Weight Watcher or Calorie Count? Do you think points add up right?

Taken from my journal entry today

So, after getting back four pounds in a bid to restart my weight loss (thank you the YOU plan) I've stalled again.

Several people I know have had real success with weight watchers and one of them has loaned me all the literature etc (as I can't afford to join a class right now). So I'm going to give it a go but must say that at first glance, i feel conflicted, and somewhat skeptical.

Some of the free foods confuse me and some of the really high pointers I'm sure are not as leathal as the points system suggests. My allowance would be 20 points a day, yesterday I hit around 29 points, but added up to only around 1800 calories. Point made, my goal is 1500 cals and I over did it yesterday but was still beneath my daily burn yet according to weight watchers almost 50% over. The same way with today's plan I will go half a point over the 20 but not hit 1400 calories. How does that work? For now, I'm going back to my university science routes and it's a simple experiment. It will be a pain in the arse but I'm going to start recording points and calories every day and see what happens. Or should I do a week on points then a week counting?

If you're reading this and have any WW experience I'd love to hear from you.

The WW system has a big flaw which is that members tend to end up undereating.   I'm not sure whether this is deliberate (that would make me very cynical) or accidental but it certainly happens.   The points are a combination of the calories but also the fat content.... because WW is still wedded to the 'low-fat diet' idea.   So you can have 100 cals of, say, nuts and they'd be higher in points than 100 cals of wafer biscuits simply because of the fat content.  

There's another minefield surrounding exercise points.  Members should add back points for doing exercise and many of them don't bother... so more undereating.  And then members are encouraged to save up points for the weekend (max 2 a day admittedly)... but this often gets abused and then they're in a dodgy 'binge/starve' situation if they're not careful. It just compounds things.

I did WW a long time ago and, because I'm quite good at sticking to diets and I prefer eating healthily, I lost weight quite rapidly but hit the classic undereating 'stall'... week after miserable week.  Of course (and here's the cynical me again) this means I was going back to classes, worrying about my progress and paying for the privilege!  

If you go with points system... make sure you add an extra 2 or 3 each day to allow for activity and fill up on as many veggies as you can get your hands on!!!

I was quite successful with WW -- the first time I tried it.  Every time after that, I was woefully unsuccessful...  I have been very successful here with counting and journalling.

I believe WW is about 50 cal/pt which means that at 20 pts you are eating only 1000 calories -- which is not enough.

My fatal flaw with WW was that I was pushing so hard to meet my points that I ended up eating junk, often, just so I could get some points and not be under -- but I wasn't teaching myself how to eat properly.  Now, I'm no saint, but I eat much more healthily (??) now that I count calories and log, than I did when I counted points and logged....

I love WW have lost 25lbs since july 31 with no struggles and no slip ups I dont have to eat junk to make up for points I eat my points and at the end of the day i am full and well nourished...but its not for eveyone i guess.

I tried WW as well. I lost 30lbs and then just stalled and couldn't lose anything after that. I was hungry all of the time too.

CC seems to work best for me, I don't feel starved, I'm losing weight with only tiny stalls in between AND it's free!

My sister-in-law has a WW cookbook that had wonderful recipes in it.  I looked up a teriayke (sp) turkey burger and which was only say 3 points ( I don't remember) but the calories were almost 500 cals for the one burger - no bun, no cheese, nothing.  Pfft. I'd much rather have two bocas each on a bun with a 1/2 slice of cheese on each and some roasted veggies for darn near the same! haha 

But, whatever works best for you.  I think I'd lose my mind trying to do both plans at once though. :o)

Hi Jenna,

I did WW and lost 25 lbs 7 years ago.  Kept if off for 3 years and then gained it back and more w/ life's stressful events!  I've been tracking the points against the daily cals too.  I think the cals are a little higher than I'd expect. 

It's not that the points are off, I think it's a combo of 2 factors: 1) cals are more accurate & 2) WW takes FIBER into account on the point system as well as fat, so if you eat high fiber low fat foods to stay w/in your points like I did, it's not only healthy but it also helps you lose weight, which is not a bad thing.

I wouldn't put too much stock in the burn meter, since it doesn't know your individual metabolism.  I know I need to stick to my old WW system of 21 pts/day, 1200 cals/day to lose weight.  Easier said than done, isn't it!

-Diane

Hi,

I am a lifetime member of WW and was proven to be successful, then... but now at the  lowest point range, like 18 pts I was starving myself... not intentionally but according to the point system I was eating my alloted points but not enough calories to lose weight.

I think it is a great program for some, but I have found counting calories way more effective in losing weight, this time around.

Hope this helps

Original Post by coach_k:

I believe WW is about 50 cal/pt which means that at 20 pts you are eating only 1000 calories -- which is not enough.

 If thats the case, they would suggest 1100 calories for me. Right now, I am losing weight at a faster rate than I have at any other point and Im eating between 1700-1800 calories a day.

