Freestyle After 9 months

ladymajky, thank you for posting these menus. Very interesting and, as Becky said, losing weight with Freestyle would be so hard.  There is no correlation between calories and points. And, I wonder how WW explains these differences. 

Sigh... no wonder people are so frustrated with Freestyle. Why does WW say this program is so successful? 

Hello!

WOW, very interesting thread!!! I first joined WW when I was 16 about 40 years ago.  Have been on every single one of their programs.  I am extremely fed up with WW!!! Their new program is absolutely terrible. I have also been double and sometimes triple tracking only to find out I am not eating more than 1000 calories with the 23 points.  Besides being absolutely sick of chicken and eggs, I truly feel as if I am on a "diet".And to top it off, I am NOT losing weight. I do not feel as if this is a lifestyle change. I feel restricted in so many ways. At the end of this month, my subscription with WW will be canceled. It truly makes me sad!  I am looking into a variety of calorie counters that will help me keep track of what eat.  It seems as if many of you feel the same way!  

zazzles , Back in the day WW's position on points was that it was easier for people to keep track of a 2 digit number than a 3 or 4 digit number. That is, easier to keep track of 26 points than, say, 1200 calories. I think this may have been in a patent app. And, back then it probably was easier. Lots of people were doing it in their head or were paper tracking. Tracking online didn't exist. SmartPhones weren't around. We didn't mostly have a computer in our pocket all the time. Now, it is very, very easy to track calories.

I just passed my 5th anniversary of daily tracking on MFP. People are sometimes astonished about that and think it must be very difficult. In reality, on an average day I spend way less than 5 minutes a day tracking. Most foods I eat will pop up on MFP as soon as I start typing the food in the phone app. If it is a rare new food, it is usually in their database. It is not common that I have to enter an entirely new food. Tracking calories is very, very, very easy. And, I get all the nutritional info which I pay a lot of attention to.

WW devised points for a world where that simplicity did a lot and most people did find it easier to track 26 points rather than 1200 calories. But, that isn't the world we are in now.


This is the other side of the same coin. Because FS and SP are disconnected from calories in many ways (especially FS), you can end up with my situation. I eat less than a 1000 calories and am well over my daily points (and, no, I didn't eat a lot of junk). On the other hand, because of the disconnection with calories it is just as possible to eat too many calories and not hit your daily points. I like a lot of zero point foods. If it was important to me to do it, I'm pretty sure I could have a pretty good day that was near zero in points. The issue for me, though, is I like more variety in my food and I have some foods that I really like (such as nuts) that are high points. But, the opposite can be true for people who really do prefer the zero point and lower point foods and eat a lot of them each day.


linda3412 ,
  I personally would not pay for just the online version of WW if the program wasn't working for me.  I would pay to go to meetings (I am doing that since I got over goal weight a couple of months ago).  Meetings don't really focus on points.  So, I can happily go to meetings and that accountability and support is helpful to me.  If it wasn't, though, then I wouldn't pay.

Yep, that was what WW said at the time. But then when you consider their explanations for not providing paper towels for barefoot weigh-in, the loss of bravo and 5# loss stickers, the discontinuance of 12-week challenges with charm awards at the end, the loss of printed weigh-in labels, etc., etc., etc., we all know how much WW's explanation of things can be taken at their word.

And you raise an interesting thought: points may have started out to be a simplier way to tally a number to indicate calories consumed, but with SP they've gotten way far afield from that. Now points don't control calorie intake—they (attempt to) control behavior.

Flounder is zero points...how appropriate!

I appreciate being informed on how to change behavior; I resent being (mind) controlled into doing so.

WW has stayed married to the point system because it is their gimmick.  Unfortunately, that gimmick has a major limitation - you can only use a few nutrients to compute the points.  In an effort to restrict sugar and sat fat they gave up on the idea of a balanced diet because it doesn't fit the gimmick.  Hence, restrict sugar and sat fat and increase protein - viola -- a healthy diet.  Except it isn't necessarily.

PP was a great program, but part of the WW marketing tool is changing the program every few years to drag the people back.  Maybe they'll circle around again to PP after the FP boom fizzles.

Like many of you, I'm floundering around trying to figure out what direction to head.  I liked PP but I don't really care for the apps I've found.  So maybe back to calories.  Just struggling with finding the discipline again to get in gear, and I'm so very disappointed in WW.