Fruit and Veg Don't Count??
EllieB_5
Posts: 247 Member
Weight Watchers is not the only place saying you can eat as much fruit and veg as you want without counting the calories. On one hand I can understand this since most fruit and veg have low calorie counts, the fibre is quite filling, and the micro-nutrients very beneficial. On the other hand a calorie is a calorie regardless of where it comes from.
Is there any benefit to not counting these calories? If I pigged out on huge bowls of veg and/or fruit then maxed out my calorie limit on other food groups won't I be sabotaging my weight loss?
Is there any benefit to not counting these calories? If I pigged out on huge bowls of veg and/or fruit then maxed out my calorie limit on other food groups won't I be sabotaging my weight loss?
0
Replies
-
Not a good practice IMO. If you're filling up on celery, sure. But if you eat a lot of fruit, you're sabotaging yourself by not logging it. Check into the calorie count of the 4 nectarines, 2 bananas and 2 cups of sugar-snap peas I devoured yesterday.
Yes, it's good for you in terms of vitamins and fibre. It does also have calories which you need to consider if you are trying to lose weight.0 -
SarcasmIsMyLoveLanguage wrote: »Not a good practice IMO. If you're filling up on celery, sure. But if you eat a lot of fruit, you're sabotaging yourself by not logging it.
Pretty much what I'm thinking, especially in regards to fruit. Fruit can have such a high sugar content that I would think fruit, in the least, needs to be logged. Mostly I'm trying to figure out why diet organizations like WW are touting this as a method to lose weight; is it just another "eat as much as you want" scam or is there some sort of science to it.
0 -
I believe the Weight Watcher's fine print says fruit isn't unlimited.0
-
I don't think there's any science behind their practice of not counting it. I suspect they're just trying to make it easier for WW followers to stick to the plan by limiting the amount of work required in logging.0
-
DeguelloTex wrote: »I believe the Weight Watcher's fine print says fruit isn't unlimited.
Ah, okay. So WW followers are sort of being duped by the fruit thing not being included in "regular print". Kind of a sh1tty thing to do to people. I know someone who is eating unlimited veg and fruit and I just don't see them losing much weight on unlimited fruit... and they're paying WW for this? Very sh1tty if you're correct.0 -
Outside of the Weight watchers program, not really. They give you a very low calorie allowance (if you actually track your food here as well as there, the totals are super-low) and give you "free" veggies and fruit because it's already factored in by decreasing your calories to spend on everything else. It ensures a minimum produce intake (because you'll be rabid wolverine hungry otherwise) and makes you choose fresh fruit and veggies over less nutrient dense choices. Also, I don't think they are great at communicating this, but only the first 3 servings of fruit are "free", so the calories aren't quite as unlimited as they seem.
I suppose you could do something similar if you needed the extra incentive to eat fruits and veggies, but it's easier to just set your calorie allowance accurately and log everything, especially given that you won't be able to accurately predict the number of calories worth of produce you'll eat on a day to day basis.
0 -
I don't know about other programs, but Weight Watchers does NOT say you can eat as much fruit and veg as you want without counting the calories. First, Weight Watchers has fruit and veg built into their "points" system. To lose 1.5 lbs per week (which is reasonable given my goals) at a "lightly active" activity level, MFP gives me a goal of 1630 calories. My daily points allowance on Weight Watchers is 33 points, which translates to roughly 1220-1320 calories, which is too low, right? Fruits and vegetables make up the rest (and if you don't eat them and therefore end up eating too little each day...that's not doing the program correctly. They recommend 5-9 servings of fruits and vegetables per day to do it right). Second, Weight Watchers recommends that if you're not achieving your desired results that one of the first things you do is examine your fruit consumption and consider limiting it to 2-3 servings per day. They're aware that you can't just pound down 2400 calories of bananas per day on top of 1300 calories of other food and expect to lose weight. Fruits and vegetables are 0 points to encourage people to consume reasonable amounts of nutrient dense foods.
With that being said -
Non-starchy vegetables typically don't pack much of a calorie punch. I do log them, personally, but honestly if you didn't (or if you just ballparked the serving sizes) it probably wouldn't be the end of the world. And if you're hungry and don't have a ton of calories to spare, veggies are a great choice regardless.
Fruits and starchy vegetables are another story. Like some previous posters mentioned, there can be a LOT of calories in those types of foods. I'd recommend treating them as any other food on MFP.0 -
MakePeasNotWar wrote: »Outside of the Weight watchers program, not really. They give you a very low calorie allowance (if you actually track your food here as well as there, the totals are super-low) and give you "free" veggies and fruit because it's already factored in by decreasing your calories to spend on everything else. It ensures a minimum produce intake (because you'll be rabid wolverine hungry otherwise) and makes you choose fresh fruit and veggies over less nutrient dense choices. Also, I don't think they are great at communicating this, but only the first 3 servings of fruit are "free", so the calories aren't quite as unlimited as they seem.
