The Good Clean Nutrition Podcast

Why the Stories We Carry Influence our Eating Behaviors

This post is adapted from my conversation on the Good Clean Nutrition Podcast with Dr. Ginger Hultin, where we explored the often-overlooked connections between our life experiences and how we eat.

The Hidden Legacy of Early Life Stress

When we talk about eating patterns, the conversation usually centers on willpower, education, or finding the “right” diet. But what if your relationship with food is actually shaped by something deeper—the stories, stressors, and trauma you carry with you? Where does early life stress fit into the picture?

My research has focused on how exposures in the first 18 years of life cluster and accumulate to increase risk for a wide range of health outcomes. The most well-established outcome? Addictive disorders. The link between early life adversity and addiction is sometimes fivefold, even tenfold in some studies. This is foundational for understanding how trauma affects eating and our relationship with food.

Understanding the Trauma-Addiction Connection

We know that trauma and adversity are linked to almost every health outcome. But when we think specifically about the trauma-addiction link, there are several ways to approach it. In biological sciences, we look at how adversity can “get underneath the skin” and change one’s biology. At the same time, there are significant social factors that predispose someone to addictive disorders.

What captured my interest was how this translates to addiction with substances beyond drugs and alcohol—specifically, ultra-processed foods. This is admittedly controversial, particularly in the eating disorder community. But the question remains: How does early life adversity set someone up for substance-seeking behavior when that substance is food?

Food as Self-Medication

Here’s what the research tells us: Food can be used to self-medicate and reduce negative affect. This can contribute to body image issues and disordered eating over time. The challenge is that we can’t undo adversity in the first 18 years of life. Once we identify these exposures, the real question becomes: How do we help people with significant early life stress?

Thinking Beyond Binary Categories

A lot of people have binary ways of thinking—you either have food addiction, or you don’t. But when you think of mental health conditions on a continuum and a spectrum, that’s why I use terms like “addiction-like eating,” “substance-seeking behavior,” or “hedonic eating.” Being more pleasure-based in our eating means using food to alter our neurochemistry.

Of course, many people think they have food addictions or sugar addictions when they might actually have restrictive tendencies or body image issues instead. A skilled clinician can review an entire life course history—psychological and psychiatric profiles—to determine what’s likely and, most importantly, what will help.

The Multiple Phenotypes of Depression

One of the biggest discoveries in mental health nutrition has been the idea that there are multiple phenotypes of depression and depressive disorders. There’s been a longstanding assumption that depression was simply a serotonin issue. The pharmaceutical industry has dominated that narrative to get anyone who meets the criteria for depression on an SSRI or SNRI.

The data suggest that many people don’t improve on those medications. In some cases, people get worse. This isn’t to say these aren’t life-changing, life-saving medications—it’s just that everyone with depression tends to get lumped into a single box.

The Inflammatory Phenotype

When we think about other biological phenotypes of depression, the one that’s emerged most prominently is the inflammatory phenotype. This is the person with baseline higher inflammatory markers, whose immune system has become dysregulated.

The area I’ve taken the most interest in is inflammation that starts in the gut and can spread throughout the periphery, cross the blood-brain barrier, and lead to neuroinflammation. It’s safe to say that many people with depression have higher levels of inflammation. It’s harder to say definitively that the inflammation is driving the depression—it can be a bi-directional process.

Coming back to trauma: If someone has a lot of early life trauma, they have a lot of early life immune activation. If they’re self-medicating with food, the likelihood of that leading into midlife or later-life depression is high. And it doesn’t necessarily mean it’s a serotonin problem.

This is the challenge in thinking about depression—nuancing it, discerning between the different types, and running experiments with various interventions. For example, if someone didn’t respond to an SSRI, that suggests they might be more responsive to an anti-inflammatory dietary approach.

Anxiety, ADHD, & the Gut-Brain Connection

Anxiety & Gut Bacteria

One of the bigger findings with anxiety has to do with gut bacteria. There have been efforts to identify particular strains that play a role. Anxiety is responsive to nutrition intervention, but the data suggest the depression story is clearer because we have more longitudinal, prospective studies.

The research shows that people who change the way they’re eating can leave the depression category over time, while people eating diets high in ultra-processed foods—low in fiber, low in nutrients—tend to develop incident depression at higher rates.

Anxiety and depression often cluster and co-occur. Many people need multi-layered support: not just nutrition interventions, but psychological interventions and social support. The key is connecting the dots between biology, thinking patterns, and social context.

ADHD & Food Additives

ADHD is fascinating because it often develops earlier in life. There’s been significant interest in the idea that food additives in the food supply can be contributors. There’s a lot of attention on ultra-processed foods, food dyes, and artificial colors.

The literature isn’t super convincing yet, but quite a few parents report that when they change their child’s eating pattern, they notice significant improvements in symptoms. That’s a part of evidence-based medicine we can’t ignore.

The Overarching Summary

When people eat a lot of low-nutrient, high-inflammatory-compound food—low in fiber—it tends to disrupt the gut-brain axis. When people can move toward colorful produce high in polyphenols, a wide range of fibers, and high-quality protein, mental health tends to improve.

We both know that these types of changes are challenging, particularly for youth. We must be realistic. But I would argue that some of the significant challenges with highly palatable foods—particularly those we feed to children—set up an expectation of a specific type of reward.

