Weight Watchers ProPoints plan – what’s it all about?
Weight Watchers put out a press release “embargoed to 1st November 2010″. The press release that I saw had two pages – each page looked like it was designed to fold into a two sided postcard. One page was called “The SCIENCE behind the Weight Watchers ProPoints Plan” and the other was called “The Weight Watchers ProPoints plan EXPLAINED. I’ll refer to them as the SCIENCE PAGE and the PROPOINTS PLAN EXPLAINED PAGE below…
THE SCIENCE PAGE
The science page essentially says “Calories have been around for nearly 200 years”. The science page notes that the work was developed in the late 1800′s by a chemist called Atwater. Wilbur Atwater was also working with Max Rubner and, between them, they developed the first calorimeter and established that the approximate calorie content of carbohydrate, protein and fat was 4, 4 and 9 respectively. If I share at this stage that, in Rubner’s publication in 1901 (Note 1), carbohydrate, protein and fat were estimated to have 4.1, 4.1 and 9.3 calories per gram respectively – you can see that this has never been a precise science. (Rubner recorded the calorific value for olive oil as 9.4, so even his 9.3 was an average of four fats reviewed).
ProPoints seems to be about taking on board the fact that carbohydrate, protein and fat require different amounts of energy to be turned into energy by the body. Weight Watchers may think they are leading the way with this ‘new’ science, but they are playing catch up. Indeed on Radio 4 this am, Weight Watchers company dietitian Zoe Hellman opened by saying the science has been there for 10-15 years. Here is my take on the SCIENCE page:
1) The science on carbohydrate, fat and protein being different is right – the obesity world has known this for almost a decade (not 10-15 years). (It’s quite fun to see Weight Watchers acknowledge this, as dieticians have been saying “a calorie is a calorie” since time began and this proves that it isn’t!) Here’s an extract from p23 of my book:
“…Eric Jequier, who works in the Institute of Physiology, University of Lausanne, Switzerland found that the thermic effect of nutrients (thermogenesis – energy used up in making useable energy) is approximately 6-8% for carbohydrate, 2-3% for fat and 25-30% for protein (Note 3). I.e. approximately 6-8% of the calories consumed in the form of carbohydrate are used up in digesting the carbohydrate and turning it into fuel available to be used by the body. In contrast, 25-30% of the calories consumed in the form of protein are used up in digesting the protein and turning it into fuel available to be used by the body…
Richard Feinman and Eugene Fine, a biochemist and a nuclear physicist respectively, have done some outstanding research in the area of thermodynamics and metabolic advantage of different diet compositions (Note 4). In their 2004 paper, they took Jequier’s mid points (7% for carbohydrate, 2.5% for fat and 27.5% for protein) and applied these to a 2,000 calorie diet comprising 55:30:15 proportions of carbohydrate:fat:protein. This demonstrated that 2,000 calories yielded 1,848 calories available for energy. I repeated the calculation for a 10:30:60 high protein diet, as another example, and the yield drops to 1,641 calories.”
Dr. Geoffrey Livesey has been another great pioneer in this area. He has estimated that fat has 8.7 calories per gram. Back in 2002, the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) assembled an international group of nutritionists, including Livesey, to investigate the possibility of recommending a change to food labelling standards to update the four, four and nine calories attributed to carbohydrate, protein and fat respectively (Note 2). The group, with the exception of Livesey, decided to stick with the long-standing values because, the report concluded, “the problems and burdens ensuing from such a change would appear to outweigh by far the benefits”. I would have supported Livesey, but with the recommendation that he go way further and challenge the entire application of these estimates.
To put this idea of thermogenesis (energy used up in making available energy) in simple terms – let us say that we eat 100 calories of, say, banana – the Jequier work tells us that 92-94 calories may be available to the body. Eat 100 calories of, say, white fish (a close approximate to protein) and only 70-75 calories may be available to the body. The body effectively has a 25% advantage if trying to get energy from protein vs. carbohydrate. However…
a) We should not use this as a plan to eat an unnaturally high protein diet as this can deplete the body of vitamin A and damage the liver. We need to eat real food in the natural fat/protein balance that nature provides;
b) This assumes that the body will try to use protein for energy and it likely won’t. There are an estimated 1,500 calories needed for the basal metabolic rate for an average woman and these ‘body maintenance’ calories need to come in the form of fat, protein, vitamins and minerals – things that the body can use for building bones density, cell repair, fighting infection and generally keeping us alive. The good news is – eat good calories in the form of real food (meat, fish, eggs, dairy products, veg/salad, nuts/seeds) and the body can use these as part of the 1,500 calorie planned maintenance for the day. Eat 400 calories of sugar (no fat, protein, vitamins or minerals) as the average Briton does and the body can’t use these for basic needs. Then you have to burn these off with activity, or they can be stored as fat.
2) On this SCIENCE sheet – bottom section – we find the words: “this helps to create an energy deficit which is fundamental for successful weight loss.” I disagree. We can only lose weight (break down triglyceride, which is what human fat tissue is) when the body has no option but to break down triglyceride. This can only happen when there is no glucose or glycogen (the body’s storage form of glucose) available in the body. Eat 3,000 calories of pure meat and fish (zero carbohydrate and therefore no glucose or insulin to store fat) and a person will lose weight. Eat 3,000 calories of sugar, white flour and processed carbohydrate and the same person will gain weight.
Weight Watchers are still calorie counting – they are still obsessed with creating a calorie deficit (and – as we will see below – they still believe the fundamental calorie myth that it’s all to do with 3,500 calories and one pound of fat).
3) Finally, the bottom section of the science page states “filling and healthy foods are also great choices for healthy weight loss, as they are nutritionally superior, being higher in fibre and/or lower in salt, sugar and saturated fat.” I disagree. Nutrition is about what is IN a food as much as what is NOT in a food. The nutritious macro nutrients are fat and protein (carbs just provide energy and we can get that from fat – eaten or stored – as well). The micro nutrients are vitamins and minerals and the levels of these define how nutritious a product is. The most nutritious foods on the planet are liver, sardines, eggs, milk and sunflower seeds, They all contain no sugar (sucrose) whatsoever, but they also contain no fibre. They do contain plenty of excellent saturated and unsaturated fat. Fat is our friend! It is only the enemy of calorie counters. It contains the essential fats and the fat soluble vitamins, A, D, E and K.
Are Weight Watchers saying that ProPoints will be all about eating real food and only real food? Only eat what nature intended us to eat? Check out their food products page and I think the answer will be no. The ingredients in these products are horrific. One features on my web site list of my least favourite products – check out the number and the nature of the ingredients in the Weight Watchers Double Chocolate Brownie!
Don’t talk to us about nutrition Weight Watchers until you are prepared to ditch all your processed foods and tell us to eat as nature intended instead.
THE PROPOINTS PLAN EXPLAINED PAGE
This doesn’t actually explain ProPoints very well at all. Maybe the idea is that you need to pay to attend a Weight Watchers meeting or pay to find out more on-line so that they can tell you as a paying person. The page says that ProPoints is new, “very different” and “takes into account the amount of protein, carbohydrate, fat and fibre in a given portion. The result is a more accurate nutritional approach.”
I was on BBC Radio Wales with Ms Hellman this morning and she said that the calorie labels on foods are not accurate. I can imagine quite a few calorie counters not being happy about that!
The minimum daily ProPoints allowance is going to be 29. Call me cynical, but we all currently know that 1 Weight Watcher point is c. 50 calories. We don’t actually need Weight Watchers if we can count to 1,000 – if we can only count to 20 (units of c. 50) we may need them. Maybe Weight Watchers have realised this and want a number that can’t easily be converted so I’ll be interested in the ‘conversion’ of ProPoints to calories. People will be looking for a similar conversion going forward – calorie counters count calories at the end of the day!
In addition to the daily allowance, everyone is given an additional 49 ProPoints as a weekly allowance to use however they choose. Weight Watchers will no doubt hope you’ll be using them on their chocolate brownies and other processed food.
On the bottom part of the “explanation” page you can see the 3,500 calorie theory “the plan is designed to lead to a healthy and sustainable weight loss of up to 2lbs a week.” That can only come from one place – Weight Watchers believe that one pound of fat equals 3,500 calories (it doesn’t) and that, if you create a deficit of 3,500 calories you will lose 1lb of fat (you won’t). i.e. if you cut back by 1000 calories a day you will lose 2lbs a week (and I would be 6lbs in a year’s time – yeah right!) (All of this is covered extensively in my latest book: The Obesity Epidemic.
Zoe Hellman, Weight Watchers company dietician, is quoted on the top part of this page. On this link , Zoe Hellman is quoted as saying: “One pound of fat contains 3,500 calories. To lose 1lb a week you would need to cut out 3,500 calories from your overall weekly nutritional requirements, this equates to needing a deficit of 500 calories a day.” (Point 6). I blow all of this apart in chapter 7 in the book. (I emailed Zoe Hellman about this on 6 April 2010 but she never replied).
There is also a note on this EXPLANATION page about fruit being ‘free’. It won’t count as part of the ProPoints allowance. I find this astonishing. Most calorie counters I know binge on fruit – they can eat a pound of grapes and/or 6-8 apples a day with no problem. Allowing people to eat as much fruit as they want whenever they want is going to have ProPoint dieters full of fructose and glucose all day long and make it impossible for them to be in a fat burning mode. Plus, fructose (see chapter 13 of my book) is now called “the lipogenic (fattening) carbohydrate” in the obesity world. Fructose goes straight to the liver to be metabolised – where it can be turned into fat if insulin is present. Insulin is present whenever we eat a carb (like fruit) and hence fruit – especially fruits with lots of glucose like bananas – can turn the body into a wonderful fat storing machine.
In this paragraph about fruit, Zoe Hellman refers to five-a-day as if it is a scientific principle in the top part of this “explanation” page. “We’ve made it easier than ever before to take in your five a day”, she says. This is not science. In Chapter 13 of The Obesity Epidemic I give the background to give-a-day. It started as a marketing campaign by fruit and veg companies in California in 1991, working with the American National Cancer Institute (NCI) (who have since trademarked the term). There was no evidence at the time that it would provide any benefit for cancer, let alone any other health condition. There has been none since (see the April 2010 a study in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute written by Paolo Boffetta, as the lead of a large group of European researchers).
Vegetables in butter are nutritionally useful (not as good as liver, sardines or eggs) but fruit is not that nutritious, too high in sugar, metabolised by the liver and best avoided by anyone needing to lose weight. Five-a-day is marketing, not science.
THE BOTTOM LINE
As Stunkard and McLaren-Hume proved in 1959 (Note 5): “Most obese persons will not stay in treatment for obesity. Of those who stay in treatment, most will not lose weight, and of those who do lose weight, most will regain it.” Stunkard and McLaren-Hume’s own statistical study showed that only 12% of obese patients lost 20 pounds, despite having stones to lose, only one person in 100 lost 40 pounds and, two years later, only 2% of patients had maintained a 20 pound weight loss. This is where the often quoted “98% of diets fail” derives from and it refers to calorie controlled diets. The 2007 Franz study updated the research on this topic and concluded the same – a fraction of the weight we expect to lose is lost and most of that is regained. There is simply no evidence in the obesity journal world of calorie restriction producing sustained weight loss.
Here’s another extract from p68 of my book where Weight Watchers themselves prove that people will lose a fraction of what they expect…
“On July 12 2010, under the headline “Weight Watchers does work, say scientists”, Sarah Boseley, health editor for The Guardian wrote a wonderful endorsement for Weight Watchers following a study done by the Medical Research Council (MRC), funded by Weight Watchers (Note 6). The original presentation of results from the MRC revealed that 772 people were studied: 395 people were simply given weight loss advice from their doctor (the GP group) and 377 were funded to attend Weight Watchers (419 of the 772 completed their respective programme). The study was a year in length and the likely deficit was at least 1,000 calories per day (a typical Weight Watchers allowance is 18-20 points, which approximates to 900-1,000 calories vs. an average 2,000 calorie requirement for a woman). The article reported that the GP group lost an average of six pounds (we know from the Franz study that ‘advice alone’ people did well to lose anything) and the Weight Watchers group lost an average of 11 pounds. The Weight Watchers group should have lost 104 pounds in fat alone. This study provided irrefutable proof that the calorie theory is wrong, which should have been front page news in itself, but this was not the story of the article. The story was “you’ll lose twice as much weight with Weight Watchers.” The headline should more accurately have been “Weight Watchers works better than just going to the GP, says study funded by Weight Watchers; but you will be lucky to lose one tenth of your lowest expectation.” Not as catchy, but far more honest.”
At the end of the day, it doesn’t matter if Weight Watchers make a slight adjustment to the idea that protein is 4 calories per gram or that carbohydrate is 4 calories per gram. It doesn’t really matter what calorie number we assign to each food. Counting/restricting calories does not work – and we have known this since Benedict’s study in 1917. If calorie restriction did work, we would not have an obesity problem, let alone an epidemic.
p.s. Jan 2011 update – please note that I am sadly simply unable to keep up with comments on blogs/youtube/facebook and all the wonders of the web. Please feel free to leave a comment to have your say & for others to read. If you have any questions our forum is the best place to have them answered. Your question may well have been answered already so you can read the thousands of questions already there if you don’t want to join. Many thanks for your understanding. Very best wishes – Zoe
Note 1: Max Rubner, “Zeitschrift fur Biologie,” Festschrift zu Voit, (1901).
Note 2: Dr. Geoffrey Livesey, “The Calorie Delusion: Why food labels are wrong”, New Scientist, (15 July 2009).
Note 3: Eric Jequier, “Pathways to Obesity”, International Journal of Obesity, (2002).
Note 4: Richard Feinman and Eugene Fine, “A calorie is a calorie violates the second law of thermodynamics”, Nutritional Journal, (2004).
Note 5: Stunkard A. and M. McLaren-Hume, “The results of treatment for obesity: a review of the literature and report of a series”, Archives of Internal Medicine, (1959).
Note 6: http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2010/jul/12/weight-watchers-works-say-scientists
http://www.mrc-bsu.cam.ac.uk/BSUsite/CHTMR/AM_forweb.pdf
106 Responses to “Weight Watchers ProPoints plan – what’s it all about?”
Comments
Read below or add a comment...
Please feel free to leave a comment. For personal diet & health questions, please visit The Harcombe Diet Club Forum.
Keep in touch
My Books
Can't wait for the post? Full versions of all books are available as instant downloads.
Instant access now >> Click here for more info
Intermittent Fasting. Free Special Report. Get the facts behind the claims.
This is a free eBook for you to enjoy and to share freely with friends and colleagues.
Hi there – I’ve edited my previous comment to avoid confusion. I was ‘just’ a veggie – I always consumed milk and eggs – sorry for mixing up the lacto and ovo lacto! Hence why veggie always worked for me!
Another option – not in the Stop Counting Cals book – is to have porridge oats with water instead of part of the veggie brown rice allowance (swap gram for gram). This gives you a breakfast option – NLY, as you’ve worked out, being the other one. There is also brown rice cereal (out of the allowance again), which is best eaten dry anyway.
Well done so far! What a difference processed food avoidance makes eh?!
Do check out our club – http://www.theharcombedietclub.com – loads of lovely, friendly people in to help with queries and offer support all day long
Best wishes – Zoe
I’ve been doing WW since April and have lost 10 pounds. I’m plateuing a bit now, but it is working to at least keep the 10 pounds off.
Weight Watchers does have an alternative plan that sounds a lot like what you are proposing. It’s called Simply Filling.
Low-fat meat, skim milk, olive oil, whole grains and most veggies are on it. I believe also some nuts are, such as raw almonds. The rules are that if you eat carbs, you should eat whole grains, and not for more than 2 servings a day (you can have oatmeal for breakfast, for example).
So the alternative Weight Watchers plan does limit carbs and encourages people to eat more protein. You do get a discretionary budget of points for the week for treats not on the filling food list, but it’s not a lot.
I myself limit processed foods in my diet, cook in bulk on weekends, and eat the leftovers throughout the week (or til I get sick of them and cook something else).
Hi Zoe
I have been following the posts here with interest over the week. Whilst I have no problem with some of your views about food expressed here in these comments, such as avoiding processed food, eating nuts and not eating too many carbohydrates, I think you have to be careful not to give people the impression that they can lose weight by following GI, WW, Zoe Harman or any other guidelines on types of food consumed without taking into account the amount of food consumed on a long term basis.
I think for most people wanting to stay the same weight your ideas are great and healthy, but however you measure it, calories, GI, or whatever the only way to lose weight is to eat less. We don’t need as much food as we think we do. However you cut it that is why I think so many people have a problem (myself included), that the message has got lost somewhere.
Susan
You make some valid points, but your criticism of Weight Watchers indicates a mis-understanding of the program, and of people.
WW absolutley focuses on lean meats/fish, proteins, legumes fruits veggies, water and exercise. It has never been about calories in/out. That is only a small part of the program.
The reason you mis-understand people is– people generally will want a brownie! They will want cookies and cake and chips. That is reality so WW takes that into account and allows for it without making you feel like you have “blown” your diet.
WW does not “encourage” or push over-precessed sweet foods. They simply make their own options available (very tiny part of the program and of meetings), which are to be part of your otherwise well-balanced diet.
I have been on WW for 5 years and am healthy, eat well and exercise and have kept the weight off.
Hi Sofia – Wow! How critical and presumptive and wrong!
Having written a book called “Why do you overeat? When all you want is to be slim” and having researched obesity, food cravings, food addiction and the biochemistry and psychology of eating, dieting and obesity since the age of 15, I know a heck of a lot more about this topic than you belittle and likely more than you do! I truly understand that people want a brownie – because they are addicted to such things and, if they have one, they will want more. Weight Watchers makes money from selling such things, so it is in their interest to allow this as part of a ‘diet’. How can you say WW does not encourage or push these foods when, they advertise the WW chocolate brownie, referred to in this blog, to encourage us to reach for this “Rich chocolate brownie with an indulgent Belgian chocolate & vanilla mousse, oozing chocolate sauce”?
What I am also saying is that the current dietary advice is so far from a well-balanced diet, it is not true. Having analysed each line of the UK National Food Survey for every year since 1974, we consume 1,576 calories a day in the UK from pure processed food. c. 1,100 calories come from just 2 ingredients – flour and sugar. A healthy balanced diet is based on only the food that nature has provided for us to eat – meat & eggs & dairy products from grass grazing animals, fish, vegetables, salads, nuts & seeds, and fruits and whole grains in moderation if you want to manage weight easily and without hunger.
I have been eating real food for 15 years – I would be amazed if I don’t eat twice what you do (my calories have a job to do – none are ‘empty’). I don’t exercise – I’m bursting with energy so I do normal things that a person is designed to do – nothing that requires me to schedule in something ‘unnatural’. If you don’t eat WW products and you do eat the healthiest macro nutrient – fat (not lean meats) – then you may “eat well”. If you avoid fat, eat lean meats and have an unnatural level of protein as a result and eat any processed food, I would beg to differ.
Very best wishes – Zoe
Hi Susan – this is so interesting! I don’t say people need to eat less because I fundamentally believe that this is the last thing that people should do. All the evidence from scientific studies (Benedict 1917, Keys 1945, Stunkard & Hume 1959 and Franz 2007 – to pick out the best spanning almost a century) confirms that eating less does not lead to sustained weight loss. Stunkard & Hume quantified it with the fact I put in the blog – 98% failure rate. I have written entire books on why this happens – the combination of physical and psychological things that happen if we eat less and the dominoes that then fall to virtually guarantee regain and invariably more.
The whole blog above is saying weight isn’t about calories and therefore isn’t about eating less. Weight gained is triglyceride formation and weight loss is triglyceride break down. Both of these are determined by glucose and therefore carbs – not calories. The ultimate irony is that people who try to eat less/cut calories, eat more carbs (because they are lower in calories so you get ‘more bang for the buck’) and they therefore eat more of the macro nutrient (carbs) that causes weight gain!
Don’t eat less – eat better. Eat no empty calories – only real food and manage your carb intake and frequency of carb consumption if you want to lose weight.
Very best wishes – Zoe
Weightwatchers are not a philanthropic institution, they are a commercial company whose bottom line is making a profit. Go to any meeting and the pressure is on to spend money. Apart from collecting your weekly fees there is always a sales table laden with recipe books, point-counting devices and sweet treats. The Pro-points system is simply a new way to make you part with your money. Most people will find it difficult to work out the pro-points value of foods so will purchase a whole new set of recipe books, points calculators and scales.
I maintain that WW does not push or encourage brownies or other similar foods. I go to meetings and have gone for years and have had maybe 6 different leaders. Yes, the products are available but NO leader I have met has every encouraged them.
As a matter of fact, most leaders and WW members will advise that one way to get off a plateau is to cut down on “sugary treats” for a few weeks, that is, not eat the “empty” points and eat cheese with apple, peanut butter or other types of “snacks”.
The availability of WW packaged foods is maybe 1% of the program. Outsiders may not realize that because they see the advertisements, but when you really know the actual plan and go to meetings, read the message boads and talk with others who are on WW you would be amazed at how little of the WW pre-packaged foods any of us eat.
And by the way, WW agrees with you in part — foods that are higher in whole grains than in their caloric-equivalent white flour counterparts, are lower in points. You do not seem to acknowledge that.
I also do not agree that eating a brownie leads to the addiction. In fact, not being able to enjoy youself with a desert after a good dinner once in a while, or at a party, is likely to be a non-sustainable life-style for most.
And, if you are right, and it is “addictive” – so what? I would rather live a life of being able to occasionally have my desert and my wine and my fun.
As for not exercsing– WOW. How any woman over 30 can brag about that is shocking to me. Maybe it is because I am form NY. You may be thin but I doubt you have any definition in your triceps, biceps, calves and a 6-pack for abs. I am 44 and have a better body now than when I was in my 20′s.
I also consume more, not fewer, calories, becasue I run 5 times a week and lift weights 3 times a week. I am a busy professional, yet make time to keep my body healthy and even more important, my mind. Exercise always makes me feel better an releives depression and stress.
Again, you do make some valid points – I do agree in eating “mainly” real foods- but your unfounded extreme position on WW weakens your arguments.
Hi Zoe,
I managed to find what I think is your Franz reference. It looks to me that is exactly what those authors are are saying, they found that reduced energy diet alone and reduced energy diet with exercise led to weight loss whch was sustained to 48 months following a plateau at 6 months followed by a little regain. I have quoted Maron Franz’s team conclusion below. I actually think we agree in part, I think if a person followed your guidelines they would end up taking in less calories and lose weight. But I remain unconvinced me that reducing the energy value of food intake is not crucial to losing weight.
Kind regards
Susan
Their conclusions
“Based on a systematic review of the literature, weight management
completers can expect to lose a modest
amount of weight that will decrease their risk for developing
chronic health problems. Weight-loss interventions
involving attention to food intake—diet alone, diet and
exercise, meal replacements, and weight-loss medications
combined with diet—seem to produce the most encouraging
short-term results. At approximately 6 months,
weight loss begins to plateau across nearly all interventions,
but with continued professional support such as
was provided in the clinical trials, weight loss can be
maintained.”
Franz, M. J. et al (2007)’Weight loss outcomes: A systematic Review and Meta Analysis of Weight Loss Clinical Trials with a minimun 1 yesr follow up.’ Journal of the American Dietetic Association vol = October 2007 pp= 1755-1767.
Hi Susan – I’m not sure if you still need to buy the whole article to see all the detail. The points I make in my recent book are that the calorie theory promises a weight loss of 1lb for every 3,500 calorie deficit and the Franz study (as does every one before) shows this is massively overstated. I plot the calorie promise in my book on top of the Franz chart and it’s staggering. The conclusion of franz was that people were lucky to be 3-6 kg down if they could be followed all the way through to 48 months. Nick Finer presented this at the Wales National Obesity Forum conference in May and said that (he was involved in this study) the evidence showed that people simply delayed breaking through a further gain marker by a few years.
The amount of weight lost is a fraction of what is promised and expected. The amount kept off is smaller still and most of the people I work with lose, gain back more, lose, gain back more and they are eating less and gaining more over time.
The article also notes “health care professionals and participants often express frustration believing that if a reduced energy intake is maintained (or decreased even further as was done in some studies), weight loss should continue. This appears not to happen… (and) …if weight-loss interventions are discontinued, weight regain is likely to occur.”
Please believe whatever you want – I am only interested in evidence and there is none that calorie restriction is an effective weight loss tool over time for more than a tiny percentage of people – those with the will power of Posh Spice being top of the list!
The only way to convince someone is to repeat the Kekwick & Pawan 1956 experiment (if reading it doesn’t work). They gave patients 2600 calories of fat/protein (zero carb) and they lost weight and then the same patients 2000 calories of carb/protein (protein is in everything other than oils) and they gained weight. You can’t gain weight unless you eat carbs! Give is a go!
Ciao – Zoe
I used to follow WW program some 5 or 6 years ago, didn’t lose a single pound. The food allowance always seemed not enough, and rather than anything else – it made me to overeat on sugary fruit, as fruit had a 0 point value. Although maybe it wasn’t WW’s fault after all, as 1.5 years ago I found out I was hypothyroid. As I suspect – my medical condition was probably the reason why all the other diets I tried over the years didn’t work either. However, the despair caused by constant trying and failing gave me some lovely ‘side efects’ – thinking about food all the time, organising all my life around eating, being obsessed with food, taking my own food to dinner parties, if attending at all. I also became absolutely paranoid about fat – I have eaten low fat for as long as I can remember.
I found out about the Harcombe diet completely randomly, and decided to give it a try – although I am a vegan (for ethical reasons) and trying this eating plan meant changing my eating patterns completely (cutting out carbs).Phase 1 was very hard, but I got through it. I didn’t really seem to have symptoms of any of the 3 medical conditions Zoe is talking about in her book, although I have noticed that my breakfast cereal cravings have stopped (probably intolerance to wheat?) and I have lost some weight too, finally! And phase 2 feels is so much easier to follow, great!
However, I have a few worries too, as the diet doesn’t seem to be easily adjustable to vegan diet. First,it seems that now I am afraid of carbs as much as I was afraid of fats before, trying to limit myself to no more than one carb meal per day (breakfast). I’ve cut out all wheat and rye, basically all carbs I ever eat come from vegetables, fruit, my breakfast oats and some brown rice. Could I be lacking carbs, could it be the reason why I’ve started feeling so tired and sleepy lately?
My other concern is my fat meals – as I don’t eat anything that comes from things with ‘faces’, I am afraid that I might not be getting enough calories. My typical fat meal is a large salad with some avocado and olives and olive oil dressing,
I sometimes eat vegan ‘cheese’ too, although I hardly doubt that it isn’t processed food.. Are there any other vegan fat sources? I think I have been avoiding fat for too long to know.. :)
I would really appreciate it anyone had any advice on this..
Hi Linda – do check out our lovely club - there are more people to help then I can manage so we have lots of helpers! The vegan one is a real problem and it’s a personal choice that only you can make. I was veggie for about 20 years before starting to eat meat and fish again – meat as recently as Good Friday 2010. Having studied nutrition to the point of analysing individual foods for vitamins and minerals ‘for fun’, I came to the realisation that it is called a food chain for a reason and I no longer felt that I could be optimally healthy without eating animals. It was agonising at the time, but I have no regrets since making the choice and feel even better than I did before. The B12 alone for me says that humans are at risk being vegan. The unbeatable nutrients in meat, fish and eggs also convinced me that we have evolved to eat animal products.
It’s entirely your call but my biggest piece of advice would be to soul search your principles and see if your weight and health is more important than abstaining from all animal products. I remember that I wanted to shoot the first nutritionist who suggested that to me over 10 years ago. I wish I had listened to her now, as I worry that I will be suffering osteoporosis in later life as a result of my veggie years. As regards weight, if you avoid the only zero carb foods on the planet (meat and fish are carb free and eggs virtually so) and you eat such a restricted diet as you do now – you are likely to develop the 3 conditions, if you haven’t done so already (your wheat observation would likely have been right). People will be reading this thinking how on earth can a vegan become overweight (I don’t know if you are, but I’m hoping you’re not feeling overweight with a BMI of 20 or something!) and the answer is carbs!
Your avoidance of fat will likely have caused fat soluble vitamin deficiency – the UK average intake is substantially lower than it should be – we are generally suffering malnutrition as a result of our dangerous low fat advice. Rickets was reported at the weekend (Nov 2010) as being evident in one in 5 children. We need milk and eggs for vitamin D. As a vegan, you would need to eat over 2 kg of sunshine grown mushrooms every day to get a minimum recommended intake of vit D. You have no natural way of getting life vital B12. My health is my top priority. Food for thought…
Very best wishes – Zoe
Ms. Harcombe, you write:
‘Eat 3,000 calories of pure meat and fish (zero carbohydrate and therefore no glucose or insulin to store fat) and a person will lose weight. Eat 3,000 calories of sugar, white flour and processed carbohydrate and the same person will gain weight.’
By your ‘calculations,’ vegans would be the size of hippos, which they are not. And vegetarians in general would have to be pushed in wheelbarrows down the street by muscular attendants.
Such silliness wrapped in ‘scientific’ talk about diet.
“I used to follow WW program some 5 or 6 years ago, didn’t lose a single pound. The food allowance always seemed not enough, and rather than anything else – it made me to overeat on sugary fruit, as fruit had a 0 point value.”
Fruit only became points free under the new pro-points program, so that is not correct. At the meeting I attend the message has been repeated again and again that does not mean over eat fruit.
I approached WW as a cycnic, but have had the same experiences. No hard sell and a fixed fee for a program that suits my lifestyle and works for me. One aspect people understimate is the group support. It has been an eye-opener for me.
I have lost 10kg and I eat far more than I used to. Much more fresh veg, wholegrains and fibre than before as well. Everyone to their own and good luck to those wanting to lose weight and eat more healthily, whatever approach they adopt.
It hurts to see someone using it’s scientific background to make appeal to autorithy argument. Who care what you wrote and studied? I know a lot of highly educated individual who believe diffently than you – so what? All that matter is scientific data and empirical evidence. Before the low-carb craze, a lot of people lost weight on high-carb diet. I haven’t look at the paper you cite, but it’s pretty damn sure that it’s self-report, or was it controlled metabolic study, where the food are given in controlled setting? You, as the highly educated individual that you are, must know how worthless self-reported calorie intake are? If not, Anothony Colpo already reviewed all the evidence regarding metabolic study, and Taubes & Eades followers are all wrong. But you are all either too blind or stubborn to admit it.
Low-carb works because 1) it takes out lots of food which are very easy to over-consume, thus drastically reducing caloric intake 2) are higher in protein, that have a higher TEF and satiety, thus, again, reducing caloric intake.
Here is the real tricks that never fail : get a weight, and weight your food. Have a healthy, balanced diet, with a small caloric deficit, ajusting it as you loose weight, with cheating (overconsumption) here and there for psychological and hormonal purpose, and do heavy weight training 2 time a week. Aim for a slow but steady weight loss. and YES, there will be plateau. Keep on though, and it shall start again.
Obviously there is not much money to be done by promoting sometime so simple right? It is much more selling to come off with sometime complexe and “different”, quick, endorse by a MD or a PHD.
I saw you comment on Carbsane blog, you should hang around to educate yourself a bit more. Yes, even PHD can be wrong. You should not be so arrogant and act like you know everything. No one does. Sorry if i’m being rude here, but you need to chill out and open your mind and tell to yourself that you are not God. A little bit of humility and self-critic would help you a long way. I know it’s hard when we have published books and papers, we think we are at the top.
Btw, the Kekwik and Pawan study is rubbish. Eades used it one to prove his points, and Colpo completly destroyed it.
http://anthonycolpo.com/?p=99
“Hi Sofia – Wow! How critical and presumptive and wrong!
Having written a book called “Why do you overeat? When all you want is to be slim” and having researched obesity, food cravings, food addiction and the biochemistry and psychology of eating, dieting and obesity since the age of 15, I know a heck of a lot more about this topic than you belittle and likely more than you do! “
Zoe,
Do you have a source for the basal metabolic rate needing to be met from fat, protein, vitamins and minerals. I’ve read widely about nutrition and this is the first time I’ve read this. It certainly makes ‘sense’ to me but I’d be interested to know if there’s research that confirms it.
This is a great post and I’m a firm believer that it’s not as simple as calories in vs calories out. As a full time athlete I know from experience that no matter how much I exercise if my diet is wrong I put on weight.
Thanks for the work you’re doing to get this message across. Hopefully one day governments will either stop advising us or give the correct advice.
Steven
Hi Steven – I’m sorry but I don’t have a source for that bit other than me! Everything I’ve learned about nutrition has been from reading widely – as you do – and you discover that everything you are taught formally in nutrition courses is wrong (1lb does not equal 3500 cals; you will not lose 1lb if you create a deficit of 3500 cals; fat is life vital – not public enemy number 1; carbs are uniquely fattening – not the things we should be basing our meals on; HDL and LDL are not even cholesterol, let alone good or bad! and more and more.) We would never get away with teaching people that London was the capital of France – how we get away with something so wrong and so important is beyond me.
Barry Groves also talks about useful calories – so I’m not the only person to have worked this out. When you know the role of protein, fat, vitamins and minerals you can see that these calories “have a job to do”. When you review the Kreb’s cycle and see that sugar (and we eat 400 cals of this per avg Brit and American per day) does not even provide energy (we need B vitamins for this and sugar brings no vitamins to the party) – you can see that this is the ultimate empty calorie.
Dieticians are oft heard saying “we need carbohydrates for energy”. a) we need far more calories for BMR than for energy above BMR so we need more of the stuff that helps BMR – fat and protein b) fat is better because it can be used for BMR stuff and/or energy by the body so you’ve got more chance of it being used up and c) – we’re suffering an obesity epidemic! The last thing that 2/3 of the Western world needs is energy – some people are carrying around a year’s supply of the stuff – they need to stop eating carb energy to let their body use its reserves!
Thanks for your nice comment at the end – it will be individuals like us who make the difference. I say exactly what you say above in my last chapter of “The Obesity Epidemic” – governments should give the right advice or shut up – they are really not helping at the moment!
Very best wishes – Zoe
I certainly don’t need carbs for energy. I regularly do 100+ mile rides on a cheese omelette breakfast and then either no food or high fat / protein snacks. Athlete friends take a lot of persuading to not just throw down more sugar when they feel the sugar low but when they just let their body sort itself out the invariably find that they have nice even energy levels. I’ve always taken this to mean their body has switched to fat burning mode and they all have hours (days) worth of that hanging around their body.
I look on carbs as a limited resource I can consume and therefore I need to make them all count by ensuring I get them from sources rich in other stuff (minerals, vitamins etc..)
I’m glad to hear what you say about whats taught is generally wrong. When the penny dropped about nutrition I was keen to try and make a difference so I looked into getting “qualified” but started to believe I would just get taught a load of nonsense. For now I satisfy myself by trying to influence those that I come in to contact with.
I’m now a follower of this blog and will re-tweet relevant stuff.
Thanks
just curious, Zoe, on the new WW plan (PointsPlus) they’re acting like Avocados are the new enemy. Would you have any idea why?
Because WW are fat phobic! The new system has made fruit ‘free’ (which is mad because a) people crave and overeat fruit – women particularly and b) fructose – fruit sugar – is called the fattening carbohydrate in the obesity world in which I work). However, there are only 2 fruits with a fat content – olives and avocados. So they don’t want you eating real healthy fats found in real healthy food – they want you eating sugar, which is what fruit breaks down into. x
Who owns WW?
It was Kraft. They know how to keep addiction alive. Your hooked for life going up and down the scales, and Kraft make money both ways. Stay with real food. No sugar, grains, lubricants or processed food for good results.
I think WW is a franchise model – so each individual franchise is owned. However, find this eye-opening. My sister did weight watchers before her wedding and looked great. I only had like 10 lbs to lose, but I tried it. She encouraged me to go to th meetings. I have read a lot about nutrition for years and knew something was off in the meetings and online. But, I was realy trying to follow the plan. ( I really think she lost the weight cause she started running and wedding stress.)
I actually think I gained a few pounds! Yes, their intention is to make a profit.
Would never do it again. And I 100% agree with yoru fruit post.
I only read a small portion of the above comments. I have tried many diets, calorie counting, eating different and certain kinds of foods on certain days, etc,etc,etc.
I would have thought that people are intelligent enough to realise that what WW does is give you a choice, yes you can eat empty calories or you can spend those points on something substantial and filling. I also found that giving me the oppurtunity to earn some treat/extra points (however you want to look at it) meant that I was much less adverse to the idea of exerise, in fact using a points diet, and not weightwatchers I might add, was my most successful weight loss, and yes I did keep the weight off for some time. My eating habits changed when my family relocated and I turned to food for comfort. Needless to say I will need to follow a diet again now, and I have to be honest, this is the kind I will look to…….if its not broken dont fix it in my opinion!!!!
Wow Zoe…you really stirred up a few hornet nests with your comments on WW.
I can’t help but wonder if this passionate defence of the WW program comes from a bunch of angry sugar addicts trying to justify their need for a ‘fix’.
For a group of now supposedly slim and healthy people many seem to be very aggresive and unhappy.
If WW is so good…why are they reading and commenting on your blog?
Just saying…
Hi Sera – thanks for making me smile – how insightful! I was a queen of calorie counting (gold medal standard when I developed anorexia as a teenager!) – I never wanted to think about managing carbs, as they were the only things I wanted to eat. What was the point of meat, fish, eggs, real yoghurt when I could eat 8 pieces of fruit and a packet of fruit gums instead of a proper meal. I was underfed and undernourished and a miserable food addict. Boy will I never go back there – where’s my full fat cappuccino with cocoa on top?!
Ciao – Zoe
This is hilarious. Criticising WW/kraft for being profit making entities. And you made nothing from your books?!
Hi Jackie – About 40-50p per £8-10 book thanks for asking! And my books don’t give anyone obesity, type 2 diabetes or food addiction – they aim to do the opposite.
Plus – you’re missing the irony of a food company the size of Kraft (Toblerone, Terry’s chocolate orange, oreo cookies, ritz crackers, Cote d-or chocolate etc) being behind WW. Make people fat on the one hand and then try to slim them down on the other – brilliant profit strategy and disastrous for human health and the obesity epidemic.
Some of us are trying to solve the obesity epidemic – I used to make over 10 times as much as I do now employed at director level in blue chip companies. It is no where near as satisfying as helping people lose weight, gain health and overcome food addiction.
Best wishes – Zoe
Hi Zoe
I have just started WW. I am overweight following a period of disability caused by a problematic pregnancy. I was immobile & spent the best part of a year either in bed or in a wheelchair. I am slowly starting recovery and regularly take a pain medication which is known to cause weight-gain & increased appetite. So far I have not found WW too inspiring I attended the first meeting last week and without being rude, all the WW representatives were overweight women, and not just slightly overweight but much bigger than my friend and I who have joined WW together. We are taking part in a ‘sponsored slim’ to spur us on. My metabolism seems to have slowed right down and I am still not able to exercise at any great intensity without causing pain. The charity slim requires me to lose 10% of my weight in 4 months. Do you think that this is feasible or do you have a suggestion for any other dietary / nutritional programme? If you cannot advise please direct me to somewhere more appropriate.
Many thanks
Hi Karen – I’m so sorry to hear about your recent health problems – it is all too easy to forget that pregnancy places a genuine strain on the woman’s health and can be a very tough time for some women – especially for you by the sounds of it. Assuming that you are not already at or close to natural weight, 10% in 4 months should be very achieveable. If you’ve not come across The Harcombe Diet – check out http://www.theharcombediet.com. We also have the loveliest on line support club at http://www.theharcombedietclub.com. You’ll be able to see what people post and the support they get. We have to have some kind of pay-to-post amount (lowest rate is £1 a month – considerably less than any WW club for 1 week) to keep spammers out. I also have this site and http://www.theobesityepidemic.org for my research – all I do is try to help people lose weight, gain health and end food addiction.
If you are not familiar with the diet – the best book to read to see what we believe in is “Stop Counting Calories & Start Losing Weight.” Should be not much more than £4 on Amazon and available in libraries etc. Here’s a bit of research that I posted in the club to show how people who lose on low cal diets (WW) regain. Hence – even if you do lose any weight – chances are (98%) that you’ll be where those even larger women are before long.
Hope this helps
Best wishes – Zoe
Excellent article! Couldn’t agree more! I’ve been low-carbing and eating a diet of delicious foods for 7 years (all cooked from scratch) – all from the meats, fish, vegetables, dairy, nuts and seeds, with a few berries thrown in occasionally – have lost about 100lbs with no hunger, no feeling of deprivation. I make my own low-carb bread and I buy low-carb pasta on-line (tho only use both of these occasionally). I bake low-carb cakes and pastries (again only occasionally). I have never felt better and finally have mastered weight control.
The relatively large anounts of carbs in the Weight-watchers Propoints plan is just going to cause the blood sugar spikes (and then the troughs once the insulin kicks in) that mekes you hungry about an hour after you’ve eaten (the high-carb breakfasts are particulary horrendous to me!) …. but then Weightwatchers has been owned by Heinz since 1978 so I think the words “vested” and “interest” spring to mind!
Carry on the good work, I’ll be behind you all the way!
Hi Teresa – awesome achievement! Huge well done on your weight loss. The low carb weight loss I see also stays off – the evidence for 98% regain is with low cal diets. I fancied a baked spud for lunch the other day and about 2 hours later I remembered what hunger felt like! Back to omelettes, fish or meat for me.
Many thanks for your lovely comments
Very best wishes – Zoe
Hi
I agree with Zoe & Teresa that low-carb diets absolutely do work as limiting the sugar in the body ensures that less fat is created. However, readers should not take this as a universally safe way to lose weight.
I have followed low or zero carb diets twice, and twice ended uo in hospital after passing out during a hypoglycemic attack (low blood sugar). whilst the majority of people would not experience this as their bodies regulate insulin appropriately, there are a significant number of people who , like myself, do not regulate insulin as well, and are prone to hypoglyaemic attacks.
I am not saying that people should not follow low carb diets as they can be very successful, but they should be careful if they think they may have blood sugar level problems. (I had no idea that I had this conditon until tests were performed after the incidents referred to above)
Best Wishes – Charlie
dear zoe, i have just started ww again aftera 9 month break and we were just wondering weather the new system actuallly works and how it works? is it just a money maker it looks as if they want you to lose the weight slower to make more money . after reading the older comments i’m not sure about continuing although last year when i went i lost 60 pounds so something must work.
hi Zoe
Thanks for your advice. Since my last message I have discovered I’m pregnant again. I’m not physically fit enough to do any fatburning exercise due to my disability and I think that dieting is not recommended for pregnant women? Is this something that your nutrition plan could help with or should I wait until i’ve given birth again? My biggest fear is that pregnancy and immobility will cause further weightgain. Thanks, Karen
I have to say, Zoe, your diet is the best I have ever come across for swift weight loss. At first the food is enjoyable, as the general consensus is that you shouldn’t eat fatty foods, but the novelty soon wears off for most people. After four weeks on it I can no longer look at a slice of bacon or an egg! Hardly the result you would hope for given how good eggs are for you.
In the end it is no different from any other diet in that it hasn’t sufficient variety to keep the vast majority of human beings satisfied for very long and indeed, the saturated fat becomes sickening over time.
Not only this, you underestimate the fact that the meat contained in supermarkets today is not the pure kind that our ancestors thrived on. It has been tampered with. You are what you eat, as are the animals that we eat, and most chicken is full of antibiotics, beef full of hormones and bacon full of sulfites. You are very critical of additives, however, I consider these to be additives. I don’t want them in my meat, they damage me and yet they are there.
The best diets to follow are those containing balance and variety. There is no evidence of the long-term affects that eating this kind of diet has and given this fact I believe it is very risky to discount entire food groups! However, we have very convincing evidence given the longevity of the Japanese, that their diet is the one we should aspire to, or something similar. It contains good carbs, good proteins and good fats.
Hi Zoe,
I first read an artical about your eating plan in the Daily Mail, i was curious, so bought one of your books and by following the plan I lost 11lb in 8 days ( I had cheated a bit by sneaking in 1 bottle of dry red wine and some 85% dark chocolate)! I was never hungry and felt full of energy!! this was a nice surprise as previously i had done weight watchers and not managed to lose that much weight in 5 months. Similarly I did Slimming World but felt bloated and lethargic from the overconsumption of carbs!! I also noticed how at either of the groups they pushed branded foods – WW – their own brand and Slimming World – Muller lights.
I did slip over Xmas but today I have jumped back onto your 5 day plan and will stick with it through all 3 phases, it’s definitely the most sensible eating plan I’ve seen and will continue this forever!! Thank You so so much!
Hi Lindsey – thanks so much for sharing this. Keep up the real food!
Very best wishes – Zoe
Hi Zoe
I have just ordered a copy of your book because on 13/12/2011 I managed to catch the flu and as I was sick for a week in bed I stopped smoking. I never bought another packet and I have gained a stone. I am by no means a large lady 5.4 and weigh 10st8 now. I really want to get back down to 9st4 as I was before I stopped smoking as my clothes are so tight, Do you think this plan will work for me ? When I smoked, about 10 a day, I ate most things I wanted and never really gained .. I am 43
Thanks
Lisa
Hello, Zoe – I just had to add a comment, having only “discovered” you today when reading my lunchtime magazine. I immediately went online to see what you had to say, and I am so delighted to see that there is someone out there who has challenged all the ingrained “low fat, low calorie” thinking that has been drummed into our society for far too long. I visited my doctor three years ago to ask for weight loss advice, and I hate to say that I felt he would probably tell me to “eat less, move more”. I needed to lose around three stones then. To my joy, he understood exactly what I needed, and suggested I do exactly what you have been writing about – cut out processed foods and empty carbohydrates, and eat good fresh unadulterated foods. I was stunned when he said I could have things like cream if I wanted to. My partner didn’t believe that I would lose any weight at all if I stuck to the doctor’s guidelines, but I did. I won’t say that I never craved certain things – at one point, I would have killed for cream crackers, of all things! It didn’t take me long to lose over a stone, and I felt good. I recently had my blood sugar and cholesterol levels tested (because my father has developed diabetes type 2, and I was advised to do so). Blood sugar is totally normal, and cholesterol is 4. I am 45. My partner has since been given the same dietary advice by the same GP, and he is now shedding weight, too. I eat saturated and unsaturated fats, all types of “real” meat, different types of fish, at least one egg every day, and plenty of vegetables. I realised how awful most “healthy” breakfast cereals are, and stick to porridge if I have one now. I have never, ever bought foods which are branded as “diet” foods, as I’ve always believed they are totally unnecessary anyway – simply a means of duping people into signing up to an expensive class, thinking they can still have cakes, sweets, biscuits and puddings and lose weight without “giving up your favourite foods”. I, too, read the nonsense about red meat, and I was glad that I wasn’t the only one who thought that the good old cave man must have been riddled, therefore, with colorectal cancer! What utter nonsense. I’ve often wanted to pelt the Nutella advert, too, as it totally fails to mention the colossal amount of sugar contained in one serving, in addition to the hazelnuts, skimmed milk and cocoa!!! We’ve all been totally misled for far too long – I wish your book enormous success, and am going to nip out and buy it as soon as I can. Sorry for the lengthy post – I am just so impressed!
Delighted I found your blog, rejoined ww two weeks ago only to be hit with a new plan, v boring. Am 5’5″ 35yo 14 stone and 6lbs weight seriously affecting me, you would think as a nurse I’d know better, just finished a thesis on obesity and Irish nurses experience caring for this patient group very eye-opening. Tried blood type diet many years ago and ww many many times, daylight robbery. The blood type diet worked great but I was not allowed eat hardly anything being type o- so really would love some advice if possible. I agree ww with the new eat all fruits is a load of tripe. They have basically just doubled the points value of everyting and tricked us into paying for more of the same it’s twenty euro to join and ten per weeks. And the subliminally push the foods they have bars and sweets etc piled high at the desk where you pay in. 61% of the Irish population is overweight an 39% obese. A frightening statistic from the OECD. People need to realise that when they are ill people will have to break their backs to assist them. Not good. Its cheap processed foods that have us in this state. People are afraid of hunger. When I was a kid we ate 3 times a day. Most people eat way more than that everyday. Frightening that more people are overweight and obese in the world today than are starving.
