# Does Weight Watchers Really work- a personal opinion



## Russell Williams (Jan 7, 2007)

Does Weight Watchers work?



The following represents my opinion. Before forming their own opinion people should contact the Weight Watchers company and study their data about the long-term effectiveness of the program. Be sure to ask to see their five-year and 10 year out data.



In my opinion if the Weight Watchers program really worked Weight Watchers would've gone out of business years ago. If most of the people who joined Weight Watchers successfully lost weight until they reached insurance company standards and that weight stayed off for the rest of their lives what would have happened?



Weight Watchers was created in the late 60s. If most of the people who joined Weight Watchers lost all the weight they wanted to lose and kept it off Weight Watchers would initially make millions and millions of dollars as millions of Americans paid to join the Weight Watchers program.



However, since it is a written program, while it could be copyrighted, it would be impossible to prevent people from sharing it with their friends and to prevent other people selling the program at greatly reduced rates or giving it away for free. Therefore, there would very quickly be two classes of people. The first class would be those who had lost all the weight they wanted to with the Weight Watchers program and therefore had no need to participate in the program anymore. The second class of people would be those who were still losing weight on a bootleg copy of the Weight Watchers program and therefore were not paying any money to Weight Watchers. Soon all of those people would also be thin and would no longer need to participate in the real Weight Watchers program or in some bootleg copy of the Weight Watchers program.



If the Weight Watchers program truly caused everyone who used the real program or a bootleg copy of it to lose weight and keep it off for the rest of their lives there would be no repeat business.



In summary, if almost everyone who joined the Weight Watchers program, the real program, or a bootleg copy of the program, lost weight and kept it off for the rest of their lives, for at least the last 20 years there would been almost no fat people in the United States and the Weight Watchers program would long ago have gone out of business.



The above represents the opinion of Russell Williams and may or may not represent the opinion of Weight Watchers Inc..


----------



## Kimberleigh (Jan 7, 2007)

Whats with all the Weight Watchers questions?

It's just another scheme, so f'in what?


----------



## NFA (Jan 7, 2007)

Weight Watchers tells us their product doesn't work. Everytime they run "Results Not Typical" as they proclaim a success story. There is no real debate over whethet it works our not. Their critics say it doesn't. WW agrees.


----------



## out.of.habit (Jan 7, 2007)

I fail to see where this relates to size acceptance. Your opinion of WW as a business is all fine and good, but what does this have to add to the conversation of _being okay (or happy) with fat_?


----------



## Russell Williams (Jan 7, 2007)

As long as a large percentage of people in the population believe that being fat is a personal choice than fat people are more likely to be subjected to discrimination, nasty comments, and viewed as people who lack willpower.

As long as a fat person is viewed as ones who lacks willpower than it becomes easy for other people to suggest that the fat person join Weight Watchers or some other organization which, supposedly, will help them develop the willpower to get thin.

What is the easiest and fastest way to prove to people that Weight Watchers does not make all of its members thin? Point out to people that Weight Watchers has been in existence for a long time and that, if most of the people who joined Weight Watchers got thin and stayed that way for the rest of their lives, Weight Watchers would have ceased to exist a long time ago.

If an employer threatens to raise your health insurance costs unless you joined a weight reduction program it is not a good policy to tell the employer, "I do not have to listen to you". It might protect you a bit if you asked the employer to direct you to the program that has at least a 50% long-term success rate. It might help to explain to the employer that as soon as he can provide you with that information you will consider joining the program that is required if you are to keep your health benefits at the same cost.

What is a parent to do if a school sends home a note telling a parent that the child has been weighed and measured and found to be fat and that the responsible parent should consider finding some sort of a program to make the child thin? To simply throw the note into the trashcan causes the parent to run the risk that school officials might start trying to decide if the welfare department should be notified that the parent has a fat child and is not taking steps to change the situation. If the school suggests going to Weight Watchers you have my opinion to show them and ask then if they see any problems in my logic.


----------



## UncannyBruceman (Jan 7, 2007)

Russell Williams said:


> In my opinion if the Weight Watchers program really worked Weight Watchers would've gone out of business years ago.



You just answered your own question. There is no effective diet plan or miracle drug. In fact, the FTC is looking to sue four major diet pill distributors on the grounds of false advertising, two of which include Cortislim and TrimSpa.


----------



## Dr. Feelgood (Jan 7, 2007)

So far, everyone has been talking as if WW were a diet. It isn't: it's a way of life. This much I have picked up from conversations with my sister-in-law, the former WW Grand Dragon. She joined WW, lost the weight she wanted to, and continued coming back _to make sure she didn't regain the weight_! THIS was always Weight Watchers' big hook: you keep paying your dues, attending the meetings, buying the dinners, etc., so you _won't get fat again. My informant dropped out in disgust after Pillsbury bought WW and changed the program, but while she was in it -- and she was in it for years -- it was more like a twelve-step program (or a religion) than a diet._


----------



## out.of.habit (Jan 7, 2007)

Russell Williams said:


> As long as a large percentage of people in the population believe that being fat is a personal choice than fat people are more likely to be subjected to discrimination, nasty comments, and viewed as people who lack willpower.



Perhaps this should have been in your original post. Makes your point more clear. Though Kimberleigh is right, you have been bringing up WW a lot lately.


----------



## out.of.habit (Jan 7, 2007)

Dr. Feelgood said:


> My informant dropped out in disgust after Pillsbury bought WW and changed the program, but while she was in it -- and she was in it for years -- it was more like a twelve-step program (or a religion) than a diet.



...or a cult...


----------



## SandyBoston (Jan 7, 2007)

I think like most diets WW works as long as you stay on it. When you go off of it you gain the weight back just like every other diet. Sometimes I say to hell with diets they don't work long-term anyway. Then sometimes I feel really fat and full and slow and then I think about going on a diet again. The good thing is that thought only lasts about 3 hours and I am back to my old habits.


----------



## NFA (Jan 7, 2007)

SandyBoston said:


> I think like most diets WW works as long as you stay on it. When you go off of it you gain the weight back just like every other diet. Sometimes I say to hell with diets they don't work long-term anyway. Then sometimes I feel really fat and full and slow and then I think about going on a diet again. The good thing is that thought only lasts about 3 hours and I am back to my old habits.



You assume your weight is a moral failing, but thats an entirely unwarrented assumpsion. Its not that your "old habits" are making you fat. Its that the behaviors required while dieting are functionally unsustainable. This isn't healthy eating. Its disordered eating. Most people cannot sustain that, especially when the body evetunally resists and even more extreme measures need to be taken to continue losing weight. Losing weight is as easy as holding your breath. Keeping it off is as easy as continuing to hold your breath. The fact that momentary weight loss can be achieved relatively easily is not proof that fat is an abnormal state caused by personal failures. Saying WW works just so long as you stay on it is like saying you can fly if you jump and just stay in the air.


----------



## Russell Williams (Jan 7, 2007)

The comparison between two types of recent posts of mine intrigued me.

"Though Kimberleigh is right, you have been bringing up WW a lot lately.[/QUOTE]"

If I talk about weight watchers a lot of people comment. If I talk about writing a letter to the editor about a columnist who has implied that fat is a four letter word, it seems that relatively little attention is paid to such a post.

Anybody have any thoughts on why there is this difference?

If I talk about going into medical facilities and asking people to putting armless chairs so that fat people may sit in comfort while they're waiting for medical treatment, sometimes people ridicule me for doing such a ridiculous thing. I still do it.

Yours truly,

Russell Williams


----------



## LillyBBBW (Jan 7, 2007)

out.of.habit said:


> Perhaps this should have been in your original post. Makes your point more clear. Though Kimberleigh is right, you have been bringing up WW a lot lately.



..and there's something wrong with that because.......? :huh:


----------



## out.of.habit (Jan 7, 2007)

LillyBBBW said:


> ..and there's something wrong with that because.......? :huh:



I wasn't implying that there was anything wrong with it. Just an observation of a controversial subject. Lots of folks have very strong and firmly held opinions about weight watchers as a concept and entity, as well as dieting histories firmly intertwined with their dogma. It's a hot button issue, and not just within SA communities. That's all. Perhaps that should have been in _my_ original post. :doh:


----------



## LillyBBBW (Jan 7, 2007)

out.of.habit said:


> I wasn't implying that there was anything wrong with it. Just an observation of a controversial subject. Lots of folks have very strong and firmly held opinions about weight watchers as a concept and entity, as well as dieting histories firmly intertwined with their dogma. It's a hot button issue, and not just within SA communities. That's all. Perhaps that should have been in _my_ original post. :doh:



Many of us have already formed our opinion on WW and other such diets in general, I know. When I saw Russell Williams post I don't know what provoked me to even read it. It seemed as though it was just going to touch on the same thing that has been said before a zillion times but he did touch on something I hadn't even thought of. It may have been old hat to everyone else but it was news to me. His post was relevant and on topic and maybe your response was not meant to be censoring but it seemed to imply that his thoughts are not welcome because they come off as repetative. You may have seen it before, I didn't. There's enough tub thumping room around here for all of us I say.


----------



## Mini (Jan 7, 2007)

I know people who've lost weight and kept it off with Weight Watchers. They've changed their lifestyles to include more exercise and have cut back on eating unhealthy food.

Do I think it works for everyone? Not to the degree it shows in the commercials, but it's a proven fact that consuming fewer calories and combining it with exercise (not just walking; actual exercise) will lead to weight loss. Period. 

The controversy, of course, is whether there's any real health benefit to it. Not my area of expertise, I'm afraid.


----------



## out.of.habit (Jan 7, 2007)

LillyBBBW said:


> Many of us have already formed our opinion on WW and other such diets in general, I know. When I saw Russell Williams post I don't know what provoked me to even read it. It seemed as though it was just going to touch on the same thing that has been said before a zillion times but he did touch on something I hadn't even thought of. It may have been old hat to everyone else but it was news to me. His post was relevant and on topic and maybe your response was not meant to be censoring but it seemed to imply that his thoughts are not welcome because they come off as repetative. You may have seen it before, I didn't. There's enough tub thumping room around here for all of us I say.



Sorry to Russell, and Lilly. Definitely did not mean to come across as censoring (  ). That comment came as a surprise to me! lol I will certainly admit that even seeing the words 'weight watchers' raises my hackles a bit, but one of the things I like best about Dimensions is one's ability to let loose an opinion without fear of ousted because it might be contrary to popular thought. I love the respectful debates. I'm getting used to being more open and honest about my (hopefully intelligent) thoughts here, and not just that pollyanna, "I love your photo" yea-saying, only girl. Takes some practice. And as odd as this sounds, thanks for calling me out on it, Lilly. Helps me to see the multiple facets of how I may come across.

Back to your regularly scheduled thread.


----------



## LillyBBBW (Jan 7, 2007)

Yeah the Dutchess of York keeps hers off but she has people who take care of that for her. People who want to have a life and or a career beyond tap dancing around a meal plan are s.o.l. for longterm maintenence unless they have the added energy of ocd working in their favor or a waitstaff who packs bag lunches and will deliver at a moments notice. If one already has a lifestyle that's pretty full it's difficult to incorporate another unless you're willing to compromise one or two. If you're willing to sell a piece of your soul to WW then you'll be a success.


----------



## Mini (Jan 7, 2007)

LillyBBBW said:


> Yeah the Dutchess of York keeps hers off but she has people who take care of that for her. People who want to have a life and or a career beyond tap dancing around a meal plan are s.o.l. for longterm maintenence unless they have the added energy of ocd working in their favor or a waitstaff who packs bag lunches and will deliver at a moments notice. If one already has a lifestyle that's pretty full it's difficult to incorporate another unless you're willing to compromise one or two. If you're willing to sell a piece of your soul to WW then you'll be a success.



I was referring to my aunt. 

She's lost about 60 pounds and has kept it off for the better part of seven years. She doesn't have staff members catering to her every whim, she doesn't have OCD; she just cut back on really high-calorie foods and gets more exercise. Exactly like I said.


----------



## Tooz (Jan 7, 2007)

I had a friend who was forced into WW at the age of 10 (yeah, I know, wtf). She's 21 now and has a multitude of identity and image issues. Granted, WW is not the only factor in it, but I feel it did play a big part.

Also, my mother was in WW for a while in the 70s and lost like 90 pounds. She eventually gained it all back.

Someone suggested it to me once, but I have to say I'd never go. WW, to me, seems like the quintessential "your weight makes you a lesser person, but you can fix it and be awesome by losing it!" thing. If I wanted to lose weight, I'd bust out a fricking ab roller and carrot sticks. Jesus.


----------



## LillyBBBW (Jan 7, 2007)

Mini said:


> I was referring to my aunt.
> 
> She's lost about 60 pounds and has kept it off for the better part of seven years. She doesn't have staff members catering to her every whim, she doesn't have OCD; she just cut back on really high-calorie foods and gets more exercise. Exactly like I said.



Good on her! I'm not saying it can't be done, just saying that it can't be done if it can't be implemented.


----------



## supersoup (Jan 7, 2007)

Mini said:


> I was referring to my aunt.
> 
> She's lost about 60 pounds and has kept it off for the better part of seven years. She doesn't have staff members catering to her every whim, she doesn't have OCD; she just cut back on really high-calorie foods and gets more exercise. Exactly like I said.



i have an aunt that has done the same thing, so i think it works. she lost 57 pounds, and hasn't gained any of it back in close to 3 years, and she does the same thing...aerobics in the morning, eats healthy, and walks every night.


----------



## NFA (Jan 7, 2007)

> She's lost about 60 pounds and has kept it off for the better part of seven years. She doesn't have staff members catering to her every whim, she doesn't have OCD; she just cut back on really high-calorie foods and gets more exercise. Exactly like I said.



Results not typical.


