Switching and Weightloss Success?

KiaraThompkins8263 wrote: »

I'm currently on WW and thinking about making a switch more so in the cost department I do enjoy WW but I'm want to see if I can save some money and I am more use to counting points than calories and I'm concerned that I won't be able to stick with it

Got it - thanks!

Here's what I understand from friends IRL and other MFP-ers who've done WW, though I'm not a former WW person myself.

WW points tend to penalize heavily for . . . treat foods, for lack of a better term. The free foods tend to be things that are more nutrient-dense, not quite as calorie dense. In essence, they tend to push you toward more nutritious, and probably more filling foods.

This rest is more personal experience from me, so YMMV:

Personally, I'm such a veggie/fruit lover, I'm sure I could gain weight on WW free foods.

Key point: There's ample research that it's calories that are the direct trigger for weight gain/loss/maintenance.

The trouble is that many foods people think of as junk foods, highly-processed foods, treats, even (somewhat to my horror) "bad foods" - those tend to have relatively many calories, be relatively less filling/satisfying, and not have as many nutrients (for their calorie level) as so-called "whole foods". (I think WW makes those high point foods.)

So, if a person calorie counts, they could - in theory - lose weight eating all McDonalds food, or mostly Twinkies, or something like that. Legit, people have done that: Eaten really iffy stuff, lost weight, improved cholesterol and blood sugar at the same time, all that jazz.

But doing that is kind of a party trick, something done for effect (or publicity). Most people who try to lose weight eating largely fast food, highly-processed food, etc. . . . they're going to crash and burn before they reach their weight goals because they can't feel full, or don't feel energetic/good.

On the flip side, people who try to eat only (exaggerating) kale and boiled no-skin chicken, they're likely to find it super unpleasant, and not be able to stick to it. They crash and burn in a different way, maybe eating foods they crave, or giving in to social situations - whatever.

What's the solution? Balance, IMO: Mostly whole foods (lean meats/fish for protein, maybe some cold-water fatty fish for Omega-3s; healthy fats from nuts, nut butters, seeds, avocados, olive and avocado oils; plenty of varied, colorful veggies/fruits for micronutrients and fiber) . . . plus a few small treats now and then just for joy (chocolate, a rare rich dessert, a deep-fried appetizer super occasionally, whatever).

Balance is somewhat individual. Different people thrive on different eating routines.

To me, that's what's brilliant about calorie counting: I like that flexibility. I eat mostly so-called whole foods, and I definitely prioritize getting good nutrition on average over the week(-ish). But I also eat some small treats almost daily, and have a truly indulgent meal or day infrequently. I lost weight fine (class 1 obese to healthy weight in just under a year), and have maintained similarly for 8 years since. For me, calorie counting is *perfect*: It's so flexible, and logging highlights my nutrition averages for monitoring.

Will it work for you? I don't know. Give it a think. Maybe even try it in parallel with WW for a month. (Yes, that's a lot of work. But you can get most of the benefits from free MFP, not premium . . . and see how the two compare.)

I hope some former WW folks will comment. But I hope this gives you a bit to consider, too.

No matter what you decide, I'm cheering for you to succeed: Reaching and staying at a healthy weight has been a huge quality of life improvement for me. I want that for everyone, including you.

Best wishes!