I expect I'm going to have at least a few more posts bashing Weight Watchers, so I thought I should say a few good things about them.
I'm two weeks and three meetings in. We'll see how I'm feeling in a few months, but for now I like the fundamental system.
Weight Watchers now offer two different plans. The "Flex Plan" is what most people think of; you get a daily point (or as they call it POINTS™) allotment (and a weekly "slop" allotment), different foods cost different values. The "Core Plan" doesn't track points or calories, instead giving you a pretty strict list of things you eat; you can splurge a little with a weekly allotment of points, just like the Flex Plan.
The Core Plan seems to brutal to me. The list of acceptable foods is much, much too short for me. It definitely seems implausible if you eat out regularly. I can see it working for other people, but I don't ever expect to try it.
The Flex Plan is pretty straightforward. WW gives you a booklet of some common foods showing the points per item. They'll sell you more complete books, or access to their web database. If you know the nutritional information, you can use the provided cardboard slide rule to calculate the points of anything. For people with calculators, the equation is pretty simple:
| points = | calories | + | fat | − | fiber |
| 50 | 12 | 5 |
Calories are as Americans measure them, or "kilogram calories." Fat is in grams. Fiber is specifically "dietary fiber," is in grams, and is limited to 4 grams in a given dish. Results are rounded to the nearest whole number (matching WW's books), or to the nearest half (matching WW's web site).
(Weight Watchers doesn't, to my knowledge, admit that this is the equation, but it's
widely known. No surprise, as it's
clearly documented in their patent, 6,040,531. (Backup patent link.) Using my slider I've confirmed that the equation is correct. The observant will notice that the patent was granted in 2000; apparently Weight Watchers changed their system recently.)
WW has an equation for determining how many points you get each day, then they assign a flat 35 points as extra to use over a given week. (I'd share the equation, but it's less clear that it's public information. For a sense of scale, it bottoms out at 18 and tops off at 44. The last page of the patent has a table with some example ranges, but it's clear that the equation and that table don't quite jive.)
Limiting myself to the points I have each day hasn't proven too hard for me. So far hunger hasn't been the problem; the problem has been limiting myself, especially at restaurants. For example, my favorite meal at Culver's is a cheeseburger basket and a chocolate shake. It's 41.5 points (1730 calories, 86 grams of fat), more than I get in a single day. Based on the meetings, many people do have hunger problems, so this might just be me.
The points system has proven very enlightening, and I'm getting a much better grip on how much I eat. Of course, this isn't WW specific, by all accounts a key to any effective diet is learning how many calories you're actually consuming.
You're also given some general guidelines, encouraging you to eat a certain amount of fruits and veggies and to drink milk.
The points system is fundamentaly calorie counting mixed with generally good nutrition. I'm not convinced that it's better than simply calorie counting and good nutrition. However, WW provides guidelines and structure which I do think are effective. I wouldn't think anything of tracking calories, fat, and fiber directly, but I'm a geek who carries around a Palm PDA, so the simplification into points may help others.
You're encouraged to attend one Weight Watchers meeting per week. You start by optionally weighing in (only the staff know your weight). You're given a pamphlet or small booklet based on how many weeks you've attended. Presumably after some number of visits you'll have collected the entire set and won't get any more. You're also offered a little paper booklet for tracking points for a week. Then you head to the meeting proper.
Based on my experience (I gather each meeting group is different), you get a group of about 40 people, the majority of whom are women. A leader gives a short talk and motivational lecture about weight loss, frequently asking audience members for examples of what works for them, or what has proven problematic. It seems very female oriented to me, but the meetings are hyped as being important and I believe it probably is. The weekly meetings act as a sort of chapter marking, giving a concrete marker to your progress. Hearing from other people helps focus the mind and provide some reassurance that weight loss is possible. You get little stickers and later on keychain charms for achieving various goals, and everyone applauds when you do. It's just using peer pressure as positive reinforcement, and I know it's a trick, but it's still an effective motivator. Presumably one can learn useful tips from the meetings, but I haven't hear anything noteworthy yet.
So, fundamentally you've got a simplified calorie counting, good nutrition guidelines, and some positive peer pressure. I can't see anything wrong with it. It sounds reasonable to me and research suggests that it's more effective than other diet plans.
That's probably the last good thing I'll say about Weight Watchers. I'll try to report back later with more on how effective it is, but in the meanwhile I'm going to complain about the stupid and sloppy things WW does.
(For any fellow geeks interested in dieting on their own, I suggest checking out the Hacker's Diet.)
(2007-03-29: Typo fix: proben to proven. Later fix: apparent to apparently.) |