----------



## Miss Vickie (Jan 7, 2007)

Mini said:


> I know people who've lost weight and kept it off with Weight Watchers. They've changed their lifestyles to include more exercise and have cut back on eating unhealthy food.
> 
> Do I think it works for everyone? Not to the degree it shows in the commercials, but it's a proven fact that consuming fewer calories and combining it with exercise (not just walking; actual exercise) will lead to weight loss. Period.
> 
> The controversy, of course, is whether there's any real health benefit to it. Not my area of expertise, I'm afraid.



Mini, I know people who've done well with WW -- in fact probably WW folks are by far the most successful in terms of long term results, at least in my pool of perpetually dieting chick friends. I think the advantage of WW is that a) it's a good mix of foods as opposed to say South Beach, Atkins or Pritikin, so it's more in line with the human's naturally omnivore diet, b) You can be on the diet and still maintain a somewhat normal eating pattern so that makes it more successful. You can have Pizza Hut (just not a whole pizza), ice cream (but not a whole pint), stuff like that. They also have been emphasizing higher fiber, healthier foods, which I like, but they do have convenience foods available as well. 

My problem with WW and why it wasn't successful for me was that at my highest weight I could have something like 29 points. That was actually MORE than I ate on a regular basis. So it didn't work too well for me although "back in the day", before messing up my metabolism with stupid diets, WW was a good way for me to check in on what was a good amount of food for me to lose some weight on, to encourage me to drink water, and to exercise. I lost very little weight (I think 10-15 pounds in six months) but it wasn't painful being on it in the slightest, and I did feel better.

Jenny Craig, OTOH? I lost a ton of weight, felt like crap, and quickly gained it back. Atkins? Never lost an ounce, but ruined my gall bladder. Carbohydrate Addicts diet? Loved it, lost a bit of weight, but it kind of perpetuated a negative eating pattern where I'd eat my biggest, most carb-laden meal at night. 

I think overall it has the most balanced nutrients of any diet, but beyond that I can't really say what the health benefits are. Any program or lifestyle change or what have you that encourages whole foods, lots of water and exercise is a good thing in my book.


----------



## Mini (Jan 7, 2007)

LillyBBBW said:


> Good on her! I'm not saying it can't be done, just saying that it can't be done if it can't be implemented.



Well, yeah. Kinda goes without saying. I think I misunderstood you.


----------



## Miss Vickie (Jan 7, 2007)

NFA said:


> Results not typical.



True, but if she feels better and is healthy what's the harm, as long as the foods she's eating are healthy?

I agree with you completely, though, about disordered eating. But I think it goes beyond dieting and the dieting culture. I think that our whole CULTURE is one of disordered eating. All you can eat buffets, eight burgers for a dollar specials, gallon size drinks of sugared sodas. Not a whole food in sight. I think THAT'S disordered and needs to be changed. If we all ate healthier from the getgo, got more activity on a regular basis, and drank water, we'd all be healthier for it, and maybe even, in the process, be able to maintain weights that work for us.

Please let me be clear. There's nothing wrong with being fat, and we should have the same opportunities for happiness as anyone else. But it can also be hard to be fat. Hard to tie shoes, hard to get around to do the things we want to do to enjoy our lives, hard to maintain our health, etc. I've been to both sides now and while sometimes I miss my fluff (and at 180 pounds I'm no skinny thing), my life is easier now, I can't deny that, and I'm enjoying the weight I am. Maybe that makes me a traitor to the movement, but for me, being over 300 pounds was unhealthy and downright painful. That being said, I support anyone in being happy in their skin at any weight, and if they want to change their weight, I support that as well.

I don't think dieting is the answer, though. I do think, however, that as a culture we need to look at what we're putting into our mouths and pay more attention to quality, rather than quantity. :eat1: :eat2:


----------



## Mini (Jan 7, 2007)

NFA said:


> Results not typical.



Bit of a cop-out, wouldn't you say?


----------



## TheSadeianLinguist (Jan 7, 2007)

Mini said:


> I was referring to my aunt.
> 
> She's lost about 60 pounds and has kept it off for the better part of seven years. She doesn't have staff members catering to her every whim, she doesn't have OCD; she just cut back on really high-calorie foods and gets more exercise. Exactly like I said.



A friend of mine and I were discussing this earlier today. I think there are people who are truly overeaters. Overeating is a hard habit to break. 

And then there are people who are fat. Just plain fat. I do know starving fucks up your metabolism and for that reason crash-dieting is a bad idea. Some people's metabolisms never recover from it. Both recoveries from anorexia nervosa left me fat, 140-ish the first time, and 158 the last time. Yay. However, if I eat pretty much whatever I want, I weigh in the area of 115. My friend, eating junk food several times a week, when she's healthy, weighs about 105 when she's healthy. (She's 5' 5", and also "got heavy" post-recovery, about 120.) Eating a 1200 calorie a day diet, a normal amount for an adult woman, she loses weight. I've known women who gain as much as half a lb. a week eating just slightly more than that.

Overall: Weight Watcher's is probably a good way to learn if you're an overeater or not. Working 8 hour days, driving half a hour in traffic, and still wanting time for a life, people just aren't going to exercise more.


----------



## Mini (Jan 7, 2007)

TheSadeianLinguist said:


> A friend of mine and I were discussing this earlier today. I think there are people who are truly overeaters. Overeating is a hard habit to break.
> 
> And then there are people who are fat. Just plain fat. I do know starving fucks up your metabolism and for that reason crash-dieting is a bad idea. Some people's metabolisms never recover from it. Both recoveries from anorexia nervosa left me fat, 140-ish the first time, and 158 the last time. Yay. However, if I eat pretty much whatever I want, I weigh in the area of 115. My friend, eating junk food several times a week, when she's healthy, weighs about 105 when she's healthy. (She's 5' 5", and also "got heavy" post-recovery, about 120.) Eating a 1200 calorie a day diet, a normal amount for an adult woman, she loses weight. I've known women who gain as much as half a lb. a week eating just slightly more than that.
> 
> Overall: Weight Watcher's is probably a good way to learn if you're an overeater or not. Working 8 hour days, driving half a hour in traffic, and still wanting time for a life, people just aren't going to exercise more.



I would never argue that Weight Watchers is the right choice for everyone. Ideally, people would be happy and healthy at whatever weight they were at, but that's just not the case.

I think Weight Watchers is a better choice than most "diets" because it promotes lifestyle change as opposed to crash dieting. If someone is carrying more baggage than they want, then the option is there. If they're happy and healthy the way they are, that's fine, too.

There, two paragraphs to say exactly nothing. Go me!


----------



## TheSadeianLinguist (Jan 7, 2007)

Mini said:


> I would never argue that Weight Watchers is the right choice for everyone. Ideally, people would be happy and healthy at whatever weight they were at, but that's just not the case.
> 
> I think Weight Watchers is a better choice than most "diets" because it promotes lifestyle change as opposed to crash dieting. If someone is carrying more baggage than they want, then the option is there. If they're happy and healthy the way they are, that's fine, too.
> 
> There, two paragraphs to say exactly nothing. Go me!



I think the only shitty thing is preying on people by advertising that some 500 lb. woman got down to a size 3, in a way that emphasizes your life will be piss perfect if you're thin. One of my favorite commercials from my childhood was a Jenny Craig commercial about how this woman lost weight and then "had the confidence" to find the love of her life. 

A good nutrition plan and exercise benefits anyone, but it's certainly no promise a fat person will no longer be fat. Of course, it's exactly the best marketing scheme to go, "You'll still be fat if you do this, but you'll feel better!" or, "Well, it's still better than slamming down a doughnut." It gets the business in to promise extreme results, but it doesn't keep it.


----------



## liz (di-va) (Jan 7, 2007)

WW was just another cog in the eating disorder-creating/metabolism-ruining/body image-destroying formative teenage/young adult years for me. Whee. Wish it'd go away (get tired of ads).


----------



## Aireman (Jan 8, 2007)

Dr. Feelgood said:


> So far, everyone has been talking as if WW were a diet. It isn't: it's a way of life. it was more like a twelve-step program (or a religion) than a diet.



I did WW for about a year and lost 70 pounds. I have gained about 20 pounds back over the many years since I went. But over all it was a good experiance. The program did teach me about a life style change. Consider that a 22 yr old guys nutrition program might be a bit lacking:eat1: . WW is not so much a diet as a traning program.

Just my two cents.


----------



## BigBeautifulMe (Jan 8, 2007)

Most of these posts (the ones supporting WW) made me want to vomit. 

The fact that they supported my eating-disordered grandmother in projecting her illness onto me by accepting a healthy, fit 9-year-old as a client tells me that there is something inherently wrong with their system. Oh, and obviously they worked quite well for me (not). Luckily, I barely remember the year I spent with them.


----------



## NFA (Jan 8, 2007)

Aireman said:


> I did WW for about a year and lost 70 pounds. I have gained about 20 pounds back over the many years since I went. But over all it was a good experiance. The program did teach me about a life style change. Consider that a 22 yr old guys nutrition program might be a bit lacking:eat1: . WW is not so much a diet as a traning program.
> 
> Just my two cents.



Results not typical. "I did it, so can you!" doesn't change that.

Results NOT typical. WW's words, not mine. Their words over 500 times on their website according to Google. That probably doesn't count the times its buried inside graphics.

Results NOT typical.


----------



## Michelle (Jan 8, 2007)

TheSadeianLinguist said:


> Eating a 1200 calorie a day diet, a normal amount for an adult woman, she loses weight.


 
Casey, for a 5'4" woman weighing 120 pounds to maintain her weight, 1600 calories per day is just about right. 1200 calories is not a maintenance amount of daily intake for a "normal" adult woman who works in a non-active position, unless she's very small. 1200 calories is better described as a dieting amount. Especially if the woman is in an active job.


----------



## Michelle (Jan 8, 2007)

Mini said:


> Do I think it works for everyone? Not to the degree it shows in the commercials, but it's a proven fact that consuming fewer calories and combining it with exercise (not just walking; actual exercise) will lead to weight loss. Period.


 
Mini, regimented walking IS actual exercise for those people who have previously lived a sendentary lifestyle or who are mobility impaired. Many fat people use a walking program as their exercise. In fact, doctors will also recommend regimented walking as exercise and an aid to talking off weight.


----------



## Friday (Jan 8, 2007)

1200 calories a day would in fact probably cause her metabolism to go into slow mode due to her body's perception of short food supplies. When I go that low I don't lose and will in time start to gain at least a little. If I keep my eating at about 1600-1800 calories I slowly lose at a rate of 1-2 pounds a week.

I don't count calories though, I just try to use the basic outline the diabetic clinic's nutritionist gave me.


----------



## Mini (Jan 8, 2007)

Michelle said:


> Mini, regimented walking IS actual exercise for those people who have previously lived a sendentary lifestyle or who are mobility impaired. Many fat people use a walking program as their exercise. In fact, doctors will also recommend regimented walking as exercise and an aid to talking off weight.



Very true. I should have been more specific.

Fat or thin, *everyone* should exercise regularly, be it via walking (a good start), or something more intense.


----------



## BeautifulPoeticDisaster (Jan 8, 2007)

Dr. Feelgood said:


> So far, everyone has been talking as if WW were a diet. It isn't: it's a way of life. This much I have picked up from conversations with my sister-in-law, the former WW Grand Dragon. She joined WW, lost the weight she wanted to, and continued coming back _to make sure she didn't regain the weight_! THIS was always Weight Watchers' big hook: you keep paying your dues, attending the meetings, buying the dinners, etc., so you _won't get fat again. My informant dropped out in disgust after Pillsbury bought WW and changed the program, but while she was in it -- and she was in it for years -- it was more like a twelve-step program (or a religion) than a diet._


_


Exactly. WW if used as a tool to change your life can work. Though it takes a compete change of lifestyle and environment. 

I have been on WW successfully (sort of, lol). In 2001 I got up to 565.7...and I was only 22! I was hell bent on losing weight. I was on it for about year...on and off. I got down to 480. Then I had major life changes (went to univerisity and parents got divorced unexpectedly). I am 523 and stay in between 505 and 530 depending on the time of the month and my circumstances. I have never been back to the high end of 500. Showing that not every person that quits this program will gain all their lost weight back and then some.

I wouldnt say WW would work for everyone...but it can and does work. I know several people who have maintained goal for years after losin 50+ pounds. Im not preching WW here, but of all the programs out there....WW is the one that is livable to me.

[note] when I was on WW I customised it for me. I figured out the math to figuring out points per weight range and adjusted mine accordingly so that I was not starving to death. I was eating 40-45 points a day or something like that. Not WW approved, but it worked for me....until my life fell completely apart.

You've inspired me to give it another go Russell  


*sits back with supersoaker awaiting flames*_


----------



## NFA (Jan 8, 2007)

Gaining back half of the weight lost is proof that the system works? I actually suspect WW agrees, though they probably don't do feature stories on those results. And even then:

RESULTS NOT TYPICAL.

But heaven forbid anyone, anywhere, not be genuflecting before the altar of weight loss and point out out what WW and other diet companies are saying.

Results not typical. As in, this product doesn't work.

---

PINKY: Poit! What if everyone in the world went on a diet?
BRAIN: Diets don't work.
PINKY: Even if you call them "A whole new way of eating?"
BRAIN: No.


----------



## BeautifulPoeticDisaster (Jan 8, 2007)

NFA said:


> Gaining back half of the weight lost is proof that the system works?



Um not proof that it works...it's proof that not everyone who uses WW to lose weight gains it all back. And what Ihave gained back I have deserved...its not like I am slaving away counting points and gaining weight, lol, that would be nuts. And it has been 6 years...so I think it is a fair maintain considering I am not dieting or holding back at all.

I think there is no universal way to eat and be healthy...its a very personal thing.


----------



## LillyBBBW (Jan 8, 2007)

BigBellySSBBW said:


> Um not proof that it works...it's proof that not everyone who uses WW to lose weight gains it all back. And what Ihave gained back I have deserved...its not like I am slaving away counting points and gaining weight, lol, that would be nuts. And it has been 6 years...so I think it is a fair maintain considering I am not dieting or holding back at all.
> 
> I think there is no universal way to eat and be healthy...its a very personal thing.



Why can't you stay on it? Seriously, what happens to you that you can't maintian a program that is supposted to be so perfect, easy and healthy for you? Is it the stress that causes you fail the diet or the insufficiencies of the diet that causes the stress in the first place? Seems to me you can only do this diet if you live a peaceful uneventful life. As soon as the cat pukes and it starts raining outside everyone is reaching for the ice cream. The term for it these days is called yo-yo'ing which by many accounts is more dangerous than if you sat with your hands folded and did nothing.


----------



## Dibaby35 (Jan 8, 2007)

Out of all the programs I was on...WW was the best. But it does cost money so your screwed if you can't afford it anymore 

Oh well have my band now..but I still try and use the tricks I learned from WW to keep myself on track.


----------



## TheSadeianLinguist (Jan 8, 2007)

Michelle said:


> Casey, for a 5'4" woman weighing 120 pounds to maintain her weight, 1600 calories per day is just about right. 1200 calories is not a maintenance amount of daily intake for a "normal" adult woman who works in a non-active position, unless she's very small. 1200 calories is better described as a dieting amount. Especially if the woman is in an active job.



I've been told 1200 to 1800 for women, for maintenance. I think I'm supposed to be eating somewhere between 1300-1400 calories, or was told somewhere in there. It's very much on the low side though, and I have seen people who GAIN on diets of 1500, and not because they were lazy. I have no understanding of metabolism. *Sigh.*

You're right; probably the average person is going to see some loss on a 1200 calorie a day diet. However, I've seen people who experience relatively little or no loss eating about that much, or people who see drastic results.


----------



## BeautifulPoeticDisaster (Jan 8, 2007)

LillyBBBW said:


> Why can't you stay on it? Seriously, what happens to you that you can't maintian a program that is supposted to be so perfect, easy and healthy for you? Is it the stress that causes you fail the diet or the insufficiencies of the diet that causes the stress in the first place? Seems to me you can only do this diet if you live a peaceful uneventful life. As soon as the cat pukes and it starts raining outside everyone is reaching for the ice cream. The term for it these days is called yo-yo'ing which by many accounts is more dangerous than if you sat with your hands folded and did nothing.



wow that was vicious 

my entire family fell apart when my parents split up, thats a bit more than the cat puking. I have no desire to be thin, but I do have to do something. I sat with my hands folded for 2 years. I gained 150lbs. I think it is great if maintaining a weight comes naturally to you. It does not for me. I don't see what the difference is between counting calories and points. People on this board talk about eating healthy all the time and because I chose to do it in this said manner, I am now evil. I dont think WW is for everyone, I have said that over and over and over.

Your post was mean and accusatory. Im not perfect. I don't claim to be. Why is it everything is so black and white here? Can't people express a different opinion without being made to feel like shit? That response to me was not a general response, it is filled with "you" and "your" implying a direct response to me.

I'm at a loss as to what to say. It was mean.


----------



## out.of.habit (Jan 8, 2007)

Just tossing another concern in here...

It seems like Weight Watchers, like a bad therapist, creates an lifestyle of need and dependence on their system. So, as it's been said, you continue to pay them, and they continue to tell you that you can't live without them, that you're damaged, that you're not strong enough to ever leave, that you can't trust yourself to eat normally ever again. They report that they have one-size-fits-all plans for weight loss, one-size-fits-all plans for maintainence, but even admit they aren't nutritional experts when they tell you that in order to be accepted as someone at "goal" above their standardized weights for people of all types, you must get a doctor's note stating that "just a little fatter" is the right weight for you. (Wandering off thought, sorry.)

I guess I take ethical issue with a company that purports to give you the _framework_ for a healthy lifestyle on your own (some yes, some no), while simultaneously telling you that you will never be able to live without their support. The mixed messages are amazing... you walk in, and they don't even talk to you until you've paid your $35 and get weighed, and continue to tell you, "You can be beautiful if..." and "You can be healthy if...," basing their initial opinions about whether you are healthy or beautiful, or acceptable on the number they see on their side of the scale. Fuck, you get a gold star and a bookmark if you lose 10lbs, and if you stay for 16 weeks, you get the special "praying hands" charm that means, "Oh, you're really in the club now." If you lose 10% of your body weight, you get a keychain to put it on! Woo!

Sorry. You can see they are very near and dear to my heart, and the topic strikes not only one nerve, but several, if not my entire central nervous system. 
Now, if you'll excuse me, I think I need to count the points I'm about to consume in form of chocolate and coffee.

*Results not typical. 

(Sorry about the rant, I tried to stop it, but it bitch slapped me and typed itself.)


----------



## BeautifulPoeticDisaster (Jan 8, 2007)

out.of.habit said:


> Now, if you'll excuse me, I think I need to count the points I'm about to consume in form of chocolate and coffee.
> 
> *Results not typical.
> 
> (Sorry about the rant, I tried to stop it, but it bitch slapped me and typed itself.)




LOL. 

I don't typically pump money in the system so to speak. I know how it work enough to be able to do it alone, at home, for free=) It's easier than counting calories to me....smaller numbers and all

I do hate the diet industry and I do believe WW is a huge part of that industry, I was just sharing a personal opinion...as the post title invited me to do.


----------



## out.of.habit (Jan 8, 2007)

BigBellySSBBW said:


> my entire family fell apart when my parents split up, thats a bit more than the cat puking.



When one's world spins out of control, it follows one's eating patterns would be affected. You're right, that's not a fair comparison.

Though, I think Lilly was saying that yo-yo-ing is worse for one's health than just outright gaining, not that one wouldn't gain if they didn't yo-yo. 



BigBellySSBBW said:


> Can't people express a different opinion without being made to feel like shit?



I think this is what I meant by hot-button issue. Weight loss is a very personal and painful thing that many people go through before they get here. Sometimes they still go through it once they get to Dimensions, but the difference is that they are receiving some fat-positive messages, and hopefully that's a protective factor for how shitty they feel about themselves when they have a 'gain week', or 'cheat' on their diets. 

Even after being here at Dim for a while, it is hard to separate the criticism of weight loss with one's self-worth when you need to lose for health reasons, or you haven't entirely abandoned the idea that you're not quite thin enough yourself, even if you think fat is lovely, but you think you should be slightly less so. 
("You here, as a generalization.)


----------



## LillyBBBW (Jan 8, 2007)

The questions I asked were not an attack, just a general observation about diets or wol in general. (wol=way of life) I noticed that whenever I embark apon any kind of lifestyle change I seem to do well untill something goes wrong. Suddenly at that point the regimine becomes insufficient or inconvenient and I don't have the stamina to keep up with it. Either it's not enough or it's too much to handle, I don't know. I was not trying to suggest that your family situation wasn't real or stressfull. My apologies if it came off that way. Bottom line, I've gotten to the point where I'm sick of the 'one program is all you need to get by' approach. I think a body's nutritional needs change from moment to moment, needing more and less depending on what stage you're in. I was merely interested in your experiences because they sounded something like mine. 




BigBellySSBBW said:


> wow that was vicious
> 
> my entire family fell apart when my parents split up, thats a bit more than the cat puking. I have no desire to be thin, but I do have to do something. I sat with my hands folded for 2 years. I gained 150lbs. I think it is great if maintaining a weight comes naturally to you. It does not for me. I don't see what the difference is between counting calories and points. People on this board talk about eating healthy all the time and because I chose to do it in this said manner, I am now evil. I dont think WW is for everyone, I have said that over and over and over.
> 
> ...


----------



## BeautifulPoeticDisaster (Jan 8, 2007)

out.of.habit said:


> When one's world spins out of control, it follows one's eating patterns would be affected. You're right, that's not a fair comparison.
> 
> Though, I think Lilly was saying that yo-yo-ing is worse for one's health than just outright gaining, not that one wouldn't gain if they didn't yo-yo.
> 
> ...



Oh I think my fat is lovely, and I adore my body. I just cant stand not being able to be as active as I want to be. My idea of thin as a twig is 250. I want to be 400...thats all.

As far as diet mentality, I dont belive in cheating, lol...I believe in eating more somedays. When I am PMSing I could out eat just about anyone. I can't get full. I don't consider that a failure. I consider it life.

As far as weight loss goes. I don't consider myself a failure, even now, lol. I consider myself on a break...a long break.

I am not losing for looks. Im damn fine. Im losing for health and longevity...an issue most here have not had to deal with on the scale that I have. So it strikes a chord when people sorta tell me I don't have the right to lose weight and find what works for me.

But I feel better now. I had a good cry. My second one over Dim boards today. Not sure if I have a thick enough skin to be here. I take everything far too personally. Im a softie like that.


----------



## Punkin1024 (Jan 8, 2007)

I've done WW 3 times in my life. Everytime, I'd dropped around 30 pounds or so and then reached a "plateau". I always got tired of counting calories, points, whatever and just stopped doing it. Though, I will say that I did learn a lot about eating healthy and nutrition. As BigBellySSBW said - it isn't for everybody. I believe that I did get some good out of the nutrition info I got from WW and I've seen people that worked the plan and have maintained for years. It all depends on what you want in life, what is important to you. Personally, I'd rather eat as healthfully as I can, exercise and just take it from there. I've accepted myself as I am and I'm comfortable with it - and that is what really matters.

~Punkin


----------



## BeautifulPoeticDisaster (Jan 8, 2007)

LillyBBBW said:


> The questions I asked were not an attack, just a general observation about diets or wol in general. (wol=way of life) I noticed that whenever I embark apon any kind of lifestyle change I seem to do well untill something goes wrong. Suddenly at that point the regimine becomes insufficient or inconvenient and I don't have the stamina to keep up with it. Either it's not enough or it's too much to handle, I don't know. I was not trying to suggest that your family situation wasn't real or stressfull. My apologies if it came off that way. Bottom line, I've gotten to the point where I'm sick of the 'one program is all you need to get by' approach. I think a body's nutritional needs change from moment to moment, needing more and less depending on what stage you're in. I was merely interested in your experiences because they sounded something like mine.




Ok you want a honest response? you got it.

When my life falls apart to any degree, the first thing to go...is me. Eating, sleeping, paying bills etc. I will stop taking care of me to get whatever else needs to be done, to help whomever needs help...and then in the end I am left with chaos.

Sorry I am so sensitive, but my parents divorced when I was 25. (Im 28 now) It was sudden. My family grew up with the love lasts forever mantra...and in one weekend it was all over. I still have nightmares....even moreso now that I am with Mike in a safe place. I wake up crying because I dream my parents are getting back together. I can't even explain how painful it is to want to go home...when home doesn't exist. Lots of people go through the seperation of a family, but when you go from "Families are Forever" to the end in less than 48 hours Easter weekend...it is rough. I haven't dealt with it properly (obviously). I don't know how to fix the hurt it has caused. And it's not anyones problem here, so sorry for bogging people down.

That being said. It's not just my eating/dieting that goes nuts when the cat pukes...it's everything. I'm a fairly selfless person when I need to be. My mom needed me, my sister went missing...etc. 

I don't have any advice. I obviously can't even keep a clear head while making a post. 

In short, Im losing weight for the right reasons. I don't believe in a uniform plan for anyone. I took the idea behind WW and made it my own. I didn't pay for it. I have my own scale to weight myself. I believe in healthy eating. Which seems to be easier when not single. I thought it would opposite...but its not. 

Ok seriously, I need to go cry again, lol. effing womanhood and hormones!


----------



## out.of.habit (Jan 8, 2007)

BigBellySSBBW said:


> Im a softie like that.



I know exactly what you mean. But again, all those "you"s in that last post, generalized to the world. lol, and NFA will agree when I say "Results not typical." in regard to my own post.


----------



## tinkerbell (Jan 8, 2007)

A year and a half ago, I did WW and lost 25 lbs. I never actually paid for the system - found everything I needed on the net  (and from friends who paid for everything) It does work, if you follow it, and overall, it wasnt too hard for me to follow - you just have to be committed to counting points, and measuring out your food. I was also working out on a regular basis, and FELT better. 

I stopped doing it - found many excuses to stop counting, and to stop exercising, so of course I gained it all back. I don't blame the WW program - thats my own fault for eating junk and not exercising. 

I've never been to a meeting - so I don't have an opinion on how that works. I just know for me, the actual WW plan did work, and would have kept working for me if I would have stuck with it.


----------



## LillyBBBW (Jan 8, 2007)

I'm sorry about your family's breakup, hun. My parents fought all the time and I wished, *prayed* that the two of them would divorce and bring us all some peace but alas they will quibble and fight each other jostling back and fourth chasing to the grave it appears. My family puts the funk in disfunctional, all of them and I often have fantisies of standing up and just walking away to become somebody else, or at the very least changing and unlisting my telephone number without notice. Truly I am sorry for what you're going through and sorry if I may have kicked a little salt in it. 

There aren't too many studies that I've heard of or found that talk about nutritional needs when a body is under a tremendous amount of stress. I find that most diets, even balanced ones don't address this. The body needs more during this time I am convinced. Once during a stressfull family drama I deliberatley became obsessed with staying on course. I said, "Damn those freaks to hell, I'm not going to give it to them." I remember I got so sick. Seriously I was lethargic and my physical symptoms grew worse as my body's hunger response kicked up to high velocity. It's one of the reasons I'm convinced that no cookie cutter plan will always fit since our lives, habits and physical needs seem to change from moment to moment. 




BigBellySSBBW said:


> Ok you want a honest response? you got it.
> 
> When my life falls apart to any degree, the first thing to go...is me. Eating, sleeping, paying bills etc. I will stop taking care of me to get whatever else needs to be done, to help whomever needs help...and then in the end I am left with chaos.
> 
> ...