I have tried WW before using my mothers books. I only did it for two months. I did manage to lose 15-20 lbs but then I stopped losing and lost all motivation to continue. Looking back, it was probably because I wasnt eating enough and was hungry all the time. So, I guess I would recommend CC over WW. I have managed to stick to CC for 8 months now and have lost 48 lbs. CC takes a very healthy, manageable approach to weight loss that I would recommend to anyone.

Good luck.

I'm currently doing WW online, I have lost half the weight I need to since April 08. It has been great for me up to this point because it has taught me portion size as well as making better food choices. I am now on CC as well because I need to take more control and focus on what activities will do for my caloric needs and WW falls short on really helping there. I think there are benefits to both and I think there is still some old thought processes with WW that need to be updated. But, overall it is a great program. I only joined CC a couple of days ago, so I will see what I can gather from this program, so far I really like what I see, I may switch completely over ....

Hmmm alot of similarity, lose around 20- 25 pds and taper, me too!

Coach K is right, the points 'average' to around 50 cals a point.  Mine was set to 24 (1200) cals, but what you have to consider is they don't count most vegetables and high fiber foods give you more food per volume.  Plus you have 35 extra points (5 per day av) to use over the week.  So really if you are eating what they consider a healthy diet; high fiber foods with lot's of vegetables (0 points) plus your extra weekly points, you would be adding 250 - 500 a day to your minimum calories, which is around what CC says to eat.

The problem is eating only the minimun and not enough fibre/vegies, then the diet has some flaws.  I found it an easy way to count things though, and the fiber average ended up being 5gms fiber = 1 less point.  So if you think about it, 25 grams a day = 5 extra food points a day.

24 pts

5pts for 25gms fiber

5pts for weekly additions

= up to 34 points a day or 1700 cals

Make sense?

Yes I'm a numbers geek.

Personally I'd go for calorie counting over points any day.  It is the same amount of effort to count calories as it is to count points, and best of all - it's free!

I also think the WW plan is a bit off when it comes to judging the number of points something has by the amount of fat in it.#

I've done both and i much prefer calorie counting. For me it has also proved to be infinitely more effective than WW.

I have a friend who lost 80 lbs on WW since last Oct. She has lent me all the literature,  but I know what you mean about being skeptical. I did WW once before and found it too limiting.

I once found the scientific formula online for figuring what a WW point is. It's something like calories vs. fat vs. fiber vs. protein. This may be a better way to lose the weight than counting calories alone, b/c it does take in account all these nutritional factors.

Even though everyone says to lose weight one must burn more calories than they consume, from experience I'm learning that what makes up those calories will determine whether you lose or not. See, I was counting calories. I kept it 1500 a day as prescribed for my BMI. I ate basically what I wanted to eat ( could've been a more balanced diet). Didnt lose anything.. My guess is that what comprises the calories you eat is just as important as how many calories you eat.. So much for "weight loss = calories consumed < calories burned.

WW might work...

Wow, thanks for all your responses everyone, I've decided to run them side by side for a week and see what happens! Yes, I have too much spare time on my hands

Today I've hit 20 of 21 points and about 1250 calories, so I'm worried that's not quite enough but I'm not too hungry so let's wait an see what we get. I'm a bit concerned about my defecit (about 700 plus I'm about to hit the stepper) but it sounds like I can get another couple of points for that? I don't get the exercise points or these extra 5 points as I'm only going from a friend's eat wisely ww book which doesn't mention either of these points, could anyone explain??

And thanks again for all the feed back, much appreciated xx

My problem w/ WW (and I did lose quite a bit of weight on it, but gained it all back) was that I took advantage of the point system and thought "heck, I can eat an entire box of KD for my points, and then just eat salad and veggies for every other meal!" and never took into consideration eating HEALTHY.  For me, it was all about eating my points.  I didn't clue in to the fact that I had to distribute my points properly throughout the day, and not save them all up for a fatty, nutritionless dinner because I felt like it.  I know, common sense, but it felt like a free for all "and I can still lose weight!"... No wonder I gained it all back! 

I find CC much more complete because I'm paying attention to my NUTRITION, not just the number of calories I'm shoving in my gullet every day!

From what I recall from doing WW is that any food that is really high fiber ( the other person said over 5g per serving but I thought it was 8g) you can subtract a point for each serving. For example if you eat a peice of bread that is 110 calories this would be 2 points. But if it has 9 grams of fiber it is only 1 point. So your getting an extra point.

You can also earn points for working out. I dont know the exact calculations but it averages out like the first 50-100 calories burned is 0 points but any thing else over that you earn points for. I always averaged 1 point to equal 60 calories. So if I worked out and averaged 100 calories 0 points but if I burned 150 calories it was 1 point, 300 calories 3 points.

Hope this helps.

I did WW before and lost weight but gained it back and then some.

I spend too much time saving points for the weekend, then I would be starving and end up eating too many points by the end of the week. It may have been I was eating the right foods though.