I suppose you could do something similar if you needed the extra incentive to eat fruits and veggies, but it's easier to just set your calorie allowance accurately and log everything, especially given that you won't be able to accurately predict the number of calories worth of produce you'll eat on a day to day basis.
I've never seen that. Their current literature (I'm currently a paying WW member) is that all fresh fruit is free, regardless. But, you're supposed to consider how you're using the fruit (are you using 2lbs of fruit in a smoothie every day? are you pounding berries as a mental/emotional replacement for pounding potato chips? etc) and re-evaluate if your weight loss isn't as expected.
0 -
MakePeasNotWar wrote: »Outside of the Weight watchers program, not really. They give you a very low calorie allowance (if you actually track your food here as well as there, the totals are super-low) and give you "free" veggies and fruit because it's already factored in by decreasing your calories to spend on everything else. It ensures a minimum produce intake (because you'll be rabid wolverine hungry otherwise) and makes you choose fresh fruit and veggies over less nutrient dense choices. Also, I don't think they are great at communicating this, but only the first 3 servings of fruit are "free", so the calories aren't quite as unlimited as they seem.
I suppose you could do something similar if you needed the extra incentive to eat fruits and veggies, but it's easier to just set your calorie allowance accurately and log everything, especially given that you won't be able to accurately predict the number of calories worth of produce you'll eat on a day to day basis.
I've never seen that. Their current literature (I'm currently a paying WW member) is that all fresh fruit is free, regardless. But, you're supposed to consider how you're using the fruit (are you using 2lbs of fruit in a smoothie every day? are you pounding berries as a mental/emotional replacement for pounding potato chips? etc) and re-evaluate if your weight loss isn't as expected.
I'm not on Weight Watchers, so I may have gotten some bad information. I actually heard this from my mother who is on WW, and her group leader taught that "free" fruit was limited to the first three servings. Maybe that was just a guideline from the particular leader and not WW official policy. This also was a few years back and there may be a new iteration of points.
ETA: I looked up the current guidelines, and you are right, it's all fresh fruit. Don't know if the 3 servings rule is out of date or just wrong. Thanks for the info0 -
Weight Watchers is not the only place saying you can eat as much fruit and veg as you want without counting the calories.
WW doesn't really say that. WW points are lower based on the assumption that you will eat fruits and vegetables. It's a way that's supposed to encourage the eating of more vegetables (and I think less logical than just counting calories, but that's me).On one hand I can understand this since most fruit and veg have low calorie counts, the fibre is quite filling, and the micro-nutrients very beneficial. On the other hand a calorie is a calorie regardless of where it comes from.
Is there any benefit to not counting these calories? If I pigged out on huge bowls of veg and/or fruit then maxed out my calorie limit on other food groups won't I be sabotaging my weight loss?
I see no benefits unless you find it makes it way more burdensome or something.
I don't limit vegetables (or fruits, really, but I'm not someone who eats crazy amounts of fruit), but I like counting them. It's my way of encouraging myself to eat lots.0 -
Great conversation. I had a discussion with my wife about this last night. Thanks for the info.0
-
I eat fruit everyday and really started seeing weight loss progress when I started counting the calories from them. Veggies I'm not strict about unless they are starchy.0
-
I don't think that many people got fat or stay fat eating peaches or green beans. Their calories aren't substanial. And if you eat a lot of them, you will poo them out quickly.0
-
caroldavison332 wrote: »I don't think that many people got fat or stay fat eating peaches or green beans. Their calories aren't substanial. And if you eat a lot of them, you will poo them out quickly.
TBH, I find the more fresh fruit and vegetables I eat, the lower my calorie totals are, because I eat less of everything else when I'm filled up on produce.
That being said, if you don't track the 100-400 calories (or more) in produce you eat, it could lead you tho think you have a deficit when you don't, and you could end up accidentally eating at a surplus. Some evenings I eat nuts as an after dinner snacks, and I sometimes calculate the serving size based on how many calories I have left for the day.0 -
I always thought the "free fruits and veggies" was a ploy to get people to eat more of those foods.0
-
Where in the WW plan does it say Fruits and Vegetables are "unlimited"? While it is true that they don't count as points. There is a 5 to 8 serving limit that is clearly written under the healthy checks system of the plan.Weight Watchers is not the only place saying you can eat as much fruit and veg as you want without counting the calories. On one hand I can understand this since most fruit and veg have low calorie counts, the fibre is quite filling, and the micro-nutrients very beneficial. On the other hand a calorie is a calorie regardless of where it comes from.
