Weight Watchers & LC?

I was under the impression that they've had a LC plan for a while now, at
least I seem to remember reading of it here before.

My question is, how does one know when one is 80% full? Seems so subjective
to me. I guess some can work within such guidelines.

Glassman wrote:
:: My wife came home from a WW meeting tonight. She needs to lose
:: just a bit, and is not much of a meat eater, and thus not an LC fan.
:: She eats next to nothing in tiny portions all week, but never misses
:: some bread every day and at least 2 or 3 sugared desserts a week. I
:: was amazed to see the new WW plan. It looks suspiciously like a
:: modified LC plan now! Meat and veggies. No portion size! They tell
:: you to stop eating when you're 80% full..... is that a riot? You can
:: eat a limited amount of whole grains per week, based on a point
:: system. What a joke after all the abuse heaped on us from that
:: crowd over the years. How many fights did we have with them first
:: telling us it's calories in/calories out, then low fat, and then how
:: dangerous LC eating was to our health.
::
::
:: --
:: "Don't get me wrong... I'm SNARKY"
:: JK Sinrod
:: Sinrod Stained Glass Studios
:: www.sinrodstudios.com
:: Coney Island Memories
:: www.sinrodstudios.com/coneymemories

"Glassman" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

My wife came home from a WW meeting tonight. She needs to lose just a
bit, and is not much of a meat eater, and thus not an LC fan. She eats
next
to nothing in tiny portions all week, but never misses some bread every
day
and at least 2 or 3 sugared desserts a week. I was amazed to see the new
WW
plan. It looks suspiciously like a modified LC plan now! Meat and
veggies.
No portion size! They tell you to stop eating when you're 80% full..... is
that a riot? You can eat a limited amount of whole grains per week, based
on
a point system.
What a joke after all the abuse heaped on us from that crowd over the
years. How many fights did we have with them first telling us it's
calories
in/calories out, then low fat, and then how dangerous LC eating was to our
health.

They did something like that back in the 80s, when the low-fat Snackwell
craze was at its peak. They offered a plan where you just counted fat and
fiber grams and kept fat grams within a certain limit. You had to have a
certain number of fiber grams, which encouraged you to eat more veggies and
whole grains and beans, rather than low-fat, low-fiber empty calorie foods.
It didn't last very long, though, because people didn't lose weight on it
very well, particularly women.

Now they are attempting to cash in on the low-carb and South Beach trends, I
guess.

HG

First they attack LC for being unscientific.
Then they attack it for being dangerous (after it has been shown to be
scientifically valid).
Then they attack it for being a fad (after it is shown to be safe).
Then they attack it for being an old fad.
Then they quietly incoporate it in their diets.
Then they admit that they have it in their diets and that is what
they've been saying all along.

Voila, the evolution a new way of eating, while avoiding admitting that
you were wrong all along.

TC

Glassman said:

My wife came home from a WW meeting tonight. She needs to lose just a
bit, and is not much of a meat eater, and thus not an LC fan. She eats next
to nothing in tiny portions all week, but never misses some bread every day
and at least 2 or 3 sugared desserts a week. I was amazed to see the new WW
plan. It looks suspiciously like a modified LC plan now! Meat and veggies.
No portion size! They tell you to stop eating when you're 80% full..... is
that a riot? You can eat a limited amount of whole grains per week, based on
a point system.
What a joke after all the abuse heaped on us from that crowd over the
years. How many fights did we have with them first telling us it's calories
in/calories out, then low fat, and then how dangerous LC eating was to our
health.

--
"Don't get me wrong... I'm SNARKY"
JK Sinrod
Sinrod Stained Glass Studios
www.sinrodstudios.com
Coney Island Memories
www.sinrodstudios.com/coneymemories

Roger Zoul said:

I was under the impression that they've had a LC plan for a while now, at
least I seem to remember reading of it here before.

My question is, how does one know when one is 80% full? Seems so subjective
to me. I guess some can work within such guidelines.

80% Full

Recently, I encountered a claim that the Japanese way of eating was to
eat till you were 80% full, and then stop. This was alleged to account
for a lower incidence of obesity in Japan.

There were related stories about the high waste of food in Japan.

However, I was unable to find more than just one or two web sources for
"eating till 80% full". Some stories are just made up.

Reminds me of Atkins..... "Eat till satisfied, not stuffed".

Whatever gets one to eat less is possibly a good thing.

