Quote:
Originally Posted by RoseRodent
I think WW can be attractive to people who don't feel strong on their maths skills, equally the idea of measuring in cups rather than having to weigh things out, so if you can get 1 point for a cup of something it's easier than seeing calories per 100g (or whatever in US units) then weighing out 30g of it and having to divide and multiply. I easily and automatically do this in my head, but then my maths is strong and I can balance and juggle these big numbers. I know many people who just feel out of their depth as they start to go into calorie numbers.
What I don't understand is how many people have done WW and said it's so much better and easier because the points are in a book (I never found anything I regularly eat in the WW books!) but also because they don't have to weigh and measure and count things, just count points. I know it's a sense of perception, but if you are counting points then you are counting! But aside from "free" foods why on earth are people on WW not weighing and measuring? No wonder it doesn't seem to be working out for them if they are counting "chicken" as, let's say, 1 point (don't know the proper values) when it's 3 portions of chicken!
I don't know if I would call myself a "refugee" from WW - I've had success with both WW and CC.
I agree with the idea that WW appeals to ppl with weaker number skills, but it's not really a hard-and-fast rule. I attended WW@Work along with plenty of other science & technology people. Yes it can be an easier way to crunch numbers rather than trying to remember if I'm at 1235 or 1285 cals for the day. With CC I
had to log. Not necessarily a bad thing, but with WW that wasn't necessarily the case (my choice, WW does encourage logging.)
I found that the skills I learned through WW meeting were what helped my success at CC. WW focuses more than "just" points - I thought I knew what a balanced diet looked like until I attended meetings.
Portion distortion is a danger to anyone on a diet, CC and WW alike. WW does encourage weighing and measuring. The core/simply filling/(new name?) method of WW
does allow for 'eating until satisfied not full' but by far what I've seen is that WW members prefer the security of measuring. As to volume vs weight, one of the best tips I received was to start weighing, and I agree it's more accurate, and sometimes you get more than what the volume would have been. In the overall scheme though the difference between 30g of Cheerios v. 1c isn't going to be significant enough to really throw someone off.
The meetings made a huge difference for me, but when I only needed to list ~7 I went to CC for a change, and had success. After LO#2 is born, I'll be back at WW meetings as the group support was great for the larger amount I need to lose.
Hope this clarifies. Like other PP, I'm not putting CC or WW up or down over the other, just trying to clarify some things about WW for you. Whichever works for you, good luck!