So unpopular opinion maybe, but I think the problem is the new Weight Watchers plan.
I did it in 2007 and lost about 40 pounds. I crept back up a bit so went back and got down about another 6 pounds from my previous low. At that point, I was still 14 pounds into the obese category. But when they changed the way they calculated points, I only got 3 points above what the minimum was. So even though I still had 44 pounds to lose, I was already close to the minimum number of points. I had a lentil soup recipe that changed from 6 or 7 points under the old system to 13 points under the new system. I know lentils have carbs, but good god, they have fiber and aren't the same as eating a bowl of ice cream or something.
I admittedly don't know a lot about WW, but I've heard this from multiple people - that WW can be sort...fickle? in how points are calculated throughout the years. So during a particular point in time, it favors low-fat options and then they'll recalculate and it favors low-carb options. Almost like they're being trendy? I don't know if that's a fair assessment, but it's strange to me that things have fluctuated so much over time.
So unpopular opinion maybe, but I think the problem is the new Weight Watchers plan.
I did it in 2007 and lost about 40 pounds. I crept back up a bit so went back and got down about another 6 pounds from my previous low. At that point, I was still 14 pounds into the obese category. But when they changed the way they calculated points, I only got 3 points above what the minimum was. So even though I still had 44 pounds to lose, I was already close to the minimum number of points. I had a lentil soup recipe that changed from 6 or 7 points under the old system to 13 points under the new system. I know lentils have carbs, but good god, they have fiber and aren't the same as eating a bowl of ice cream or something.
I admittedly don't know a lot about WW, but I've heard this from multiple people - that WW can be sort...fickle? in how points are calculated throughout the years. So during a particular point in time, it favors low-fat options and then they'll recalculate and it favors low-carb options. Almost like they're being trendy? I don't know if that's a fair assessment, but it's strange to me that things have fluctuated so much over time.
I was really bothered that the leaders seemed to have no idea how the formula worked. I didn't expect them to share it since it's proprietary, but when I asked how the points were calculated, their response was basically ¯\_(ツ)_/¯.
It's been a while, so the specifics are fuzzy. But I want to say that on the program I originally did, I got 30 points and the minimum anyone got was 24. On the new one, the minimum went up to 26, but my allotment went down to 29. I did it for a few weeks before I gave up, and the only week I lost weight was the week I went over my points.
I admittedly don't know a lot about WW, but I've heard this from multiple people - that WW can be sort...fickle? in how points are calculated throughout the years. So during a particular point in time, it favors low-fat options and then they'll recalculate and it favors low-carb options. Almost like they're being trendy? I don't know if that's a fair assessment, but it's strange to me that things have fluctuated so much over time.
I was really bothered that the leaders seemed to have no idea how the formula worked. I didn't expect them to share it since it's proprietary, but when I asked how the points were calculated, their response was basically ¯\_(ツ)_/¯.
It's been a while, so the specifics are fuzzy. But I want to say that on the program I originally did, I got 30 points and the minimum anyone got was 24. On the new one, the minimum went up to 26, but my allotment went down to 29. I did it for a few weeks before I gave up, and the only week I lost weight was the week I went over my points.
Dang. Just out of curiosity - how many calories did that translate to, approximately?
Yes, in metro DC we are lucky to have a lot of options. The only thing I wish we had was a gourmet salad place, perhaps like a Chipotle for salad-lovers.
I also think the problem with eating out is the size of the portions. Sometimes they are bigger than my head, and could feed a small family for at least a meal (or two...).
I was really bothered that the leaders seemed to have no idea how the formula worked. I didn't expect them to share it since it's proprietary, but when I asked how the points were calculated, their response was basically ¯\_(ツ)_/¯.
It's been a while, so the specifics are fuzzy. But I want to say that on the program I originally did, I got 30 points and the minimum anyone got was 24. On the new one, the minimum went up to 26, but my allotment went down to 29. I did it for a few weeks before I gave up, and the only week I lost weight was the week I went over my points.
Dang. Just out of curiosity - how many calories did that translate to, approximately?
I think it was probably 1400. For someone 44 pounds overweight.
Yes, in metro DC we are lucky to have a lot of options. The only thing I wish we had was a gourmet salad place, perhaps like a Chipotle for salad-lovers.
