What To Do? WW or CC?

I'm at a loss.  I was doing CC for three wks. before I weighed.  I gained 2 1/2 lbs!  I went immediately to WW forum AGAIN.  Now the scale is going down but very slowly, 1/4 lb. for 2 wks.  Am I just doing it all wrong?  I can count.  I think I'm using CC right, as I don't go over my calories.  I must admit I don't eat like when on WW because you have to eat a certain amount of dairy and vegs. and fruit.  I'm just looking for help here, some encouragement, advice.  Why are you guys on CC and maybe not WW?  

because the CC way, I control all the calories. WW weighs calories and gives them points. I don't like that. Some high fiber stuff can have low points but eating a lot can add up the calories and you won't even know. I don't like having a middle man. I want clear cut numbers. Not weighted numbers.

I've done WW a couple of times and it didn't work for me.  The main problem with it is the points.  Because of points an extra small bite of something can add an extra point.  If you have been allotted 20 points for a whole day, that extra small bite has cost you 5% of your daily points.  That's just not right.  I like CC so much better - actual calories, analysis that breaks down your sugar grams, fat grams, carb grams etc., and the tracking tools.  All without the points.

I have been on ww for a long time and i also kinda flip flop between them... on cc i lose much slower than i did on ww so i to am on the fence BUT i think (this is just my op) you lose quicker on ww cause of the pt counting and how the fat and fiber figure in to your daily pts apposed to you just counting your calories cause your calories can Carrie more fat than perhaps you could have had on ww.. ?? Hope that makes some sense

By the way ww did work out for me i did lose 40 lbs but then thought all was good and gained back 30 lbs so that's where i'm at now. either way whichever you choose good luck!

i finc¨d cc best because i can eat what i choose and i like those numbers an stats. lost a lot.

For me CC feels less like dieting and more about eating healthy. I can choose how to meet my nutritional needs based on the food I prepare each day rather than have a certain amount of fruits,vegetables,dairy,etc. I do incorporate some of what I learned through WW in the past which helps me choose the lower calorie veggies,fruits,etc.

I also found that for me the meetings were kind of frustrating when the topic was not something I could relate to. I can review the forums and group postings for ideas when faced with a personnel challenge. This is my third week with CC and I actually think this is my way to a permanent life style change.

Good luck to you with whichever you choose.

I prefere CC because I'm a cheapskate and it's free.

Also, I find CC to be more flexible because, on WW, what would you do if the food doesn't have an assigned 'points value'?  I guess you could calculate it if you knew the fat/fibre/etc. - but that's an extra layer of work I don't want to have to do.  And CC seems to give more credit for calories burned through exercise.  I'm active enough that that becomes a real issue.  Plus I like the built in tracking of things like sodium, calcium and iron levels.

But mostly, I'm cheap.  And I've lost almost 40 pounds on CC, getting down to a healthy weight for the first time since I was a young child.  So, I definitely feel like I'm getting a good bargain.

I am a transformed lifetime member of ww.. I have done ww numerous times and have always lost weight... then gained it back

now I totally focus on cc.. I feel like i was starving on ww.. I wasn't eating enough calories for an actual weight loss. I have maintained at or below 135 lbs for close to  ayear now with cc.  

I hope this helps.

I paid for WW for a year to lose 6 pounds.  I gained it all back plus 20 lbs.  I haven't paid CC a dime and I've lost 13 lbs.  I feel much more in control here.  At WW they couldn't figure out why the program wasn't working for me.  I understand now.  I was staying within my points on WW, but I'm pretty sure I was eating too many calories.  Stupid 0 point foods.

WW encouraged activity, but they didn't seem to think it was necessary for successful weight loss.  It is for me.  I know that now.

I agree with Kashmir, it is more about healthy eating and less about the "D" word.  I didn't realize how I fall short of calcium on a daily basis until I did the analysis, and my sodium intake was out of hand.  I think CC gives you a more comprehensive look at your health and not just your "diet".  I've only lost 3#, but I think I'm healthier already just trying to keep my fat and sodium below the suggested levels, and vitamins like A, C, and calcium up above or at the suggested levels.

And I'm short so on WW I only get 18 points!  Its ridiculous.  That means my calories could be as low as 900 if I didn't get enough fiber in that day, and that's just dangerous.

This made me curious, and I calculated my "points" on what I've eaten today, and they add up to 14 points, but I've only had 670 calories with an A- as my nutrition analysis grade.  That would leave me with only 4 points for dinner, and I'd blow it and feel de-motivated, when I've really had an excellent day so far!

Which ever one you choose, you need to commit to living that way for life or you're wasting your time. If you go back to eating the way that you got fat, you'll gain it back. I don't think of myself as 'on CC'. CC is just a tool I use like my scale or sauce pan. Only it comes with friends!!!

Thank you everybody for the replies.  Very helpful AND way nicer than the ww site.    They can be rough.