Is there any benefit to not counting these calories? If I pigged out on huge bowls of veg and/or fruit then maxed out my calorie limit on other food groups won't I be sabotaging my weight loss?0 -
I'm on WW as well. There is a 5 to 8 serving per day recommendation for fruits and vegetables. They are zero points, but there is a limit that a lot of WW members miss. IMHO, WW needs to be more clear about this and not just expect people to find out by looking at the heathy checks section.MakePeasNotWar wrote: »Outside of the Weight watchers program, not really. They give you a very low calorie allowance (if you actually track your food here as well as there, the totals are super-low) and give you "free" veggies and fruit because it's already factored in by decreasing your calories to spend on everything else. It ensures a minimum produce intake (because you'll be rabid wolverine hungry otherwise) and makes you choose fresh fruit and veggies over less nutrient dense choices. Also, I don't think they are great at communicating this, but only the first 3 servings of fruit are "free", so the calories aren't quite as unlimited as they seem.
I suppose you could do something similar if you needed the extra incentive to eat fruits and veggies, but it's easier to just set your calorie allowance accurately and log everything, especially given that you won't be able to accurately predict the number of calories worth of produce you'll eat on a day to day basis.
I've never seen that. Their current literature (I'm currently a paying WW member) is that all fresh fruit is free, regardless. But, you're supposed to consider how you're using the fruit (are you using 2lbs of fruit in a smoothie every day? are you pounding berries as a mental/emotional replacement for pounding potato chips? etc) and re-evaluate if your weight loss isn't as expected.
0 -
I'm on WW as well. There is a 5 to 8 serving per day recommendation for fruits and vegetables. They are zero points, but there is a limit that a lot of WW members miss. IMHO, WW needs to be more clear about this and not just expect people to find out by looking at the heathy checks section.MakePeasNotWar wrote: »Outside of the Weight watchers program, not really. They give you a very low calorie allowance (if you actually track your food here as well as there, the totals are super-low) and give you "free" veggies and fruit because it's already factored in by decreasing your calories to spend on everything else. It ensures a minimum produce intake (because you'll be rabid wolverine hungry otherwise) and makes you choose fresh fruit and veggies over less nutrient dense choices. Also, I don't think they are great at communicating this, but only the first 3 servings of fruit are "free", so the calories aren't quite as unlimited as they seem.
I suppose you could do something similar if you needed the extra incentive to eat fruits and veggies, but it's easier to just set your calorie allowance accurately and log everything, especially given that you won't be able to accurately predict the number of calories worth of produce you'll eat on a day to day basis.
I've never seen that. Their current literature (I'm currently a paying WW member) is that all fresh fruit is free, regardless. But, you're supposed to consider how you're using the fruit (are you using 2lbs of fruit in a smoothie every day? are you pounding berries as a mental/emotional replacement for pounding potato chips? etc) and re-evaluate if your weight loss isn't as expected.
No, it doesn't say that. Their "good health guidelines" clearly state that it's "AT LEAST 5 servings per day, 9 if you're over 350 pounds." Nowhere on their site (and, yes, I've been searching quite a bit) does it give a limit, just repeated statements that all fresh fruit and most fresh vegetables are 0 points. Individual meeting leaders may give some recommendations as to limits, but there is no official WW rule as such.0 -
I'm on WW as well. There is a 5 to 8 serving per day recommendation for fruits and vegetables. They are zero points, but there is a limit that a lot of WW members miss. IMHO, WW needs to be more clear about this and not just expect people to find out by looking at the heathy checks section.MakePeasNotWar wrote: »Outside of the Weight watchers program, not really. They give you a very low calorie allowance (if you actually track your food here as well as there, the totals are super-low) and give you "free" veggies and fruit because it's already factored in by decreasing your calories to spend on everything else. It ensures a minimum produce intake (because you'll be rabid wolverine hungry otherwise) and makes you choose fresh fruit and veggies over less nutrient dense choices. Also, I don't think they are great at communicating this, but only the first 3 servings of fruit are "free", so the calories aren't quite as unlimited as they seem.
I suppose you could do something similar if you needed the extra incentive to eat fruits and veggies, but it's easier to just set your calorie allowance accurately and log everything, especially given that you won't be able to accurately predict the number of calories worth of produce you'll eat on a day to day basis.
