Anyone else shocked at how WW points translate into their average daily calories? 😱
Options
islandlifenc
Posts: 107 Member
I've been using WW online since April and I did drop pounds quickly through May and about half of June, but then my weight loss started to stall. I've still been following the plan faithfully, but still, there was no movement on the scale.
Just out of curiosity I decided to go back over the last week and put my calories in on MFP to see what was going on.
Turns out the problem is exactly what I suspected: My weight loss has stalled out because my daily points average — even after eating ALL OF MY WEEKLIES — was only about 1,200 calories/day.
I'm a 40+ y.o. female and I weigh 212. MFP says to maintain my weight I should be eating just over 2,000/day and to lose 1 lb/week (a healthy amount, I think), I should be eating around 1,500 calories/day.
Some days I was eating under 900 calories! No wonder I was losing fast initially AND no wonder I finally stalled out. My body thought I was starving it! That said, I've just cancelled my WW and will stick with MFP going forward.
I was just wondering if anyone else has had this experience.
Just out of curiosity I decided to go back over the last week and put my calories in on MFP to see what was going on.
Turns out the problem is exactly what I suspected: My weight loss has stalled out because my daily points average — even after eating ALL OF MY WEEKLIES — was only about 1,200 calories/day.
I'm a 40+ y.o. female and I weigh 212. MFP says to maintain my weight I should be eating just over 2,000/day and to lose 1 lb/week (a healthy amount, I think), I should be eating around 1,500 calories/day.
Some days I was eating under 900 calories! No wonder I was losing fast initially AND no wonder I finally stalled out. My body thought I was starving it! That said, I've just cancelled my WW and will stick with MFP going forward.
I was just wondering if anyone else has had this experience.
30
Replies
-
Welcome to the community!
With what you've shared, it now makes sense why so many WW people are here.
Great detective work on your part. Something tells me you'll do great!12 -
Not sure about detective work or not But basically WW is expecting people to hit the no points foods... hard! And thus not lose very fast most of the time--or at all possibly!
What I don't get/understand about WW (and why I use MFP instead) is that while some of the no points foods may (or may not) be "healthier" / "better" choices, they still have calories and energy!
Which means that regardless of whether you eat these, or other items that are less acceptable to WW, you can still gain or lose fat depending on how many calories you end up with!
So my little brain doesn't understand the benefit of deliberately ignoring that healthy is not necessarily energy balanced, especially since for many years (just like quite a few of us I suspect) I blamed being obese to not eating in a "healthy" manner--totally ignoring that the base of the pyramid of "eating in a healthy manner" is eating at the appropriate caloric balance!14 -
Shocked, no. Glad to see you here!2
-
You don't stall on your weight loss by eating less and "starving." That's actually how you keep losing, although in an unhealthy way.27
-
I would have thought the reason you're not losing is because food that is 'free' or whatever the terminology is for WW, isnt really free in terms of calories so you cant have been eating an average of 1200 cals a day if you're not losing weight (unless there is a lot of water retention perhaps)9
-
DancingMoosie wrote: »You don't stall on your weight loss by eating less and "starving." That's actually how you keep losing, although in an unhealthy way.
I respectfully disagree. When I first started here, I was on 1200 calories for 2 lb/week loss. It wasn't until I upped it to 1370 calories for 1 lb/week loss that the weight started dropping off.
Eating too little can work against you.35 -
Yep. I did WW briefly, and I was constantly hungry. Yes, I could have eaten more zero points foods, but I would get anxiety over not wanting to eat too many, so I started calculating what I was eating. Most days, it was 800-1,000 calories a day. Which brought me back here.
5 -
DancingMoosie wrote: »You don't stall on your weight loss by eating less and "starving." That's actually how you keep losing, although in an unhealthy way.
I respectfully disagree. When I first started here, I was on 1200 calories for 2 lb/week loss. It wasn't until I upped it to 1370 calories for 1 lb/week loss that the weight started dropping off.
Eating too little can work against you.
This would mean that it is impossible to starve to death. It is not. There are other factors to consider, like inaccurate logging or water retention.27 -
First of all, thanks for all of the great comments! I'm glad to know this makes some sense to somebody other than me.
That said, regarding this:I would have thought the reason you're not losing is because food that is 'free' or whatever the terminology is for WW, isnt really free in terms of calories so you cant have been eating an average of 1200 cals a day if you're not losing weight (unless there is a lot of water retention perhaps)
I can totally see how it would seem that is the problem, and I had actually wondered if that might have been the case, as well, but I've ALSO been tracking my 0-point foods and yet STILL averaging under 1,200/day. I suspect I could keep eating under 1,200/day and the scale would eventually move, but from what I've been reading, throwing a monkey wrench in one's metabolism is a real thing and I'm afraid that may be what I've done — in slowing it down because my body thinks I'm just not eating enough any more.justanotherjenn wrote: »Yep. I did WW briefly, and I was constantly hungry. Yes, I could have eaten more zero points foods, but I would get anxiety over not wanting to eat too many, so I started calculating what I was eating. Most days, it was 800-1,000 calories a day. Which brought me back here.
THIS! This is my story with WW. I'll admit I did great with it back around '99/2000 when WW first rolled out their FlexPoints and I made it to goal, but I was in my 20s then. Since that time I've had a son (now 16) and gained all of that weight back and THEN some. I'm finally serious about taking those pounds off and getting fit again. I'm thankful for the almost 20 lbs I've lost this time around, but with still close to 50 lbs to go, I just know their methods aren't going to be sustainable for me. I don't like pigging out on zero-point foods. I'd rather eat reasonable amounts of all kinds of foods that I actually like.
