weight watchers vs MFP

My personal opinion is that points are just a complicated way of counting calories. I prefer to count calories because they're all treated as equal. So I can have, for example, a piece of chocolate without being punished for it by it counting as "more" the way it would with WW where two items with identical calories might have different point values. A good example is that they treat fruit as "free." I was doing the plan when the system changed and there were a number of unhappy campers on their message boards who didn't understand why they increased their fruit and their weight loss stalled.

I've done both and pointsplus can be a little easier for logging . Also certain fruits and most vegetable are zero points. MFP is however FREE.

Weight watchers made much more sense before the internet, smart phones and MFP. If it came down to calorie counting with a paper and pencil vs weight watchers, I can see where the ease and convenience of points comes into play. Now that you can log food with a barcode scanner on your smart phone, save your frequent meals and foods, create recipes, and search a mega database in a matter of seconds, I see no real advantage to weight watchers.

There is a way to track WW points plus on MFP, along with calories. If you're interested say so and I'll see if I can find the thread.

I had this same conversation with a coworker this morning. I have done both WW and MFP and in my opinion I prefer MFP. Both are great programs and both work wonderfully. There is however one catch on both.....you have to commit and you have to log everything. Choose the one that works best for YOU.

Avocados aren't free and everyone gets some education about what are appropriate portions and knows that 1000 calories of fruit a day isn't appropriate (or should). And they're told to listen to their bodies and also to cut back fruit if they're eating a lot and having trouble.

I do see a lot of people having trouble with WW but I think it's because the average intake on WW now is in the 1800s. You have a lot of leeway on it so if you can't lose at that level, you need to make the decision to monitor your fruit and maybe not eat all your weeklies and/or activity points.

One plus that I liked about weight watchers was that most fruits and veggies are zero points. This isn't magic, WW gives you less calories (in the form of points) than my fitness pal would, leaving you to fill the void with veggies and fruits. That's really smart, even though fruits and veggies still have calories it's really hard to over indulge on them. I dare you to try and eat 1,000 calories in just broccoli in a single day, you'd explode.

I like Fitness pal ultimately better though because I can track my macro nutrients better, don't have to be hassled with converted everything to points and it's totally free.

While this is true to some extent, it is, however, very easy to eat 1000 calories of fruit in a day. If that counts for zero points then some people can have difficulty losing weight on WW if they eat a lot of high sugar fruit. Bananas, in particular, are very high in sugar and calories. A "large" banana is about 120 calories. An average avocado is over 300 calories. I once ate a half of a small seedless watermelon over the course of one afternoon and was shocked to discover that it was well over 250 calories.

I've seen more than a few people in these forums who couldn't lose weight on WW and came here and had success.

Very true great point.

i've done them both and i can say that i'm doing better with myfitnesspal. did i forget to mention FREE.

I am a veteran of weight watchers! I lost quite a bit several years ago, when they had their Core Program. I STILL Love that one today. But they renamed it and refenagled it to power foods ors omething or other. not sure what they call it now. I really liked weight watchers, especially the support I got. I went religiously to my tuesday noon time meetings, and I loved my leader. I think he helped me with my motivation and just overall morale.

Core was more a whole foods, eat clean (basically, no counting points unless you are eating outside of Core foods. So, it'd be comparable to Clean eating, paleo (maybe?), just good healthy grains, lean meats, lots of veggies and fruits. Nonfat dairy is the only thing I would greatly disagree with, even to this day. The points system is pretty easy overall. And things with same calories have different points, that just says there's difference in the other calculations, like FIBER or FAT. I wish they would consider sugar, but I don't think they've done that yet?? I'm not sure. I haven't been in about 3-4 years?

I loved WW when i did it. I did very well on it at one point. I think the support was more my boost though. If you were just doing weight watchers online, then I'd say just do MFP. If you were considering meetings, then i'd say go for it! Because you can't really get that kind of IN person support from the internet... Sorry guys! I'm just saying, having people directly in your life supporting your efforts, and giving you that boost or consoling on the gain due to whatever... or just that GOOD kick in the pants you need, It honestly can't be beat!

But I'd say, eat smartly, avoid processed foods overall, and try to find people in your life, not just here, to help with your efforts. That really is the only difference, if you aren't going to WW meetings.

I do both WW and MFP. I find that WW points and their informational tools ("cheat sheets") help me navigate decisions about food choices. They favor eating things that are filling, with low glycemic index, things that are not captured strictly by calorie counting. They encourage participants to eat more fruits and vegetables, less carbohydrates and alcohol (ok, an oversimplification, but you get the idea). In the past I focused only on calories, but then made poor food choices. I would stay within my calorie budget, but eat high calorie foods. I was always hungry because the food wasn't filling.

I still like knowing how many calories I'm taking in - it makes for an interesting comparison, so I am tracking both. Long term, I imagine I would stick with MFP once I reach goal weight.

The biggest problem that I had with it when I did WW last year was their food database. I don't know how it is now but it was in serious need of an update. Actually I noticed their site hadn't changed at all from when I did it in 2008. I ended up on MFP double tracking for 3 weeks just to track my macros because you can't get that information while tracking on WW. When I seen how much better it is here (the food database and the forums) I cancelled my WW subscription.

I lost 32 lbs. on WW and never gained back an ounce. I joined MFP because it was free not because WW didn't work for me. I have used many of the same principles I learned from WW when I joined MFP and never had a problem with regaining weight because of the transition. Both programs are excellent if people take the time to learn to use them correctly. Both could be carried into the maintenance phase.

The biggest problem that I had with it when I did WW last year was their food database. I don't know how it is now but it was in serious need of an update. Actually I noticed their site hadn't changed at all from when I did it in 2008. I ended up on MFP double tracking for 3 weeks just to track my macros because you can't get that information while tracking on WW. When I seen how much better it is here (the food database and the forums) I cancelled my WW subscription.

I did a couple months back on WW earlier this year. Their site and database suck still. I even complained to corporate. They should be ashamed of charging for that. I'm a lifetime member and would love to have the motivation of getting the apps free but since they're so bad I don't want to use them, even for free.