----------



## runningman (Jan 8, 2007)

LillyBBBW said:


> I'm sorry about your family's breakup, hun. My parents fought all the time and I wished, *prayed* that the two of them would divorce and bring us all some peace but alas they will quibble and fight each other jostling back and fourth chasing to the grave it appears. My family puts the funk in disfunctional, all of them and I often have fantisies of standing up and just walking away to become somebody else, or at the very least changing and unlisting my telephone number without notice. Truly I am sorry for what you're going through and sorry if I may have kicked a little salt in it.
> 
> There aren't too many studies that I've heard of or found that talk about nutritional needs when a body is under a tremendous amount of stress. I find that most diets, even balanced ones don't address this. The body needs more during this time I am convinced. Once during a stressfull family drama I deliberatley became obsessed with staying on course. I said, "Damn those freaks to hell, I'm not going to give it to them." I remember I got so sick. Seriously I was lethargic and my physical symptoms grew worse as my body's hunger response kicked up to high velocity. It's one of the reasons I'm convinced that no cookie cutter plan will always fit since our lives, habits and physical needs seem to change from moment to moment.



This is so true. How can WW say I have to live to 1300 calories a day when we do different amounts of exercise a day. I'm not talking about exercise routines in the gym. I mean everyday things we have to do. We might walk downstairs and realise we've left something upstairs that we have to go back to get. It all burns calories. If you are somewhere cold you will automatically burn more calories coz your body needs them to keep warm. WW can't possibly take into account all these little differences. And I would tend to agree that we probably need more calories to cope with emotional upheavel. Doubtless there's no physical evidence to support this but it stands to reason. The primary reason for eating is to burn calories for fuel. When people are stressed they use up alot of emotional energy. Hence the need to replace it. I think the last 4 lines demonstrate why I'm not a scientist!! But hopefully you all get my drift.


----------



## NFA (Jan 8, 2007)

tinkerbell said:


> A year and a half ago, I did WW and lost 25 lbs. I never actually paid for the system - found everything I needed on the net  (and from friends who paid for everything) It does work, if you follow it, and overall, it wasnt too hard for me to follow - you just have to be committed to counting points, and measuring out your food. I was also working out on a regular basis, and FELT better.
> 
> I stopped doing it - found many excuses to stop counting, and to stop exercising, so of course I gained it all back. I don't blame the WW program - thats my own fault for eating junk and not exercising.
> 
> I've never been to a meeting - so I don't have an opinion on how that works. I just know for me, the actual WW plan did work, and would have kept working for me if I would have stuck with it.



RESULTS NOT TYPICAL!

No. Fat people are not to blame for being fat. Not when NOTHING has been shown effective or safe at turning a fat person into a not-fat person.

Results Not Typical.

Fat people aren't failures because they don't keep up with disordered eating plans. Fat people aren't failures if something that works maybe 1% of the time doesn't work. Fat people are not failures because they are fat.

Results NOT typical.

Weight loss doesn't work if you try really hard. It doesn't work if you really really want it to. It doesn't work if you really really need it to. It doesn't work. "Successes" are atypical. We need to stop putting the burden on fat people by blaming them personnelly for the failures of a system which doesn't work 99% of the time. When something fails 99% of the time, "user error" stops being a reasonable explanation. I don't care if WW tells you you're responsible for being fat. I don't care if Jenny Craig tells you to feel responsible for being fat. I don't care if NutraSystem tells you to feel responsible for being fat. I don't even care if you now tell yourself to feel responsible for being fat.

Results not typical.


----------



## moonvine (Jan 8, 2007)

Dr. Feelgood said:


> So far, everyone has been talking as if WW were a diet. It isn't: it's a way of life.



Hate to break this to you, but the diet industry is hip to the fact that people are recognizing diets don't work. Now they advertise themselves as "lifestyles" or "ways of life" or whatever other term they can come up with. It is still a diet. 

I dug up this data on the web that shows that WW participants lost an average of 6 pounds, at a cost of $180 per pound lost:



> Weight Watchers does not work. After decades of refusing to publish outcome data, a report has finally appeared (JAMA, April 9 2003 isssue, volume 289:1792-1798). 400 women were randomly assigned to Weight Watchers or to "self-help", which consisted of handing them a brochure. After two years of weekly meetings, weekly weigh-ins and one-on-one consultations the WW group had lost 2.9 kg (6 lbs). They had lost 4.5 kg at the end of the first year but were progressively regaining. Based on the $11 price of the weekly meeting alone, each pound of weight lost cost the experimenters $180.



http://smtd.fullbleed.net/archives/2003_07.html


----------



## moonvine (Jan 8, 2007)

Mini said:


> Do I think it works for everyone? Not to the degree it shows in the commercials, but it's a proven fact that consuming fewer calories and combining it with exercise (not just walking; actual exercise) will lead to weight loss. Period.



Fewer calories than what? I believe our own Vickie went on WW and gained weight. I hope she'll be around to tell her story here, but IIRC she exercised dedicatedly for years and ate few calories and didn't lose substantial amounts of weight. IIRC she was able to maintain her weight by doing this.

It is most certainly not a proven fact. Usually when I hear stuff like that it is coming from a troll. One would think those here would be more enlightened.


----------



## moonvine (Jan 8, 2007)

TheSadeianLinguist said:


> I've been told 1200 to 1800 for women, for maintenance. I think I'm supposed to be eating somewhere between 1300-1400 calories, or was told somewhere in there. It's very much on the low side though, and I have seen people who GAIN on diets of 1500, and not because they were lazy. I have no understanding of metabolism. *Sigh.*
> 
> You're right; probably the average person is going to see some loss on a 1200 calorie a day diet. However, I've seen people who experience relatively little or no loss eating about that much, or people who see drastic results.



Casey, I would research this more. I believe that the World Health Organization defines 1200 kcal per day as either starvation or semistarvation level. I would not think that would be a healthy amount for anyone unless they were extremely small to begin with. My mother is 98 pounds, so maybe it is a good amount for her - and I doubt she eats that much, but I don't think it is a good amount for someone of more average weight.


----------



## moonvine (Jan 8, 2007)

NFA said:


> RESULTS NOT TYPICAL!
> 
> No. Fat people are not to blame for being fat. Not when NOTHING has been shown effective or safe at turning a fat person into a not-fat person.
> 
> Results Not Typical.



*Still being out of rep for NFA, goes dedicatedly to work on the "clone NFA project."*


----------



## GWARrior (Jan 8, 2007)

NFA said:


> RESULTS NOT TYPICAL



its pretty funny how you keep saying that to everyone person on this board that has lost weight with the program.

i dunno. seems pretty typical.


----------



## Sandie_Zitkus (Jan 8, 2007)

I hate posts like this that get people who like each other saying mean things to each other because one thinks dieting can work and the other thinks all diets are going to fail.

If you want to diet - *do so *- if you don't - *then don't.* And respect each others right to do what is right for them

It really is that simple.

As for me - many of you would be on my ass about what I am doing to lose weight. But it's my choice and one I choose to keep to myself. My mobility is severely compromised by my weight and I want my life back. So I do what I think is right and keep my mouth shut about what it is.

Works for me.:bow:


----------



## runningman (Jan 8, 2007)

Sandie_Zitkus said:


> I hate posts like this that get people who like each other saying mean things to each other because one thinks dieting can work and the other thinks all diets are going to fail.
> 
> If you want to diet - *do so *- if you don't - *then don't.* And respect each others right to do what is right for them
> 
> ...



Here, here. I was just thinking exactly the same. I'm an FA so therefore love big girls and hate the word diet! But at the same time you can't go around proclaiming all diets are for shit and nothing works because if someone feels uncomfortable at the size they are they should lose weight. When they do this hopefully they will have the support of as many people close to them as possible - partners, close friends, family etc. Lord knows it must be difficult enough without being told it's all worthless and impossible. So as Sandie pointed out - if it's right for you do it, if not don't. 

I think I just championed the cause of dieting. I need some medication!


----------



## NFA (Jan 8, 2007)

GWARrior said:


> its pretty funny how you keep saying that to everyone person on this board that has lost weight with the program.
> 
> i dunno. seems pretty typical.



And that is how lies become enshrined as fact. Because ultimately, there will be enough people who think if something is repeated a couple times that makes it true. Doesn't matter that statistics show WW doesn't work. Doesn't matter that WEIGHT WATCHERS THEMSELVES say "Results Not Typical" because they know they can't stand behind product. You get a couple "success" stories, and people won't care that you just admited that the product doesn't work. Its proven enough for them. Truth becomes irrelevant. That's why the diet companies all so quickly agreed to label their products as ineffective. Because they know the culture of weight stigmatization is so strong, it just won't matter. People will believe the lie they want to believe rather than the truth appended with an asterix. People will believe that fat people are moral failures and if they are just good enough, it'll work for them. People will drown themselves in blame and self-loathing and shield a multi-million-dollar business that knows its product doesn't work. The multi-million dollar businesses depend on that dynamic and are all too eager to promote a culture which scorns and debases fat people as living embodiments of failure. They want users who always assume its their fault and who don't question why their products fail at such an extreme rate. They don't want people questioning the system, they want them hating themselves. And they know even admitting the ineffectiveness of their product won't change that one bit.

RESULTS NOT TYPICAL. Clearly it hasn't been repeated enough.


----------



## Sandie_Zitkus (Jan 8, 2007)

And some people will lose weight and be healthier and live longer lives.

Why do you care so much what others do that does not effect you??

OH and here is another point to think about:

Diets do work. If you lose weight on that diet (whichever it is) it worked. If you then choose to go off the diet and go back to your original eating habits - you will gain back the weight. That's not the diets fault - it did what it said it would do. Not changing your eating habits for a lifetime is the culprit - not diets.



NFA said:


> And that is how lies become enshrined as fact. Because ultimately, there will be enough people who think if something is repeated a couple times that makes it true. Doesn't matter that statistics show WW doesn't work. Doesn't matter that WEIGHT WATCHERS THEMSELVES say "Results Not Typical" because they know they can't stand behind product. You get a couple "success" stories, and people won't care that you just admited that the product doesn't work. Its proven enough for them. Truth becomes irrelevant. That's why the diet companies all so quickly agreed to label their products as ineffective. Because they know the culture of weight stigmatization is so strong, it just won't matter. People will believe the lie they want to believe rather than the truth apprended with an asterix. People will believe that fat people are moral failures and if they are just good enough, it'll work for them. People will drown themselves in blame and self-loathing and shield a multi-million-dollar business that knows its product doesn't work. The multi-million dollar businesses depend on that dynamic and are all too eager to promote a culture which scorns and debases fat people as living embodiments of failure. They want users who always assume its their fault and who don't question why their products fail at such an extreme rate. They don't want people questioning the system, they want them hating themselves. And they know even admitting the ineffectiveness of their product won't change that one bit.
> 
> RESULTS NOT TYPICAL. Clearly it hasn't been repeated enough.


----------



## Miss Vickie (Jan 8, 2007)

Sandie_Zitkus said:


> If you want to diet - *do so *- if you don't - *then don't.* And respect each others right to do what is right for them
> 
> It really is that simple.



Wise words, Sandie. I agree completely.



> As for me - many of you would be on my ass about what I am doing to lose weight. But it's my choice and one I choose to keep to myself. My mobility is severely compromised by my weight and I want my life back. So I do what I think is right and keep my mouth shut about what it is.
> 
> Works for me.:bow:



Best of luck to you in your efforts to become mobile again. I know it isn't easy, and I hope things go really well for you.



Sandie_Zitkus said:


> And some people will lose weight and be healthier and live longer lives.
> 
> Why do you care so much what others do that does not effect you??



That's a good question. Your choosing to lose weight for your own health doesn't change the fact that we all deserve to be treated fairly, and with dignity. In that way, I'd like to think that we're all on the same page.


----------



## Aliena (Jan 8, 2007)

Michelle, you're right about maintaining weight being above 1200 calories. My miniture education has taught me that a maintaining weight caloric intake for a woman of (and I use this word lightly) 'normal' circumstances is around 1400-1800 calories a day. 1200 calories is a weight loss number as I understand it, even for someone of a smaller size, simply because of metabolic issues. 

Mini, walking is hard core exercise, especially for me, as it gets my cardio up and running. If I maintain it for a good 20-30 minutes, it builds my stamina, strengthens my muscles, and pumps the blood through the heart, thus making it stronger. It is considered a valid form of a good cardio enhancing workout.


----------



## Sandie_Zitkus (Jan 8, 2007)

Thank you Vickie your words mean a lot. 




Miss Vickie said:


> Wise words, Sandie. I agree completely.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## BeautifulPoeticDisaster (Jan 8, 2007)

Sandie....there are several things I wanted to rep you for...but alas..it would only let me do it once...so I hope it got you good! :d Limited mobility is hard for others to understand. I find that even more true for FA's...except when they start to get a little chuby and decide deiting is ok. But I shall save the "hypocrisy in fat admiration" discussion for another post.



To Lilly: I really REALLY adore you...that's why I took earlier so personal. Im sorry.


----------



## Dibaby35 (Jan 8, 2007)

I just wanted to add one more thing that I do like about WW. If you do get to goal as long as you maintain your weight close to your goal they let you attend meetings for free. So it doesn't have to be a constant money sucker if you get to goal. Just didn't know if everyone knew that.


----------



## Mini (Jan 8, 2007)

moonvine said:


> Fewer calories than what? I believe our own Vickie went on WW and gained weight. I hope she'll be around to tell her story here, but IIRC she exercised dedicatedly for years and ate few calories and didn't lose substantial amounts of weight. IIRC she was able to maintain her weight by doing this.
> 
> It is most certainly not a proven fact. Usually when I hear stuff like that it is coming from a troll. One would think those here would be more enlightened.



I've got enlightenment coming out of the ass, m'dear. 

There are *so* many things I could say right here, but I'm not going to bother. It's not worth the rift.


----------



## ripley (Jan 8, 2007)

Mini and TSL...firstly let me say that I respect you as long-time contributing members of Dimensions.

Secondly, your opinions about weight loss have less weight for me than a fart in a hurricane. Neither of you has been fat (I don't agree that a 150 lb. woman is fat) and certainly neither one of you has been obese (let alone morbidly obese). I don't care if your aunt's cousin's best friend's therapist's pedicurist lost 800 pounds on WW and kept if off till the day they died, withered and clutching a celery stick. YOU have never done WW. I'm not sure really why either one of you would post so many times to this thread. 

I'm really not trying to be mean, but I just want you to realize that the life of your average obese/morbidly obese person is totally beyond your ken.





Caveats, apologies, etc....
I am not attacking anyone. 
I don't personally stand behind the words "obese" or "morbidly obese." I used them to bluntly prove a point. 
I'm not saying that anyone should or should not post to this thread. I just really don't understand.


----------



## Tracyarts (Jan 8, 2007)

I guess the thing that bothers me, is that those who are so anti-weight loss have never dealt with any of the really bad things being very fat can cause. 

Lose your mobility, your health, your independence, and your very ability to live a meaningful life and then get back to me with your hardcore diet stance. I have seen people TOTALLY change their diet stance when it was their health and mobility or their wife's ability to earn money and take care of herself at stake. 

Tracy


----------



## LillyBBBW (Jan 8, 2007)

BigBellySSBBW said:


> <Snipped>
> 
> To Lilly: I really REALLY adore you...that's why I took earlier so personal. Im sorry.



You have nothing at all to apologize for. I'm just glad you spoke up. Sometimes I get so caught up in my own personal frustrations about a subject that I blurt things out not realizing how it comes across. I didn't mean to toss it to you so hard. I'm sorry. You are one of my favorites here. I've missed your postings.


----------



## TheSadeianLinguist (Jan 8, 2007)

Well, I don't take offense, because nothing personal was said. 

WW, overall, is kind of aimed at the really fat, but really, it's aimed more at your average size woman. As a kid, I actually DID participate in a local program similar to Weight Watchers. I was 10. My dad was worried about me being fat, although, about a year ago I realized, no, I was never fat during my childhood. Talk about a piss-off.  

For me, it certainly didn't help my attitude about food and exercise, and although it wasn't WW, I can't imagine WW is much better. The similar program was not a help to me. It helped surface a few lifetime fears: Fear of others watching me weigh, exercise. 

No, thankfully, I've NEVER had to deal with the awful parts and discrimination of being really fat. Wouldn't want to. What I do know: If this sort of program DOESN'T work for you, it's emotionally devastating.




ripley said:


> Mini and TSL...firstly let me say that I respect you as long-time contributing members of Dimensions.
> 
> Secondly, your opinions about weight loss have less weight for me than a fart in a hurricane. Neither of you has been fat (I don't agree that a 150 lb. woman is fat) and certainly neither one of you has been obese (let alone morbidly obese). I don't care if your aunt's cousin's best friend's therapist's pedicurist lost 800 pounds on WW and kept if off till the day they died, withered and clutching a celery stick. YOU have never done WW. I'm not sure really why either one of you would post so many times to this thread.
> 
> ...


----------



## LillyBBBW (Jan 8, 2007)

Tracyarts said:


> I guess the thing that bothers me, is that those who are so anti-weight loss have never dealt with any of the really bad things being very fat can cause.
> 
> Lose your mobility, your health, your independence, and your very ability to live a meaningful life and then get back to me with your hardcore diet stance. I have seen people TOTALLY change their diet stance when it was their health and mobility or their wife's ability to earn money and take care of herself at stake.
> 
> Tracy



This is not about weight loss. This is about Weight Watchers. Nobody here has stated an opinion that weight loss is wrong for people who need it. The premise of this thread is to argue that the numbers just don't support the assumption that Weight Watchers is the raging success its advertising suggests.


----------



## Donna (Jan 8, 2007)

TheSadeianLinguist said:


> No, thankfully, I've NEVER had to deal with the awful parts and discrimination of being really fat. Wouldn't want to. What I do know: If this sort of program DOESN'T work for you, it's emotionally devastating.




Would you expound on this last statement a little further? I am trying not to read between the lines, but it's coming off sounding like you are saying that those of us who are really fat are pinning our life's hope on a diet program?


----------



## TheSadeianLinguist (Jan 8, 2007)

Donnaalicious said:


> Would you expound on this last statement a little further? I am trying not to read between the lines, but it's coming off sounding like you are saying that those of us who are really fat are pinning our life's hope on a diet program?



I only meant for myself, from a 10 y/o's perspective, at which point "fatness" is terrifying. Should have clarified.


----------



## Friday (Jan 8, 2007)

The trouble with WW's (and any other diet) comes when people think that 'a diet' is something you go on temporarily and come off when you have achieved your goal. Your diet is what goes in your mouth, period. If you expect to reach and maintain any kind of goal, whether it's gaining or losing, or controlling diabetes or gout (for example) without any desire to change your current weight, you aren't going to make it and stay there unless you make permanent changes.

And anyone who thinks that I am somehow not a member in good standing of the SA movement because I chose to make changes in my diet to control my blood sugar and blood pressure, and to be able to reach my own feet can kiss my ass.


----------



## Violet_Beauregard (Jan 8, 2007)

Good heavens...what a thread this has turned out to be! None of this is worth fighting over - remember - everyone is entitled to their opinion. That said, I have to agree with Sandie. If you want to diet, then diet. If you don't then don't. Not every diet, works for every person, regardless of the diet. Everyone's metabolism and physical make up is not ideal for every diet. WW might work for one person and not for another. It depends on the person and what they put into it, and how the diet reacts with their own body. I was on WW, several times. The basic premise is that they teach you to make healthier food choices in combination with exercise. Nothing more, nothing less. They never guaranteed a certain amount of pounds lost. They were very encouraging if you didn't lose as much as you thought you should that week and were constantly offering suggestions regarding menu choices and alternatives. "Results not typical" is the case, but the average person on the diet will lose something. Any diet is a change in your eating habits and life style, that is a life long change. You cannot lose 95 pounds and say "Ok great, I'm skinny" and go right back to your former eating habits. You'll gain it all back, and then some. Been there, done that. 

People are overweight for various reasons as well. In my case, it's in our family genes. Others might have medical problems that cause weight gain. Still others may have emotional problems that are soothed by eating. Then there are those of us who are all of the above. Whatever the reason, people are overweight. If you are happy, healthy and love yourself, it doesn't matter what size you are...live your life. If you feel you want to be thinner (not I did not say "thin"..."thin" is relative), then find the eating habit (not diet) that is best for you, along with exercise that is best for you.

As far as what others think.... it's not my business what this person chooses as their eating habit or that person chooses as their eating habit. What matters to me is what my eating habit it. Everyone should have that same feeling. People complain about everyone else minding their business, yet they're the first ones to stick their nose into someone else's business. (I am absolutely not referring to anyone on this board - let me qualify that right now).

To wrap this up - I'll reiterate what I said and what Sandie said.... If you want to diet - then diet. If you don't - then don't.

Ok.... I ready for the tongue lashing.... bring it on!! LOLOL


----------



## SamanthaNY (Jan 8, 2007)

Friday said:


> And anyone who thinks that I am somehow not a member in good standing of the SA movement because I chose to make changes in my diet to control my blood sugar and blood pressure, and to be able to reach my own feet can kiss my ass.



LOVE THIS - love it.:wubu: :wubu:


----------



## Aireman (Jan 8, 2007)

NFA said:


> Results not typical. "I did it, so can you!" doesn't change that.
> 
> Results NOT typical. WW's words, not mine. Their words over 500 times on their website according to Google. That probably doesn't count the times its buried inside graphics.
> 
> Results NOT typical.



How many times can you repeat yourself??? I never said WW is the cure all end all, nor did I say everyone whoever went to WW lost weight. I don't think WW or any diet program is evil. Someone forced to go is evil. Societies focus on body shape is evil. Anyone who hates something based on an OPINION is wacko! Not just WW but ALL diet programs are forced to state "results not typical". Focus your energy on a positve endever. 

My three cents.


----------



## Russell Williams (Jan 8, 2007)

That if someone suggests to you that you should go on a weight loss diet there is a good deal of scientific evidence to suggest that the proper answer to that statement is, "Why do you think I should be fatter?"

I have talked with probably hundreds of fat women about their dieting histories. Almost all of them tell of diet by diet getting fatter and fatter.

I would like to see an ad for one of these weight-loss dieting programs that showed a before and after picture. The after picture was taken about three years after the weight-loss diet was started. The after picture showed the person being bigger than when they first started. Underneath the picture was the statement, "These results are typical".


----------



## Violet_Beauregard (Jan 8, 2007)

BigBellySSBBW said:


> But I feel better now. I had a good cry. My second one over Dim boards today. Not sure if I have a thick enough skin to be here. I take everything far too personally. Im a softie like that.




Though I understand the need to... don't cry. It's really not worth it. (though I'm a firm believer that a good cry does wonders...) Everyone is entitled to their own opinion....including you sweetie. Relax and move on. Don't dwell on it. 

Here.... have a cookie..... :eat2: A yummy cookie does it for me every time!!

Feel better?


----------



## Violet_Beauregard (Jan 8, 2007)

Aireman said:


> How many times can you repeat yourself???





Amen.....

Can we say broken record???


----------



## Sandie_Zitkus (Jan 8, 2007)

I'll say amen to that Tracy 






Tracyarts said:


> I guess the thing that bothers me, is that those who are so anti-weight loss have never dealt with any of the really bad things being very fat can cause.
> 
> Lose your mobility, your health, your independence, and your very ability to live a meaningful life and then get back to me with your hardcore diet stance. I have seen people TOTALLY change their diet stance when it was their health and mobility or their wife's ability to earn money and take care of herself at stake.
> 
> Tracy


----------



## GWARrior (Jan 8, 2007)

broken record.


----------



## NFA (Jan 9, 2007)

Aireman said:


> How many times can you repeat yourself??? I never said WW is the cure all end all, nor did I say everyone whoever went to WW lost weight. I don't think WW or any diet program is evil. Someone forced to go is evil. Societies focus on body shape is evil. Anyone who hates something based on an OPINION is wacko! Not just WW but ALL diet programs are forced to state "results not typical". Focus your energy on a positve endever.
> 
> My three cents.



As long as there are people who think one "success" justifies telling fat people they are FAILURES, I will keep pointing out the inconvenient FACTS that some people don't want to hear.

RESULTS NOT TYPICAL.

The product DOES NOT WORK. THE COMPANY ADMITS IT. Weight Watchers admits it. Jenny Craig Admits it. NutraSystem admits it. SlimFast admits it. They are FORCED to state "results not typical", because otherwise they are breaking the LAW by engaging in deceptive advertising. The depend on others who are not bound by the same legal restraints as they are to spread the lie. So as long as its spread, it should be noted...

RESULTS STILL NOT TYPICAL.

I don't care about the "Clap louder" crowd who think they can drown out the TRUTH by simply repeating a lie enough. RESULTS NOT TYPICAL.

Why are YOU people insisting on repeating yourselves over and over again when RESULTS ARE NOT TYPICAL? Why is it the hard truth that can't be repeated, but the "feel good" deception can get repeated ad infinitum? The "feel good" line which assumes any fat person who has not turned themselves into a not-fat person is a failure. I don't feel good about that. I don't feel good about something promoted so long and so hard that its made people feel personally responsible for something not of their making and making them lash out at anyone who doesn't agree. It was STUPID that this got brought up in the first place, but its brought up. And I don't care how many people want to turn this into a WW Club meeting. Its NOT. I don't go to WW club meetings. I don't stalk Jenny Craig centers. This is not a diet club. You didn't want anyone to disagree with you, then don't say anything. Don't you DARE tell me that I don't have the same right to express myself as the diet backers do. They want to use this forum to promote their beliefs? Then they should be prepared for people who disagree. Like Weight Watchers, for instance. After all, they are the ones who said: RESULTS NOT TYPICAL. I'm just borrowing the company line. I guess you'll just have to excuse me if I don't feel the need to hide it behind an asterix and in tiny print.

RESULTS STILL NOT TYPICAL.


----------



## Mini (Jan 9, 2007)

Logical fallacy: Argument through repetition.

Get a new routine, dude.


----------



## Sandie_Zitkus (Jan 9, 2007)

Jeez NFA give it a rest.




NFA said:


> As long as there are people who think one "success" justifies telling fat people they are FAILURES, I will keep pointing out the inconvenient FACTS that some people don't want to hear.
> 
> RESULTS NOT TYPICAL.
> 
> ...


----------



## NFA (Jan 9, 2007)

Hey, you know, I just checked Weight Watchers website and it seems Results are still not typical. 500 times. Guess someone should chastize them for repeating themselves. How terribly uncivil of them. Don't they know the the privlaged status quo simply cannot tolerate being exposed to differing views? I mean, if they cannot tolerate it after seeking out differing views at one of the few places its okay to disagree with the status quo, what must they think having to endure such crass truth at a website created by the status quo. Someone simply must write them a stern letter.


----------



## Sandie_Zitkus (Jan 9, 2007)

And no one ever got anyone to see their point by bashing their head against a wall. It just gets messy that way.

Those results are typical and predictable.






NFA said:


> Hey, you know, I just checked Weight Watchers website and it seems Results are still not typical. 500 times. Guess someone should chastize them for repeating themselves. How terribly uncivil of them. Don't they know the the privlaged status quo simply cannot tolerate being exposed to differing views? I mean, if they cannot tolerate it after seeking out differing views at one of the few places its okay to disagree with the status quo, what must they think having to endure such crass truth at a website created by the status quo. Someone simply must write them a stern letter.


----------



## Friday (Jan 9, 2007)

'Results not typical' does not equal 'never works' and no one should be ruled by your opinion NFA. Especially since thou do protest too much.


----------



## Miss Vickie (Jan 9, 2007)

Friday said:


> 'Results not typical' does not equal 'never works' and no one should be ruled by your opinion NFA.



Oh my gosh. This is sooooooo true. Just because the results they show on TV aren't typical (losing 60 pounds in three months -- or whatever) doesn't mean it's not a success. I guess it just depends on what you define as success.

Is my WLS not successful because I'm still "obese" by the BMI charts? Maybe some would think so, but I sure don't. I'm thrilled to pieces with the results, because I didn't WANT to be thin. I still wanted some cushion, some curves, but I wanted to be able to, as Friday says, "reach my feet", to tie my own shoes and be able to walk to my car without getting out of breath, to control my hypertension, glucose and lipids without drugs. To me that's the measure of success, not some stupid BMI chart that means nothing to me as a body.

If people can manage their weight while eating sensibly, then who does it hurt? WW encourages a balanced diet, while providing enough convenience foods for the busy person. They encourage exercise, water consumption, and the like. How is that a bad thing? My biggest beef with places like WW is that they tell you what your goal weight should be. I think that's BS, because it's based on those damn charts. I think that I should be able to determine my goal weight. I fought with my Jenny Craig counselor because she had my goal weight listed as something like 126 pounds -- total bullshit for me. It was a goal I knew I couldn't, and didn't even WANT to, achieve. If someone's goal is to lose 50 pounds, or get off of medications (whatever poundage that takes) or just feel better, that should be okay. It seems like with these programs it's not, and I think that is one of the many things that sets people up for failure.

WW isn't perfect, but it's a damn site better than a lot of programs out there. Of course long term lifestyle changes are better, but sometimes people want a plan they can follow, and WW provides that.


----------



## Aliena (Jan 9, 2007)

Not to mention that companies are in the business to make money. Therefore, they're going to pick the best of the best samples of customers that have used their product, hence results not typical.

It is your right to disapprove of a product, thus avoid it at all costs and be the Paul Revere of warnings to those whom you care about. However, I think it's rather presumptuous to tell me that finding the best ways to achieve better health, (be it WW or whatever) is futile, because it happens to be a product on the market that is plugged by an industry you despise. What might be a failure in your eyes, could very well be a success in mine. That's what makes us individuals; our different experiences. 

Vickie, once again, fantastic points! 

Friday--you rock! :bow:


----------



## BeautifulPoeticDisaster (Jan 9, 2007)

Results Not Typical = You can't sue our pants off if you don't lose all the weight you want.


----------



## out.of.habit (Jan 9, 2007)

I just wanted to drag this statement out of the middle of the rest. This is important. 



NFA said:


> Don't you DARE tell me that I don't have the same right to express myself as the diet backers do.



Repeated or not, he is making a good point, and someone ought to recognize that. Ya'll are right, it doesn't mean that it never works, but NFA is pointing out that it doesn't reliably produce the same results from person to person. I think that's something we've all already agreed upon. I don't think NFA has once said it can't work for anyone at all, but he is expressing the disturbing fact that the companies can't back their products, be it dieter error, or ineffective means of weight loss. A lot of people have seen it work, and have seen folks get thin and stay thin. That rocks for them, if it gives them what they need, health, mobility, independence, these are the important things, and no one denies that weight loss for these reasons is good. 

Unfortunately, for the vast majority of WW attendees, what they're looking for is self-confidence, self-efficacy, and a pat on the back from the "THEY" that are putting the unreachable standards on a higher shelf every time you get close to gaining their approval. That is cruel. That is typical. Yes, people _can_ do it. But in the same way they can do it, and it's right for them, some folks can stay fat, and that has to be okay too, because if it's not, what the hell are we all sitting here talking for? The most disturbing thing about this is that we are ignoring the fact that we're arguing about the machine that tells ALL of us that we ought to be slender. 

I'm glad ww works for some folks, I just wish they didn't tell me (us) that I would be better if I weren't so damn fat.


----------



## fatkid420 (Jan 9, 2007)

UncannyBruceman said:


> You just answered your own question. There is no effective diet plan or miracle drug. In fact, the FTC is looking to sue four major diet pill distributors on the grounds of false advertising, two of which include Cortislim and TrimSpa.



Lifestyle changes work, im living proof!


----------



## LillyBBBW (Jan 9, 2007)

fatkid420 said:


> Lifestyle changes work, im living proof!



I've got three dead relatives who are proof otherwise.


----------



## NFA (Jan 9, 2007)

No matter how saintly one thinks their reasons are for losing weight, feeling good about that still presumes that weight loss is an achievable and realistic goal. It isn't. There are better, more achievable, and more sustainable ways for any person to improve their health. Stigmatizing fat hasn't worked. The 1% flukes don't validate it. Everyone thinks if they just try hard enough, they can be in that 1%. No matter how much that person wants to be praised, that attitude still explicitly regards anyone who is fat as being in a state of failure. They just didn't try hard enough. That's not fair, and I don't care one bit if they are doing it to themselves. That doesn't make it right and it doesn't obligate me to abandon my beliefs and shower them with praise. If someone wants to feel better and feel healthier, I cannot feel good about them trying to lose weight because its just not connected and the overwhelming likely result is that they'll weigh more than they started. Fat stigmatization hasn't worked. No matter how much someone blames their body or desires weight loss, it still doesn't work. And I refuse to buy into the selective subjectivity of diet backers who preach on and on about how everybody should be free to do what they want, when the reality is THEY are free to do what they want and its only people persuing Health at Every Size who are under genuine attack.

They plead for subjectivist ideals, but they only confront one side who is making a case for a specific path. They claim that everyone can do what they want, but only if some of us keep it to ourselves. For all the love notes about WW, where are the attacks on their lengthy history of promoting fat discrimination and bigotry? Only people who believe in HAES are attacked for expressing themselves. Expressing support for dieting goes unchallenged. Disagreeing with them is by definition uncivil, uncouth. But disagreeing with us is saintly and divine. They cloud their arguements in calls for subjectivity, but their actions betray a very objective standard. They claim to want everyone to do what they want, but in fact they really only want to protect the status quo from criticism. When they plead for us to not get into this here, they are trying to shut down one isolated place for disagreement with the status quo. Because they show no desire or inclination to go after sites that promote the status quo. Only places that don't are to be shamed into silence.

There is a world willing to ignore "Results Not Typical". What really upsets these people is that there is one place where some people are going to notice the fine print. Can't have that, now can we. But whether they care to read what comes after the asterix or not, the fact remains.

Results
Not
Typical.


----------



## EtobicokeFA (Jan 9, 2007)

NFA said:


> No matter how saintly one thinks their reasons are for losing weight, feeling good about that still presumes that weight loss is an achievable and realistic goal. It isn't. There are better, more achievable, and more sustainable ways for any person to improve their health. Stigmatizing fat hasn't worked. The 1% flukes don't validate it. Everyone thinks if they just try hard enough, they can be in that 1%. No matter how much that person wants to be praised, that attitude still explicitly regards anyone who is fat as being in a state of failure. They just didn't try hard enough. That's not fair, and I don't care one bit if they are doing it to themselves. That doesn't make it right and it doesn't obligate me to abandon my beliefs and shower them with praise. If someone wants to feel better and feel healthier, I cannot feel good about them trying to lose weight because its just not connected and the overwhelming likely result is that they'll weigh more than they started. Fat stigmatization hasn't worked. No matter how much someone blames their body or desires weight loss, it still doesn't work. And I refuse to buy into the selective subjectivity of diet backers who preach on and on about how everybody should be free to do what they want, when the reality is THEY are free to do what they want and its only people persuing Health at Every Size who are under genuine attack.
> 
> They plead for subjectivist ideals, but they only confront one side who is making a case for a specific path. They claim that everyone can do what they want, but only if some of us keep it to ourselves. For all the love notes about WW, where are the attacks on their lengthy history of promoting fat discrimination and bigotry? Only people who believe in HAES are attacked for expressing themselves. Expressing support for dieting goes unchallenged. Disagreeing with them is by definition uncivil, uncouth. But disagreeing with us is saintly and divine. They cloud their arguements in calls for subjectivity, but their actions betray a very objective standard. They claim to want everyone to do what they want, but in fact they really only want to protect the status quo from criticism. When they plead for us to not get into this here, they are trying to shut down one isolated place for disagreement with the status quo. Because they show no desire or inclination to go after sites that promote the status quo. Only places that don't are to be shamed into silence.
> 
> ...



I agree! However, stigmatizing fat, goes deeper than that! When a weight loss plan or product fail, no blames the makers for making a bad product (unless someone dies). If fact, the makers get to blame the users for not using their product faithfully enough! 

The big problem here is that most people believe that doctors and scientists are infallible, and their wisdom is unquestionable! And, they know that so they use to they advantage!


----------



## moonvine (Jan 9, 2007)

fatkid420 said:


> Lifestyle changes work, im living proof!



Oh, goody, the troll is back.


----------



## Accept (Jan 9, 2007)

I don't want to get flamed BUT.. Weight Watchers works pretty well as far as I'm concerned. The system is not only very simple, but it's very easy to make a lifestyle out of. There's a lot of give.

Every since I was a teen, if I felt too heavy, I would just cut back for a couple weeks and drop the weight. Then I'd go back to normal. It was like an "intentional yo-yo" system. As I've gotten a little older, it's become a bit harder to drop so easily. Last fall I bootlegged WW, and it's been really easy and kinda fun. It's also been slowly but surely effective, even though I haven't found the time for consistent exercise for a while.

I'm definitely not saying it's for everyone. Heaven forbid all the women in the world become twigs. But it's worked for me with how I deal with my weight, so *shrug*.


----------



## LillyBBBW (Jan 9, 2007)

EtobicokeFA said:


> I agree! However, stigmatizing fat, goes deeper than that! When a weight loss plan or product fail, no blames the makers for making a bad product (unless someone dies). If fact, the makers get to blame the users for not using their product faithfully enough!
> 
> The big problem here is that most people believe that doctors and scientists are infallible, and their wisdom is unquestionable! And, they know that so they use to they advantage!



WW just simply did not work for me. I never lost a pound, even gained weight on the program. I dreaded the weigh ins. The atmosphere when you don't lose any weight is to grill you on what you did that week. You must be lying. You did something wrong, you're not following the program right. Are you drinking enough water? My mindset had me thinking I'd better have some loss next week so I don't look like a slobberin' sow next to the others who squeal and jump up and down as they watch the scale move downward. It was degrading. 

In many cases it would be better to just buy several nutrition books, learn all you can, exercise, go to OA if necessary and live with the consequences. So much cheaper and probably better for you overall than running up against the tar and feathering that is WW time and time again. "You musta been doing something wrong 'cause it worked for me," doesn't encourage anyone to seek solutions elsewhere. They just say, "I'll try again next year." It wastes a lot of time and money. It doesn't work for everybody.


----------



## Tracyarts (Jan 9, 2007)

NFA said:


> There are better, more achievable, and more sustainable ways for any person to improve their health.




RESULTS
NOT
TYPICAL!


You know, sometimes there are just *not* better and more achieveable and more sustainable ways for any person to improve their health. Are you open minded enough to listen to people who have encountered that reality?

What do you say to those of us for whom drugs and other therapies have not diminished the chronic pain? Have not controlled the diabetes and blood pressure problems? Have only been a band-aid solution for chronically festering open wounds and skin rashes and sores? 

Do you just shrug and tell us we have not found the right drugs and therapies yet? Keep on plugging away, and hopefully you will find your answer in the form of a pill? How long is acceptable suffering to you, in the interest of sparing that precious poundage, which seems to be more important to you than the people who carry it? Should we suffer six months? A year? Two years? Forever? 

What if those pills cause side effects that rival the initial problems? Are we truly improving our health in *better* and more achieveable and more sustainable ways? The side effects from the diabetes meds I took and prescription pain meds I took were pretty serious. I had to take medications to combat the side effects of the initial medications. 

And what about mobility? Wheelchairs and scooters will get you to point A and point B. As long as point A and point B are wheelchair and scooter accessible. Mobility assistance technology is NOT a "better and more achieveable and more sustainable" alternative to being able to walk with your own two legs. 

What do you say to the bedbound? Are they living a "better and more achieveable and more sustainable" alternative to physical ability and capability? Could you honestly stand at the foot of the bed of a very supersized person who was in obvious suffering and say with a clear conscience that weight loss is not a valid option for them they just need to be made as comfortable as possible with whatever medical options exist? I mean, could you? 

I mean, have you honestly listened to the stories of people for whom weight loss was the only answer to reclaiming a liveable life? I don't know if you have. 

Have you ever pushed a supersized person in a wheelchair or helped them navigate a scooter in a scooter unfriendly location? Have you ever doctored the sores and rashes and other problems that plague the very supersized, especially those with poorly controlled diabetes? Have you ever felt pain so bad in your joints that it made you cry? That you could not sleep at night? But the only drug that remotely took away your pain was habit forming and caused sleep disruption and made you feel like a zombie? And cost so much that some months you had to beg money from family to pay for medications AND keep a roof over your head? Have you ever found some brief and fleeting solace in an alternative therapy that your insurance would not cover but you could not afford otherwise? And known that the only thing standing between you and a brief respite from the constant pain was money you were too sick to earn? Have you ever wondered just how far you would compromise yourself to get that money? Have you ever camped out in the bathroom because your diabetes meds made your intestines purge themselves on a regular basis? And the only other diabetes med availible makes you retain so much fluid that your feet feel like they are going to split open like an overripe tomato? 

If you can honestly say that you have either lived in a body that fat or have had ongoing personal experience with a person living in a body that fat, then keep on talking your talk.

But for those of us who have lived it, and who have tried "better, more achieveable, and more sustainable ways to improve health (and mobility)"... we know that sometimes

RESULTS
NOT
TYPICAL

And the only answer is to lose at least some weight.

Tracy


----------



## Sandie_Zitkus (Jan 9, 2007)

Thank you Tracy you said what I wanted to say but all I could come up with was "kiss my ass". LOL

Thanks again.


----------



## LillyBBBW (Jan 9, 2007)

So go ahead and try to lose weight. If that one doesn't work, try another. If that one doesn't work, try another. Keep on trying. If that doesn't work, go see a surgeon. When you start to gain the weight from that, start over again. Doesn't it disturb anyone at all how little anyone knows about obesity? How substandard the treatment of obesity and obesity related illnesses are? That they waste more money researching to dig up more horrible news about fat people than they do to actually cure people? Reports that will actually help people get a quiet little mention on page 22 of the newspaper while "obesity kills family of four" is on the front page. I've watched too many people suffer or die desperately reaching out for the holy grail that merely exists for a few in the form of weight loss. Can't we do better? Are we wrong to ask for better? Do what you have to do but I'm not going to pretend there's no fly in the ointment. 





Tracyarts said:


> If you can honestly say that you have either lived in a body that fat or have had ongoing personal experience with a person living in a body that fat, then keep on talking your talk.


----------



## Sandie_Zitkus (Jan 9, 2007)

Lilly I used to think just like you. When I had no, or just a few, physical problems I said the same things you just said here. But when I couldn't even walk from one end of my house to the other without being out of breath - when I couldn't sleep because I couldn't breath - when my back hurt day and night along with my hips and knees - when my blood pressure was out of control and when I couldn't go anywhere with Wayne because I couldn't walk - I changed my mind. I've seen many people here lose weight and get their lives back. I'm going to do that too. I choose not to just quietly acccept my weight as "that's who I am" I choose to fight tooth and nail for my life. And I choose to do what I have to do to not live the rest of my life from my living room couch. That's what I choose.

You can choose another way - I'll support whatever decision you make.




LillyBBBW said:


> So go ahead and try to lose weight. If that one doesn't work, try another. If that one doesn't work, try another. Keep on trying. If that doesn't work, go see a surgeon. When you start to gain the weight from that, start over again. Doesn't it disturb anyone at all how little anyone knows about obesity? How substandard the treatment of obesity and obesity related illnesses are? That they waste more money researching to dig up more horrible news about fat people than they do to actually cure people? Reports that will actually help people get a quiet little mention on page 22 of the newspaper while "obesity kills family of four" is on the front page. I've watched too many people suffer or die desperately reaching out for the holy grail that merely exists for a few in the form of weight loss. Can't we do better? Are we wrong to ask for better? Do what you have to do but I'm not going to pretend there's no fly in the ointment.


----------



## LillyBBBW (Jan 9, 2007)

I support you in that, Sandie, 110%. You are absolutely doing the right thing. I have a family history of death while in the throes of extreme forms of weightloss. It improved their lives for a moment and then they were gone. I fear it like nothing else. It *WILL* go well for you. I *know* it will. For me I don't know, that's why I have to keep shouting.




Sandie_Zitkus said:


> Lilly I used to think just like you. When I had no, or just a few, physical problems I said the same things you just said here. But when I couldn't even walk from one end of my house to the other without being out of breath - when I couldn't sleep because I couldn't breath - when my back hurt day and night along with my hips and knees - when my blood pressure was out of control and when I couldn't go anywhere with Wayne because I couldn't walk - I changed my mind. I've seen many people here lose weight and get their lives back. I'm going to do that too. I choose not to just quietly acccept my weight as "that's who I am" I choose to fight tooth and nail for my life. And I choose to do what I have to do to not live the rest of my life from my living room couch. That's what I choose.
> 
> You can choose another way - I'll support whatever decision you make.


----------



## Sandie_Zitkus (Jan 9, 2007)

Thank you Lilly - I can also accept and respect and support your choices. 






LillyBBBW said:


> I support you in that, Sandie, 110%. You are absolutely doing the right thing. I have a family history of death while in the throes of extreme forms of weightloss. It improved their lives for a moment and then they were gone. I fear it like nothing else. It *WILL* go well for you. I *know* it will. For me I don't know, that's why I have to keep shouting.


----------



## Tracyarts (Jan 9, 2007)

LillyBBBW said:


> So go ahead and try to lose weight. If that one doesn't work, try another. If that one doesn't work, try another.



I did. It worked. Life is much better now. I am still quite fat, but not so fat as to destroy my health and mobility. There is still pain and there are still challenges, but not to the extent that it was 100 pounds ago.

I would have loved to have found magic pills that controlled my pain, gave me back my mobility and stamina, and controlled my health problems. But that was not an option, no matter how much money I found to throw at the problem. So I did what I had to do to make my life more liveable (by MY standards). 

Glad for your concern, hope if you are ever in the same position you can find your way back to vitality like I did.

Everybody deserves to live well. 
Tracy


----------



## NFA (Jan 9, 2007)

Accept said:


> I don't want to get flamed BUT.. Weight Watchers works pretty well as far as I'm concerned. The system is not only very simple, but it's very easy to make a lifestyle out of. There's a lot of give.
> 
> Every since I was a teen, if I felt too heavy, I would just cut back for a couple weeks and drop the weight. Then I'd go back to normal. It was like an "intentional yo-yo" system. As I've gotten a little older, it's become a bit harder to drop so easily. Last fall I bootlegged WW, and it's been really easy and kinda fun. It's also been slowly but surely effective, even though I haven't found the time for consistent exercise for a while.
> 
> I'm definitely not saying it's for everyone. Heaven forbid all the women in the world become twigs. But it's worked for me with how I deal with my weight, so *shrug*.



Wow. Gosh. A few months and everything.

Results STILL not typical.

No one is preventing anyone from thinking they can lose weight. Last I checked, I still didn't have the power to control other people's decisions. But I control mine. I don't support dieting or intentional weight loss efforts. My beliefs do NOTHING to threaten anyone else's, but I'm getting really sick and tired of people who think I have an obligation to support something I think is counterproductive and harmful. No, I don't feel good about your current "successes". I don't feel good about the atypical testimonials touted in commercials. Deal with it. Quit acting like you are entitled to have everyone bow at your feet and abandon themselves to pay homage to your weight loss efforts. You're not. There is a world out there that is aggressively hostile and dismissive towards my beliefs about dieting. But here we have one place with "Size Acceptance" right in the description, and you expect me to shut up so I don't offend the weight losers? Give me a break! You want to feel this is your only option, well I'm not stopping you. All I'm doing is saying that I believe there is another way. If you can't deal with that, its not my problem. Because guess what?

Results still not typical.


----------



## Tracyarts (Jan 9, 2007)

NFA said:


> Results STILL not typical.




So, NFA... I noticed that you have never really addressed the responses from those of us who have lived through lost mobility, destroyed health, chronic pain, and a diminished life because of our weight.

I am asking you to take a few minutes and respond, based upon your iron clad anti weight loss stance, as to what you feel is the best option for people who are or who have found themselves in such a position. If the medications are not working and mobility aids like scooters and wheelchairs only go so far. What are we to do?

If we are not to attempt to lose weight, what options does your way offer to us? 

And for those of us who *have* lost weight, even a little, but enough to get off of medications and recover mobility and diminish chronic pain and lack of stamina... can you honestly not be happy for us that our lives are better? 

Even if that respite from pain and suffering was a brief one?

I just don't get it. But then again, I am guessing that because you have no direct personal expereince with these weight related problems, you do not get my opinion either.

Tracy


----------



## Sandie_Zitkus (Jan 9, 2007)

No, NFA what you are doing is browbeating us with your opinions. If this truly was just what you believe you would do so without repeating yourself over and over and over. 

Like I said how people react to you bashing them over the head with your opinion - is typical and predictable.

It may be time for you to look beyond your own needs and see that just maybe carrying 400 lbs is a whole lot different then admiring it.






NFA said:


> Wow. Gosh. A few months and everything.
> 
> Results STILL not typical.
> 
> ...


----------



## Tracyarts (Jan 9, 2007)

Sandie_Zitkus said:


> It may be time for you to look beyond your own needs and see that just maybe carrying 400 lbs is a whole lot different then admiring it.



And that is as real as it gets. 
Tracy


----------



## BeautifulPoeticDisaster (Jan 9, 2007)

LillyBBBW said:


> go to OA if necessary




I think OA works on a much larger scale of guilt than WW does. And it does cost...you have to donate...even if it is only $2 a night....that's still cost. And the whole OA premise is religious based and it tells you that you have an addiction and a mental illness. I have gone to 2 meetings. They made me feel weird and creepy. I don't want somoene know my buisness (a sponsor) and I don't want to sit around reading out of some silly book hoping I will get better.

Now I do agree with you Lilly that buying a bunch of books and exercising etc is the best anyone can do. I don't do WW conventionally. I mention I adjusted the points for my weight. I eat anytime I am hungry. I have couted 120 point in one day before, lol. Owell. I don't pay for meetings. I just used their general idea of 3 milks a day, 8 waters, 5 fruits and veggies and exersice. And I tend to do better when I eat more protien and veggies. It's totally a personal thing. 

If you don't feel unhealthy, I don't think you should feel pressure to lose even an ounce! you are beautiful! I just feel unfit and a tad unhealthy at the moment...but I won't be getting skinny, lol. If I could do all the things I wanted to in life, I would stay this size, but alas, I cannot. And my shape has a lot to do with that I think, lol. Im ALL belly, no ass, no boobs, no legs, ALL BELLY...and that makes a huge difference in mobility and health


----------



## Friday (Jan 9, 2007)

> No matter how saintly one thinks their reasons are for losing weight, feeling good about that still presumes that weight loss is an achievable and realistic goal.



Obviously, you have some deepseated personal issues about this subject. I suggest you find a therapist instead of trying to put your failure on everyone else. I've been losing weight (as have several people here) for over 2 years without anything but common sense and I'm hardly going to let some insecure juvenile tell me that it's not real.

Saintly was your word. Who's been telling you that you're a BAD person because you're fat? And why don't you try telling them to piss off instead of haranging us with your fantasies?


----------



## Tina (Jan 9, 2007)

Tracyarts said:


> So, NFA... I noticed that you have never really addressed the responses from those of us who have lived through lost mobility, destroyed health, chronic pain, and a diminished life because of our weight.
> 
> I am asking you to take a few minutes and respond, based upon your iron clad anti weight loss stance, as to what you feel is the best option for people who are or who have found themselves in such a position. If the medications are not working and mobility aids like scooters and wheelchairs only go so far. What are we to do?
> 
> ...



Tracy, I'm guessing you will not get that response from Brian -- just as you never have before. I have heard the word "myopic" used in reference to him before and I believe it fits. They say that the exact opposite of dysfunction is still dysfunction, but that somewhere in-between is the healthy medium, and I believe that. Listening to diet gurus is not the way, but we who have lived in our own bodies for all our lives, and who have walked the roads of dieting, of eating with abandon, and of health and mobility problems because of our weights, can listen to ourselves and what works for us.

What is "success"?
Some would say that the only success is losing enough weight that we would be 'acceptable' by insurance table standards. 

Others would say that success only comes from eating what we want when we want, with no regard for health or consequences. 

To me, success is improved mobility and health from treating my body well, feeding it, by and large, healthy foods, and moving it on a regular basis. That isn't easy in the least, and maintaining over time can be a struggle, but living a life that isn't really a life is a struggle, too. The healthy food/movement method often involves weightloss, a word that has been understandably stigmatized due to the societal expectation-driven diets that were imposed on many, if not most, of us fat people. Especially those of us who were fat as children. 

Fact is, when possible, weightloss can be (along with other changes) a life saver, when done sanely and in ways in line with the body's health. I don't mean "life saver" in the sense of mortal life only, but also emotional life and the feeling that one is living one's life or not. Weight loss is not achievable by everyone, but certainly is by some, and for the long term, too, despite what some bystanders would claim. Oh, and when one listens to one's body while acting in ways consonant with improving one's health, the Results Are More Typical Than You Might Think, especially if you only focus on the results that support a particular agenda.


----------



## LoveBHMS (Jan 9, 2007)

BigBellySSBBW said:


> I think OA works on a much larger scale of guilt than WW does. And it does cost...you have to donate...even if it is only $2 a night....that's still cost. And the whole OA premise is religious based and it tells you that you have an addiction and a mental illness. I have gone to 2 meetings. They made me feel weird and creepy. I don't want somoene know my buisness (a sponsor) and I don't want to sit around reading out of some silly book hoping I will get better.
> 
> 
> > I have gone to many OA meetings and one of the first things they tell you is there are no dues or fees. They pass a hat around and you can put money in if you are able to, but you are still welcome if that is not the case.
> ...


----------



## moonvine (Jan 9, 2007)

LoveBHMS said:


> OA is *not* about weight loss, it is about treating compulsive eating and other eating disorders and is modeled on the same 12 Step program as Alcoholics Anonymous. It isn't a diet program; it is for people who have an unhealthy relationship with food whether that means overeating, undereating, bulimia, or any other use of food in an unhealthy or unsafe manner. If you go to meetings there are men and women of all ages between 80 and 400 pounds. People go there because they have done such things as shoplifted food, hoarded it, told lies to friends and family regarding eating habits, used food as a drug, etc.



It would seem they would call it something like "Eating Disorders Anonymous", if it is also for "undereaters." If I considered myself an "undereater" and were worried about that, the last thing I would probably do is even research something that called itself "Overeaters Anonymous," because just from its name it would seem to not be the place for me. I know diddlysquat about OA, I'm just sayin...


----------



## LoveBHMS (Jan 9, 2007)

A lot of people seem to confuse it with Weight Watchers or other diet programs, and I was just saying that it serves a different purpose.

Its name can't possibly take in all the potentially dangerous and unhealthy behaviours that people have with food. Members come into the program through numerous sources, including word of mouth and simple advertising in newspapers. You'll find it sometimes in lists of public health programs at hospitals or even churches and there will typically be a short description of the types of issues it may help with.


----------



## Accept (Jan 9, 2007)

NFA said:


> Wow. Gosh. A few months and everything.
> 
> Results STILL not typical.
> 
> ...



good lord... ok


----------



## tinkerbell (Jan 9, 2007)

NFA said:


> RESULTS NOT TYPICAL!
> 
> No. Fat people are not to blame for being fat. Not when NOTHING has been shown effective or safe at turning a fat person into a not-fat person.
> 
> ...




