Now, I know that we're in the middle of a huge diet revolution -- so many more people, health care professionals and the like, are understanding the effect that carbs have on our bodies. Which means, plans like the SBD and Sugar Busters, are gaining much more popularilty. It's all about healthy eating.
But. I'm feeling so frustrated today, I'm thinking, what if Weight Watchers is for me? I mean, then I still get to eat carbs -- which seem to be the only foods that fill me up. (I was hungry for 3 weeks on Ph1. The first time I've felt full since I started this plan was on day one of Ph2, when I had a bowl of oatmeal. And I wasn't hungry the rest of the afternoon. It was remarkable.)
Granted, I get the carbs I need in Ph2, so maybe going to a plan where I can eat what I want but in very limited amounts... maybe that's not for me either.
Has anyone been on both, and can give me an idea of what they liked and didn't about each plan?
Keeping in mind, I'm 5'3" tall and don't have much to lose.
I did weight watchers ages ago and lost quite a lot of weight then slowly put it back on again. I have lost it again on SB Diet and am committed to losing more weight, getting down to my goal weight and staying there this time around. I still count points on SB Diet and use this to control portions. I found the problem with ww was that I although I changed my eating, I didn't get into good eating habits that were sustainable. For example, I would eat really low calorie food all day then go out with girlfirends and have a huge desert instead of dinner. You need to find out what works best for you. I found that by eating white bread, pasta, rice and sugary food I craved foods, felt hungry a lot, slumped about mid-afternoon and ate portions too large (to fill me up) to maintain a healthy weight. I was hungry all the time on weight watchers. I like the SB Diet as an eating plan. The onus on eating healthy fats, good carbs, lots of vegies, plenty of water and getting regular exercise makes good sense but I don't think going hungry all the time is going to be sustainable for any length of time for you. Many nutritionalists advocate for six small meals and a portion of protein at each of these meals. There is also a call for less refined carbohydrates (eat the fruit rather than drinking the juice, choose whole grains rather than processed starches). I don't think I could go back to white bread/rice/pasta and sustain a healthy weight and when I was a healthy weight I ate whole grains, lean meat, fish, chicken, nuts, loads of fruit and vegies, and was really active. You may find phase two or even a modified phase three will work for you. Perhaps you could combine ww with sb diet. You may also be consuming too few calories and this is why you are not full.
Here's the deal: You can follow Weight Watchers and have good carbs and good fats. If you find the WW program helpful, and a model you can live with, then do it. There's nothing in WW that says you have to eat simple carbs if you don't want to. It is a sane, balanced program, with the flexibility to allow people to eat the particular foods they feel most comfortable with.
P.S. While the public may be more aware of the benefits of certain kinds of fats and carbohydrates for general health, it's not like this is news. Jane Brody's Nutrition Book advocated monostaturated and polyunsaturated fats, warned against hydrogentated oils, and touted complex carbohydrates in the 1970s. While we are currently suffering, as a society, from overconsumption of simple carbohydrates, they can be included in a balanced, healthy, portion- and calorie-controlled diet.
I did both. I was actually around the same starting weight when I started both WW and SBD. and i lost around 15 lbs on WW (so same point i am now) and gained it back slowly when i stopped counting points and just totally went off it basically (over the course of 2 years). personally i find SBD much easier to follow and i've lost the same amount of weight in 2 months that took me almost 4 months to lose on WW since i would cheat alot on it. personally i find it tedious and hard to count points. cause alot of times you can't be sure of the point value in certain foods if they aren't listed. and often times i would eat stuff whose point value wasn't readily available which was a problem.
also since nothing was off limits, i found it hard to control myself on WW. cause you figure well just a bit more won't hurt etc. whereas on SBD i like that some things are bad and you know its bad. on SBD i KNOW when i've cheated. whereas onWW sometimes i could fool myself into thinking oh well i can bank that or its not THAT bad. i dont' know its weird! anyways time will tell how much more weight I lose but I am going to assume that I will definately lose more on SBD and stick with it much more than i did with WW. in terms of hunger i was also hungry on WW too, i was also a bit at the beginning of SBD but now i'm usually never hungry.
I am doing Weight Watchers but they have a higher protein (read as lower-carb) plan now which I am following and incorporating SBD into.
Basically you are on the flexpoints system but eat fewer carbs (not eliminating them entirely though) and they encourage you to eat whole grain products, brown rice, etc.
They also have a higher carb program suggestion for those people who need carbs -everyone is different.
My friend is doing the higher carb plan since she seems to not be able to function without them and it is the only thing that fills her up and I do the lower carb version since my body doesn't react well with a lot of carbs especially white flour products and I need to eat protein in the morning or I am starving within an hour of eating.
Both of us are losing weight.
I like the points sytem and the meetings for support and accountablility and the weekly weigh ins and you don't have to eat food that you don't like.
I also like SBD - I am doing phase 2 right now- but I enjoy the foods on this program as well and keep track of my points at the same time.
I am not suggesting you try to do both as it is a lot of work but this is what works for me.
In a nutshell you can do a better carb version of WW so if you think that WW may be right for you then by all means check it out.
__________________ We are cups, constantly and quietly being filled.
The trick is, knowing how to tip ourselves over
and let the beautiful stuff out. - Ray Bradbury
Posts by members, moderators and admins are not considered medical advice and no guarantee is made against accuracy. Please see your physician before taking advice found on the internet.
I've done WW in the past. I liked it a lot, but didn't lose much and didn't keep it off. However, SBD is so easy for me. I've lost three times the amount of weight so far, and have truly stayed on the program for over a month longer.
It really is a personal thing. If you are a compulsive overeater, have emotional eating problems, crave more when eating carbs and have trouble stopping at a little, then WW is not for you, IMHO. But if you are full on carbs, don't emotionally overeat, and can make good food choices even when you have freedom to eat unhealthy foods, then you should be able to succeed on WW.
Posts by members, moderators and admins are not considered medical advice and no guarantee is made against accuracy.