Weight watches vs counting calories

Options
13»

Replies

  • HonkyTonks
    HonkyTonks Posts: 1,193 Member
    Options
    I always assumed that weight watchers points was basically just another way of representing calories. Simplified down so people didn't have to deal with all those big numbers :P Personally it's way easier to find the calorie content of basically any food than go and find points for various foods (which aren't all going to be available). Plus I like to see the method behind the madness so to speak, for my own peace of mind. I don't think after "learning" how to count calories I could ever switch to any point system.
  • lin7604
    lin7604 Posts: 3,019 Member
    Options
    we are all in the same age range, maybe a year or two different. same height but not weight as you said. I am the slimmest. We all move around the same amount. So what do you thin i should so? when i started MFP i logged all my foods in and i was eating healthy and around 1700-1800 cals in the end b/c of all the fruit etc i was eating and didn't lose a lbs in over a month. SO i figured i was still eating too much, and as they say you need to reduce your intake by 500 cals to lose weight, so that is right in the ball park...am i wrong to think this?
  • flnative
    flnative Posts: 12 Member
    Options
    I have tired WW old and new. I never found success with them. I see others losing weight on it but it just never worked for me. I like MFP because I Iike tracking my caloric intake and my nutrional values. I also like to see how many calories I burn compared to my food intake. WW uses a point system for calories burned based on how you feel during the exercise. I didn't like that either. It is just not for me.
  • Crystal_Pistol
    Crystal_Pistol Posts: 750 Member
    Options
    that's excatually my point! how can you loose weight eating so many items with calories?

    As long as you eat at a deficit, doesn't matter what you eat. Your deficit is from your maintenance cals. You can eat a lot more than you think and still lose weight. The higer the deficit, the quicker the loss.
  • jcr85
    jcr85 Posts: 229
    Options
    At the end of the day, Weight Watchers has a 97% long term failure rate, so I wouldn't take your friends results as typical or long term.


    Strong facts.
  • Crystal_Pistol
    Crystal_Pistol Posts: 750 Member
    Options
    I tried weight watchers once. I didn't lose anything, but in retrospect, I question my honesty with the system. I did it with the points before it became points plus. I had NO loss, but I'm losing counting calories on MFP.

    I see a difference in my own level of readiness and honesty with logging- I feel like that has been the difference.
  • karenhs2
    karenhs2 Posts: 197
    Options
    I did WW a year and I did lose weight. In the end, however, the weekly meetings were not enough support, I didn't really like the online portion (some of it, yes, but very complicated in parts) and it was expensive to keep going. To me, when I found MFP, it was like getting all the best parts of WW PLUS a wonderfully supportive online community available 24/7 AND it was FREEEEEE.

    To the OP - have you considered adding resistance training to your strategy? I am not an expert but I know that I have read that as something that many have to do to either get those last few lbs off OR change their body so that they are happy with it (muscle weighs more than fat but takes up less room so a really toned body looks better and fits into clothes better but can weigh more).

    If you are hungry all the time, you probably need to examine your food choices closely. I have to eat protein with just about every meal to keep from going hungry. And I also need a good proportion of vegetables to fill me up. I often keep a lo calorie but veggie dense soup on hand for when I am especially hungry. And I try to exercise more in order to be able to eat more.
  • _VoV
    _VoV Posts: 1,494 Member
    Options
    To me Weight Watchers is the same thing as Calorie Counting, just with a point system assigned instead of actual calorie numbers. At the end of the day, Weight Watchers has a 97% long term failure rate, so I wouldn't take your friends results as typical or long term.

    For an off color and funny take on Weight Watchers, read this: http://www.cracked.com/article_18965_5-weight-loss-tips-cynical-*kitten*.html

    That was funny!
  • cxxviii
    cxxviii Posts: 40
    Options
    It may just seem that way. The grass is always greener you know....

    I did WW and I've counted calories and I find that the points add up to just about the same amount of calories I'm allowed to eat in a day.

    Also, WW people might be adding points by exercise, or you see them using banked points (you're allowed to do that).

    You can also "bank" if you zig zag your calories. So I find it to be about the same.

    Bottom line is

    Calories Count!

    Best to you.
  • Alexdur85
    Alexdur85 Posts: 255 Member
    Options
    I did weight watchers in short spurts and would lose 10lbs each time but then I would gain it back because I just got SO TIRED of trying to figure out those darn points! Calories is simple, one number to look at.. easy.. points not so much.. you have to have a calculator and you would have to have it FOR THE REST OF YOUR LIFE!. It's just a system that is trying to get you to buy their stuff. That's why they have a "lifetime membership". I don't need MFP to count calories.. it's alot of fun and I enjoy it but I don't NEED it.

    And now can fruit and veggies not have any points value? A banana has 100 calories at least in it! How can they give it 0 points? How is it teaching people how to eat? I can have this slice of cake, and this lasagna and for the rest of the day I will just eat apples and bananas??? uh.. not how it works!
  • lindalou4850
    lindalou4850 Posts: 217 Member
    Options
    did weight watcher years ago and lost a ton of weight..I think it is the combination of food at each meal that has a lot to do with it.. I think MFP is much easier.. But to each their own !!

Categories