Quoted message said:

Glassman wrote:
:: My wife came home from a WW meeting tonight. She needs to lose
:: just a bit, and is not much of a meat eater, and thus not an LC fan.
:: She eats next to nothing in tiny portions all week, but never misses
:: some bread every day and at least 2 or 3 sugared desserts a week. I
:: was amazed to see the new WW plan. It looks suspiciously like a
:: modified LC plan now! Meat and veggies. No portion size! They tell
:: you to stop eating when you're 80% full..... is that a riot? You can
:: eat a limited amount of whole grains per week, based on a point
:: system. What a joke after all the abuse heaped on us from that
:: crowd over the years. How many fights did we have with them first
:: telling us it's calories in/calories out, then low fat, and then how
:: dangerous LC eating was to our health.
::
::
:: --
:: "Don't get me wrong... I'm SNARKY"
:: JK Sinrod
:: Sinrod Stained Glass Studios
:: www.sinrodstudios.com
:: Coney Island Memories
:: www.sinrodstudios.com/coneymemories

--
1) Eat Till SATISFIED, Not STUFFED... Atkins repeated 9 times in the book
2) Exercise: It's Non-Negotiable..... Chapter 22 title, Atkins book
3) Don't Diet Without Supplimental Nutrients... Chapter 23 title, Atkins
book
4) A sensible eating plan, and follow it. (Atkins, Self Made or Other)

<[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

First they attack LC for being unscientific.
Then they attack it for being dangerous (after it has been shown to be
scientifically valid).
Then they attack it for being a fad (after it is shown to be safe).
Then they attack it for being an old fad.
Then they quietly incoporate it in their diets.
Then they admit that they have it in their diets and that is what
they've been saying all along.

Voila, the evolution a new way of eating, while avoiding admitting that
you were wrong all along.

TC

And still another way to make money for WW!

MaryL

<[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

First they attack LC for being unscientific.
Then they attack it for being dangerous (after it has been shown to be
scientifically valid).
Then they attack it for being a fad (after it is shown to be safe).
Then they attack it for being an old fad.
Then they quietly incoporate it in their diets.
Then they admit that they have it in their diets and that is what
they've been saying all along.

Voila, the evolution a new way of eating, while avoiding admitting that
you were wrong all along.

TC

Glassman said:

My wife came home from a WW meeting tonight. She needs to lose just a
bit, and is not much of a meat eater, and thus not an LC fan. She eats
next
to nothing in tiny portions all week, but never misses some bread every
day
and at least 2 or 3 sugared desserts a week. I was amazed to see the new
WW
plan. It looks suspiciously like a modified LC plan now! Meat and
veggies.
No portion size! They tell you to stop eating when you're 80% full.....
is
that a riot? You can eat a limited amount of whole grains per week, based
on
a point system.
What a joke after all the abuse heaped on us from that crowd over the
years. How many fights did we have with them first telling us it's
calories
in/calories out, then low fat, and then how dangerous LC eating was to
our
health.

All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is
violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.

- Arthur Schopenhauer

Sound familiar?

"Glassman" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

My wife came home from a WW meeting tonight. She needs to lose just a
bit, and is not much of a meat eater, and thus not an LC fan. She eats
next
to nothing in tiny portions all week, but never misses some bread every
day
and at least 2 or 3 sugared desserts a week. I was amazed to see the new
WW
plan. It looks suspiciously like a modified LC plan now! Meat and
veggies.
No portion size! They tell you to stop eating when you're 80% full..... is
that a riot? You can eat a limited amount of whole grains per week, based
on
a point system.
What a joke after all the abuse heaped on us from that crowd over the
years. How many fights did we have with them first telling us it's
calories
in/calories out, then low fat, and then how dangerous LC eating was to our
health.

--
"Don't get me wrong... I'm SNARKY"
JK Sinrod
Sinrod Stained Glass Studios
www.sinrodstudios.com
Coney Island Memories
www.sinrodstudios.com/coneymemories

My mother used to work for WW in the early seventies thru the eighties.
Back then it was what I would call portion controlled low carb. She got fed
up with the company when they were sold (Pillsbury I think) and introduced
there own line of foods and modified the original plan. She did get to meet
Jean Nidetch on several occasions (5th and 10th year) and said she was a
heck of a lady.

Later

Rick

That's mind-boggling since their frozen entree package has a really
in-your-face warning about how bad a low carb diet is for you. I picked
one up recently to check the ingredients and found their low-carb
warning extremely offensive. I didn't even bother to check the
ingredients after that and just decided not to buy their product. I
don't like to give my money to companies that treat potential customers
like morons. My sense was that they were doing that in an attempt to
keep people from buying products labeled "low carb" instead of their
products. If the quality of the product can't sell the merchandise,
then you have to wonder what it is they are really selling. I don't
typically buy the "low-carb" labels anyway since they're so expensive
and so many are not really LC.

