Weight Watchers vs Macros...

honeydew22

Any past, or present Weight Watchers out there? I have been struggling with the new points system (smart points) My husband really believes in counting macros and feels it is a healthier way to drop the weight vs the drastic drop in calories smart points has offered (was eating around 1600 a day and the last week on WW I have averaged about 1000 a day)

Anyone have thoughts or opinions on this. I don't want to lose motivation for losing weight by leaving WW but I also want to have a better balance in my calories and nutrients.

Is it worth doing both?

TriciaFPal

WW was good for starting out but it was better years ago. I lost 94lbs doing WW in one yr but that was an old program they no longer endorse.
After my second baby (4yrs ago) they changed the program and then again this summer but I've done MFP ever since.
I found the new programs had too many opportunities not to truly accountable (bananas are 0 points??) And it did not keep me fuelled to chase 3 kids. Macros are the way to go, for me at least.
The price tag of MFP is waaaay better, too!!

MissusMoon

Playing with your macros won't necessarily result in weight loss. A calorie deficit is what's required. How you get there is up to you.

TriciaFPal

MissusMoon wrote: »

Playing with your macros won't necessarily result in weight loss. A calorie deficit is what's required. How you get there is up to you.

But eating 1000 calories a day on WW is not a great choice for long term weight loss either. Changing macro goals (while staying within calorie goals) can help with fullness and paying attention to eating in a healthful way.

WW does not count calories, but assigns values to food based on their carb/protein/fat content. Therfore when on the program (without counting separately) one doesn't know the actual CICO (or macros) that happens daily.

Hope you find your balance and what works for your own body, honeydew22!

cwolfman13

Your macros are pretty irrelevant for weight loss really...it comes down to calories...you can track macros and have a very low calorie diet or track macros and have a reasonable amount of calories...or you can just track calories and have a reasonable amount of calories or do an unhealthy very low calorie diet...none of that has anything to do with tracking macros.

Most people who monitor their macros are coming from a fitness perspective...macro ratios can make a difference in fitness performance, recovery, etc...from a diet perspective, macros make up your calories...so if you're counting calories, you are in some way also counting macros because you can't have calories without the macros.

honeydew22

I guess it was my mistake to refer to only "Marcos" since in my mind, counting macros involves being in a calorie deficit/counting calories as well (since calories are mentioned in each response above)