Why Doesn't Weight Watchers Work?
Options
Replies
-
Weight Watchers does work, as long as you work it properly. My only issue with their system (and this is me) is that I didn't learn proper nutrition with them. I went with foods that gave me the most bulk for my points which meant a lot of carbs and I ended up tired and hungry, I shed half of my hair, and my skin was all dry and crepe-like. Turns out I wasn't getting enough protein and fat.
"Eat this number of points and you will lose weight". Very true, I lost a lot.0 -
Ww works. I tried it and lost weight. I gained it back. What failed for me is you're taking an extra step changing calories into points. I could never wrap my head around the points system. I find calorie counting so much easier as every label has calories on it. There are no points labeled. Everything seemed like more work. Plus it cost money. I know people it's worked very well for. Just not my thing.0
-
Sabine_Stroehm wrote: »WW does work for losing weight. As does MFP, as does low carb, Dukan, etc. etc. etc.
Many people lose weight. Keeping it off is the challenge.
This.0 -
Point #4 on this list talks a bit about how many fruits/veggies WW expects you to eat per day. The calories for 5 (to 9) servings are built into your points goal. Keep in mind that a serving of berries, for example, is 1/2 cup. A serving is not just "however much I feel like eating all at once." I can easily eat a pound of strawberries in a day but know that it is much more than 1 serving.0
-
Point #4 on this list talks a bit about how many fruits/veggies WW expects you to eat per day. The calories for 5 (to 9) servings are built into your points goal. Keep in mind that a serving of berries, for example, is 1/2 cup. A serving is not just "however much I feel like eating all at once." I can easily eat a pound of strawberries in a day but know that it is much more than 1 serving.
Thanks for posting that. I think that nails exactly what I was doing.
0 -
If a pound of strawberries = 145 calories, that translates to about 4 points. so yes, that's definitely doable. But I remember reading on the WW boards about a woman who couldn't understand why she wasn't losing and then revealed that she was eating an entire watermelon every day.
My point (no pun intended) is that there are no "free" foods. Zero points does not mean free. I really think that when leaders explain the program to new members they need to stress this more, because so many people come away from their first meeting with the idea that they can eat as many fruits and veggies as they want.0 -
ANY PLAN works if people adhere to the rules. Sticking to the rules after losing the weight is the issue that all people face.
That's why it's important to pick a program you KNOW you can do for life. I prefer eating whatever I want to eat, but understanding that I have a calorie limit I need to adhere to so I don't gain.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
0 -
booksandchocolate12 wrote: »If a pound of strawberries = 145 calories, that translates to about 4 points. so yes, that's definitely doable. But I remember reading on the WW boards about a woman who couldn't understand why she wasn't losing and then revealed that she was eating an entire watermelon every day.
My point (no pun intended) is that there are no "free" foods. Zero points does not mean free. I really think that when leaders explain the program to new members they need to stress this more, because so many people come away from their first meeting with the idea that they can eat as many fruits and veggies as they want.
This is so true. A few weeks a go a mini argument started in a meeting because a new member was upset that someone mentioned eating too much fruit. "But aren't fruits free" was thrown all around the room which is what got me thinking on this subject. I don't know if it's selective hearing on my part or others, but whenever I talk to someone about why they love the plan, the free things comes up. Thinking back, the amount of fruits I insisted on every day (including days I went over my allowance into the 49 extras) means I was probably not eating at a deficit at all. I think I'll stick with MFP for this reason. I like all my calories where I can see them.0 -
My thing is, why do WW when you can use MFP for free?0
-
LolaKarwowski wrote: »My thing is, why do WW when you can use MFP for free?
A lot of people like WW because of the group meetings and having to be weighed by somebody else. Different strokes for different folks.0 -
TimothyFish wrote: »I think you answered your own question. It doesn't work because there are calories in everything. It would be possible to get fat eating nothing but fruit. When you include other things in your diet and then add fruit on top of that, those extra calories start adding up. I'm sure WW works fine for people who don't care to eat fruits and vegetables.
Actually WW doesn't say you can eat all the fruits and veggies you want. I went 3 years ago, and it was recommended to do only 5 servings at 0 points. And some did have points, like avocado and peas and corn. Just like with MFP, you get out what you put in.
But I like MFP better.
0 -
ninasharpe228 wrote: »booksandchocolate12 wrote: »If a pound of strawberries = 145 calories, that translates to about 4 points. so yes, that's definitely doable. But I remember reading on the WW boards about a woman who couldn't understand why she wasn't losing and then revealed that she was eating an entire watermelon every day.
My point (no pun intended) is that there are no "free" foods. Zero points does not mean free. I really think that when leaders explain the program to new members they need to stress this more, because so many people come away from their first meeting with the idea that they can eat as many fruits and veggies as they want.
This is so true. A few weeks a go a mini argument started in a meeting because a new member was upset that someone mentioned eating too much fruit. "But aren't fruits free" was thrown all around the room which is what got me thinking on this subject. I don't know if it's selective hearing on my part or others, but whenever I talk to someone about why they love the plan, the free things comes up. Thinking back, the amount of fruits I insisted on every day (including days I went over my allowance into the 49 extras) means I was probably not eating at a deficit at all. I think I'll stick with MFP for this reason. I like all my calories where I can see them.
When I was doing WW, fruits were not "free" but non-starchy veggies were. It made sense to me to be able to make a giant salad with greens, tomatoes, bell peppers, onions, etc and only have to count the dressing. It made much less sense when they added in fruits.
0 -
TimothyFish wrote: »I think you answered your own question. It doesn't work because there are calories in everything. It would be possible to get fat eating nothing but fruit. When you include other things in your diet and then add fruit on top of that, those extra calories start adding up. I'm sure WW works fine for people who don't care to eat fruits and vegetables.
Actually WW doesn't say you can eat all the fruits and veggies you want. I went 3 years ago, and it was recommended to do only 5 servings at 0 points. And some did have points, like avocado and peas and corn. Just like with MFP, you get out what you put in.
But I like MFP better.
I've never done Weight Watchers, so I had no way of knowing that. To me, "free" seems to indicate that you can have as much as you want, since it wouldn't push you over the point limit. If you are supposed to limit yourself to 5 servings, then it appears that Weight Watchers has a communication problem with some of the people who sign up for it.0 -
jessica22222 wrote: »Ww works. I tried it and lost weight. I gained it back. What failed for me is you're taking an extra step changing calories into points. I could never wrap my head around the points system.
This is what I always think. I've never done WW, so maybe there's some benefit I don't see, but if you are going to count why not go with the actual calories?0 -
TimothyFish wrote: »TimothyFish wrote: »I think you answered your own question. It doesn't work because there are calories in everything. It would be possible to get fat eating nothing but fruit. When you include other things in your diet and then add fruit on top of that, those extra calories start adding up. I'm sure WW works fine for people who don't care to eat fruits and vegetables.
Actually WW doesn't say you can eat all the fruits and veggies you want. I went 3 years ago, and it was recommended to do only 5 servings at 0 points. And some did have points, like avocado and peas and corn. Just like with MFP, you get out what you put in.
But I like MFP better.
I've never done Weight Watchers, so I had no way of knowing that. To me, "free" seems to indicate that you can have as much as you want, since it wouldn't push you over the point limit. If you are supposed to limit yourself to 5 servings, then it appears that Weight Watchers has a communication problem with some of the people who sign up for it.
This I would agree with.
0 -
ninasharpe228 wrote: »SingRunTing wrote: »Weight watchers worked for me when I actually stuck with it. I think I did it before the "free" fruits and veggies though.
My downfall with weight watchers was that it didn't give me enough points (calories). I was hungry all the time and would give up eventually. I'd rather eat a little more and lose a little slower with a plan that I can actually stick to. That's why MFP works better for me.
I was talking to my bf about this, why did they switch from the former model. It seems like allowing for fruits and veggies made a lot more sense than their current model.
I remember reading an article when they made the switch to 'free' fruits and why they were suddenly free when previously they had two points or four points. WW saw people choosing 'unhealthier' options instead of the fruit. The example in the article was pretzels, I believe, instead of an apple. A snack pack of pretzels had fewer points than the apple for whatever reason so people were eating the pretzels and missing out on the fiber, vitamins, etc that the apple has. The reasoning was that making fruit have zero points, people would be more likely to eat those and get more nutrition out of their food.
It's been so long since the change was made that I would not be able to find that article again if you paid me a million dollars. Heck, it might have been on the WW site because I used them for a couple months and read tons of stuff on the site.
0 -
Weight Watchers does work, but you have to read the instructions, and follow it, just like any other plan..... Just because they believe that they cater to mostly adults who can read and follow the instructions, does not make it their fault when people eat seven bananas or a whole watermelon each day and then blame it on the plan.....0
-
Weight Watchers work's just fine. It's one of the most successful approaches to weight loss in the world. They've consistently updated their approach to keep up with nutritional guidelines. Anyone who follows their program will lose weight successfully. I used their program successfully for years.
My issue with them was my unwillingness to integrate the point system into my daily life. My sister-in-law is a long time member and has been successful at using the point system with no argument as well as maintaining her weight for years. And once you get to maintenance, the plan is free. Also, since it's a paid program, you are not bombarded with ads and spam on the forums.
Short of referring someone to a dietician, my recommendation to anyone looking to address a weight issue would be either WW or MFP.0 -
WW worked for me for my first 30lbs. Then I just stopped losing weight, and it was not until I joined MFP and looked at my macros that my weight started dropping again. I think WW works well for people who have a lot to lose, but when it comes to the last 10/20/30lbs, it's just not accurate enough anymore.0
-
I lost over 30 pounds on the "old" WW points system. I was still in maintenance when they converted to the "new" Points Plus system and it did not work for me at all (I gained while following it). I think they've adjusted it since then because that happened to a lot of people (when they first rolled it out there wasn't a limit on fruit and the minimum points level was 26). I'm not sure what changed, though, because that's when I left WW.
The minimum points were set too high if you were already focused on healthier foods and the free fruit (even just 5 servings) does really add up. For example, two bananas in a day is only 4 servings, but it's 240 calories! If you're on 1200 calories for weight loss (as I am), then that's 20% of your daily allotment. In order to avoid gaining, I had to be really vigilant of what I was eating, in addition to the points, which just made it too much work (more than simply calorie counting because you end up counting calories and points).
I prefer MFP now because it's free and allows me to adjust things more transparently based on my own needs. I agree with Arliah, too, that the new WW system seems to work better at helping people who have more to lose and who need to learn healthy eating habits (it really does help with that).0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.7K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.8K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 395 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.3K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 960 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions