On 11/30/05 1:47 PM, in article
, "Willow"

2- The points are not based only on calories.. but also on the amount the
fat grams and fiber grams the food contains.. so there's not a set number of
calories to it..

Technically that is true, but for all practical purposes it is basically 50
calories per point. I've seen the equation (it's a copyrighted equation, so
it's listed with the government in a publicly accessible area!). No matter
how little fat a serving of food has, or how much fiber, the points never
vary much from basically 50 calories per point.


The number of points you are allowed depends on how much you weight.. so
again there isn't a set number of calories. 227lbs means 28 pts as a daily
target(minimum in a day) plus 35 pts a week.. 231 pts per week plus your
activity pts which you earn by being physically active..

That averages to 33 points per day, or about 1650 calories per day. That is
very close to the 1700 calories per day I have been aiming for.



I don't think you're undereating so much as overthinking..

hahaha.

I can't help you
with the calories counting.. because I don't do it, and I think it's a very
bad system.. it doesn't take account of the quality of the foods you're
eating.. only the calories..

Maybe. But I really don't think it is all that different from WW points. I
think they are statistically indistinguishable. I would rethink using
calories and use WW points instead if there were some numbers showing I am
wrong though.


I can tell you that the Weight Watchers system works as is.. and that to me,
it's the easiest and healthiest way to go. plateaus happens, slow downs
happens, gain happens.. it's all part of loosing weight.. there's no perfect
solution.. but there's only two things that will bring you to long lasting
success, patience and perseverance..

Thanks.

doug@persevering!