WW Points?

Equus5374

First off, I'm not a WW user. I'm making an observation of something that confuses me regarding the calculation of the WW points system. A friend is on WW; the other day I was talking about Lindor Truffles (those darling things I like to call "heaven's balls"). I like to have them, and I just count them in my calories, no biggie. She comments that they "wreak havoc" with her points because they are 4 points each. This is understandable, because each little ball is around 80 calories. However, I know that she does not track points for fruits and vegetables consumed. I on the other hand, know that the type of apple I eat is also 80 calories. To me, 80 cal. = 80 cal. Does WW rate points on nutritional value and not overall calories? If so, do their "followers" actually eat in calorie deficits or is it all about better nutrition?

Just curious...

daremightythings

WW allows users to have fruits and non-starchy vegetables 'free.' They don't count towards points because the WW idea is that no one ever got fat from eating too many fruits and vegetables. It's a pretty dumb idea, if you ask me.

CurlyCockney

I haven't done WW but manymanymany years ago I did Slimming World, and the theory is that you will eat a lot more of heaven's balls (I love that name!) than you would apples etc.

WW and SW dieters must be in a deficit to lose, and many people are successful with them.

DrifterBear

I did WW for a while recently and think it's great for people who are starting out and don't know about proper dieting. I wasn't a beginner but did it mostly for the accountability. I found points convert generally around 40 cal to 1 point but it can be very different based on the type of food. There's some secret sauce in how they calculate points so that an 80 calorie chocolate ball will be more points than 80 calories of grilled chicken. As your friend found, tracking the WW points discourages her from eating that treat while from a calorie perspective you may see it as a trade off to an apple.

Pieces of fruit and veggies are 'free' on WW but they say if you're blending them, baking them, or otherwise changing them to make it more tasty or easier to eat large quantities then you should enter it in a way to count it as points. In other words, there's a big difference between and apple and an apple pie. I agree though that a couple extra apples or bananas per day can do serious damage.

TeaBea

It's my understanding that the overall caloric value of Weight Watcher's starting points are very low. When you eat "free" fruits and veggies you actually come up to a more normal deficit level.

The reason Lindor Truffles "wreak havoc" with her points is WW (newer points) are less forgiving for carbs. I'm not low carb (no medical issues) - so newer WW doesn't interest me.

Edited .......secret sauce! I love that explanation.

KathyApplebaum

The explanation WW gives is that you didn't join because you ate too many carrots, it's because you ate too much carrot cake. On a more realistic note, it's not too likely that someone is going to binge on 500 calories of carrots. (Besides, you only get 5 servings a day "free", and it's already built in to your points)

WW worked well for me for many years, precisely because of the free fruits and veggies. It totally eliminated the fear of being hungry, because I could always have a carrot or an apple. Having that fear gone led me to do a much better job tracking and to exercise regularly. Now that I don't need the free veggie crutch, I'm not with WW any more.

Strawblackcat

If I'm not mistaken, following a day on Weight Watcher's points with no extras (fruit, veggies, ect.) sets you at a very low level of caloric intake. The idea behind the "free" fruits and veggies is to incentivize you to fill the gap with them instead of chocolate and chips (since they"count"). Eating the free things is essentially supposed to put you at the proper deficit.

WalkingAlong

Equus5374 wrote: »

Does WW rate points on nutritional value and not overall calories? If so, do their "followers" actually eat in calorie deficits or is it all about better nutrition?

Points do consider the macronutrients. 200 calories of alcohol, fat or sugar costs more points than 200 calories of say lean protein. WW is about learning to eat both the right amounts and to be satisfied at those amounts. By choosing lean protein and plants over say truffles and bacon, you can be very satisfied at say 1500 calories.

And when you're given say 1000 calories a day (in points form) plus 5 servings of produce, you eat those 5 servings, usually, which isn't a bad habit to get into.