|
|
Post by bbbearsmom on Nov 28, 2019 17:54:56 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by littlepioneerwoman on Nov 28, 2019 19:32:53 GMT
I think I’m good with 2 pounds vs. 5. It’s bad enough I sometimes find myself a few pounds over the 2 and have to work my way back. I’m afraid if I had 5 pounds to play with, I’d easily find myself creeping up 7 or 8 and that could feel more daunting.
|
|
|
|
Post by bbbearsmom on Nov 28, 2019 19:43:25 GMT
littlepioneerwoman, I think you are right about that. I heard that one reason WW doesn't want people to get too far under goal is that they then have a lot they can gain before they are in trouble, and then end up yo-yo dieting to maintain their goal.
|
|
Kitty
Transcendent Member
Posts: 1,449
|
Post by Kitty on Nov 28, 2019 19:53:36 GMT
I think a 5 pound range is more realistic. You can be up more than 2 pounds at weigh in time just through normal weekly weight fluctuations. I have plenty of weeks (and did when I was on maintenance) where my weight would vary more than 2 pounds. I don't think it is healthy to have to stress so much about having a normal weight fluctuation that could be due to having eaten a salty meal.
|
|
|
|
Post by zazzles on Nov 28, 2019 20:22:54 GMT
If the WW rule was 2# over or under as it is supposed to be during maintenance (only), the it woudl be a problem to retaine Lifetime membership benefits. But since it is 2# over (only), for me less wiggle room is better.
I always assumed that the 2# wiggle room was an allowance for clothes (without shoes). I know that when I weigh at home without clothes and then go to the Stewdeeo and weigh without shoes, wallet, keys, belt, etc. I am almost always 2# above my home scale weight.
|
|
|
|
Post by fullmahina on Nov 28, 2019 22:16:09 GMT
If the WW rule was 2# over or under as it is supposed to be during maintenance (only), the it woudl be a problem to retaine Lifetime membership benefits. But since it is 2# over (only), for me less wiggle room is better. I am confused---I always you had to be within two pounds of your goal weight (over OR under) to get the free weigh-in. I am nowhere near goal but a girl can dream so could you clarify this, zazzles? |
|
|
|
Post by bbbearsmom on Nov 28, 2019 23:49:27 GMT
fullmahina, They only enforce two pounds over. I think the idea is that during the six week maintenance period you are not supposed to go more than two pounds under or over. I haven't read the Lifetime booklet in years though. I don't think they enforce it about not being under anymore.
|
|
|
|
Post by zazzles on Nov 29, 2019 1:37:34 GMT
I am confused---I always you had to be within two pounds of your goal weight (over OR under) to get the free weigh-in. I am nowhere near goal but a girl can dream so could you clarify this, zazzles? What bbbearsmom says. If they enforced the rule as written, then — members who reach maintenance and go through maintenance would have to be -/+2# on their last weigh-in before being awarded Lifetime status. — lifetime members who were more than 2# above or below goal would have to pay. Some locations do enforce the rule before awarding lifetime status; my location does not. I don’t know of any hard line locations or staff who enforce the -2# rule. That, likely, would be the last time they ever saw that member. |
|
|
|
Post by luanne on Nov 29, 2019 1:43:52 GMT
If I remember back to the days when I still worked for WW we didn't enforce a 2 pound under rule, but if a member started dropping too far below goal the leader was supposed to counsel them. And if they dropped to a certain point below, they could be dropped as a member if they didn't get a doctor's note. I don't remember that ever happening while I was working.
|
|
Kitty
Transcendent Member
Posts: 1,449
|
Post by Kitty on Nov 29, 2019 1:45:13 GMT
Yes, I don't think they should have a +- 5 pounds at weigh in. I do think they should allow you to weigh in at goal so long as not more than 5 pounds over goal (v. 2 pounds) since normal weight fluctuation (especially in women) is often more than 2 pounds during the week even when you are totally maintaining.
|
|
|
|
Post by zazzles on Nov 29, 2019 1:47:14 GMT
If I remember back to the days when I still worked for WW we didn't enforce a 2 pound under rule, but if a member started dropping too far below goal the leader was supposed to counsel them. And if they dropped to a certain point below, they could be dropped as a member if they didn't get a doctor's note. I don't remember that ever happening while I was working. One friend in my meeting got threatened and had to get a doctor’s note. She had gotten notes several times, and the doctor told her when she got the note that it would be the last—he felt she was way too thin. Now she struggle to stay 2# below her goal weight. She also told me that she had had that battle with WW ever since she joined and reached goal. The solution she finally hit on was to carry a few rolls of quarters in her pockets at weigh-in when she new she was going to be given trouble. |
|
|
|
Post by borntexan on Nov 29, 2019 2:06:52 GMT
There was an article on the website I think last week that mentioned if you weigh a certain amount of lbs below the low end of your goal range after being told to get a doctors note there was a possibility you couldn't attend meetings until you were over the low end.They went on to say you were given several warnings before that would happen though.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jennifer on Nov 29, 2019 2:13:14 GMT
I've been more than 2lbs under for awhile now, they never say anything to me except, good job here's your etool voucher, a weekly and a name tag.
|
|
chook
Epic Member
Posts: 327 
|
Post by chook on Nov 29, 2019 9:51:15 GMT
We are given a 2kg window (which is 4.4 lbs). The last time I looked at the rule book here, you needed to be within the 2kg above or below to get the free meeting....and if you are constantly under, they will ask you to re-adjust your goal weight.
This is one of the major issues I have with WW, when they force members to stay within such a narrow window. I’ve lost track of LTM who told me they spent the first half of their month eating without a care, and the 2nd half in severe restriction trying to make up for it. I’d rather WW just allowed ppl to be anywhere within 2 lbs of their healthy weight range (or the range specified by their doctor), rather than 2 lbs of a specific weight.
|
|
|
|
Post by fullmahina on Nov 29, 2019 14:21:26 GMT
Thanks for the explanation and yes, I think that the pressure to stay within such a narrow weight range could be unnecessarily anxiety-inducing. I do like the idea of staying somewhere within your healthy weight range as was earlier stated--it's a pretty substantial range but it would make more sense.
Then again, a lot more members might qualify for lifetime status and WW is having enough trouble with its financials without adding more non-paying members!
|
|