13 -
DancingMoosie wrote: »DancingMoosie wrote: »You don't stall on your weight loss by eating less and "starving." That's actually how you keep losing, although in an unhealthy way.
I respectfully disagree. When I first started here, I was on 1200 calories for 2 lb/week loss. It wasn't until I upped it to 1370 calories for 1 lb/week loss that the weight started dropping off.
Eating too little can work against you.
This would mean that it is impossible to starve to death. It is not. There are other factors to consider, like inaccurate logging or water retention.
Agreed. You do not stop losing weight because you are eating too little, especially not short term. If that were possible than anorexics would be overweight. They are not. As someone in recovery for an eating disorder I never gained or stopped losing when I was in my disorder.11 -
It seemsDancingMoosie wrote: »You don't stall on your weight loss by eating less and "starving." That's actually how you keep losing, although in an unhealthy way.
I respectfully disagree. When I first started here, I was on 1200 calories for 2 lb/week loss. It wasn't until I upped it to 1370 calories for 1 lb/week loss that the weight started dropping off.
Eating too little can work against you.
I'm sorry that a couple of you seemed to misunderstand my post.
The last sentence refers to my experience. I was certainly not referring to someone who was literally starving themselves or had an eating disorder. I was referring to my own experience.11 -
DancingMoosie wrote: »You don't stall on your weight loss by eating less and "starving." That's actually how you keep losing, although in an unhealthy way.
I respectfully disagree. When I first started here, I was on 1200 calories for 2 lb/week loss. It wasn't until I upped it to 1370 calories for 1 lb/week loss that the weight started dropping off.
Eating too little can work against you.
It can work against you but not with fat loss. Your body must have energy to maintain itself and fuel movement. Where it can possibly work against you in the short term is on the bathroom scale. My theory is that for some people eating less can increase stress and cortisol which results in water retention. This water weight gain masks losses on the scale. Eating more relaxes that person which causes the water to "exit" and the weight starts showing up again.14 -
I have the opposite. 23 points for me can easily come out to 1800 calories. I'm a volume eater and like fruit. So those zero point foods will take the hit. I'll usually maintain or lose slowly.2
-
DancingMoosie wrote: »DancingMoosie wrote: »You don't stall on your weight loss by eating less and "starving." That's actually how you keep losing, although in an unhealthy way.
I respectfully disagree. When I first started here, I was on 1200 calories for 2 lb/week loss. It wasn't until I upped it to 1370 calories for 1 lb/week loss that the weight started dropping off.
Eating too little can work against you.
This would mean that it is impossible to starve to death. It is not. There are other factors to consider, like inaccurate logging or water retention.
For whatever it is worth, I had a similiar problem. Big dude, 6'6" ('large wrist'/big boned), lost 5# very fast due to a horrible acid reflux event; then went gonzo on a cucumber /garbanzo bean/ other diet - 800-1,000 CPD - lots of walking, then walking in hot weather for 2 hours combined with intermittent fasting. So I had lost another 20-23 pounds, but hit a Wall. Changed to 2 hours of hiking up 700' ridge, still no progress.
MFP folks implored me to up my consumption. Way upped protein, now 1,600-1,800 CPD, weight loss happening slower. About halfway to tentative goal.
SW: 315
MFP: 287?
CW: 281
GW: 245?
Good luck!3 -
... My theory is that for some people eating less can increase stress and cortisol which results in water retention. This water weight gain masks losses on the scale. Eating more relaxes that person which causes the water to "exit" and the weight starts showing up again.
This actually makes a bunch of sense! I'm not sure if that was what was going on with me, but it's certainly plausible. Regardless, I think I need to stick with MFP. It's way less stressful than WW for me. 😬
1 -
Not sure about detective work or not But basically WW is expecting people to hit the no points foods... hard! And thus not lose very fast most of the time--or at all possibly!
What I don't get/understand about WW (and why I use MFP instead) is that while some of the no points foods may (or may not) be "healthier" / "better" choices, they still have calories and energy!
Which means that regardless of whether you eat these, or other items that are less acceptable to WW, you can still gain or lose fat depending on how many calories you end up with!
So my little brain doesn't understand the benefit of deliberately ignoring that healthy is not necessarily energy balanced, especially since for many years (just like quite a few of us I suspect) I blamed being obese to not eating in a "healthy" manner--totally ignoring that the base of the pyramid of "eating in a healthy manner" is eating at the appropriate caloric balance!
It makes intuitive sense to me. If you told me broccoli and kale are magical zero calorie foods, I wouldn't get fat eating them.2 -
Oh my god! I just looked up zero point foods. Apples! A banana can easily be 100kcal. Artishoke hearts usually come here in vinegar and oil, all the fatty fish (yes, I can cook meals with them as main ingredients), lentils! (same as fish), the pear in my breakfast came in at 51kcal. Basically, most of my food comes from the zero point list, plus some rice/pasta/bread. I guess I easily eat 800kcal per day from that list!4
-
welcome!
are you using a food scale for all foods to log on MFP (did you to get the numbers above? or did you use measuring cups/spoons)?
What's your calorie goal now?1
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 388 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.2K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 918 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions