New weight watchers point plus
Options
lucielu2
Posts: 251 Member
Ok so im doing the new ww and fruits and veggies are 0 points.The issue im having is that i do enter them in mfp its not really matching(wich im fine with)
Would you not enter fruit and veggies in mft so it close to weight watchers at the end of the eday?
For example im over 1200 cal right now in mft but still have 4 point with ww.
Just wanted peoples opinion on this one.
Would you not enter fruit and veggies in mft so it close to weight watchers at the end of the eday?
For example im over 1200 cal right now in mft but still have 4 point with ww.
Just wanted peoples opinion on this one.
0
Replies
-
If your loosing weight stick with WW but if you not maybe you should go with MFP0
-
If your loosing weight stick with WW but if you not maybe you should go with MFP
Hiya I agree with the above - try just doing one or the other, you don't want to get to the point later down the line where your getting stressed out over points AND calories
good luck0 -
This is my entire issue with WW. The bottom line is that 3500 calories=1 pound. The body doesn't "think" in points. Also, please feel free to correct me, but you aren't necessarily watching your fat/carb/protein ratio with points either, which is important for overall health. I would try to watch both. If your calories are at 1200, screw the points and try to get your points lines up with calories instead of the other way around. Just thoughts. I am really interested to hear others thoughts on this topic. Veggies and fruits have calories, so i don't get how they can be "free". I could get fat on fruits and veggies if I wanted to.0
-
i have done ww in past and wondered the same thing about 'free foods" or zero pt. foods. i've read that 50 cals is equal to 1 pt. so according to your post that would give you an additional 200 cals for today... hmmm... i say this... nobody ever got fat eating grapes and carrots0
-
I did WW and had success until I quit, then I gained it back (plus pregnancy). I tried doing it again recently, but it just wasn't working.
Then I came here (for free, I might add) and lost 20 pounds in 5 weeks. MUCH better than with WW and I'm never hungry and I eat what I want. THIS made me change my lifestyle...WW just made me count.0 -
I'm doing WWPP too, but not losing any weight past 3 lbs! I've only lost 3 lbs in 1-1/2 months! I don't like the PP system. I did the old point system from 2005-2008 and it worked like a charm. I think WW made the fruits and most veggies 0 points because they want us to lose MUCH slower than people were on the old point system. I'm choosing to log my food on MFP and forget about WW. I think MFP works better!0
-
This is my entire issue with WW. The bottom line is that 3500 calories=1 pound. The body doesn't "think" in points. Also, please feel free to correct me, but you aren't necessarily watching your fat/carb/protein ratio with points either, which is important for overall health. I would try to watch both. If your calories are at 1200, screw the points and try to get your points lines up with calories instead of the other way around. Just thoughts. I am really interested to hear others thoughts on this topic. Veggies and fruits have calories, so i don't get how they can be "free". I could get fat on fruits and veggies if I wanted to.
i agree fruits and veggies got calories--the old weight watcher way fruits were counted-thanks for ur opinion0 -
Already over 1200 calories w/ MFP but still have 4 points with WW.....
well reason is... WW calculates points with calories, fat and fiber.... so on WW 100 calories may be two points, but if the fat content is too high then it may end up being 4 or 5 points etc. so calories and points will never exactly match between the two sites.
I too recommend picking one site and sticking to it (tracking wise), but if you like both message boards on both sites then by all means use them, ya know.
I just don't see the point in double tracking.0 -
I'm doing WWPP too, but not losing any weight past 3 lbs! I've only lost 3 lbs in 1-1/2 months! I don't like the PP system. I did the old point system from 2005-2008 and it worked like a charm. I think WW made the fruits and most veggies 0 points because they want us to lose MUCH slower than people were on the old point system. I'm choosing to log my food on MFP and forget about WW. I think MFP works better!
yeh i think that is what im going towards too-this new plan dont seem to be working like the old one0 -
i used to get 25 pts... that would be about 1250 calories. my sister had 18 pts and that would be 900 calories. according to studies we should all eat 1200 calories or we will halt weight loss. i think you should eat the free foods. i agree w/ above post though, keeping track of pts and calories would drive any one nuts. 0
-
Already over 1200 calories w/ MFP but still have 4 points with WW.....
well reason is... WW calculates points with calories, fat and fiber.... so on WW 100 calories may be two points, but if the fat content is too high then it may end up being 4 or 5 points etc. so calories and points will never exactly match between the two sites.
I too recommend picking one site and sticking to it (tracking wise), but if you like both message boards on both sites then by all means use them, ya know.
I just don't see the point in double tracking.
Agree-double tracking is driving me nuts...lol...the new point on ww is no longer on calories its all based on fat , carb. protein and fiber-the old way was way better--thanks for you input-i want to know what people think .0 -
I did WW and had success until I quit, then I gained it back (plus pregnancy). I tried doing it again recently, but it just wasn't working.
Then I came here (for free, I might add) and lost 20 pounds in 5 weeks. MUCH better than with WW and I'm never hungry and I eat what I want. THIS made me change my lifestyle...WW just made me count.
true and agree , mfp it is all the way -lol0 -
Already over 1200 calories w/ MFP but still have 4 points with WW.....
well reason is... WW calculates points with calories, fat and fiber.... so on WW 100 calories may be two points, but if the fat content is too high then it may end up being 4 or 5 points etc. so calories and points will never exactly match between the two sites.
I too recommend picking one site and sticking to it (tracking wise), but if you like both message boards on both sites then by all means use them, ya know.
I just don't see the point in double tracking.
Agree-double tracking is driving me nuts...lol...the new point on ww is no longer on calories its all based on fat , carb. protein and fiber-the old way was way better--thanks for you input-i want to know what people think .
So, to clarify, the new point formulation does not count calories into the configuration?
I ask because I am a wellness coordinator for a company, and there are several people wanting to do WW. I am on here to check this out to possibly start an initiative using MFP, so I am very interested in your input.0 -
Oh and another thing. I did WW a few years ago, and then every time I tried to go back and do it again I just failed...
I was talking to my mom about this the other day. MFP you track calories (and fat, protein, carbs etc) when you log your food. On weight watchers you track the same thing (which is then converted to points etc.). However, the major difference (for me) is that when I am out and about and wanting to eat something, on MFP I can think... hmm, I have 300 calories left today so I am going to eat XYZ food that is 300 calories or less, but on WW I had to think, okay I have 6 points left, so if I wanted to just pick up an item and eat it I couldnt. I would need to have the points calculator with me, or my cell phone so that I could convert the calories on packaging into points. How often are you picking up package after package because the first package was 8 points, the second was 7 points, etc. etc. until you find a food that matches the exact amount of points you have left. It is SO ANNOYING.
WW makes you go through an extra step every single time when trying to figure out what you want to eat... converting calories into points. Where MFP just gives you calories. Simple, basic, and easy!!!!
That is why I dont think I can EVER switch back to WW.
End rant. 0 -
A friend bought some WW lemon cake bar things the other day and they are 1 point. They have ZERO nutritional value, and almost 200 calories. This kind of system doesn't necessarily encourage healthy eating. Let's say I eat three as a treat. ONLY 3 points, but almost 600 calories (which would be half of my daily allotment on here), and has NO nutritional value. A woman at work loves WW because she can have her cini-minis from Burger King with her weekly points. These have 490 calories. IF she hit her caloric needs each day and this was extra for her week, based on calories, she would gain a pound over 3 weeks of doing this! I just cannot support this math.0
-
Already over 1200 calories w/ MFP but still have 4 points with WW.....
well reason is... WW calculates points with calories, fat and fiber.... so on WW 100 calories may be two points, but if the fat content is too high then it may end up being 4 or 5 points etc. so calories and points will never exactly match between the two sites.
I too recommend picking one site and sticking to it (tracking wise), but if you like both message boards on both sites then by all means use them, ya know.
I just don't see the point in double tracking.
Agree-double tracking is driving me nuts...lol...the new point on ww is no longer on calories its all based on fat , carb. protein and fiber-the old way was way better--thanks for you input-i want to know what people think .
So, to clarify, the new point formulation does not count calories into the configuration?
