Weight Watchers opinions

ekalexm

I lost 19lbs in 2 months with Weight Watchers towards the end of last year. However, half of it crept back on again fairly quickly, chiefly through my own indiscipline. However, some people are critical of the WW plan, while it seems to work well for others. Would be interested in getting the views of those who have previously been with WW. Did it work for you? Did you keep the weight off? Are the My Fitness Pal website and associated tools superior?

BigGuy47

Plenty of opinions here:

http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/448249-myfitnesspal-vs-weight-watchers

luvinlaurakate

WW works, or can work, but just like this site it is a life-long process and takes making the proper choices when it comes to the food we eat. WW really isn't much different than what this site achieves, they just simplify (or complicate?) it into a points system instead of seeing the values like we do here. In my opinion, what makes this website superior is that it is FREE. That is pretty much it.

ekalexm

Thanks Laura and thanks for the link Big Guy.

The cost of WW seems excessive and unnecessary. They certainly take advantage of the support network they are offering, which as you say is available here for nothing.

sherisse69

I did WW years ago. I hit my goal within a little under a year. I had lost approximately 50lbs. I became a lifetime member. I continued with weigh ins to help maintain for a few years, on and off. This helped me maintain for almost 10 years. I absolutely believe it can be a fabulous source of support, and assistance - BUT the program needs to fit YOU. YOU need to like the program. I tried going back about a year or so ago. The program had changed. I tried the new....didn't do so well. Try to do the old that I new....and it no longer fit ME. Hence, how I ended up here. I let myself slide, due to my own lack of discipline - no result of the programs I had access to.

It is costly but that can also be a motivation to keep going, and aim to hit your goal. Because once you are a lifetime member (hitting your goal) you can weigh in and join groups for free, as long as you stay within 2lbs of that goal weight. You only pay again, when you are above, and only until you get back.

I think it is also helpful as you are face to face with motivation and support. You are accountable, face to face, when you do poorly. You can ask questions face to face when in need of guidance.

I don't think that FP is superior, but I don't think WW is either. They are just different. You just need to try and see what works best for you.

Best of luck

Akimajuktuq

I have no use for WW. They were the first agency I went to for weight loss help and their nutritional advice sucked. Low fat, fill up on empty carbs (like rice cakes). I had some poor WW leaders. They were thin, but sickly from not eating healthy. They've gotten far too much of my money. Also, their food brand is not made with healthy ingredients.

I was on WW online until I discovered MFP about a month ago. I used WW to track my food and weight. However, WW keeps food macros secret and applies their own "Points" value. They allow lots of food for zero points, grains have reduced points, but they penalize protein and fat foods with higher points (based on same calorie values), which is what I need to base my diet on. $22 per month down the drain for nothing.

MFP is superior in every way. I can set my own nutrition goals. They have an excellent database (although I wish members wouldn't add things without macro info-makes searching very time consuming). The only issue with MFP has been that people on different kinds of eating plans attack each other in the forums and can't respect that one way of eating isn't for everyone. It's ok to discuss differences of opinions but I hate the misinformation passed off as fact and the disrespect shown by some. But avoiding the message boards is always an option.

cjc166

WW still allows you to eat addictive foods and can be lacking in micronutrients (it is for most people). Long term is difficult for WW due to having to constantly be eating less than your body is telling you to. The best I've found is a whole foods plant-based diet (and this is coming from a former near-carnivore). I've lost 30 lbs since starting "Eat to Live" 6 weeks ago, and after making the initial decision, this is the easiest thing I've ever done. I get to eat until I'm satisfied, I no longer need to count calories, and I'm not walking around like a hungry bear. It might be worth looking into.

sherisse69

WW still allows you to eat addictive foods and can be lacking in micronutrients (it is for most people). Long term is difficult for WW due to having to constantly be eating less than your body is telling you to. The best I've found is a whole foods plant-based diet (and this is coming from a former near-carnivore). I've lost 30 lbs since starting "Eat to Live" 6 weeks ago, and after making the initial decision, this is the easiest thing I've ever done. I get to eat until I'm satisfied, I no longer need to count calories, and I'm not walking around like a hungry bear. It might be worth looking into.

WW actually has what they used to call their CORE program (not sure if that is still the name) but that is where you have select, clean foods that you can eat until satisfied without counting the points. It is another option to look into, if someone is interested in WW. Again, it is all about what works for each individual. In terms of lacking calories for life, or eating "addictive" foods, I beleive that comes down solely on the person making the choices on what they put into their mouths. Just my thoughts.

weird_me2

I was on WW online until I discovered MFP about a month ago. I used WW to track my food and weight. However, WW keeps food macros secret and applies their own "Points" value. They allow lots of food for zero points, grains have reduced points, but they penalize protein and fat foods with higher points (based on same calorie values), which is what I need to base my diet on. $22 per month down the drain for nothing.

