Recently, a wonderful Bright Lifer in California sent me a stuffed Lorax. If you’re not familiar with him, he is a creation of Dr. Seuss. When trees are being cut down and a beautiful area deforested, he pops up and says “I am the Lorax, I speak for the trees”—because no one else is speaking for them.

I’m like the Lorax, but I speak for the 10s. I speak for the food addicts. I do this because no one else is doing it, and it’s 20% of our population. Why do we need someone to keep an eye on how things are for those on the high end of the Food Susceptibility Scale? I have four thoughts on that.

First, I speak for the 10s in interpreting dietary recommendations. Many health professionals are starting to see food as a big part of health, which is great. But we need to think about how their recommendations are received by those whose brain is hijacked by sugar and flour—tweaked and warped by addiction.

Here’s an example: green juice, like celery juice, is a great idea for health. But it’s not great if you’re a food addict. It hits the bloodstream fast and impacts the reward centers of the brain. There’s no point in drinking celery juice to boost your health if it ups the odds you’ll follow it with a pint of ice cream for dinner.

Another example: whole food plant-based advocates often say it doesn’t matter how much you eat if you’re eating the right things. That’s not true if you’re a 10. In that case, large quantities—even of supposedly beneficial foods, like apples or Brussels sprouts—can lead to a binge. Or, can thwart your efforts to live at a healthy weight.

Second, I need to speak the truth about research that is incorrectly done or not done with our community in mind. An example: the PET scan of dopamine downregulation in the nucleus accumbens that is all over the internet. It’s completely flawed. It’s got three brains: “Normal” “Cocaine” and “Obese”… but it uses the word “obese” when what it’s talking about is food-addicted. They are not the same thing.

Research often isn’t done with the right variables. As the field advances, it’s getting corrected. But I speak to the need for food addiction to be considered in research—and considered properly.

A third example is GLP-1 weight loss drugs. For some people, they can be helpful. But who’s going to be watching to notice what happens to food addicts on those drugs? If someone uses them, and then they need to get off them—who’s going to notice what happens to their brain then? Are the cravings going to be worse than ever? Will they be lighter, indicating that the drugs are healing? I need to watch out for these people. I care about what happens to brains like ours.

Finally, in our Bright Line community, in the vlogs, the books, and elsewhere, I have a bias. I tilt toward educating the foods addicts in our community about what is happening in their brains. I speak to the 10s.

Here’s an example: in our Circles, which are the online support platform, we do not allow pictures of food at all. We have a special place for Bright-Line-compliant recipes and pictures, but nowhere are non-compliant food pictures allowed.

Those are just a few examples of how I often feel like the Lorax, speaking for all those with food addiction. And thanks again to the Bright Lifer who sent me the Lorax stuffie!