Emma

In article <[email hidden]>,

Quoted message said:

First they attack LC for being unscientific.
Then they attack it for being dangerous (after it has been shown to be
scientifically valid).
Then they attack it for being a fad (after it is shown to be safe).
Then they attack it for being an old fad.
Then they quietly incoporate it in their diets.
Then they admit that they have it in their diets and that is what
they've been saying all along.

Voila, the evolution a new way of eating, while avoiding admitting that
you were wrong all along.

Quoted message said:

Glassman said:

My wife came home from a WW meeting tonight. She needs to lose just a
bit, and is not much of a meat eater, and thus not an LC fan. She eats next
to nothing in tiny portions all week, but never misses some bread every day
and at least 2 or 3 sugared desserts a week. I was amazed to see the new WW
plan. It looks suspiciously like a modified LC plan now! Meat and veggies.
No portion size! They tell you to stop eating when you're 80% full..... is
that a riot? You can eat a limited amount of whole grains per week, based on
a point system.
What a joke after all the abuse heaped on us from that crowd over the
years. How many fights did we have with them first telling us it's calories
in/calories out, then low fat, and then how dangerous LC eating was to our
health.

They really should be called to the mat on this.

Emma Thackery <[email hidden]> wrote:
:> That's mind-boggling since their frozen entree package has a really
:> in-your-face warning about how bad a low carb diet is for you. I
:> picked
:> one up recently to check the ingredients and found their low-carb
:> warning extremely offensive. I didn't even bother to check the
:> ingredients after that and just decided not to buy their product. I
:> don't like to give my money to companies that treat potential
:> customers
:> like morons. My sense was that they were doing that in an attempt to
:> keep people from buying products labeled "low carb" instead of their
:> products. If the quality of the product can't sell the merchandise,
:> then you have to wonder what it is they are really selling. I don't
:> typically buy the "low-carb" labels anyway since they're so expensive
:> and so many are not really LC.
:>
:> Emma
:>
:>
:> In article <[email hidden]>,
:> [email hidden] wrote:
:>
:>> First they attack LC for being unscientific.
:>> Then they attack it for being dangerous (after it has been shown to
:>> be scientifically valid).
:>> Then they attack it for being a fad (after it is shown to be safe).
:>> Then they attack it for being an old fad.
:>> Then they quietly incoporate it in their diets.
:>> Then they admit that they have it in their diets and that is what
:>> they've been saying all along.
:>>
:>> Voila, the evolution a new way of eating, while avoiding admitting
:>> that
:>> you were wrong all along.
:>
:>> Glassman wrote:
:>> > My wife came home from a WW meeting tonight. She needs to lose
:>> > just a
:>> > bit, and is not much of a meat eater, and thus not an LC fan.
:>> > She eats next to nothing in tiny portions all week, but never
:>> > misses some bread every day and at least 2 or 3 sugared desserts
:>> > a week. I was amazed to see the new WW plan. It looks
:>> > suspiciously like a modified LC plan now! Meat and veggies. No
:>> > portion size! They tell you to stop eating when you're 80%
:>> > full..... is that a riot? You can eat a limited amount of whole
:>> > grains per week, based on a point system. What a joke after
:>> > all the abuse heaped on us from that crowd over the years. How
:>> > many fights did we have with them first telling us it's calories
:>> > in/calories out, then low fat, and then how dangerous LC eating
:>> > was to our health.

On Sun, 15 Jan 2006 00:24:21 -0600, Emma Thackery <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

That's mind-boggling since their frozen entree package has a really
in-your-face warning about how bad a low carb diet is for you.

Is this the one that says (small letters) "the truth about" (large
letters) LOW CARB? And then on the back they rant about how bad it
is?

If they still do that (I don't even *look* at their products any
more), seems like it was also designed to sucker inattentive shoppers
into buying, thinking they're getting LOW CARB food.

--
Face your fears.
Live your dreams.

In article <[email hidden]>,

Patricia Martin Steward said:

On Sun, 15 Jan 2006 00:24:21 -0600, Emma Thackery <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

That's mind-boggling since their frozen entree package has a really
in-your-face warning about how bad a low carb diet is for you.

Is this the one that says (small letters) "the truth about" (large
letters) LOW CARB? And then on the back they rant about how bad it
is?

If they still do that (I don't even *look* at their products any
more), seems like it was also designed to sucker inattentive shoppers
into buying, thinking they're getting LOW CARB food.

--
Face your fears.
Live your dreams.

Yep, you have it right.... that's the one. Since there is little
consumer protection anymore, it seems, companies get away with that kind
of fraud and deceit.

Emma