Actually, some of that is not true. WW actually tends to penalize more for carbs and assigns slightly lower weight to proteins than it does carbs or fat. It also gives a set of health guidelines to follow, which MFP does not. Some people need the structure and find that having a goal to eat X amount of fruits/veggies, dairy, oil, etc. a day makes it easier to adapt to a healthy lifestyle. Also, yes, WW does allow for "free" foods, but if you look at their formula for figuring daily points for people, it subtracts about 150 calories from the daily caloric need before giving the points goal, so if they didn't allow for "free" fruits and veggies, then people would have more points to use. MFP also allows users to eat back all exercise calories burned, but WW allows only about 1/2 of those to be eaten through the use of Activity Points.

I see posts on MFP and people's diaries where they aren't really eating any foods with good nutritional value and they are wondering why they can't lose, so sometimes people may need someone to give them a goal for health. It's all really just a matter of preference.

I did WW a few years ago and got down to my lowest adult weight ever. I started it after counting calories for a year and not losing anything for several months. Unfortunately, I let life get in the way and gained all of my weight back, but WW worked well for me. It was a much needed break from calorie counting, which can make you crazy in a whole different way. I think that if calorie counting isn't working for you for some reason, WW would be a good thing to try. WW also has in person meetings which some people need as opposed to an online community.

Akimajuktuq

I was on WW online until I discovered MFP about a month ago. I used WW to track my food and weight. However, WW keeps food macros secret and applies their own "Points" value. They allow lots of food for zero points, grains have reduced points, but they penalize protein and fat foods with higher points (based on same calorie values), which is what I need to base my diet on. $22 per month down the drain for nothing.

Actually, some of that is not true. WW actually tends to penalize more for carbs and assigns slightly lower weight to proteins than it does carbs or fat. It also gives a set of health guidelines to follow, which MFP does not. Some people need the structure and find that having a goal to eat X amount of fruits/veggies, dairy, oil, etc. a day makes it easier to adapt to a healthy lifestyle. Also, yes, WW does allow for "free" foods, but if you look at their formula for figuring daily points for people, it subtracts about 150 calories from the daily caloric need before giving the points goal, so if they didn't allow for "free" fruits and veggies, then people would have more points to use. MFP also allows users to eat back all exercise calories burned, but WW allows only about 1/2 of those to be eaten through the use of Activity Points.

I see posts on MFP and people's diaries where they aren't really eating any foods with good nutritional value and they are wondering why they can't lose, so sometimes people may need someone to give them a goal for health. It's all really just a matter of preference.

I did WW a few years ago and got down to my lowest adult weight ever. I started it after counting calories for a year and not losing anything for several months. Unfortunately, I let life get in the way and gained all of my weight back, but WW worked well for me. It was a much needed break from calorie counting, which can make you crazy in a whole different way. I think that if calorie counting isn't working for you for some reason, WW would be a good thing to try. WW also has in person meetings which some people need as opposed to an online community.

Actually I am not wrong. For a high fiber bread (and other grains) you can count one Point for 110 calories. Lean proteins get assigned 1 point for 50 calories. Less lean cuts get charged 1.5-2X the points for same calorie value. Less than 20 calories for fat (ie a tsp butter) count as a point. Most fruits are zero, but don't dare eat an avocado!

WW can work for some people, usually temporarily (as it was for you). People who don't have grain/legume/fruit sensitivities. And who want to spend a lot of money. You say it's "structured" but they won't even give calorie or macro info. I need that info to stay on track for MY healthy foods.

The fact that WW foods are unhealthy also says a lot about their organization.

As for activity points, and eating them back, I just don't. I also don't pay much attention to calories, I more interested in the macro-nutrients.

dvelocity

My two cents

Weight Watchers is a company and a brand looking to make a profit. They will do what they need to do to make that profit. They are no longer the lady in her living room that wanted to provide help and assistance to her friends/peers that were struggling with weight loss.

New programs result in new interest from old members and spike in revenue for the company. The Points Formula and other changes to the program help with that.

Having said that. I lost 80 pounds on Weight Watchers, kept it off for over 5 years. I stopped thinking about diet and exercise and gained everything back.

I learned a lot about my relationships with food while I was a member. I learned a lot of strategies for dealing with everyday life and how it affected my relationship with food. At that time in my life this information was valuable to me and worth every penny I paid.

I have learned, but now I need to practice. I don't need WW to practice so MFP is a better fit for me. I can accomplish what I need to, daily tracking of food. bragging about success, and encouragement when I struggle all here and for free.

I think both are good and agree that you need to find what is good for you.

weird_me2

I was on WW online until I discovered MFP about a month ago. I used WW to track my food and weight. However, WW keeps food macros secret and applies their own "Points" value. They allow lots of food for zero points, grains have reduced points, but they penalize protein and fat foods with higher points (based on same calorie values), which is what I need to base my diet on. $22 per month down the drain for nothing.

