Mathmaniac, it sounds to me almost as if you're saying that weight watchers is something to aspire to and low carb is something you follow because you can't commit to the full WW way of eating because of an inadequacy you feel of not being able to eat carbs. Doesn't it torment you, going to WW every week, seeing a woe that you can't allow yourself to do?

Lee

I guess I'm not communicating very well that there is no WOE to see. There is only efforts, progress and measurements to see. That is ALL there is to see at WW. That is why I go. That is why I weigh in there.

I like carbs and I allow myself to eat carbs that are low-glycemic. Salads, for example. And non-starchy vegetables. I don't think I'll ever be able to enjoy eating a pizza - a really good piece of pizza (the days of eating a whole pizza are over) - because I react to it like an addict - must have more! WW allows you everything, including good pizza, as long as you know how those points affect your diet. They also show you the option of eating 'good-enough' pizza that you can eat more often and fits, 'points-wise', into your diet. I can't even do that; it just makes me want a really good pizza so I'm back where I started!

WW is not something I aspire to. It's something I understand and appreciate. I like the weigh-ins. I like the success stories. They reward people every single meeting for weight loss that varies from 3 lbs to 80 lbs. They don't focus on your failures - if you do, then they are there to talk about how to make the diet work for you, with suggestions. It's not like homework or school and there aren't any grades involved. The weighing-in is done so that no one sees your weight but you and the person managing the scale. The only time the person managing the scale says anything is when you have lost weight.

Over the years, WW has refined the way it handles dieting and support, to become better than the WW I attended the first time decades ago. Yet, even decades ago, I lost weight with WW. That original plan they had - which told you how many cups of vegetables to have and how many slices of bread - is still used by some people at WW, if they want to use it! And then, the next week, if they want to use something more up-to-date, they change it themselves, and don't have to tell anyone.

It all boils down to the same thing: recognizing that what you put in your mouth has an effect.

I'm not communicating these things about WW and its plan well enough - because, if I were, you wouldn't ask how I can 'torment' myself by going to meetings. All there is at meetings is positive talk and a supportive atmosphere. There is no judging. There is no diet hammered into your brain; above all, there are no evil foods.

Halloween is coming up. All the holidays are coming up. We won't be talking about evil candy, bad buffets with breads and cakes and evil carbs. From past Halloweens, I know we'll be talking about how many points there are in a KitKat. Knowing that number, can you fit it into your day's allowance, knowing you are going to be handing out KitKats at the door to trick-or-treaters. Or, is there something else that might tide you over until that activity passes? Your choice. It's all about choice.

If I'm sitting in the group, listening to the talk, it doesn't even apply to me. I don't like sweets. But, I do get hungry and when I'm manning the candy basket at the door on Halloween, I can 'tide myself over' with some cheese. Or eat dinner before the first kid comes to the door. Dealing with hunger - that's a talk you will hear at WW. Behavioral strategies. All of those talks are useful.

I can tell you that I've NEVER left a meeting thinking that it was a waste of my time.

But that's the thing. Without all the excess carbs, I don't get irrational hunger that has to be "dealt with". I used to get hunger so bad I would eat sugar out of the bag with a spoon. Now that I am off grains and starches, have a normal relationship with food.

WW spends a lot of time teaching people how to keep eating stuff that makes them so hungry they need a support group in the first place!

Imagine an AA meeting where they try to teach alcoholics how to just have a little alcohol...like, say, on a points system. Hard liquor is worth so many points, beer and wine maybe less. Fewer points if you add soda to your drink, account for how many ice cubes you add, etc... You would drink up to your daily points limit and then stop. Then you would go to meetings and discuss your points and how you followed or didn't follow your points. Maybe have a drink tally instead of a weigh-in....

Yes. It is as insane as it sounds. So is WW.

WW doesn't talk about any specific foods, really, and when they do - they don't tell you that you HAVE to eat anything. Eating your points worth is up to you. Only you. And if all those points are chicken, do you have a complaint about it? Then stop. If you don't, and it's working, then don't.

Without carbs, I have an ash-ey feeling, like something burnt and died is still circulating in my system. I start craving carbs. So I eat something non-starchy and that solves it. WW has no problem with that. I don't go to WW to ask them to make low-carbing work for me.

They don't spend any time telling you how to eat. They spend a lot of time telling you that there are skills to reaching a goal. There are obstacles to reaching a goal. This is how you deal with that... actually, it applies to almost any goal you have. It's about focus. It's about measuring your progress. It's about adjusting your behavior. For that matter, how is this any different at all from a group that gets together to support each other's reaching goals? Not at all different - which is why other groups have sought to emulate WW.

Overeater's Anonymous comes to mind. T.O.P.S. comes to mind. I've never gone to either of those groups.

Actually, the Zone Diet and South Beach are in the business of showing people how to manage carbs. The support aspect is missing, though. WW offers that. Am I missing something here? There's a subset of dieters on this board who live the VLC lifestyle (which would never work for me) but they are a subset. The majority whose journals I read are fully engaged in carb-eating, the same types of salads I eat.

At WW, you don't discuss your points. You discuss your progress. Or lack of it.

I had to take the leader aside and ask her to clarify how many points I can have. It was in the booklet, it was adjustable, it was individual, and that was because the number of points - added or subtracted or allotted - is never mentioned in meeting. The leader has told us the points that she uses, because currently, she's shaving 5 pounds off her frame. She mentioned it in passing. It is the single time I've ever heard a number mentioned.

So how is it that there is such misunderstanding of what WW is today? I think people have memories of WW from decades ago or bad meetings they attended, or bad feelings they have about 'failing'; if that were the case with me, I would have quit low-carbing long ago. It has all the problems and failings and limitations of any diet.

There is plenty wrong with it.Funny, my $12 spring scale gives the exact results [body weight] as the clinic scale I weigh in at the doctors, when the weight of my clothes, wallet, keys and cell phone are subtracted Not necessarily, cutting calories can slow the metabolism, while increasing fat calories can increase the metabolism burning even more calories.Good idea. With LC and fasting I lowered my FBS from 116 to 88 in a year.Yes, VLC can be tough if you don't get enough fat, especially saturated fats. It's a difficult concept many people just can't accept. Maybe true, but once again losing scale weight is not as important as losing body fat -- it's all about body composition. I know, I sound a bit like "The Caveman" today.

'Funny, my $12 spring scale gives the exact results [body weight] as the clinic scale I weigh in at the doctors,'

Funny. Mine doesn't. In fact, if I go to the doctor's and the scale says x, but WW's scale says Y, I say, 'Here's my weight from WW' and they take that. The doctor's scale is not calibrated as accurately as the WW scale, and they are the first to admit that. They record my WW weight in my medical records.

'Not necessarily, cutting calories can slow the metabolism, while increasing fat calories can increase the metabolism burning even more calories.'

My experience has been different. My body, my experience. I don't argue with my body.

'Good idea. With LC and fasting I lowered my FBS from 116 to 88 in a year.'

I'm sure you know that I have been IFing for over a year. I started in April 2009. I lowcarb. My blood sugar has not been affected positively or negatively. From knowing diabetics on this board, I have learned to home test my glucose - fasting and two hours after meals.

When I VLC'd, my food of choice was well-marbled steak. No lack of saturated fat in my diet, even today!

As for losing body fat: so far, losing pounds 'by the scale' has matched what I'd expect from the way my clothes fit. If I lose pounds, my clothes fit better. On the other hand, when I did resistance training 3x a week, I became muscular and strong, and my clothes fit better, two sizes smaller. However, I was still obese - and I never got into the lower clothes size I wanted. That was my experience.

WW are aware that 95% of dieters will put the weight back on. By providing a 'supportive environment' where 'coping strategies' are discussed, I believe people are brainwashed into believing that when they they gain they have failed and when they lose, the WW plan has triumphed for them. This promotes a following who blame themselves not the plan, and return to WW and groups like them, over and over again giving more and more money to the WW company. 95% of the people paying will be ultimately unsuccessful each time. The longterm success of the five percent and the temporary success of the rest will attract new members. The people who are made to believe that they failed the plan, not that the plan failed them will continue returning to group...and paying the fee.

If it works for you and you continue to lose then good luck to you. Positive support is always a good thing to have.

But I don't think that these groups are always all that supportive, I've been both to weight watchers and slimming world groups and there was an unhealthy competitiveness about who would be slimmer of the week or slimmer of the month, which could at times become quite catty.

Mathmaniac, I think the reason why people are responding the way they are to what you've written, is that you're coming across as evangelical about WW to a group of people, many of which have been failed by WW and are highly suspicious about the motives of the company - profits for them rather than weight loss for all.

The plan I follow cost me £5 for the book. If I went to WW it would cost me £5 a week, plus any additional products I purchased - food guides, points directory etc. Its very costly just to get weighed.

But as I said if it is working for you and you are losing then good luck to you, we all need to get support where we can.



Lee

Where's all this blame stuff coming from?

Promoting a sense of personal responsibility must mean shaming people or blaming people? I have never ever seen that or heard anything like that at WW.

In fact, WW never triumphs. The individual's management of their life triumphs. And this point is driven home a hundred different ways at meetings.

You lost 50 pounds? Round of applause for you. Not for WW. Would you like to tell us what really helped you? Hmmm. You joined the Y. Well, GOOD for YOU! That worked for YOU! I have heard people give all kinds of reasons for why they succeeded, when asked. If someone said, 'I really upped my protein and cut down my carbs and it made the world of difference to my problems controlling my appetite,' there would be nothing but applause for that person working out his or her own system for getting to their goal.

If I'm coming across as evangelical, it's because I go to WW. I know what happens at a meeting - I do like the leader who leads on the night I go. But if I don't like her, I'll go another night.

I low-carb AND I go to WW. I'm not alone in this. There are other people on these boards who do this, also. They are not incompatible.

I'm not even losing by low-carbing. I'm staying pretty much in a range that I'm stuck at. What really really killed my diet during the past year was losing focus for a few months and not using fitday, which is WW without the support group, when you come right down to it. I've just about regained my footing, with the help of WW keeping me focussed, and low-carbing being the right choice for me as far as my fears about being pre-diabetic.

IFing (Intermittent Fasting) has been extremely easy for me. I feel good doing it but I haven't lost any weight with it. More importantly, it ALSO goes well with WW, because WW doesn't dictate how and when you eat. They are extremely flexible; it's up to you - it works, then fine...

A problem with WW making money? I don't have a problem with that. If WW charges money for a meeting and I don't like that, I can go to any other WW-wannabe and they will take my donation instead of a membership fee. But I happen to like WW and their attitude and their flexibility.

I haven't bought any WW products, they are never required. I am a huge fan of Muscle Milk, which is not tied to any diet that I know of but I love the taste. Most Atkins stuff tastes like crap and the expense of any low-carb stuff makes WW stuff look positively cheap.

If that were true, at 6' tall and with big green eyes, I would have been a super model. Instead the more I cut calories the fatter and sicker I got.

'The plan I follow cost me £5 for the book.'

You paid too much if it's Atkins. My library book sale has every Atkins and Zone book, multiple copies of every edition, as people clean out their bookshelves and donate. I have all the low-carb paperback editions - at the library book sales, the diet and fitness section is loaded with these books. The Eades' books, the Zone books, Carbohydrate Addicts, you name it. These go for less than a dollar and if you wait to 'fill your bag for a buck', you can have bags full.

Bags full of the South Beach book, if you want!

WW cookbooks - some. There is no WW book that I know of, just cook books. They are not nearly as plentiful as the low-carb books. WW lets you pull from any book - you figure out your points with the little slide-rule-type-thingie and you can cook and use anything.

"Stop eating?" What, are they taking dieting advice from Encyclopedia Dramatica now?

'If that were true, at 6' tall and with big green eyes, I would have been a super model. Instead the more I cut calories the fatter and sicker I got.'

You find the level that works for you. In fact, WHATEVER works for you.

So far, so good in my case. Intermittent Fasting suits me well - 24 hours fasting, 24 hours eating - yet, it might make another person feel sick or stressed What's going on with a person, hormone-wise, age-wise, stress-wise? It all counts.

I don't think mine is a misunderstanding about WW at all. It angered me to have to learn their "point system"....and buy all their crap and get weighed in, in public, and deal with looks from those weighing me in if I didn't lose or if I gained! . Maybe it was my imagination but it felt very humiliating to me.

It did not teach me about food in general and that was what I needed and lacked. It also didn't teach me about my compulsive overeating and I really needed to learn about that!
Their whole mantra even today is low fat or non fat...nothing about how much sugar is in their very own food line.

Its hard enough to get this food thing right...but they sure don't make it easy for anyone.

I did go to OA and FAA but never to TOPPS. OA taught me a lot that I've carried with me since, FAA (no sugar, no flour, no wheat)taught me about my food addictions and that I also carry with me today. But nothing that I learned in WW has been carried over to my success today.
OK, heres one, when I see any WW food in the store, I don't even look at it!!

Sorry MM....but I don't know what you consider "seeing loss" because you don't discuss it here. I do hope that you find the success you seek... even if it is at WW.

Judy, they don't weigh in 'in public' any more. The scale's information goes to you with a sticker for a book, stamped by the computer/printer, entered into the computer.

'Maybe it was my imagination but it felt very humiliating to me.' Whether it was your imagination or not, you could just go to a different meeting; the meetings differ, the groups differ. I myself would not like to be in a meeting with the other mothers of my kids' PTO. But I wouldn't have to be.

No one hears anything about your weight loss or gain. As if they would be interested, anyway! I've never picked up that 'nosey vibe,' and the weigh-ins take less than half a minute.

It angered you to learn their point system. I could not tell you the number of points in a biscuit. You count the points or not - it is up to you, but your progress is up to you. That makes it no different from other diets.

Compulsive overeating is a topic at our meetings, as in talk about 'mindless' eating and controlling appetite by eating foods that satisfy instead of foods that don't satisfy. If chicken breast satisfies you, no one ever argues with that! If popcorn satisfies you, no one argues with that!

Low-fat or non-fat are terms I have not heard in WW; but it is true that if something is low-fat, it is lower in points, which means you can eat more of it (spinach, celery; in general, low-glycemic veggies and low-fat meats are things you can eat more of) so that can be attractive. But again, no one ever EVER says that you can't have those things that are high in points or only eat things that are low in points.

I also pass by the WW products in the grocery store. I pass by the Atkins and Zone products, too. I eat Lean Cuisine products but, as I told a friend recently, there's not THAT much difference between Lean Cuisine and Stouffer's. A couple hundred calories at most?

I've never noticed WW food to be high in sugar. I think they produce a lot of snack food that is supposed to satisfy a sweet tooth - which I don't have. If I DID have a sweet tooth, I'd feel right at home at the meetings where it seems like everyone has a low-point way to produce strawberry shortcake or some other dessert. It's just not my thing...

I go to meetings and hear about behavioral changes to make it easier to diet. That is what I hear. I don't learn about food or nutrition at the meetings. They give you a booklet - if you want it - every week, and it has a recipe that is not that outrageous or strange. The topic of the week, according to the booklet, is the same across all of WW. You want to hear the same topic treated somewhat differently, go to another meeting and hear another leader's take on it.

Get calcium, pay attention to vitamin D - these are hot topics right now. So it might be one week's topic. Or the leader may hear someone talk about eating some frozen yogurt and then that would lead to a discussion about calcium in the yogurt. Nothing radical. PLUS: if the frozen yogurt you choose is high in fat and high in sugar and it is your favorite brand, all you need to know is that you yourself are responsible for fitting it into your choices for points that day. And if it pushes your point total over the top, then you consider the points for three days, or even all week - and you recover by adjusting. It's not hard to see the sense in that.

'seeing loss' - what's that about?

You can sit here all night and type all of your good experiences with their meetings...if it works for you then thats all that is important, right?
I have zero interest in ever attending any WW meetings...and I have a friend who is a WW leader. She uses my story as an example to her meetings.

As for your "seeing loss"....I only know that your stats have remained the same for as long as I see that you're here. I have no idea if they are accurate and or if you are actually losing?
Because in my mind, if I'm not losing, then I better be looking for a different strategy.
No offense intended!!