Delighted I found your blog, rejoined ww two weeks ago only to be hit with a new plan, v boring. Am 5’5″ 35yo 14 stone and 6lbs weight seriously affecting me, you would think as a nurse I’d know better, just finished a thesis on obesity and Irish nurses experience caring for this patient group very eye-opening. Tried blood type diet many years ago and ww many many times, daylight robbery. The blood type diet worked great but I was not allowed eat hardly anything being type o- so really would love some advice if possible. I agree ww with the new eat all fruits is a load of tripe. They have basically just doubled the points value of everyting and tricked us into paying for more of the same it’s twenty euro to join and ten per weeks. And the subliminally push the foods they have bars and sweets etc piled high at the desk where you pay in. 61% of the Irish population is overweight an 39% obese. A frightening statistic from the OECD. People need to realise that when they are ill people will have to break their backs to assist them. Not good. Its cheap processed foods that have us in this state. People are afraid of hunger. When I was a kid we ate 3 times a day. Most people eat way more than that everyday. Frightening that more people are overweight and obese in the world today than are starving. As the world health organisation calls it Globesity !!
Hi Paula – lovely to hear from you. WW still hold the award for the worst product I’ve found. Check out this
You are right – eat three times a day. Eat food! And only food – nothing made by manufacturers and manage your carb intake. That’s it really.
They also have a phrase diabesity now also – to show how often obesity is seen alongside diabetes. Does obesity cause diabetes? Does diabetes cause obesity? Are both caused by following the public health advice to “base our meals on starchy foods”? There are arguments to say yes to all three.
As my book says “Stop Counting Calories & Start Losing Weight”!
A Journalist asked to try it a week ago – has lost 8 of her goal of 20lbs in 6 days – easy and healthy.
Best wishes – Zoe
Zoe,
I agree with some of your arguments – i think most people will agree that protein and natrual , unprocessed and ‘real food’ is better for you and keeps you full for longer. No doubt about this. Also unlimited fruit shouldnt be encouraged although most people will get sick of unlimited fruit after a while and switch to others. WW probably realise this. However it is interesting that you preach that WW is all about bottom line (of course they are – as are ALL companies) but at the same time you have your own agenda – the ‘harcombe diet’ – so I would be mindful about saying that WW is pushing its products when you are effectively doing the same and also being rather rude to people reading your ‘blog..’:
“Hi Sofia – Wow! How critical and presumptive and wrong!
Having written a book called “Why do you overeat? When all you want is to be slim” and having researched obesity….I know a heck of a lot more about this topic than you belittle and likely more than you do!”
I think your knowledge is awesome. Most people would love to follow a plan like yours . My fiance and I both work shifts and would find it quite a challenge to adhere to most plans that rely on alot of planning and prep . This is where ww are leading the way . We are able to link in with there web sites via our android + I phones whenever wherever we are . Our favourite food used to be chips cheese and mayonnaise from the local kebab house = 40 points !!!! Each .
We now eat food in Moderation , feel better , have better skin ,we lose weight at a steady rate and have developed a greater appreciation for food . We also enjoy fruit and salad with myself developing a love for red onions .
Maybe you need to go on Dragons den with your Harcombe diet and develop a website that will blow ww out of the water ( with an android ap ) maybe charge 7.50 a month
ww needs a bit of competition!!!!!
Good Luck
I just want to say a huge thank you to Weight Watchers! If it wasn’t for their plan I would not be as healthy as I am now and have lost over 150lb and kept it off. I eat a very varied low fat diet which includes lots of complex carbs’ such as rice, pasta, potatoes etc. I also eat ready meals and “manufactured” food and I enjoy them, nothing at all wrong with that! I live a normal life and I can have any food and drink I want, how good is that.
Weight Watchers works for thousands of people each year and they keep the weight off long term so for anyone who wants a healthy eating plan with the extra support a meeting gives then you can’t get any better than to join.
You say-
“As my book says “Stop Counting Calories & Start Losing Weight”!
A Journalist asked to try it a week ago – has lost 8 of her goal of 20lbs in 6 days – easy and healthy”
We all know that any big weight loss in such a short time period is not fat. I lost 7.5lb in my first week on Weight Watchers, their plan must be as good as yours then!
Zoe,
I have struggled with my weight for many years and recently have yet again gained weight. Between the ages of 18 and 30 I have weighed inbetween 8stone 10 andf 16 stones. I sucessfully lost weight twice, once was the rosemary connelly diet when i was 21 losing 4 and half stones in 9 months. The second diet was cutting down carbohydrates losing 5 stones in 8 months when i was 23. Both these suceesful weight losses were after having children. Since then I have exercised consistently and joined WW and slimming world on various occasions but after the first 2 weeks or so i don’t lose any weight just gain a pound or two or plateau. In this past year I have tried lipotrim and the cambridge diet whick work but leave me feeling miserable and tired then eventually lead to even more weight gain. I agree with a previous comment no matter how much exercise you do if you do not watch what you eat, you will put on weight. I have just had these past two weeks off work, I have eaten what I’ve wanted may have over indulged occasionally but have been to the gym 7 times for an hour long session (45 mins cardio, 10- 15 mins toning and weights) 2 x 8 mile walks and 2 x horseriding. I still have managed to gain 9lbs!!!! shocking…but i am ever so sensitive to carbs and feel that i am unable to eat them. I will 100% checkout your link on your previous post as anything that will make me sucessfully lose weight.
liz
I also agree 100% about the fruit I have tried that also and gained 3lbs one week when i ate too much fruit!!!
liz
Hi Liz – just happen to be on line writing an article for a newspaper! I highly recommend getting a copy of “Stop Counting Calories & Start Losing Weight” – about £4 on Amazon – if it doesn’t change your life, I’ll give £4 to charity! (And I get about 40p from a book so can’t say fairer than that ;-)). You can then get loads of support in our lovely club – http://www.theharcombedietclub.com – you sound like a prime candidate for what we advocate. In fact – if you just register for the club and do the email verify thing, you get a 10 day plan and headlines of the diet and you can get started straight away. That 9lb could be gone in 5 days!
Best wishes – Zoe
Hi Zoe
Thanks for your advice I have joined the club but I am unable to get a 10 day plan….must be my lack of IT skills!! In your book ‘stop counting calories and start losing weight’ does this give me overall advice on how to start this diet and the deatils of the various phases?
many thanks
liz
Hi Liz – yes – “Stop Counting cals…” does all this. Also – if you send a message to club support in theharcombedietclub (at the bottom of every page) the 10 day link can be re-mailed to you
Good luck!
Best wishes – Zoe