I Can Have It...So I Don't Really Want It

troylfullerton

I still remember looking (and practically drooling over) those frosted sugar cookies at the store. I had just started Weight Watchers...and I had a lot to lose. We had the Momentum Plan at the time. I was in the store--and despite being a man in his forties, I was probably pouting (no kidding). OH MAN, how good those cookies would have tasted...but (so I thought), I can't have them. THAT'S when a moment of realization hit me---"Wait a minute!" (I thought), "I'm not on a diet--I can have a cookie if I want--I just have to write it down and work it in!" As soon as I gave myself permission to have a cookie if I wanted one...magically...I didn't want one anymore. Funny how that works.... I lost ninety pounds while basically enjoying whatever I wanted to eat, but just doing it in small, manageable amounts that I worked in while feeling good about my overall healthy food choices.

NOW---all of that to say this: What's the difference between being on a program that says "you can't have that at all!" (which means you'll only crave it) and being one that CLAIMS you CAN have anything you want when in reality, it is quite restrictive in that it basically punishes any indulgence. What if it's designed such that if you DO have a little bite of something extra, at least half (if not all) of your leeway is gone for the day, and now all you get is foods that your program considers "healthy"? Mentally, isn't the effect basically the same?

I'm hoping to open a dialogue about this, because I think this situation can translate into a daily tug-of-war that can leave people tired of fighting themselves...and therefore constantly going off their program. Whereas they might otherwise have been satisfied with what they were eating, losing weight, and getting healthier, could it be that a de facto (as opposed to an explicit) prohibition has been set up, so now they want "forbidden fruit" all the time? I hope I'm making sense--because I can see this being a major stumbling block that could set some people up for failure. What are your thoughts?

minimyzeme

Hi @troylfullerton ! Welcome aboard and thanks for the provocative scenario you posed. I'll take a stab at my perspective.

All you said is / could be true. For me, there were/are two underlying premises. I wanted to lose weight (ultimately lost 80 pounds) and I accepted there were going to always be tradeoffs.

I was right there in your scenario but took a different mental fork in the road. For the most part, I accepted and was able to live with the tradeoffs of less indulgence for a smaller body. Along with the smaller body came mental rewards (see Wednesday Living the Lifestyle thread). I "accumulated" benefits of all sorts and most of the time, am willing to make the tradeoffs needed to maintain most of my weight loss. I allow about a five-pound cushion, though my preference is maintain closer to the minus 80 pounds.

Life has improved considerably for me and my family since committing to living in a smaller body. My doctor and bloodwork have confirmed I'm much healthier now than before I started WW. I feel better about myself and am more active so I can accomplish more on any given day than I could with the extra weight.

In summary, I've gained much more life and living than the "sacrifices" of cutting back on my indulgences. Is every day a (non)-picnic? No. Do I occasionally color outside the lines? Absolutely. By and large however, I'm comfortable having chosen to trade my then-obese body for a smaller version. It has become a lifestyle for me. I make no promises about "forever" and instead take it one day at a time.

So far, so good...

gadgetgirlIL

@troylfullerton - your scenario is why I've never used any version of the points system, I have only ever counted calories. I'm not going to partake in a scheme that promotes fat and sugar shaming.

I've found that by having a treat or two every day (measured portion), I rarely have uncontrollable cravings. I have chocolate bars sitting in my pantry and they don't call out to me like they once did. Same thing with crunchy crackers, another one of my former downfalls.

steve0mania

I think you're pointing out an important "mindset," and how WW approached that mindset.

The mindset that many dieters fall into is "I have to follow my plan perfectly...or else!" Clearly no one is perfect and it's challenging to strive for an unattainable level of perfection. The issue it how one manages "failure."

WW took the approach to remove the idea of failure, and I think that's really smart. As you said, figuring out how to work in a little indulgence here and there probably prevents some psychological craving that we get when we know we can't have something.

But...you're other point is a good one, and it's the reason that I dropped the current WW program. Like you, I started on the Momentum program 10 years ago (!). I lost ~50 pounds on that program, and didn't find it too hard to follow. I certainly had indulgences, but I also learned how to eat relatively "well," and at the same time, to manage my caloric intake.

Over time, though, WW has transformed from a weigh-loss/management program, to a "wellness" program. When I had 10-15 extra pounds to take back off, I rejoined WW with the idea that I would be reinvigorated by the experience and use the tools I (re)learned to manage my weight.

However, I found that I couldn't really understand the latest program. As you noted, there is a lot of punishment built in for not eating "well." This goes strongly against my scientific mind and my understanding that weight is determined by the calories in versus calories out equation. As such, I couldn't understand the underlying premises involved in the current program, and so I dropped it.

My current approach is still very restrictive but manageable. I eat three modest meals a day during the week. On Friday night and Saturday I eat bigger meals that include bread (challah), wine, meat, and dessert (in the spirit of celebrating Shabbat as an observant Jew). That provides the "indulgence" I need but puts strong and appropriate boundaries around indulging.

I guess we all have to figure out what works for us!

whathapnd

steve0mania wrote: »

I guess we all have to figure out what works for us!

I echo what @gadgetgirlIL and @steve0mania said above about the punitive nature of the most recent WW plans. I lost 44lbs on PointsPlus and found it to be a really straightfirward/easy plan to follow. It also encouraged healthy eating via the GHGs. Because a point equated to 38 calories, it was easy/quick to learn the relative value (and trade-offs) of various indulgences. Now those indulgences just seem like they need to be mostly avoided. I feel like there's a middle ground that some people need to learn in order not to blow their points/ their chances of long-term success at weight loss, but I don't think the current WW program provides that middle ground.

I quoted Steve above, because I wanted to add something to the quote. For me, its, "I guess we all have to figure out what works for us right now." For me, that might be being very restrictive for a few weeks to get snacking/ cravings under control then moving into a period of planned indulgences then to a period of working in whatever indulgence presents itself if I really want it. It's usually not linear but more an ebb and flow to what I need to do to be successful. The magic is in not being afraid to try different approaches, staying mindful and being honest with myself. (Any of those can trip me up.) Making time to reflect is also useful. GOAD is provides that space, for me.

beachwoman2006

I'm glad to see that I'm not the only one who decided that the new "WW" plan and "workshop" format is not for me.

I'm currently about 10 pounds above my official goal weight so I'm back to tracking calories via this site.