I also think the problem with eating out is the size of the portions. Sometimes they are bigger than my head, and could feed a small family for at least a meal (or two...).
Yes, in metro DC we are lucky to have a lot of options. The only thing I wish we had was a gourmet salad place, perhaps like a Chipotle for salad-lovers.
I also think the problem with eating out is the size of the portions. Sometimes they are bigger than my head, and could feed a small family for at least a meal (or two...).
Chopt and Sweetgreen are all salads!
WHERE ARE THOSE PLACES?!? I need them in my life. (heart)
So unpopular opinion maybe, but I think the problem is the new Weight Watchers plan.
I did it in 2007 and lost about 40 pounds. I crept back up a bit so went back and got down about another 6 pounds from my previous low. At that point, I was still 14 pounds into the obese category. But when they changed the way they calculated points, I only got 3 points above what the minimum was. So even though I still had 44 pounds to lose, I was already close to the minimum number of points. I had a lentil soup recipe that changed from 6 or 7 points under the old system to 13 points under the new system. I know lentils have carbs, but good god, they have fiber and aren't the same as eating a bowl of ice cream or something.
The week that I repeatedly cried from hunger was the week I quit.
Full disclosure, I am still fat. I would like to go back after I have this baby because I really did have such great success on it before. But the program change was such a non-starter for me.
I am totally with you. I did it in 2008 and lost around 20-25lbs, which was enough at that point (fun fact - my starting weight in 2008 is about what my goal weight is now ). I think it worked a lot better to balance "treats" because it worked out approximately to 50 calories per point, with a lot of healthy stuff being less than that. So if I wanted a 150 calorie piece of candy, it was 3 points and could be worked into the balance with healthy stuff.
Now it seems like while you can "eat anything you want!" you are seriously going to pay for it if you eat out, want to have a pint of regular beer (or 2 or 3 lol), or even like your example with the lentil soup. I actually don't eat a lot of candy, but I love Cadbury cream eggs and they are out right now and are 8 points. I do get 35 points a day but that's still a huge percentage of them (and only 150ish calories). And I think I only get 42 weekly points, so it's like if you go out to eat once and eat 1 piece of candy per week, you're going to have to be super strict the rest of the time. Which is maybe the point, IDK. I just did find the point allotments easier with the old system - it seemed like you could have more fun stuff if you eat healthy the rest of the time and without having to starve yourself the rest of the day to make up for it.
I will also add though that I'm a bigger food snob than I was back in 2008 and I'm a lot more focused on eating clean vs processed. I do I think I ate a lot of processed stuff then. So that might be the other difference for me?
On the other hand - I tried this new program when it first came out and felt like I failed miserably. But I did the Whole 30 earlier this year and did manage to cut down on my sugar intake, alcohol, carbs, etc so I feel a little less overwhelmed cutting back on those things for WW now. Eating out still throws me hard (I didn't eat out a single time while I did Whole 30 because of this, but by the end of the month I was dying for someone else to prepare some of my food). But I feel like the day to day meals and cooking at home are a little easier to figure out after eating so clean for a while prior to starting WW.
Post by textbookcase on Apr 7, 2017 11:05:45 GMT -5
In my town the only takeout options are pizza and Mexican. I have to drive 15-30 miles for healthier options. And I feel like even then there aren't many. Subway, a salad place, that's about it.
I know this has turned in to a WW discussion, but I'm going to answer the thread title anyways.
Yes we have a lot of healthy stuff around here. Some vegan, some vegetarian, some hispter, some hippy dippy restaurants. Lots of options with in walking distance to my work and house.
Post by wanderlustmom on Apr 7, 2017 18:43:41 GMT -5
I have a lot to say on this topic and I wish you all the best with healthy eating. I am short and petite and eight years ago I had 20 pounds to lose. I tried several things and nothing worked as well as weight watchers with meetings. To lose that much, I honestly was hungry a lot, rarely ate out and added a lot more protein and veggies to my diet. In eight years of maintaining, I can now eat at any place and any food. I just often split with my kids or husband. And I workout hard six days a week. So basically, maintaining is still not easy but I can do it. I can eat what I want as long as I eat mostly healthy, watch portions and workout. But a workout will not touch a major loss for me, nor will portion control or splitting a burger and fries with the kids. If I need to lose more than five pounds--it's hardly any eating out and major calorie deprivation