I ask because I am a wellness coordinator for a company, and there are several people wanting to do WW. I am on here to check this out to possibly start an initiative using MFP, so I am very interested in your input.
correct the new weight watchers point plus is no longer counted by calories...its based on protein, fat , carb and fiber----i think thst is why i find it so confusing now, the old way was based on cal but all changed now....old plan i used to get 18 points now i get 29 and i guess thast because fruit is free(no points)0 -
A friend bought some WW lemon cake bar things the other day and they are 1 point. They have ZERO nutritional value, and almost 200 calories. This kind of system doesn't necessarily encourage healthy eating. Let's say I eat three as a treat. ONLY 3 points, but almost 600 calories (which would be half of my daily allotment on here), and has NO nutritional value. A woman at work loves WW because she can have her cini-minis from Burger King with her weekly points. These have 490 calories. IF she hit her caloric needs each day and this was extra for her week, based on calories, she would gain a pound over 3 weeks of doing this! I just cannot support this math.
agree to that -but people need to make better choices on the new paln those cakes are higher in points now , they changed it so the things that are not so good for u have way more points as i guess on the old way people would choose chips etc cal snack as it was mostly based on cal not carb etc......so far really not sure if i like it , mfp is raelly good so i think im just gonna stick to mfp0 -
Already over 1200 calories w/ MFP but still have 4 points with WW.....
well reason is... WW calculates points with calories, fat and fiber.... so on WW 100 calories may be two points, but if the fat content is too high then it may end up being 4 or 5 points etc. so calories and points will never exactly match between the two sites.
I too recommend picking one site and sticking to it (tracking wise), but if you like both message boards on both sites then by all means use them, ya know.
I just don't see the point in double tracking.
Agree-double tracking is driving me nuts...lol...the new point on ww is no longer on calories its all based on fat , carb. protein and fiber-the old way was way better--thanks for you input-i want to know what people think .
So, to clarify, the new point formulation does not count calories into the configuration?
I ask because I am a wellness coordinator for a company, and there are several people wanting to do WW. I am on here to check this out to possibly start an initiative using MFP, so I am very interested in your input.
correct the new weight watchers point plus is no longer counted by calories...its based on protein, fat , carb and fiber----i think thst is why i find it so confusing now, the old way was based on cal but all changed now....old plan i used to get 18 points now i get 29 and i guess thast because fruit is free(no points)
Thanks SO much for your feedback. I would think you would get less points overall if fruits and veggies are free. Like anything, time will tell, but on mfp, it's tried and true!!!0 -
Oh and another thing. I did WW a few years ago, and then every time I tried to go back and do it again I just failed...
I was talking to my mom about this the other day. MFP you track calories (and fat, protein, carbs etc) when you log your food. On weight watchers you track the same thing (which is then converted to points etc.). However, the major difference (for me) is that when I am out and about and wanting to eat something, on MFP I can think... hmm, I have 300 calories left today so I am going to eat XYZ food that is 300 calories or less, but on WW I had to think, okay I have 6 points left, so if I wanted to just pick up an item and eat it I couldnt. I would need to have the points calculator with me, or my cell phone so that I could convert the calories on packaging into points. How often are you picking up package after package because the first package was 8 points, the second was 7 points, etc. etc. until you find a food that matches the exact amount of points you have left. It is SO ANNOYING.
WW makes you go through an extra step every single time when trying to figure out what you want to eat... converting calories into points. Where MFP just gives you calories. Simple, basic, and easy!!!!
That is why I dont think I can EVER switch back to WW.
End rant.
no rant is good lol -i just wanted peeps opinion-and make sence , like i thought i will stick to mfp thanks so much for ur input mean alot.0 -
Oh and another thing. I did WW a few years ago, and then every time I tried to go back and do it again I just failed...
I was talking to my mom about this the other day. MFP you track calories (and fat, protein, carbs etc) when you log your food. On weight watchers you track the same thing (which is then converted to points etc.). However, the major difference (for me) is that when I am out and about and wanting to eat something, on MFP I can think... hmm, I have 300 calories left today so I am going to eat XYZ food that is 300 calories or less, but on WW I had to think, okay I have 6 points left, so if I wanted to just pick up an item and eat it I couldnt. I would need to have the points calculator with me, or my cell phone so that I could convert the calories on packaging into points. How often are you picking up package after package because the first package was 8 points, the second was 7 points, etc. etc. until you find a food that matches the exact amount of points you have left. It is SO ANNOYING.
WW makes you go through an extra step every single time when trying to figure out what you want to eat... converting calories into points. Where MFP just gives you calories. Simple, basic, and easy!!!!
That is why I dont think I can EVER switch back to WW.
End rant.
no rant is good lol -i just wanted peeps opinion-and make sence , like i thought i will stick to mfp thanks so much for ur input mean alot.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 392K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.8K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.7K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 400 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.8K Motivation and Support
- 7.9K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.4K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 990 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.4K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions