PDA

View Full Version : worst diet Iver ever seen (weight watchers)



basix
03-15-2006, 11:38 PM
This is from another forum I post on and couldnt believe it

http://www.bluelight.ru/vb/showthread.php?t=245518

The poster had just started wright watchers and the diet that she believes will lose her weight is just disturbing.

Some examples-

Morning


1 slice bread
2

4 cup black coffee
.5

3 Tbsp butter
9

4 Tbsp half-and-half cream
2


Subtotal 13.5


Midday


2 cup mixed baby greens
0

3 cup water
0

2 Tbsp creamy salad dressing
4


Subtotal 4


Evening

None

Morning


4 tsp sugar
1.5

1 cup ready-to-eat frosted cereal
3

1 cup 2% reduced fat milk
3

4 cup black coffee
.5

4 Tbsp half-and-half cream
2


Subtotal 10


Midday


4 tsp sugar
1.5

4 cup black coffee
.5

4 Tbsp half-and-half cream
2

1 serving Spinach Pie - Greek Spanakopita
4


Subtotal 8


Evening



Nothing but sugar, butter, cream, high gi carbs and a few lettuce leaves, and regularly skipping meals.

Im not sure whether to laugh or cry.

brickt.
03-15-2006, 11:51 PM
Weight watchers is for normal people. Normal people only want the scale to show a lesser number, they don't care what kind of tissue is lost to get there.

That being said, she's doing better than 99% of the American or Australian population.

Eszekial
03-16-2006, 12:12 AM
that diet is amazingly lacking in nutrition...

I'm not sure i would consider that better then being fat.

Built
03-16-2006, 12:34 AM
A friend of mine on another board worked this out for me - a comparison of what weight watchers would give me, vs what my cutter was giving me.

**************************************
The following is a discussion of WW vs. my current cutter, and a comparison of the two approaches. Note that the suggested WW diet is actually higher in calories than I would probably be allowed, and does account for my activity level.


I really don't like the WW approach - rather than having you manipulate the actual macronutrients involved, they've created a made-up "points" system, and I think it's misleading and puts too much emphasis on portion control and ratios, which really are COMPLETELY MEANINGLESS. There is NO reason to eat low carb, or low fat, or to limit the ratio of protein to fat. None. It just comes down to your comfort levels. I can't control my appetite on lower fat, so I don't do it. Some are fine, so they do. Totally up to the individual.



Just because I was curious, I added up how many "points" your food was from yesterday and you ate 45 points. WOW that surprised me cause everything you ate was so healthy. I mean even the chocolate was low cal.



What does 45 points mean? Is this "good" or "bad"?



Well before my BLC/Fitday education, and just going off of WW this would be bad.
At your body weight your points per day should be 20 points. and then you would get additional points for exercise (probably 3-4 points).
That's why I was saying WOW cause its so many points, but all healthy points, and it’s below what your maintenance cals should be according to you.
It was really an eye opener for me regarding what you've been saying about the cals/protein. And why I'm going to continue to post on Fitday.



Hmmm. My feeling about WW was that the cals were WAY too low. This confirms my suspicions.
Interesting.
According to WW, could you design a diet for me? I'd be interested to compare it. I'll even post it up so people can do their own assessment of it.



You got it. … It'll be fun to see how much you wouldn't be able to eat.



Considering I'm losing weight on my current paradigm, yes, it will be FASCINATING.
I'm very much looking forward to it.
Please work it out in "points" and in "grams of protein, carbs, fat, and calories". We need to see how it compares.



OK finally finished
The menu is:
BF: 3-4" strawberry pancakes w/1/2c sugar free syrup
SN: 1c cherries
LU: southwest vegetable Caesar salad
DI: chicken breast w/Alfredo vegetable sauce
SN: 15 baby carrots, 1 cup of low fat cottage cheese
27 points. This would be for someone who is allowed 24 points and earns 3 activity points a day.
This is what Fitday says it is:
Total: 1301
Fat: 24 216 16%
..Sat: 4 40 3%
..Poly: 6 53 4%
..Mono: 3 24 2%
Carbs: 189 678 51%
..Fiber: 19 0 0%
Protein: 110 439 33%



That is AWESOME. Holy CRAP the fats are insanely low. And the calories!
Can I post this up as an A:B comparison (ww vs bodybuilder diet) in the open forum, and say you did the honours for me?
I would like for people to see this.
How did you make the determination of 24 points, by the way?



Sure no problem with you showing the difference.
The points are based on how much a person weighs.
With your weight (below 150) you’re allowed 20 points.
(151-174 gets 22 points, between 175-200 gets 24 points)
I don't have my WW stuff with me today, so I can't tell you exactly off hand how the exercise points are determined regarding weight/longevity etc. I have a little slider that I usually use. Again it's mainly based on the person’s weight. With my WOs that take 1 hour I earn 3 points. Since your weight is lower at the same time as mine you would probably only earn 1-2 points.




For the purpose of comparison, my average macronutrients over that month of my cutter worked out as follows:
Built’s cutter: Average for May 2005
Total: 1979 (45 WW points)
Fat: 84 758 39%
..Sat: 23 208 11%
..Poly: 14 130 7%
..Mono: 30 273 14%
Carbs: 122 405 21%
..Fiber: 20 0 0%
Protein: 190 761 40%
******************************
Suggested Weight Watcher’s diet (20 points for my weight, 3 for my activity, and another 4 because my friend was being generous …)

WW DIET
Total: 1301 (27 WW points)
Fat: 24 216 16%
..Sat: 4 40 3%
..Poly: 6 53 4%
..Mono: 3 24 2%
Carbs: 189 678 51%
..Fiber: 19 0 0%
Protein: 110 439 33%

Note that my fiber is actually higher than WW, my protein is almost double, my calories are 52% higher, my fats are more than triple the WW fats, and even with all these extra calories, my carbs are only about 2/3 of those afforded me on the 1301 WW calories.

I would be CHEWING MY ARM OFF.

Davidelmo
03-16-2006, 05:31 AM
^^LOL

That diet is pathetic. Frosted cereal... I mean wtf?! What kind of place does that serve in a diet of ANYONE trying to lose weight?

I don't even think it's about normal vs bodybuilder diet. Half of it is common sense. You can't eat sugar and leaves and hope to accomplish anything.

She'd be better off including some meat, getting some protein, cutting out the goddamm frosted cereal.. arghhhhhh

ShockBoxer
03-16-2006, 07:21 AM
^^LOL

That diet is pathetic. Frosted cereal... I mean wtf?! What kind of place does that serve in a diet of ANYONE trying to lose weight?

I don't even think it's about normal vs bodybuilder diet. Half of it is common sense. You can't eat sugar and leaves and hope to accomplish anything.

She'd be better off including some meat, getting some protein, cutting out the goddamm frosted cereal.. arghhhhhh

*sniffle* But... but... I like frosted cereal and I lost 37 pounds last year eating it.

Holto
03-16-2006, 09:03 AM
*sniffle* But... but... I like frosted cereal and I lost 37 pounds last year eating it.

Yep. Me too. Organic frosted flakes that use cane sugar.

You only require one thing for weight loss. A calorie deficit.

The13ig13adWolf
03-16-2006, 09:19 AM
women never cease to amaze me with the lengths they'll go to lose weight without doing any research whatsoever as to what's healthy and the right way to diet. wonder what her training looks like...3-5lb pink DBs with hundreds of reps per 32 exercises and 2 hours on the treadmill. loads of fun :bang:

ddegroff
03-16-2006, 10:10 AM
wow thats crazy Built! thanks, thats some good info. WW for me would be 24pts hahahaha. I would die. I can see the concept of WW less cals but thats way way to few cals. I guess its meant for the average joe, but I don't think this would even work for the avg joe. My ex-roommate's ex-girlfriend was on WW, he had all this left over food from her that had pieces of paper taped to them that had points (ie. can of tuna = 2pts). Seems like so much more work than following fitday.

Slim Schaedle
03-16-2006, 10:30 AM
^^LOL

That diet is pathetic. Frosted cereal... I mean wtf?! What kind of place does that serve in a diet of ANYONE trying to lose weight?

I don't even think it's about normal vs bodybuilder diet. Half of it is common sense. You can't eat sugar and leaves and hope to accomplish anything.

She'd be better off including some meat, getting some protein, cutting out the goddamm frosted cereal.. arghhhhhh
Frosted cereal, or sugar, may not be the ideal choice for some, but it is certainly not life or death.

People freak out about sugar too much imo. (I am not advocating including heaps of it in a diet)

As far as eating sugar and leaves, one could certainly accomplish their goals, depending on what they are and other variables.

superhombre2k
03-16-2006, 12:06 PM
Built, I'm wondering if maybe LBM has something to do with it. The average person trying to lose weight probably doesn't have nearly as much of that meaty stuff that you do and it would probably be "ok" for them to follow WW. I know when my girlfriend did WW, I made sure she was emphasizing lean protein sources every meal and she actually did pretty well with it. Trying to figure out the points for everything was a total pain in the ass though, and she just started eating healthy foods in small amounts every few hours like I do (although I am OCD about calories, macros, etc. like anyone here would be). That worked a lot better for her although she doesn't lose the weight nearly as quickly as she wants.

Geeper
03-16-2006, 12:22 PM
My wife constantly reminds me that WE (BB'er) are NOT the average person out there. I'll be looking at some "health" food and complaining that there's very little protein in it or something and she'll have to stop me and remind me not everyone is lifting weights or doing cardio everyday. I have family doing WW and I was tearing up the diet as well, but again, she stopped me and told me to really think about who I was talking about, 2 obese women who do absolutely no activity, nothing. Them starting on a point system and actually starting to realize what they where eating and how much they were eating is a good thing. It's easy to slam it, but not everyone has the same goals as us. We're freaks remember... I mean how many women do you know who look like Built?... Ahhhh...... one....

Built
03-16-2006, 01:22 PM
Built, I'm wondering if maybe LBM has something to do with it.

According to DEXA, I have somewhere between 110-115 lbs of LBM.

That ain't a TON. I MIGHT have put on 15-20 lbs of LBM in the last almost five years since I started lifting. At 50 calories per pound, that means I MIGHT be burning off a WHOPPING extra 200 calories a day from my *massivly* muscular frame. ::)

I had considered this too, but consider this: if I only had 100 lbs of LBM on my frame, wouldn't I be EXTRA careful to try to maintain that muscle? Going super low on calories and protein would only make me become even LESS muscular.

Having done this in the past myself (I dieted on a 1200-calorie low-fat, low-protein diet while doing heavy-duty cardio classes 5 days a week when I first started getting fat about 20 years ago), I can tell you it's a recipe for future failure.

And horribly uncomfortable to do, as an added "perk".


The average person trying to lose weight probably doesn't have nearly as much of that meaty stuff that you do and it would probably be "ok" for them to follow WW. I know when my girlfriend did WW, I made sure she was emphasizing lean protein sources every meal and she actually did pretty well with it.
She'll lose weight - no ifs, ands or buts. But she'll lose muscle, too.



Trying to figure out the points for everything was a total pain in the ass though, and she just started eating healthy foods in small amounts every few hours like I do (although I am OCD about calories, macros, etc. like anyone here would be). That worked a lot better for her although she doesn't lose the weight nearly as quickly as she wants.

Figuring out points - bah. Just track on fitday and you KNOW what you're eating, instead of some made-up system for "portion control".

ddegroff
03-16-2006, 01:51 PM
^^my girlfriend had a trainer, that would have her doing tons of cardio and all that jazz. She looked good but could have been in better shape. Then she moved back by me and started doing what I told her (lift heavy, diet etc). Now she looks amazing...

so i'll go with the formula around here over any diet out there on the market.

brickt.
03-16-2006, 04:16 PM
My wife constantly reminds me that WE (BB'er) are NOT the average person out there. I'll be looking at some "health" food and complaining that there's very little protein in it or something and she'll have to stop me and remind me not everyone is lifting weights or doing cardio everyday. I have family doing WW and I was tearing up the diet as well, but again, she stopped me and told me to really think about who I was talking about, 2 obese women who do absolutely no activity, nothing. Them starting on a point system and actually starting to realize what they where eating and how much they were eating is a good thing. It's easy to slam it, but not everyone has the same goals as us. We're freaks remember... I mean how many women do you know who look like Built?... Ahhhh...... one....

Quoted for the MF'n truth.

basix
03-16-2006, 09:55 PM
I dont have a problem with weight watchers at all, I think it serves a good purpose and if it can help people who couldnt otherwise lose the weight, then it's a good thing.

My only point was just how stupid this particular diet is. having 4 cups of cofee, all with sugar,4 tbs cream, a slice of bread, 4 tbs of butter some lettuce leaves with creamy dressing, then nothing for the remainder of the day Is just insane.

And I think any weight loss will be put straight back on 2X if you don't learn any healthy eating habits while on this "diet"

sCaRz*Of*PaiN
03-17-2006, 01:35 AM
That sounds incredibly unhealthy. You're an eye-opener to people Built (in more ways than one ;)).

brickt.
03-17-2006, 02:02 AM
For a sedentary middle aged woman who doesnt care about muscle loss, only wants to be 'smaller,' WW is a great start to a better diet/lifestyle, given that they fill it with good foods, not coffee, cream and bread.

However, WW does put me off in that fact that it's ultra low fat. If I were to tailor a 1200 cal diety for a non-lifting, sedentary middle aged woman, I'd probably go

P: 75g
C: 125g
F: 55g
1200cal

This would provide them with enough protein/carbs for a Cereal/Milk/Fruit Breakfast, Tuna/Salad Lunch, Lean Beef/Chicken/Salmon/Vegies dinner. Snacks in between would be nuts etc or a protein bar. If any cals were left over for the day, they could have a scoop of lowfat ice cream or something.

Davidelmo
03-17-2006, 07:42 AM
Frosted cereal, or sugar, may not be the ideal choice for some, but it is certainly not life or death.

People freak out about sugar too much imo. (I am not advocating including heaps of it in a diet)

As far as eating sugar and leaves, one could certainly accomplish their goals, depending on what they are and other variables.


Yup, I do agree. It's not life or death but we both know that there are MUCH MUCH better alternatives for someone trying to lose weight. Calorie deficit is more important but the macros of those calories DO matter.

Jordanbcool
03-17-2006, 09:00 AM
For a sedentary middle aged woman who doesnt care about muscle loss, only wants to be 'smaller,' WW is a great start to a better diet/lifestyle, given that they fill it with good foods, not coffee, cream and bread.

Its sad because this is a huge reason why america is obese these days. If they'd just understand the basic facts of weight loss they'd be so much more healthy. This is why when people stop dieting they gain the weight 10 fold. They decrease their muscle mass while starving their body.

They should call it the fat diet. I seriously think that would be much more appropriate.

-jordan

ShockBoxer
03-17-2006, 04:00 PM
Calorie deficit is more important but the macros of those calories DO matter.

Why?

If energy expended is greater than your energy intake why should it matter if you hit your target calories doing nothing more than eating teaspoons of tablesugar (100% carb diet), drinking olive oil straight (100% fat diet), or eating whey by the scoop straight out of the vat (95% protein diet)?

Dying of malnutrition aside... why?