Actually, some of that is not true. WW actually tends to penalize more for carbs and assigns slightly lower weight to proteins than it does carbs or fat. It also gives a set of health guidelines to follow, which MFP does not. Some people need the structure and find that having a goal to eat X amount of fruits/veggies, dairy, oil, etc. a day makes it easier to adapt to a healthy lifestyle. Also, yes, WW does allow for "free" foods, but if you look at their formula for figuring daily points for people, it subtracts about 150 calories from the daily caloric need before giving the points goal, so if they didn't allow for "free" fruits and veggies, then people would have more points to use. MFP also allows users to eat back all exercise calories burned, but WW allows only about 1/2 of those to be eaten through the use of Activity Points.

I see posts on MFP and people's diaries where they aren't really eating any foods with good nutritional value and they are wondering why they can't lose, so sometimes people may need someone to give them a goal for health. It's all really just a matter of preference.

I did WW a few years ago and got down to my lowest adult weight ever. I started it after counting calories for a year and not losing anything for several months. Unfortunately, I let life get in the way and gained all of my weight back, but WW worked well for me. It was a much needed break from calorie counting, which can make you crazy in a whole different way. I think that if calorie counting isn't working for you for some reason, WW would be a good thing to try. WW also has in person meetings which some people need as opposed to an online community.

Actually I am not wrong. For a high fiber bread (and other grains) you can count one Point for 110 calories. Lean proteins get assigned 1 point for 50 calories. Less lean cuts get charged 1.5-2X the points for same calorie value. Less than 20 calories for fat (ie a tsp butter) count as a point. Most fruits are zero, but don't dare eat an avocado!

WW can work for some people, usually temporarily (as it was for you). People who don't have grain/legume/fruit sensitivities. And who want to spend a lot of money. You say it's "structured" but they won't even give calorie or macro info. I need that info to stay on track for MY healthy foods.

The fact that WW foods are unhealthy also says a lot about their organization.

As for activity points, and eating them back, I just don't. I also don't pay much attention to calories, I more interested in the macro-nutrients.

Your points information is out dated. The WW plan changed 2 years ago and the whole 1 point for 110 calories of bread is no more. Now, some of those things are 3 points instead of 1, and the plan you are referring to that did that also did not allow "free" fruit or much of anything free except non-starchy veggies. The new WW points calculation formual is protein grams/10.94+carb grams/9.17+fat grams/3.89-fiber grams/12.49. This means that a product can have more protein and be lower in points than if it has more carbs. If something has 100 calories of fat or 100 calories of carbs only, it ends up being 1 point more than 100 calories of protein.

As I said before, it will vary depending on the individual needs of the person, but I think the most recent WW Plan is a very good option and can help people learn a healthy lifestyle if they need that. Most any diet plan will work for most people, it's simply a matter of sticking to it. I've lost large amounts of weight on calorie counting plans way more times than I have on Weight Watchers and ultimately have always gained it back because I didn't deal with underlying issues for why I overate in the first place. If a persons in the right frame of mind for weight loss/maintenance, any plan that they find liveable is a good plan for them.

Edited to correct the example / originally said 100 grams of carbs and meant 100 calories of carbs (25 grams).

dvelocity

If a persons in the right frame of mind for weight loss/maintenance, any plan that they find liveable is a good plan for them.

Agreed!

Lyerin

Whatever plan works for you is the best one. I had some success with WW over the years, but I could never stick to it because the point counting was not intuitive for me. I do much better here by logging my actual food and keeping track of calories, etc. Lots of people love WW though and have great success.

pattyann1112

Four years ago, I lost 60 lbs. on the old WW points system. It took me a year to lose 60 and all was well until I hit a plateau for three months which turned out to be right before the holidays! Then I didn't go back and needless to say, gained it all back. I did attempt to go back for a bit about 1-1/2 years ago when they introduced points plus. I didn't do as well, and only stayed a couple of months.

Through WW I learned alot about the proper way to eat. Once they introduced the plus program, they encouraged healthier eating and encouraged members not to use their points so much on candy, chips, and junk food (empty calories) but they had healthy guidelines that encouraged a certain number of lean proteins, low fat dairy, fruits and veggies, etc. I use what I learned there and try to apply it to MFP. I learned that all calories are not created equal and a 200 calorie candy bar is not the same as 200 calories in the form of an egg and slice of whole wheat toast, for example.

I was worried that I couldn't do MFP without having that accountability of going to get "weighed in" because that was all I ever knew (being an off and on WW member for years). But, although it's only been about 6 weeks on MFP, I'm still hanging in there and I really like it. My wallet likes it too!