Any derision (I wouldn't call it hate - that's far too strong of a word) I have for WW and Oprah's involvement in it stems purely from the way that they present it as if theirs is really the only logical and lasting way to lose weight: count an assigned number of points (based on their inconsistent way of assigning vastly different amounts of points to an equal number of calories, depending on whether the food contains fat, saturated fat, or no fat at all), then frequently change how many points you're allowed, whether any foods are point-free, and which foods are point-free, so that you're essentially constantly changing diets, even though it's still considered to be the same diet.

One of the things that gets to me is that for all intents and purposes, they're saying "last year we said this is THE BEST DIET EVER, and now we've decided it's not, so we've changed it it, and now it really is THE BEST DIET EVER!" Of course that was the message the year before when they changed the diet, and the year before that when they changed the diet again, and will be the next year, when they will (most likely) change it yet again. I have a problem with how lucrative it is for a company to admit that they were wrong so many times in as many years, simply because they've come up with something new each year, something that ends up not being the best diet ever for so many people. (To put that in perspective, I also have a problem with how meteorologists can still be paid to be wrong in their weather forecasts so much of the time.)

Being so carb sensitive, I know for sure that past versions of WW wouldn't have worked well for me, because there was far too much emphasis on carbs to fill you up, and pressure to reduce fat cals to the point where I would have felt no satiation at all (due to the way that fat cals are assigned a higher point count than carb cals). Sure, for whatever amount of time I could have white knuckled my way through it, I would have lost, but as often as I've tried to cut cals and fats in the past, I know that I always reach a breaking point, and when I do, the rebound weight gain is very fast, and usually far more than I initially lost. A lot of people are like that, and it's not a lack of willpower - it takes extreme willpower to make it through even a few months feeling like that before you reach a breaking point.

As I said before though, I think at least in this newest incarnation, it would be possible to do a LC version of WW, now that they have so many free protein sources, as long as you spent every one of your points for fats. For those who are like me (very carb sensitive), they'd still need to keep track of their carbs though, to make sure they stayed LC - the truly carb sensitive couldn't just eat freely from the entire free food list and expect it to work, because the more corn, beans, and legumes, the more insulin reaction they would have, and the more carby free foods they'd want to eat, to the point that they could end up gaining weight instead of losing.

Honestly, if LC was set up in such a way that everyone was expected to eat one specific level of carb consumption, or if my carb allowance was based purely on my weight/age/activity level, I would rebel at that too.

I've seen people do OK on WW, but the vast majority of them seem to give up on it after a couple of months (if they last that long). Those are the ones who white knuckled it through their time on the diet, mainly because with the diet being geared towards LF they were eating far more carbs than their specific body could handle, since the diet says that no food is off limits, just stay within your points... but they couldn't stay within their points, because eating the way the diet allows set off such intense cravings that they couldn't control them, so they reached a breaking point, and went off the rails. When people who don't have problems with carbs, and are doing fine with the point limits reiterate that no food is off limits, just stay within your points, then all the blame lands on you for not being able to stick to the diet. More shame, guilt and diet failure for people who don't understand that for them, it's not all about the calories - there's intense cravings and hunger set off by your body's insulin reaction to the LF diet that's higher in carbs than your body can handle.

I fully acknowledge that it's not like that for everyone, but I hate that so much of what is considered gospel in the diet and nutrition world declares that it's always all about cutting fat and calories to lose weight - it simply doesn't work like that for some of us. It just becomes a prescription for being miserable for a few months with very little weight loss to show for it, before you finally reach your breaking point, go off the rails, and regain twice what little you lost during those few months.

Of course, people who go off their diet regain, including in the LC world. No matter how you lost the weight, you can't expect to go off your diet, return to your old eating habits, and somehow magically maintain your weight loss. It isn't going to happen. If you want to maintain your losses, you need to find a diet you can stick with for life - The question is which way can you sustain eating for life? For those of us who are long time LCers, the answer is going to be LC. For those who don't have the metabolic problems related to a LFHC diet, it might be sticking to a WW style diet based purely on calories and keeping fat intake low.