I've never seen that. Their current literature (I'm currently a paying WW member) is that all fresh fruit is free, regardless. But, you're supposed to consider how you're using the fruit (are you using 2lbs of fruit in a smoothie every day? are you pounding berries as a mental/emotional replacement for pounding potato chips? etc) and re-evaluate if your weight loss isn't as expected.
No, it doesn't say that. Their "good health guidelines" clearly state that it's "AT LEAST 5 servings per day, 9 if you're over 350 pounds." Nowhere on their site (and, yes, I've been searching quite a bit) does it give a limit, just repeated statements that all fresh fruit and most fresh vegetables are 0 points. Individual meeting leaders may give some recommendations as to limits, but there is no official WW rule as such.
"All fresh fruit and most vegetables have been assigned 0 PointsPlus values. They’re such healthy, filling choices that we want to encourage you to eat them. We’ve already factored the caloric impact of these foods into our calculations of your daily PointsPlus Target. Consider them prepaid! Of course, this doesn’t mean that you can overeat as long as you’re having fruit. You should always eat reasonable portions, and stop eating when you’re satisfied. "
"With the 0 PointsPlus value fruits and vegetables, the idea is to eat to satisfaction. The Good Health Guidelines recommend five servings a day, or nine if you weigh more than 350 lbs.
With all foods that have 0 PointsPlus values, don't forget that every food has calories. Try to eat reasonable portions, and stop eating when you’re satisfied. The bottom line: Let your weight loss be the guide."
"The Good Health Guidelines
1. Eat at least five servings of vegetables and fruits each day, (nine servings if you weigh over 350 pounds.)"0 -
caroldavison332 wrote: »I don't think that many people got fat or stay fat eating peaches or green beans.
I did. I mean, I ate lots of other things too, obviously, but eating fruits and veggies doesn't magically protect you from getting fat, and if you want to know your overall calories why wouldn't you include everything?
I mean, sure, if you want to try just eating fruits and veggies (not healthy, though) and seeing if you have a deficit without counting, go for it, but that's not what was asked.And if you eat a lot of them, you will poo them out quickly.
Um, weird. Their calories count to the total like everything else.
0 -
MakePeasNotWar wrote: »caroldavison332 wrote: »I don't think that many people got fat or stay fat eating peaches or green beans. Their calories aren't substanial. And if you eat a lot of them, you will poo them out quickly.
TBH, I find the more fresh fruit and vegetables I eat, the lower my calorie totals are, because I eat less of everything else when I'm filled up on produce.
That being said, if you don't track the 100-400 calories (or more) in produce you eat, it could lead you tho think you have a deficit when you don't, and you could end up accidentally eating at a surplus. Some evenings I eat nuts as an after dinner snacks, and I sometimes calculate the serving size based on how many calories I have left for the day.
Yeah--less so with fruit, but when I eat more veggies I tend to eat less overall.
Logging them and seeing that I ate more veggies on days I was less hungry is helpful to me. Not logging them would prevent me from being able to look back and see this information. More information is better than less, IMO.0 -
WW inflates points of other items to compensate for "free" foods like veg and some fruit. That said, most people aren't going to be able to consume endless veg...that's a lot of volume...my huge garden salad that I eat consists of about 1/2 lbs of veg and clocks in at around 40 calories without dressing...it's a lot of volume for minimal calories.
It is my understanding that only 1 serving of fruit is "free" with WW.
Most who advocate for eating as much veg as you want are simply trying to get people to eat more of that kind of stuff given that the general SAD eater doesn't get anywhere close to enough...it really doesn't apply when you're actually counting calories.0 -
I'm on WW as well. There is a 5 to 8 serving per day recommendation for fruits and vegetables. They are zero points, but there is a limit that a lot of WW members miss. IMHO, WW needs to be more clear about this and not just expect people to find out by looking at the heathy checks section.MakePeasNotWar wrote: »Outside of the Weight watchers program, not really. They give you a very low calorie allowance (if you actually track your food here as well as there, the totals are super-low) and give you "free" veggies and fruit because it's already factored in by decreasing your calories to spend on everything else. It ensures a minimum produce intake (because you'll be rabid wolverine hungry otherwise) and makes you choose fresh fruit and veggies over less nutrient dense choices. Also, I don't think they are great at communicating this, but only the first 3 servings of fruit are "free", so the calories aren't quite as unlimited as they seem.
I suppose you could do something similar if you needed the extra incentive to eat fruits and veggies, but it's easier to just set your calorie allowance accurately and log everything, especially given that you won't be able to accurately predict the number of calories worth of produce you'll eat on a day to day basis.
I've never seen that. Their current literature (I'm currently a paying WW member) is that all fresh fruit is free, regardless. But, you're supposed to consider how you're using the fruit (are you using 2lbs of fruit in a smoothie every day? are you pounding berries as a mental/emotional replacement for pounding potato chips? etc) and re-evaluate if your weight loss isn't as expected.
No, it doesn't say that. Their "good health guidelines" clearly state that it's "AT LEAST 5 servings per day, 9 if you're over 350 pounds." Nowhere on their site (and, yes, I've been searching quite a bit) does it give a limit, just repeated statements that all fresh fruit and most fresh vegetables are 0 points. Individual meeting leaders may give some recommendations as to limits, but there is no official WW rule as such.
I guess I just consider recommended as a limit. it all goes back to what I said about WW needing to be more clear about this subject.0 -
cwolfman13 wrote: »WW inflates points of other items to compensate for "free" foods like veg and some fruit. That said, most people aren't going to be able to consume endless veg...that's a lot of volume...my huge garden salad that I eat consists of about 1/2 lbs of veg and clocks in at around 40 calories without dressing...it's a lot of volume for minimal calories.
It is my understanding that only 1 serving of fruit is "free" with WW.
Most who advocate for eating as much veg as you want are simply trying to get people to eat more of that kind of stuff given that the general SAD eater doesn't get anywhere close to enough...it really doesn't apply when you're actually counting calories.
Sorry but that isn't correct. If you enter a vegetable like cauliflower for example as having 2 servings, it will still equal zero points.0 -
"All fresh fruit and most vegetables have been assigned 0 PointsPlus values. They’re such healthy, filling choices that we want to encourage you to eat them. We’ve already factored the caloric impact of these foods into our calculations of your daily PointsPlus Target. Consider them prepaid! Of course, this doesn’t mean that you can overeat as long as you’re having fruit. You should always eat reasonable portions, and stop eating when you’re satisfied. "
"With the 0 PointsPlus value fruits and vegetables, the idea is to eat to satisfaction. The Good Health Guidelines recommend five servings a day, or nine if you weigh more than 350 lbs.
With all foods that have 0 PointsPlus values, don't forget that every food has calories. Try to eat reasonable portions, and stop eating when you’re satisfied. The bottom line: Let your weight loss be the guide."
"The Good Health Guidelines
1. Eat at least five servings of vegetables and fruits each day, (nine servings if you weigh over 350 pounds.)"
Thank you for this. It really cleared it up for me
0 -
I lost my first forty pounds doing nothing but changing what I ate. I got all the fruits and veggies it wanted, lean, white meats, no pasta and as low on fat as humanly possible. I was doing it for medical reasons, not to lose weight. But before I knew it, my clothes started falling off.
There are all kinds of ways to lose weight and WW has been successful for many people.
Just different ways of skinning a cat. 0 -
Weight Watchers is not the only place saying you can eat as much fruit and veg as you want without counting the calories. On one hand I can understand this since most fruit and veg have low calorie counts, the fibre is quite filling, and the micro-nutrients very beneficial. On the other hand a calorie is a calorie regardless of where it comes from.
Is there any benefit to not counting these calories? If I pigged out on huge bowls of veg and/or fruit then maxed out my calorie limit on other food groups won't I be sabotaging my weight loss?
Weight Watchers is not "unlimited" but you don't count it toward your points. I forget the amount of servings you should have of fruit and veggies according to WW but 5 comes to mind.
0 -
What an odd assumption to make. No food is 'free'. All food has calories in it. To just think you can ignore a food group as not counting toward your calorie count is not really a good idea. Every calorie counts, and when you think of food that way, and count it all in to an overall calorie goal, you're more well-rounded in the long run and more likely to be successful.
And I know plenty of people who've stayed overweight eating fruits and vegetables and little else.0 -
Because of my age and height I eat 1200 calories a day to lose .5 pounds a week and log the fruit I eat almost every day. It usually adds up to 200 calories and is an amount that for me makes a difference, because if I would just eat fruit and not log it I might easily get to 1400 calories and at that point I won't lose ( tried it for 6 month ). I also eat largish quantities of vegetables and the 250-400 calories I often ingest this way also make a big difference. Of course for those people who eat half a cup of broccoli or green beans a day and some berries on top of their yogurt it makes very little difference, I think.
It really depends on one's diet in general what to log and what not. I log everything, but understand that many people don't.0 -
I am posting this because I was eating so much fruit and vegetables on that diet and exercising a LOT: However the weight wasn't coming off
Now I am tracking everything on MFP and it's working brilliantly. 
if you are eating more calories than you are burning off, the weight will *not* go.
Trust me x0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 176K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions