Past-Trigger Reframe
Find the feeling beneath a craving and separate its old meaning from today
- Difficulty
- Advanced
- Time to result
- ~weeks to results
- Steps
- 7
- Confidence
- 91%
Peer's demonstration treats a craving as a route to a feeling rather than a simple desire for the item. The person names the cue, recalls what having or lacking the item meant earlier, and identifies the emotions attached to both deprivation and access. They then contrast the old scene with present facts, state what the younger self needed to hear, and redefine abstaining as a current choice rather than a ban imposed by someone else. Finally, they track what happens to cravings and behavior. Peer conducts this process through hypnosis in the episode, and Steven reports no processed-sugar cravings for two weeks; that personal report does not establish effectiveness for other people or conditions.
Origin
Marisa Peer demonstrates this process by hypnotizing Steven Bartlett around processed-sugar cravings. He links sweets with childhood deprivation, control, and similarity to friends, then reports two weeks later that he had experienced no cravings or processed-sugar consumption.
Core principles
- 01A desired object can carry an older emotional meaning
- 02The feeling around deprivation may matter more than the object
- 03Past circumstances should be distinguished from present capacity
- 04A chosen refusal feels different from imposed deprivation
- 05Personal reports do not establish universal treatment efficacy
How to run it
- 1
Name the trigger loop
Describe when the craving appears, what you consume or do, and how the pattern continues. Specify the target rather than using a broad label such as “bad food.”
Pro tip Track the cue, action, and immediate feeling for several occurrences.
Watch out Sudden or severe appetite changes can require medical assessment.
- 2
Find the earlier meaning
Ask what the item represented when you were younger and what not having it felt like. Look for meanings such as control, equality, reward, freedom, or belonging.
Pro tip Focus on the feeling in a concrete scene, not on forcing a dramatic memory.
Watch out Memory is fallible; do not treat an image recovered in hypnosis as independently verified fact.
- 3
Compare wanting with getting
Name the feeling while wanting the item and the feeling immediately after obtaining it. Ask whether the behavior supplies relief, recreates the old scene, or does both.
Pro tip Separate the physical experience from the meaning you assign to it.
Watch out One emotional explanation may not account for biological, environmental, or learned contributors.
- 4
Separate past from present
State exactly why the old situation is not your current one. List the choices, resources, and autonomy you have now that were absent then.
Pro tip Use Peer’s prompt: explain why “that is not me anymore.”
Watch out Do not use present advantages to shame the younger version of yourself.
- 5
Supply the missing words
Say what the younger self needed to hear about worth, safety, equality, or future capacity. Keep the reassurance tied to the memory's identified feeling.
Pro tip Use words that are specific enough to answer the old deprivation.
Watch out If the exercise becomes destabilizing, stop and seek qualified support.
- 6
Choose the present response
Acknowledge that the item remains available while stating the action you now choose. Frame the decision as autonomy rather than prohibition.
Pro tip Peer uses “I'm choosing to say no” to distinguish choice from deprivation.
Watch out Do not turn a chosen rule into rigid restriction that harms health.
- 7
Observe the outcome
Track cravings, behavior, mood, and any rebound without assuming the intervention must work. Escalate to appropriate care if the problem persists or carries health risk.
Pro tip Record both improvement and recurrence rather than relying on a success narrative.
Watch out A short personal result is not evidence of a universal or permanent cure.
In the wild
Steven recalls having disappointing lunches, being unable to afford the treats his friends had, and stealing sweets to feel powerful and similar to them. Under Peer's hypnosis, he contrasts that powerless child with his current autonomy and says what the child needed to hear. Two weeks later, he reports no processed-sugar cravings or consumption.
→ Steven reports a short-term change after the session; the episode provides no control, clinical assessment, or longer follow-up.
Common mistakes
Assuming one hidden cause
A remembered emotional meaning does not rule out physiology, environment, habit learning, or another explanation.
Treating hypnosis memory as proof
The exercise can produce a meaningful recollection without independently verifying its accuracy or causal role.
Generalizing a two-week result
Steven's report is a personal short-term outcome, not evidence that the method reliably treats cravings in others.
Is it for you?
Best for
It is best as a reflective exercise for a non-emergency habit when the person can explore memories safely and observe outcomes over time.
Not ideal for
It is not a substitute for medical, nutritional, eating-disorder, addiction, or trauma care, and hypnosis should be conducted by an appropriately qualified professional.
From the transcript
“It's not the chocolate, it's the feeling you felt when you couldn't have it.”
“I'm choosing to say no and I'm choosing to love it.”
“I've not touched sugar and I've also more importantly not had any sugar cravings whatsoever.”
From the episode
The No.1 Celebrity Therapist: The WEIRD Trick To Get Your Sex Life Back, Fix Erections & Increase Fertility! - Marisa Peer