There was a nice thread on stress over at the boards. Lisa’s (Authenticity3) answer highlighted a bunch of common pitfalls from stress (small edits and reformatting for clarity here):

  • sleep poorly: and we tend to crave comfort, convenience foods when we’re tired, not to mention the pure fact of being awake more hours and how that affects our hunger levels. We also tend to move less in our general life during the day and skip workouts.
  • emotionally eat: for such emotions as the stress itself, procrastination, irritability, despair, and even self-destruction (no one else cares, why should I?)
  • mindlessly eat: because we’re so preoccupied
  • lack of planning: since we perceive ourselves as too busy to take the time.
  • lack of tracking: which often leads to feelings of failure on top of the original stress, and the attitude of “I’ve blown it already, so what’s it matter now?”
  • eating out more often: than you would otherwise, and maybe not making the best choices at restaurants.

Too Many Points Strikes Again… Sample Targets and Why Weight Watchers Got it Right

It seems like people–mostly men–keep thinking that somehow Weight Watchers assigned them too high a daily PointsPlus target (DPT). Your DPT is based on your gender, height, age and weight. If you are honest about those things you will get an accurate DPT.

Here’s an example of the approximate DPT for a 40 year old male who is 5′ 10″ tall (images thanks to My Virtual Model):

A couple of things to note, first off as a person loses weight their DPT drops. As this guy journeys from 250 down to 165 pounds, he loses 16 DPT.

Second if you use the TEE calculator at this website you can get a sense of how the DPT relates to your caloric needs:

Weight BMR TEE DPT Total P* Total P * 35 calories Daily Calorie Deficit**
250 2212 3282 51 62 2170 1,112
165 1776 2668 35 46 1610 1,058

* Total P = DPT + 7 weekly P+ (of the 49) + 4 P+ for 0 P+ food, e.g. fruit.

** Daily calorie deficit = (Total P * 35 calories) – TEE

Notice what Weight Watchers did there? They cleverly assigned you a DPT that creates about a 1,000 calories a day deficit. That is 7,000 a week, or enough to lose the advertised “up to 2 pounds a week”.

Also notice that for computing the target, one PointsPlus value is approximately 35 calories. The food you eat might have a bit more calories or a bit less, but for computing the target 35 is used.

Nostalgia for Old Plans?

If you are feeling nostalgia for any of the classic Weight Watchers plans because you think you have too many points (you don’t, check the newbies page here :D), perhaps investigate a classic weight watcher’s plan, Brad has some blog posts on them:

  • All on one page
  • Around 1997-98 the Points-based plans came around, e.g. Flex, Winning Points, Momentum
  • Late 2010 was the start of PointsPlus


Tips to Live By…

MassRunner has a good reminder about questions to ask yourself on days when you don’t track:

  • Did you practice portion control?
  • Did you MTBC (make the better choice) most of the time?
  • Did you eat basically the same “diet” as you did while tracking?
  • Did you get APs–if that was your normal practice?
  • Did you restrict yourself to that single meal or single day and then get back OP?


Comment Spammers

Wow, someone really wants to spam our comments… I won’t dignify the particular site by passing through their link, but not to worry their website has been perma banned. I am going to add Akismet comment filtering to reduce the spam.

Scales and their Interesting Results Today

Interesting post and thread from a 2x/day weigher with lots of interesting feedback about the ups and downs of weighing more than 1x/week recommended by Weight Watchers.

Editorial: I am personally a 1-2x/day weigher, it helps me, I don’t think it helps everyone and it is not part of WW plan. That said, most National Weight Loss Registry participants mention daily weighing as a tool to keep weight off.

Food Addiction Analogies Discussion

Interesting discussion today comparing obesity/weight problems with food addiction and some good responses. Over here on the boards.

Editorial, I agree w/ Roy (the first response to the OP) most of our food issues are not en toto comparable to addiction.