingeing are being told the problem was never the food — it was the guilt surrounding it.
- Restrictive diet culture has created a psychological trap where avoidance builds pressure until it breaks, often into worse overconsumption than before.
- Ojeda's five-minute pause method — asking whether the craving is real hunger or emotional impulse before acting — offers a behavioral circuit-breaker between desire and regret.
- The shift being proposed is from short-term dietary rules to multi-year lifestyle compatibility, treating sweets as a matter of awareness and proportion rather than prohibition.
- Even nutritionally demonized fruits like bananas and mangoes are being rehabilitated, as the framework moves away from forbidden foods toward conscious, sustainable choices.
Pablo Ojeda, a nutritionist featured on the Spanish program La Roca, was asked a simple question: how do you stop craving sweets? His answer surprised people. Eat them — but do it consciously.
The body doesn't biologically require added sugar; it produces its own glucose from carbohydrates, proteins, and fats. Natural sugars found in fruit, vegetables, and dairy come packaged with fiber and nutrients. The real concern, Ojeda explained, is the quantity consumed and the quality of the product chosen. Packaged sweets are calorie-dense and nutritionally hollow, and excess sugar consumption is well-documented as a driver of obesity and cardiovascular disease.
Still, the craving persists — and the standard response of strict avoidance tends to backfire. Ojeda's alternative begins with a pause: before reaching for the sweet, ask yourself whether you're truly hungry, whether you actually want it, and whether you need it. Wait five minutes. The impulsive urge often fades or reveals itself as something other than hunger. If the desire remains, choose deliberately — keep single chocolate squares rather than full bars, limit what's in the pantry, and eat with intention rather than automaticity.
The deeper argument is psychological. Eating quickly and guiltily sets off a damaging loop: shame leads to restriction, restriction builds pressure, pressure leads to bingeing, and bingeing returns to shame. Ojeda described recognizing this pattern in his own life — realizing the problem was never food itself, but his relationship with it. A croissant need not end in anxiety.
He also pushed back against the idea that naturally sweet fruits should be avoided, calling such restrictions a sign of a poorly designed diet. A real diet, he argued, isn't a three-month regime — it's a three-to-four-year way of living, something built to fit who you actually are. If it can't sustain itself over time, it will fail. The goal is not a set of rules you fight against, but a way of eating that simply becomes your life.
Pablo Ojeda, a nutritionist who appeared on the Spanish program La Roca, was asked a straightforward question: what trick could stop the craving for sweets? His answer was disarmingly simple. Eat it. But not the way most people do.
The body doesn't actually need added sugar. When you eat carbohydrates, proteins, or fats, your body breaks them down and produces the glucose it requires. Natural sugars exist in fruit, vegetables, and milk—foods that deliver other nutrients alongside the sweetness. The problem isn't sugar itself, Ojeda explained, but the quantity consumed and the type of product chosen. A chocolate bar and a banana both contain sugar, but only one leaves your body with fiber, vitamins, and minerals. Most packaged foods in supermarkets contain added sugars, are calorie-dense, and offer little nutritional return. Research has documented a direct link between excess sugar consumption and obesity and cardiovascular disease worldwide.
Yet the impulse toward sweetness persists. It tastes good. It triggers a desire for more. People find themselves reaching for chocolate bars, donuts, pastries—foods they know aren't ideal but crave anyway. The standard response has been avoidance or severe restriction. But Ojeda proposed something different: eat the sweet thing, but eat it with awareness.
His method begins with a pause. When the craving arrives, ask yourself three questions: Do I actually want this? Do I need it? Am I truly hungry? Then wait five minutes. That initial impulse—the one that drives you to grab without thinking—will often pass or clarify itself. If, after five minutes, you still want it, then choose consciously. Keep individual chocolate squares at home rather than full packages. Limit the quantity of sweets in your pantry. Make the choice deliberate.
Why does this matter? Because when you eat a craving quickly and almost unconsciously, guilt follows. And guilt, Ojeda explained, creates a cycle. You feel bad about what you ate, so you restrict. The restriction builds pressure. Eventually you break and eat again, often more than before, and the guilt returns. You're trapped in a loop that only more eating seems to interrupt. The solution isn't stricter rules. It's breaking the psychological pattern.
Ojeda shared his own experience on social media after the broadcast. For years, he thought his problem was food itself. Then he understood the real issue was his relationship with it—the guilt, the all-or-nothing thinking, the feeling of being unable to stop. A croissant or a sweet shouldn't always end in shame, anxiety, or disappointment. You don't need to forbid foods. You need to know how and when to eat them.
He also addressed a common myth: that certain fruits like bananas, mangoes, or grapes should be restricted because of their natural sugar content. That's a poorly designed diet, he said. A real diet isn't something you follow for three or four months. It's something you build for three or four years—a way of living that fits into your actual life and habits. If a dietary approach can't sustain itself over that timeline, it isn't a diet. It's a temporary regime that will fail. The goal is to create something compatible with who you are, something that becomes simply how you eat, not something you're constantly fighting against.
Citações Notáveis
Eat it with awareness—pause, ask if you truly want it, then choose consciously— Pablo Ojeda, nutritionist
A diet is a way of life, not a temporary regime. It must be something you can sustain for three or four years— Pablo Ojeda
A Conversa do Hearth Outra perspectiva sobre a história
So when Ojeda says eat the sweet thing, he's not saying eat unlimited amounts whenever you want?
No. He's saying the restriction itself is what breaks people. The guilt is the trap. If you eat mindfully—if you pause and choose—you interrupt that cycle.
But doesn't that require a lot of willpower? Pausing for five minutes when you're craving chocolate?
It's not willpower in the traditional sense. It's just clarity. Most cravings are emotional, not physical hunger. Five minutes lets you feel the difference.
And if it's real hunger?
Then you eat. But you've chosen to, consciously. You're not acting on impulse. That changes the whole relationship.
What about people who say they can't stop once they start?
That's often because they've been restricting. When you finally allow yourself something, the scarcity makes you panic-eat. If sweets are always available and acceptable, the urgency disappears.
So the real problem isn't the sugar. It's the shame.
Exactly. The shame creates the cycle. Remove the shame, and you remove the need to binge.