If we agreed on that, then we could go on to discuss why such foods or types of foods are difficult to resist -- is it because they are super-stimulus foods or some other reason? We could also discuss the role such foods play in obesity at an individual or societal level. But those are different questions.

Ok, I've spotted the issue. I thought you were linking the two things: "These foods are hard to resist because they are superstimuli. Here, let me prove there are foods that are 'hard to resist' (whatever that means). Now that I've done so, it must be because they are superstimuli."

My problems with this are: you need to separate the experience of cravings in absence of food (ie: I can crave chocolate but not have chocolate) from the actual "difficulty to resist" (that needs definition) when the food item is in front of you. You then also need to define "superstimulus" such that the definition makes predictions, and justify belief in such a concept via showing that it applies to your examples of craved foods.

You seem to have denied that there exist certain foods or types of foods which are difficult to resist. However, you seem to have made an exception for chocolate.

I've made an "exception" for actual drugs, as separate from the other content of food.

To show what I mean, it should be plain that if I lace a pitcher of water with morphine, you will slowly develop an addiction to the water in my pitcher. This is not because water is difficult to resist, it's because I drugged the water. The fact that theobromide or caffeine occur naturally doesn't make the food "hard to resist", it makes it contain a drug.

I have presented evidence that there are other foods which are difficult to resist "foods that are both sweet and high in fat (e.g., candies, cakes or pastries, ice cream)" -- at least for women.

I don't see a working definition of "difficult to resist", is the issue. Lots of people get cravings and don't act on them, so getting a craving is not evidence that these women actually display less power of self-control when confronted with, say, cake, versus a control group.

In the same fashion, lots of people might say, "I need a damn drink!" when they're stressed-out, but the overwhelming majority of them don't become alcoholics, and most don't even actually take a drink!

Basically, you seem to my eyes to be failing to differentiate between "People like X" and "People can't control themselves around X".