Weight Watchers vs low-cal diet? which works best?

liittlebrunette

I'm wondering what peoples opinions are on weight watchers vs any other diet really but I'm leaning towards low cal

What has worked for you? what are you results? whats easier?

gjulie

Hi I lost 35 lbs with the weightwatchers plan years ago so it does work what I found difficult was to maintain what I lost and eventually I regained most of the weight,I have found sensible eating and exercise to be the most effective it has to be doable to be maintained all the time not just weeks or months! A step back from the table and astep out the door was once quoated to me and its very true!!!!

alsunrise

I also did WW and lost over 40 lbs, maintained for about a year and then gained 50 back.

LisaWilson2012

Hi I lost 35 lbs with the weightwatchers plan years ago so it does work what I found difficult was to maintain what I lost and eventually I regained most of the weight,I have found sensible eating and exercise to be the most effective it has to be doable to be maintained all the time not just weeks or months! A step back from the table and astep out the door was once quoated to me and its very true!!!!

This!

sarahharmintx

Both worked for me. 12lbs on WW and almost 40lbs on here. I lost more on MFP bc I didnt have to pay to stick with it. I customized it for me (and what works for me probably wont work for others). I think its easy to get caught up in the I have to $ (either a membership, weekly fee, food delivery service, pill dr, etc) to lose weight when most of the time, thats not true.

LaurenAOK

Weight Watchers IS a low-cal diet, it just shows you "points" instead of calories. MFP and weight watchers are practically the same thing. There are some minor differences but it's the exact same concept. Some people have more success with one than the other. I like the idea of MFP better because you can learn about actual calories in food rather than just learning about the "points" they are associated with, which mean nothing in the real world.

Tarin626

I've tried WW but you dont really learn to count calories properly. I say save your money and spend it on healthier food to lose weight on your own!

rml_16

WW IS a low-cal diet.

Oy.

youcandooeet

They're the same thing. Weight watchers has to present it in a gimmicky way or you'd have no reason to pay 10 dollars for the honor of working hard on your own and letting them weigh you once a week. They convert everything into points so you don't know the real deal, which is less in than out.

mrsvatitagain

Weight Watchers IS a low-cal diet, it just shows you "points" instead of calories. MFP and weight watchers are practically the same thing. There are some minor differences but it's the exact same concept. Some people have more success with one than the other. I like the idea of MFP better because you can learn about actual calories in food rather than just learning about the "points" they are associated with, which mean nothing in the real world.

Yup practically the same thing, cept its free here, but some people need that accountability of weighing with an actual person and oeprate better in group settings. Kind of like class room vs. on line. Concepts are the same. Try both and see which works for you, its all about you! I too tried weight watchers and got good results, but didnt want to keep paying when I found MFP is a mirror image. Good Luck!

BernadetteChurch

For me, it's definitely MFP because on WW some foods are free and you can eat as much of them as you like. So even though they be fruits and vegetables they all have calories and it all adds up. For me, even after only 2 weeks with MFP, I'm really learning to think about what I'm putting in my mouth. It's also less restrictive as you literally can eat whatever you like - as long as you know moderation!

redfroggie

I tried WW when they first came out with the points system. It was really complicated to me, having to carry around the book with that had foods listed, keeping track of your points etc. etc.
The problem for me was that I couldn't look at food in terms of a point as everything has a different calorie amount. Saying this I did lose 16 lbs doing it along with the gym, but once I stopped I gained it all back and then some.

Since being on MFP it all makes sense to me. I know that WW is now online and tracking is a whole lot simpler, but I don't want to pay for what I get here for free.

alsunrise

Actually calories are not calculated into WW points.

bakz4

I tried WW several times over the years. I guess the best way to put it is that I didn't make it work for me. Figuring out points, etc was too much for me. With MFP, you see the calories on the wrapper of what you are going to eat and you know if it will fit into your plan. Most weight loss programs now have apps for uploading calories, but I find MFP easiest to use, most convenient, and very workable. I've lost 25 pounds since April - which is something I have yet to attain with ANY program I've used.

Good luck in your journey and with your choice!

ShannonMpls

Some people do really well with the in-person support of weekly weight watchers meetings.

If you're doing Weight Watchers online, there are few differences between MFP and WW, except MFP is free. Again, though, some people do very well with the "free" fruits and veggies on WW as well as the way activity points are spread out over the week instead of here on MFP, where "exercise" cals are added to your daily allowance.

Personally, I like free. I also like not having to convert my food into arbitrary and proprietary "points" that are subject to change whenever WW decides to change its program.

For me, MFP is something I can work with long-term, well into maintenance. It's taught me portions and healthy eating habits, and forced me to examine what's in my food beyond just the calories.

purpleipod

Actually calories are not calculated into WW points.

But the components of a calorie are.

Either will work, it just depends on which one you want to use.

GeekyNerd

I have tried both but found more success with MFP. I tried the new Points Plus system but found it contradictory. They show that fruit is a zero point value which to some meant they could eat it all day long and not worry about it. We all know that's not true as fruits have calories in them. If you want to cut calories I think it's best to use a system that does exactly that and shows you an honest answer.

ShannonMpls

Actually calories are not calculated into WW points.

But the components of a calorie are.

Either will work, it just depends on which one you want to use.

