weight watchers say mcdonalds is ok!!

PeteSanchez

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/7359902/McDonalds-Chicken-McNuggets-branded-healthy-by-Weight-Watchers.html

badabababa i'm lovin it

Khannie

Haha.

The NHS recommends women should consume 1,500 calories a day and men 2,000.

Good one. Let's all starve ourselves.

lalee17

Lol what a joke.

bazmaiden

obviously in moderation

rubadub

"Weight Watchers should be ashamed of doing a deal such as this," wrote Liz, while Jen added: "This is all about money and it disgusts me to see WW have sold out."

ehhh, surely they sold out years ago, there is tons of WW junk food available, I would sooner eat a burger than many WW products.

From the NHS website.
http://www.nhs.uk/chq/Pages/1126.aspx?CategoryID=51&SubCategoryID=165

The recommended daily calorie intake varies depending on how old you are. For the average adult this is about 2,000 per day (women) and 2,500 per day (men). These calories should be made up of foods from the main food groups.

El_Dangeroso

Sher they're owned by Heinz, it's a great racket. Sell them highly processed food that makes you want to overeat and then charge them money to lose the excess pounds in a never-ending cycle that goes on forever. Genius!

Transform

Temple_Grandin wrote: »

Sher they're owned by Heinz, it's a great racket. Sell them highly processed food that makes you want to overeat and then charge them money to lose the excess pounds in a never-ending cycle that goes on forever. Genius!

agreed

Shinners13

Well people ive got to say im not impressed by the fact that ww is signing up with macd's but i have to point out that that it was on a corporate level that that choice was made.
Im not saying that ww isnt just trying to make money out of people but i want to point out that if you went to a ww meeting and took the advice of a ww leader (who is a person who had problems with their own weight and lost it) you will lose weight (from my experience anyways and plenty others that i know).
These men and women are people who know what it feels like to be overweight and are determined to help you shed the pounds. They are not just there for the money and i am positive about that point.
Anyone who works in a big corportion like that knows that they for the most part cannot influence the choices made at the top level.
Just remember that the choices made by certain people should not degrade the huge effort that is put in by the people who give the meetings every week and earn a normal wage like the rest of us.
Also i would like to say that ww promotes healthy eating (at least 5 portions of fruit and veg a day) and exercise and drinking water(2 litres min a day) which are all staples of having a healthy diet.
I think it is more appropriate for people to vent at the fact that the chemists in this country are promoting such things as lipotrim etc. which are severe and unhealthy ways to lose weight and they are making money from it!!!

Messi 10

Khannie wrote: »

Haha.



Good one. Let's all starve ourselves.

What? I'm a fairly active guy (training 3 times a week and would always get at least 30 mins physical activity on the other days) But I eat a minimum of 4000 calories a day. I would easily have 2000 calories eaten by lunch time. 2000 for the whole day is madness.

jam_mac_jam

Is this a joke? I had thought weight watchers was bad before but this is very silly.

jam_mac_jam

Shinners13 wrote: »

Well people ive got to say im not impressed by the fact that ww is signing up with macd's but i have to point out that that it was on a corporate level that that choice was made.
Im not saying that ww isnt just trying to make money out of people but i want to point out that if you went to a ww meeting and took the advice of a ww leader (who is a person who had problems with their own weight and lost it) you will lose weight (from my experience anyways and plenty others that i know).
These men and women are people who know what it feels like to be overweight and are determined to help you shed the pounds. They are not just there for the money and i am positive about that point.
Anyone who works in a big corportion like that knows that they for the most part cannot influence the choices made at the top level.
Just remember that the choices made by certain people should not degrade the huge effort that is put in by the people who give the meetings every week and earn a normal wage like the rest of us.
Also i would like to say that ww promotes healthy eating (at least 5 portions of fruit and veg a day) and exercise and drinking water(2 litres min a day) which are all staples of having a healthy diet.
I think it is more appropriate for people to vent at the fact that the chemists in this country are promoting such things as lipotrim etc. which are severe and unhealthy ways to lose weight and they are making money from it!!!

I dont agree. I heard some complete rubish at weight watcher meetings, advised to eat their processed crap and not taught anything that you would not know with the most basic idea of how to loose weight. I think that their no count diet is good as you are forced to eat so much veg, however I think the point counting just swaps processed high fat food for processed lower fat food with little change in overall diet. Most people end up going back again and again which would suggest that it does not work

corkcomp

bottom line, there are a lot of people out there who will ONLY eat processed crap, and they have no intention of changing this habbit, so in that regard weight watchers is idea for these people because it lets them eat crap, in small quantities and lose weight at the same time. Both I and most of the people on here would not agree with this approach but the fact is that it DOES work and it is better to consume 2000 cals of crap than 4000 cals of crap.

harvardgal2

jam_mac_jam wrote: »

I dont agree. I heard some complete rubish at weight watcher meetings, advised to eat their processed crap and not taught anything that you would not know with the most basic idea of how to loose weight. I think that their no count diet is good as you are forced to eat so much veg, however I think the point counting just swaps processed high fat food for processed lower fat food with little change in overall diet. Most people end up going back again and again which would suggest that it does not work

Most people is a generalisation, it does work. I lost over 3 stone on it and have kept it off. WW helps you re think your eating and promotes a change in eating habits. There are no banned foods, they simply preach healthy attitudes and habits. None of my WW leaders ever promoted WW products or "eating crap" for that matter. Perhaps it didn't work for you but it's unfair to denounce the programme for this reason. It's works for some and not others.

El_Dangeroso

harvardgal2 wrote: »

Most people is a generalisation, it does work. I lost over 3 stone on it and have kept it off. WW helps you re think your eating and promotes a change in eating habits. There are no banned foods, they simply preach healthy attitudes and habits. None of my WW leaders ever promoted WW products or "eating crap" for that matter. Perhaps it didn't work for you but it's unfair to denounce the programme for this reason. It's works for some and not others.

Two out of every thousand people reach their goal weight on WW and keep it off. That's very far from most people.

harvardgal2

Temple_Grandin wrote: »

Two out of every thousand people reach their goal weight on WW and keep it off. That's very far from most people.

Well those two show its works, the other 1,998 just don't have the determination or commitment for whatever reason. When the programme is followed,it works.

amacachi

harvardgal2 wrote: »

Well those two show its works, the other 1,998 just don't have the determination or commitment for whatever reason. When the programme is followed,it works.

Any time I say anything about WW the only defence people give is that it motivates you, where it obviously doesn't better than anything else.

harvardgal2

amacachi wrote: »

Any time I say anything about WW the only defence people give is that it motivates you, where it obviously doesn't better than anything else.

Don't understand?

amacachi

harvardgal2 wrote: »

Don't understand?

It motivates 2 out of 1000 people, how is that a good thing? There's a million and one plans out there that will work if someone sticks at it. WW will too, but it's slow and it doesn't educate properly, making it easy to slip again.
The advantage of WW, I'm constantly told, is how it motivates ya, but when you see overweight people who've been going for over 10 years, I don't believe it's very successful at that either.

Sapsorrow

WW works on the classic principle of treat the symptoms not the problem. If people were making the right food choices (as WW followers claim they are taught about) the VAST majority bar those with specific metabolic problems would be able to eat by intuition and to fufilment without having to fuss about points. Aside from emotional issues people make bad food decisions because of two things: one being uneducated and two because eating certain foods (even some seemingly healthy ones) is going to set you up for premature hunger and cravings. No one is ever going to sort their weight out in the long term until they tackle their underlying issues/misconceptions about food and I don't think weight watchers can do that as long as it continues to work on the basis of a points system that demonises fat in favour of high sugar processed crap. It's all a load of crap and really gets on my tits tbh :mad: For the price of a few ww meetings you could buy a scales, measuring tape and any number of books teaching proper nutritional principles and theories. For support why not talk to friends or family?? Food diary forums like the one here offer all the support and motivation anyone could need.

harvardgal2

amacachi wrote: »

It motivates 2 out of 1000 people, how is that a good thing? There's a million and one plans out there that will work if someone sticks at it. WW will too, but it's slow and it doesn't educate properly, making it easy to slip again.
The advantage of WW, I'm constantly told, is how it motivates ya, but when you see overweight people who've been going for over 10 years, I don't believe it's very successful at that either.

Get you now. I see what your saying.

Melia

khrystyna100 wrote: »

WW works on the classic principle of treat the symptoms not the problem. If people were making the right food choices (as WW followers claim they are taught about) the VAST majority bar those with specific metabolic problems would be able to eat by intuition and to fufilment without having to fuss about points. Aside from emotional issues people make bad food decisions because of two things: one being uneducated and two because eating certain foods (even some seemingly healthy ones) is going to set you up for premature hunger and cravings. No one is ever going to sort their weight out in the long term until they tackle their underlying issues/misconceptions about food and I don't think weight watchers can do that as long as it continues to work on the basis of a points system that demonises fat in favour of high sugar processed crap. It's all a load of crap and really gets on my tits tbh :mad: For the price of a few ww meetings you could buy a scales, measuring tape and any number of books teaching proper nutritional principles and theories. For support why not talk to friends or family?? Food diary forums like the one here offer all the support and motivation anyone could need.

I agree with nearly all of what you say, but a lot of people won't talk to friends or family about weight loss (myself included) and a lot of people won't use online forums like this. Are there any better programs focused on fat loss with weekly group meetings and measurements? (Genuine question!)

WeightWatchers is very flawed, yes, but it has its good points too. I'm pretty suspicious about the 2 in 1000 statistic. I know the number isn't massively high, but I doubt it's that low. The calculations in the link don't take everything into account. For instance, they don't count people who lost weight but didn't quite hit their goal. Losing any weight and maintaining it is a success, not just getting to an arbitrary number decided at your first meeting, which may be unrealistic for some. Not hitting goal certainly doesn't mean it didn't 'work'.

It does work for most people if the program is adhered to and if you don't eat crap (big ifs, I know, but it's what the leaders are meant to teach, even if some don't).

It's a hell of a lot better than doing nothing and staying obese and getting even more obese, like the fat acceptance blog the statistic came from advocates...

El_Dangeroso

Melia wrote: »

WeightWatchers is very flawed, yes, but it has its good points too. I'm pretty suspicious about the 2 in 1000 statistic. I know the number isn't massively high, but I doubt it's that low. The calculations in the link don't take everything into account. For instance, they don't count people who lost weight but didn't quite hit their goal. Losing any weight and maintaining it is a success, not just getting to an arbitrary number decided at your first meeting, which may be unrealistic for some. Not hitting goal certainly doesn't mean it didn't 'work'.

I agree that having accountability is probably the most powerful aspect of the WW plan. You just don't get the same thing out of an online food diary as you do with a face to face meeting. There is actually no alternative for face to face weight loss groups, maybe overeaters anonymous but I don't think most people want or even need to focus solely on psychological intervention. There is this thing called TOPS in the US that is non-diet specific. So you pick your own plan and then just go along for support and weighing, which would be great to have over here.

I actually know a low carber that secretly goes to WW meetings each week for support and accountability. She pretends to follow the plan but ignores the diet advice and does her own thing (the leader is very happy with her amazing rate of weight loss too ) .

The two in a thousand rate is actually quite accurate considering that most diet plans have around this rate of long term success. We live in a very toxic food environment so regain is a very likely prospect for all but the most committed. WW can't claim to be any more effective than other diets considering that it is far more expensive than a book. So the fact that they're clinging to out-dated and disproven dietary strategies is sort of baffling.

Melia

Temple_Grandin wrote: »

I agree that having accountability is probably the most powerful aspect of the WW plan. You just don't get the same thing out of an online food diary as you do with a face to face meeting. There is actually no alternative for face to face weight loss groups, maybe overeaters anonymous but I don't think most people want or even need to focus solely on psychological intervention. There is this thing called TOPS in the US that is non-diet specific. So you pick your own plan and then just go along for support and weighing, which would be great to have over here.

I actually know a low carber that secretly goes to WW meetings each week for support and accountability. She pretends to follow the plan but ignores the diet advice and does her own thing (the leader is very happy with her amazing rate of weight loss too ).

Haha! That's funny. TOPS sounds great.

Temple_Grandin wrote: »

The two in a thousand rate is actually quite accurate considering that most diet plans have around this rate of long term success. We live in a very toxic food environment so regain is a very likely prospect for all but the most committed. WW can't claim to be any more effective than other diets considering that it is far more expensive than a book. So the fact that they're clinging to out-dated and disproven dietary strategies is sort of baffling.

The statistics on long-term success of diets are fairly depressing. It really discourages me if I'm in the wrong frame of mind. I wonder where they actually come from? Must do some Googling.

Hopefully I have an advantage though, in that I've done this over a long period, and completely changed my lifestyle. I have no intentions of going back to the way I was. I've also taken up regular exercise and am enjoying it. I think weight loss is the easy part - maintenance is going to be the real test.

I've heard a bit about the body having natural set points, which don't reset when you lose a lot of weight, so your body constantly tries to put on weight till you get back to your set point again. I wonder how true that is? I don't have a huge appetite now. If I were to stop monitoring my diet and eat naturally, I'm sure I'd put on a few pounds but I wouldn't be going crazy eating all the time - I'm quite satisfied with what I eat. I'm certainly never starving.

I'd say it'll take a long while for WW to update their system, considering that the traditional food pyramid is still promoted by the government and by the health system. I mentioned my weight loss to my doctor the last time I was in and got handed a copy of it!

shipwreck

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1258913/Happy-1st-birthday-Mother-keeps-McDonalds-Happy-Meal-year--gone-off.html


This is why McDonalds is not a good choice for anyone.......gross......I think it will make anyone think twice about McDonalds!

jonfisher

mcdonalds is fine as long as you know the calorie count of whatever you eat, which can be quite high relative to how much it fills you.

a lot of food nazis here, i regularly eat mcdonalds 3 chicken selects, which is 400 calories.

Sapsorrow

jonfisher wrote: »

mcdonalds is fine as long as you know the calorie count of whatever you eat, which can be quite high relative to how much it fills you.

a lot of food nazis here, i regularly eat mcdonalds 3 chicken selects, which is 400 calories.

You know there's more to food that the calorie content right? Like the actual physical and chemical composition of the food and it's components? Your viewpoint is ridiculously over simplified, food exerts an influence on weight gain, loss, satiety and cravings above and beyond the actual caloric impact and I for one think that it is these subtle biochemical effects that determine whether someone is obese or slim more so than how many calories they consume. First law of thermodynamics (calories in = calories out) is a load of rubbish, humans aren't a closed system for a start.

Getwellsoon

I think one of the main problems with WW is that it tells you that these certain foods are OK to eat - that you CAN eat absolute crap as long as you don't go over points. This is why when people reach their goals they feel like they can stop their dieting, and even though they don't go crazy eating loads again, they still continue to eat this crap without pointing it any more, so the weight does very very gradually creep back on again!

I think WW should put more emphasis on eating healthier and exercising more. I've seen some people's food diaries and I'm quite shocked at the amount of processed sugary crap they eat while on WW. When they reach their goals, if they get bored of pointing and of keeping up the exercise they are going to pile the weight on again if they keep eating this type of crap without adhering strictly to their pointing system. I do like to treat myself to unhealthy things every now and again, but I could not imagine a "diet" consisting mainly of this type of food. It's plain to see that it's not healthy!

I just think that WW is an accessible way for the average person to lose some weight, but if you are into it for the long term (for health AND for staying slim) then I really think you need to ignore most of their advice and just accept the fact that you're going to have to eat good, clean, healthy and unprocessed foods for the most part of your diet and exercise as much as you can!

I heard that WW used to do a "no points" diet, where you could eat as much as you want of "no points" food (mostly fruit, veg, lean meat, unprocessed foods). I heard from someone that they have got rid of this diet!! It seems an insane thing to do?!! This was probably the best thing that they did! It seems like now, all they want to do is make money from their books, gadgets and their food products - so they've kept the pointing system as their diet so they can sell their things to their customers. Maybe in their eyes they were not making enough money from the "no points" diet, because they couldn't sell their canned/frozen/chilled food to these people?

shipwreck

Well said GWS...Ive picked some of those weighwatchers foods and at the ingredients and they are filled with pure filth!
Im off the opinion that if you cant find the ingredient in you own cupboard then you shouldnt eat it! Same goes if you dont understand what an ingredient is!! DONT eat it!

Clean and simple is how is what your diet consists of....but I agree that some treats are allowable and the odd time I give myself a treat!

Weightwatchers are a racket, they may even contribute to the obesity crisis! We all know how to lose weight, eat unprocessed food and exercise but unfortunately walk into any food store and you are bombarded with junk.

We need to be re-wired!

metamorphosis

I looked at the ingredients of my housemates ww snack - some chocolate bar thing. It had ingredient list the size of mt. everest.

Really all you need for a nice good chocolate snack is some dark choc. at most 3-4 ingredients and it grows on you.

Don't get me started at the prive of these ww products either ...