Understanding Reward Expectancy

In addiction literature, we call this reward expectancy. Someone is expecting a specific dopamine response from food, and if it doesn’t deliver that neurochemical reward, it tends to become aversive. This is really the link between food and neuroscience that people need to think more about: how food can be rewarding, how the brain learns to assign value to food based on the dopamine response.

Some people will be more susceptible than others. People predisposed to addictive tendencies, impulsivity, or with trauma exposures are going to be more likely to assign more value to palatable foods because they do something significant to reduce negative affect.

That’s a helpful way to think about addiction-like eating: using food to alter neurochemistry in a way that makes life feel more manageable. That’s the real hidden legacy of trauma—people moving through life detecting threats and unsafety when they might actually be in a safe environment.

The Apple vs. Apple Cereal Example

Consider apple-flavored breakfast cereal versus an actual apple. If you eat the apple, you won’t get the same rapid hit of carbohydrates and sugar. It’s not as palatable, and you’re not getting the same reward.

The manufacturers of that apple-flavored cereal subjected their products to extensive testing to ensure a favorable blood sugar response for the brain and an optimized flavor profile. One of the major arguments against food addiction is: what’s the actual vector? Is it the sugar? Is it the added fats? This is a food industry narrative to combat the research. But it really is a combination of factors—when food gets combined strategically to elicit a neurochemical response that makes someone want it more.

Everyone has unique neurochemistry. Some people are more responsive to salty, savory, and starchy. Some really like sweets. But most people like a combination of everything.

I always say: if you put a bowl of sugar, a bowl of flour, and a bowl of butter on the table, none would be that exciting to most people. But combine them and stick them in the oven for 20 minutes, and you’ll get something that most people’s brains will respond favorably to. It’s the combination of factors that go into food production—designed to maximize profit, oftentimes at the expense of public health.

Addition Before Subtraction

The real problem with a diet high in sugar is that it’s likely to be low in fiber and low in the spectrum of polyphenolic compounds.

However, some people validly argue that it’s easier to eat none than to make something 10-20% of the diet. People without impulsivity or addictive disorders sometimes get frustrated with that approach. “Why can’t you just have a cupcake at the birthday?”

I understand both perspectives. Some people say it’s easier not to eat certain foods because it removes the decision entirely. There’s definitely an argument that this could be disordered—some would call it restrictive. Others would say, “No, I’m taking care of myself. I’m working on personal development. I want to show up for the birthday.”

There’s a real mixed bag here. When people take a strong point of view on either side and superimpose that onto their patients or the population as a whole, that’s when people feel marginalized.

The Gut-Brain Bidirectional Communication

There’s still a lot we don’t know about the bidirectional communication between the gut and the brain. But it’s important to recognize that many times things start in the brain—think about the release of cortisol.

How some of that can feed back into the brain as a signal and lead to genetic and epigenetic changes in gene expression is fascinating. Going back to trauma: if someone has had a lot of stress in their life and they’re over-activated, producing cortisol, it’s going to impact blood sugar, inflammation, and more.

Then the gut environment and other biological systems detect these signals and send information back to the brain. We know the immune system is involved. We know gut bacteria and postbiotics are involved. We know the vagus nerve is picking up on signals and sending them back.

I’m anxiously awaiting the next wave of information, and I’m always careful not to take single studies and draw too firm of conclusions—looking instead at the totality of the literature.

Emotional Eating & Burnout

I like the term “emotional eating” because it covers the whole spectrum. There are people who, lacking motivation, choose convenience foods or eat comforting foods based on their upbringing.

Coming back to the depression-nutrition link: while poor nutrition is a risk factor for mental health outcomes, when people are depressed, burnt out, or having difficult times, it lends itself to low-effort, convenience eating.

One could argue that during tricky transitional times, giving yourself grace and doing what you need to get through challenges makes sense. The other argument is that the quicker you can get into wellness—do some testing, get on a protocol, get sunlight, start drinking water every day—the sooner you can get out of the mess.

People do tend to get frustrated when they’re fatigued and doing crisis management. That’s when nutrition shouldn’t be oversold.

It’s not what you’re eating, but what’s eating you.

A Practical First Step

If this resonates with you and you’re connecting the dots between your food habits and personal history, what’s the first step to start unraveling this?

Health should be about looking forward rather than looking back. But there is value in examining: What are some old ideas you have about food? About your body? What are some barriers that might prevent you from moving forward?

If someone had a lot of anxiety in the kitchen growing up—if their parents were fighting a lot in the kitchen and they learned it wasn’t a safe place—and now they’re seeing a nutritionist who pushes them into the kitchen… it feels hard. They’re going to want to quit.

Those are important details. Understanding your history isn’t about dwelling in the past—it’s about removing obstacles to moving forward.

Key Takeaways

• Early life stress and trauma can increase the risk for addictive disorders by 5-10 times, including addiction-like eating patterns
• Depression isn’t just a serotonin problem—the inflammatory phenotype responds better to anti-inflammatory dietary approaches
• Food addiction exists on a spectrum; think “hedonic eating” and “substance-seeking behavior” rather than binary categories
• The gut-brain axis is bidirectional, and nutrition interventions can impact mental health outcomes
• Addition before subtraction: Focus on adding fiber, polyphenols, and quality protein rather than just eliminating foods
• Understanding your personal history with food can help remove barriers to change