Ha, exactly - carbs are 4 cals, fat is 9 cals, protein is 4 cals per gram, and fiber is subtracted in some copyrighted manner. Calories are most definitely taken into account.

sweebum

They both work, because they do the same thing- restrict calories.

Some people do better with the WW community and meetings as they offer guidance and accountability. I prefer calorie counting only because I like to eat food without constraints and special points calculations.

Pick what works for you, and the one you think you can stick with, because that's ultimately what will work.

MinnieInMaine

For me they were about the same thing because I came from the prior (Momentum?) points system on WW. You track your food to stay accountable, get a little activity in to earn extra points and work on getting more fruits, veggies and your water intake in. However, I have to add that not all WW meetings are built the same - I've heard stories from different parts of the country where they approach the program slightly differently so I guess it depends on where you are and who your leaders are. Anyway, I lost almost 60 pounds then had a rough time over the 2010-2011 holiday season, tried to start back up but I was on my own since that's when WW started their Points Plus program and I didn't care for it. Thankfully I found MFP shortly after!

The biggest difference I saw between the Momentum plan and MFP was that WW provided loopholes with the fiber intake since the higher the fiber, the lower the points. A lot of folks practically lived on the "Fiber One" products including yours truly. Now I think those things are disgusting, although I do like the Fiber Plus bars.

mangozulu

Weight Watchers IS a low-cal diet, it just shows you "points" instead of calories. MFP and weight watchers are practically the same thing. There are some minor differences but it's the exact same concept. Some people have more success with one than the other. I like the idea of MFP better because you can learn about actual calories in food rather than just learning about the "points" they are associated with, which mean nothing in the real world.

This

hummzz

I've always wondered about those pre-packaged food diets. I would think that learning to eat a low cal diet would be more effective in the long run because you have learned to eat healthy and can maintain the weight loss. So in the long run....Low Cal diet.

chivalryder

I can see the responses to this being very biased.

redkitty615

I did very well on WW back in 1996 when it was based on how many proteins, fats, breads, fruits and veggies. A lot less complicated, and I felt that I was eating better than when it was point based. I also prefer MFP because it is more economical!

47Jacqueline

Both food plans work well if you pay attention to portion control. I lost a lot of weight on weight watchers many years ago, but I prefer the calorie counting on MFP these days. I don't want to figure out the point system for weight watchers.

My sister in law is on weight watchers and it's a part of her life, but I am doing just fine on MFP.

sylvuz323

Ok, peeps just because Weight Watchers has pre-packaged foods it doesn't mean that they force you to eat their foods. They are all about eating right and if you were to convert the points to calories it would be considered low calories. They just don't hold you to the same amount every single day, you have some "wiggle room". In other words you can go above your recommended calories for the day without sabotaging your goals. Both methods can work but its really about what will work best for you!

cassiegal724

Some people do really well with the in-person support of weekly weight watchers meetings.

If you're doing Weight Watchers online, there are few differences between MFP and WW, except MFP is free. Again, though, some people do very well with the "free" fruits and veggies on WW as well as the way activity points are spread out over the week instead of here on MFP, where "exercise" cals are added to your daily allowance.

Personally, I like free. I also like not having to convert my food into arbitrary and proprietary "points" that are subject to change whenever WW decides to change its program.

For me, MFP is something I can work with long-term, well into maintenance. It's taught me portions and healthy eating habits, and forced me to examine what's in my food beyond just the calories.

I agree with this. I lost 60 lbs on ww online. I got annoyed with having to calculate points and free is working for me now! I also think that there is much more support on MFP than I ever got with ww online. I know that would have been different if I went to meetings, but I'm not willing to pay $40/month. I learned a lot there and I'm learning a lot here. I def prefer MFP. Good luck with your decision!

jozzler

I lost 77 lbs with WW, and am a gold member, but now my hours at work have changed i can no longer attend, so decided to sign up on here and keep a food diary. The calories that i am on actually work out to be around the same number of points that i was allowed on a daily basis at WW!! So to me, it's the same. The only difference is that i actually liked to stand on the WW scales and not mine at home, as i figured there's would be more accurate. But i can track and log my food online for free on here, and it's acessible for my needs. Win win all round

NCTravellingGirl

I initially used a WW at work program where my company paid half and WW came to my work, so it was convenient. I lost a LOT of weight (100 lbs) in 10 months, partially because I started working out to get more points.

There is nothing wrong with WW. I didn't know how to STOP or adapt to real life though.... so I stopped... and gained back all but 30 lbs over 4 years.

I feel like MFP is teaching me to eat differently. I chose foods that balance my macros better instead of just points. WW restricts calories to a low level as you get smaller, so it worked faster for me than MFP though.

Good luck whatever your choice. Do what is right for you!

youcandooeet

There's a reason they change the plan every year. NEWER! BETTER! FASTER! STRONGERRRR! They have to keep people coming back to try it again.

It's a good support group, but they're just selling you a product that is doing the exact same thing as what you can do on this website. If it's worth it to you to have the in person meetings, more power to you, but they're just giving you a fancy equasion that does the same thing: counts calories.

Need2bfit918

Weight Watchers IS a low-cal diet, it just shows you "points" instead of calories. MFP and weight watchers are practically the same thing. There are some minor differences but it's the exact same concept. Some people have more success with one than the other. I like the idea of MFP better because you can learn about actual calories in food rather than just learning about the "points" they are associated with, which mean nothing in the real world.

exactly! in fact its an extremely low calorie diet.