I went to WW last night, after calorie counting for a couple of weeks. My friends go and I like the push towards more veggies and fruit (my god, I've never seen people more obsessed with fruit.)
Any way I figure I'll give it a good go. Then I came home and planned my day for today, both in WW and Sparkpeople, just to compare. Well, no wonder people are losing weight fast, the calorie counts are so low! (and yes WW, our bodies still recognize calories, even when we call them points.)
This was the breakdown:
Breakfast:
1 cup 2% milk
1 tsp butter
1 cup oatmeal.
8 points. 300 calories.
Lunch:
1 cup rice.
4 oz chicken thigh.
1 tsp oil.
clementines & cauliflower.
Fage 2% yogurt as a snack.
13 points. 600 calories.
Dinner:
4 oz. chicken thigh
1 cup rice
cabbage, onion, bok choy
1 tsp olive oil
9 points. 450 calories.
Total points: 30.
Total calories: 1358. (SP recommends 1440-1790 for me).
Total grams of fat: 33. Below the minimum of 38 recommended by SP and this was using 2% milk, WW really stresses skim. And I used more oils that WW recommends. Isn't fat a necessary part of a healthy diet?
Is this crazy? I mean, I'm eating healthy foods, too.
I think I'm going to use some of my weekly and activity points to get that number up to something more normal. There didn't seem to be a big focus on exercise...
Should I just stick with this super low calorie plan for a while and see if it works?
But if fruit (not to mention veggies) are free, you could easily add another 300+ calories to your diet, just by eating a couple pieces of fruit as snacks during the day.
I agree with kaplods. If you add in a couple of fruit snacks you have the extra calories you want and they're whole food calories as opposed to processed foods. I like my calories low, and I like this plan. They needed to do something to combat all of the "1 point" foods that were a ton of calories.
I also personally don't believe the calorie recommendations that the websites give us. But that's just me and I suffer from the "if a little's good, a lot's better" syndrome.
Personally, I wish Weight Watchers would go back to an exchange plan (or at least have an exchange plan option). I understand why they don't. The points plan appeals to a wider range of people because it accomodates more eating styles. While it encourages and rewards healthy eating, a person can come in with any style of diet and can adapt gradually without having to make major overhauls. When Weight Watcher's was an exchange plan (before 1997 and I joined for the first time in 1974 when I was 8 years old), I remember some members raising holy **** griping that two or three servings of fruits and three of vegetables was far too many to choke down. I was astonished even at 8 that there were adults who didn't like fruits and vegetables. That was never my problems (I loved healthy food, truth was I loved almost every food - with a few strange exceptions like apple sauce. It's usually a texture rather than flavor thing).
I also wish Weight Watchers gave a spouse/child discount like TOPS does, but you can't really compare the two in that regards, since TOPS is a not-for-profit organization and Weight Watchers is a business. Supply and demand is going to dictate whether there would be any advantage for them to do so. If they were hurting for membership, they'd probably consider it, but they're not.
I like my TOPS group (taking off pounds sensibly), because it's so inexpensive, has contests that I find fun and motivating, and allows members to follow any sensible plan they choose.
Hubby hates it though, too "touchy feely" for him (the group starts and ends with singing, and members send cards and email greetings to one another), and too many contradictory opinions (He's kind of anal about thinking there's one way to do things - it doesn't even matter if it's the right way, as long as everyone's on the same page).
He much preferred the business-like atmosphere of Weight Watchers and the fact that everyone was following the same program.
With our disability income, we can't afford for both of us to go to Weight Watchers, and he won't join without me (and he won't let me drag him to TOPS). He says "I can do it on my own," but then usually doesn't.
I didn't really want to go to TOPS without him, but I knew that if I didn't I'd be stuck in this holding pattern of not gaining, but not losing. For me, it's not the structure of the program that is most effective (just that a structure exists) and the weekly weigh-in. It's the weekly weigh-in and the positive peer pressure (and the chance of winning the biggest loser prize, no matter how slim the odds) that keeps me motivated.
The one thing I did like about WW that TOPS lacks is the ability to attend multiple meetings in a single week (almost like AA meetings). In TOPS, you can be a member of other weight loss groups, but can't be a member of two different TOPS chapters. Which means I could be a WW member AND a TOPS member, but I can't be a member of two TOPS chapters. Not that it would help me any as the three local TOPS groups all meet on Monday and Tuesday nights. My meeting is on Tuesday nights, and a second friday meeting would be perfect for me.
What is the difference between the number of calories you were eating while calorie counting and the number you will get at WW?
I posted a few days ago that this is the one thing I did not like about WW. I was always hungry! 1300-1400 calories is just not enough for me and my body. I need at minimum 1600 but more like 1700-1800 to not feel hungry or deprived. I lost almost 40lbs on 1800 calories per day.
Maybe give WW a try for a few weeks but if you had been losing on counting why pay for WW?
What is the difference between the number of calories you were eating while calorie counting and the number you will get at WW?
I posted a few days ago that this is the one thing I did not like about WW. I was always hungry! 1300-1400 calories is just not enough for me and my body. I need at minimum 1600 but more like 1700-1800 to not feel hungry or deprived. I lost almost 40lbs on 1800 calories per day.
Maybe give WW a try for a few weeks but if you had been losing on counting why pay for WW?
My points 29 bring me in about 300-400 calories lower than counting. I'm hoping WW will make me eat more fruits and veggies, since I slack off on that sometimes. Not because they are high calories, but just out of laziness. I'm just going to eat more of my weekly points and use them for things like more oils, and higher fat dairy products.
... I'm hoping WW will make me eat more fruits and veggies, since I slack off on that sometimes.
That's what I love about calorie counting through an exchange plan, I can decide how many fruits and vegetables (and starch, fat, protein, and dairy) I want to aim for - then I just make a chart and check off boxes.
I do have to credit WW for my introduction to exchanges (though the exchange system on which it was based was actually created by the the American Diabetes Association and the American Dietetic Association).
After more than 30 years of exchange plan dieting, counting calories through exchanges is almost second nature.
Weight Watchers & Really Low Calories