You wrote the above post, with a quote of MY post, so I am assuming its more of a reply to my post.

First of all, go back and actually READ my post. I never made any sort of generalizations about fat people, like you list in your post. I never said that ALL fat people should feel guilty for gaining weight back, or that all fat people are failures. And your post implies that I did. 

WW never made me feel responsible for being fat (and I never said that in my post) WW never made me feel like a failure because I gained weight back (and you can see I never said that in my post). I never joined WW, I never went to a meeting, so how can it make me feel everything your post lists? I just followed the plan on my own, because *I* find it easier than counting calories.

I simply posted my experiences with WW, and how I did loose on it. But you know what? I take responsibility for my own actions, and I gained the weight back because *I* stopped exercising, *I* stopped eating properly. *I* started eating junk food again. 

I know I'm never going to be skinny, I know that and I dont even try to achieve that. I am a curvy girl - I always have been, and I've accepted that. I dont have to accept that I have to stay at this weight and this size the rest of my life. I dont want to, and it has nothing to do with wanting to be a size 6. It has to do with wanting to stay active, and stay healthy, and not to mention fit back into a wardrobe that I LOVE (which is a size that is still considered 'plus size').

No, I don't think everyone who is fat, overweight or obese HAS to loose weight. Its a personal decision and I could care less what someone else does - I just have to decide what is best for ME and do it. 

And from your replies, I don't think you quite understand the whole "results not typical". It doesn't mean it doesn't work, it just means that everyone is not going to loose the same amount of weight because everyone is different. 

Tracyarts, Sandie_Zitkus, and others - you made awesome points in your posts, and I'd quote them all, but then, my post would be too long


----------



## LillyBBBW (Jan 9, 2007)

LoveBHMS said:


> BigBellySSBBW said:
> 
> 
> > I think OA works on a much larger scale of guilt than WW does. And it does cost...you have to donate...even if it is only $2 a night....that's still cost. And the whole OA premise is religious based and it tells you that you have an addiction and a mental illness. I have gone to 2 meetings. They made me feel weird and creepy. I don't want somoene know my buisness (a sponsor) and I don't want to sit around reading out of some silly book hoping I will get better.
> ...



I'm leaning towards what LoveBHM says but I believe you BBSSBBW. Each meeting is different according to where you go, who is running it, who is in there, etc. OA in NYC will be a whole lot different than OA in Salt Lake or in the bible belt for example. 

OA is not for dieters. It's a place to go if you have a compulsive eating disorder and you need help, fat or thin. If you don't have any of those issues you might be a little uncomfortable, there are a lot of messed up people who go. A few years ago I went a couple of times and just sat. I didn't talk I just listened, cried silently to myself and left. Nobody bothered me, asked for my BMI or placed any expectations on me at all and I felt I could get up and walk out at any time. I put in $2 each time 'cause I know they rent that space and the $2 helps. 

I don't doubt at all what you say though. In some hyper religious towns people who really need to go won't go if the sponsor has her ears pierced or they think he's a homosexual. The OA has to cater to the community mindset so that people who really need help will get it, narrow religious views and all.


----------



## LillyBBBW (Jan 9, 2007)

Overeaters Anonymous has been around for years based on the same principles as AA or NA. As it has grown it now encompasses a whole lot more than just people who eat compulsively and can't stop but the strong feeling was to keep the name as is for identification purposes. The name is established and recognized world wide and there are many offshoots and copycats out there that are poorly run or secretly sponsored by someone in the diet industry. If the name change did occur it would have to be something like ___________ Anonymous. Every suggestion alienates somebody.




moonvine said:


> It would seem they would call it something like "Eating Disorders Anonymous", if it is also for "undereaters." If I considered myself an "undereater" and were worried about that, the last thing I would probably do is even research something that called itself "Overeaters Anonymous," because just from its name it would seem to not be the place for me. I know diddlysquat about OA, I'm just sayin...


----------



## Mini (Jan 9, 2007)

NFA said:


> Wow. Gosh. A few months and everything.
> 
> Results STILL not typical.
> 
> ...



Translation: Respect my right to be a pedantic, repetitive ass.

Consider it done.


----------



## GWARrior (Jan 9, 2007)

Mini said:


> Translation: Respect my right to be a pedantic, repetitive ass.
> 
> Consider it done.



and he didnt even stick around to see that.


----------



## Santaclear (Jan 9, 2007)

NFA said:


> Results still not typical.



Post is typical. (You do get a rhythm going with the repetition tho, I like that.)


----------



## BeautifulPoeticDisaster (Jan 9, 2007)

LoveBHMS said:


> I have gone to many OA meetings and one of the first things they tell you is there are no dues or fees. They pass a hat around and you can put money in if you are able to, but you are still welcome if that is not the case.
> 
> It is also not necessarily religious based, it merely involves the concept of surrendering to a "higher power" as each member chooses to have one. OA is *not* about weight loss, it is about treating compulsive eating and other eating disorders and is modeled on the same 12 Step program as Alcoholics Anonymous. It isn't a diet program; it is for people who have an unhealthy relationship with food whether that means overeating, undereating, bulimia, or any other use of food in an unhealthy or unsafe manner. If you go to meetings there are men and women of all ages between 80 and 400 pounds. People go there because they have done such things as shoplifted food, hoarded it, told lies to friends and family regarding eating habits, used food as a drug, etc.
> 
> A sponsor is not somebody to whom you tell everyone, it is somebody that has successfully worked the program who helps to guide you through recovery.



They TELL you that no fees or dues are owed but when they pass the hat or plate I feel guilty if I don't put in money and Im not rich. As far as religion, I feel it is shoved down my throat. Im not anti religion at all, but when an organisation claims to be open to all religions but then when referring to a higher power uses terms like "He" and "Him" referring to the Christian God...which would irk me a lot less if they admitted to it. That's all.

I think OA rubs me the wrong way just like WW does for you Lilly. I cant explain it, lol, I just get angry the minute it is brought up. Now if maybe they called my higher power a She or It....I might go I'm too anti conformist for my own good sometimes, lol.


----------



## BeautifulPoeticDisaster (Jan 9, 2007)

Santaclear said:


> Post is typical. (You do get a rhythm going with the repetition tho, I like that.)





HAHAHA!! *Grabs Bongo drum and does the Results Not Typical tribal dance*


LOL!!!!


----------



## LoveBHMS (Jan 9, 2007)

As Lilly said, I'm certain the meetings are different depending on where you go. There were always people of all ages at mine, so if somebody was younger or a student or who had shared about tough financial times such as a divorce, nobody would expect them to put any money in.

I've never been at one where the higher power was specified. In fact, it's always been a point to say that each member's higher power is whatever he or she chooses it to be. I've never been at one where religion was even discussed. The concept really just means admitting, as the steps say that you are powerless over food and your life has become unmanageable and having a willingness to admit the powerlessness and turn over the problem to an entity greater than yourself.

The program is certainly not for everyone, but if you believe you may have problems with unhealthy behaviours regarding food, you may want to consider checking out meetings in other locations because they are all very different.


----------



## NFA (Jan 10, 2007)

Hmm. Their site still says "Results Not Typical". I guess its just okay for WW to say that and not me. Must be the asterix* and tiny letters that makes it okay.

*Results still not typical.


----------



## Sandie_Zitkus (Jan 10, 2007)

hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm


----------



## BeautifulPoeticDisaster (Jan 10, 2007)

Lol!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## Wagimawr (Jan 10, 2007)

Are we having fun yet?

I don't believe NFA's ever said "never lose weight". He's been pretty stringent about saying "don't try to do it through diets, which by their nature don't work", though.


----------



## Friday (Jan 10, 2007)

> NFA said:
> 
> #40
> Results not typical. As in, this product doesn't work.
> ...



And on and on ad nauseum. I don't see any allowance there for the fact that it does work for some people nor have I ever noticed any tolerance in his 'If you want to lose weight you aren't truly SA.' rants. Nor is he the only one, thus my invitation to anyone who takes that stance to kiss my ass.


----------



## Spanky (Jan 10, 2007)

And if "Results not typical" is played backwards, it says:

























"Paul Fannin is dead"

Wow! Does he know about this?


----------



## Ericthonius (Jan 10, 2007)

Spanky said:


> And if "Results not typical" is played backwards, it says:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Oh wow! I didn't think _anyone_ owned a copy of, "*Tragical Shit-Stirring Tour*", any more. And I never thought I'd live to see the day that a corruption of the line, "Paul makes me bored", from, "_I Am The Waitress_", would ever be quoted on teh internets.

Best. Post. Evah.


----------



## Friday (Jan 10, 2007)

> Oh wow! I didn't think anyone owned a copy of, "Tragical Shit-Stirring Tour", any more.



Hard at work on the cover version I see.


----------



## Santaclear (Jan 10, 2007)

I see you two are getting friendly.


----------



## BeautifulPoeticDisaster (Jan 10, 2007)

Lets distract people with a joke...humor is what I do!

_________________________
This one of those fwd email thingies, but it is hella funny...I thought, lol!


______

I was in Wal-Mart buying a large bag of Purina for my dogs and was in line to check out. A woman behind me asked if I had a dog........ Duh! 

I was feeling a bit crabby so on impulse, I told her no, I was starting The Purina Diet again, although I probably shouldn't because I'd ended up in the hospital last time, but that I'd lost 50 pounds before I awakened in an intensive care unit with tubes coming out of most of my orifices and IV's in both arms. 

Her eyes about bugged out of her head. I went on and on with the bogus diet story and she was totally buying it. I told her that it was an easy, inexpensive diet and that the way it works is to load your pockets or purse with Purina nuggets and simply eat one or two every time you feel hungry. The package said the food is nutritionally complete so I was going to try it again. 

I have to mention here that practically everyone in the line was by now enthralled with my story, particularly a tall guy behind her. Horrified, she asked if something in the dog food had poisoned me and was that why I ended up in the hospital. 

I said no.....I'd been sitting in the street licking my butt when a car hit me.


I thought the tall guy was going to have to be carried out the door.

______________________________________________

Just goes to show that people will believe anything you say about dieting if you have a testimonial to go along with it...tis kinda sad that.


----------



## LillyBBBW (Jan 10, 2007)

moonvine said:


> It would seem they would call it something like "Eating Disorders Anonymous", if it is also for "undereaters." If I considered myself an "undereater" and were worried about that, the last thing I would probably do is even research something that called itself "Overeaters Anonymous," because just from its name it would seem to not be the place for me. I know diddlysquat about OA, I'm just sayin...



Oh! I was in such a hurry to get out of here and go to bed that I forgot to mention that the name "Eating Disorders Anonymous" is already taken by a pro ana group last I heard.


----------



## BeautifulPoeticDisaster (Jan 10, 2007)

LillyBBBW said:


> Oh! I was in such a hurry to get out of here and go to bed that I forgot to mention that the name "Eating Disorders Anonymous" is already taken by a pro ana group last I heard.




That's sad...although not suprising. I took a tour of Ana sites a while ago...during a self hatred moment. But after seeing all the pics, I was happy to be me...big and fat.


----------



## moonvine (Jan 10, 2007)

LillyBBBW said:


> Oh! I was in such a hurry to get out of here and go to bed that I forgot to mention that the name "Eating Disorders Anonymous" is already taken by a pro ana group last I heard.



Now that's scary!  BTW I wasn't meaning to complain about the name, I just find it confusing. I don't have any intention of using their services at any rate. And I don't think I am in any danger of becoming an "undereater" any time soon.


----------



## Carol W. (Jan 10, 2007)

I can't know personally whether WW works or not, since I never tried it, but God knows everything else I tried over 45 years or so didn't! And believe me, I tried plenty. 

As I head into my late 50's, I remain firmly convinced that the only way not to get any fatter (and I'd rather not) is NOT to make any more weight-loss attempts. Not saying that's so for everyone. But it sure is true for me.


----------



## TheSadeianLinguist (Jan 10, 2007)

BigBellySSBBW said:


> That's sad...although not suprising. I took a tour of Ana sites a while ago...during a self hatred moment. But after seeing all the pics, I was happy to be me...big and fat.



Good news about the "pro ana" girls... They tend to just be self-deprecating normal weight girls who outgrow the phase.

Do not believe a word they write.


----------



## Aliena (Jan 10, 2007)

NFA said:


> Hmm. Their site still says "Results Not Typical". I guess its just okay for WW to say that and not me. Must be the asterix* and tiny letters that makes it okay.
> 
> *Results still not typical.



I reject your reality and substitute it with one of my own.


----------



## SamanthaNY (Jan 10, 2007)

Aliena said:


> Why would you suggest this medical proceedure to her when it obviously never worked for you?


Funny! 
Effing funny!


----------



## Friday (Jan 10, 2007)

> No. Going over the same ground twice isn't my style.



So you go over the entire repetitive thread and then take a shot at someone who wasn't involved in the broken record part and is only trying to lighten things up. Style is hardly the word I'd choose.




> However, under the subject of health and weight loss, has anyone on your medical team suggested a Mebenzadole enema? It might kill that bug that's up your ass.



Is it Aldebarian specific? If so, it might be worth a try.


----------



## Tina (Jan 10, 2007)

NFA said:


> Hmm. Their site still says "Results Not Typical". I guess its just okay for WW to say that and not me. Must be the asterix* and tiny letters that makes it okay.
> 
> *Results still not typical.



Everyone with a grand claim to make says that; it's not unusual. I operate on the knowledge that, to you though, ALL claims of weightloss are not typical, no matter how it's done. Fact is, more people are successful at it, and in the long term, than you would ever be willing to admit, Brian. So _that_ is what I was addressing

To address the subject of this thread: WW, I think it can work, but one must have a system that the program works for to begin with -- meaning that being on the program doesn't feel like starvation, and that there is actually some measurable result that comes from working it. One must also be committed to staying on it, but really, committing to any one thing for the long term can be difficult for most people, whether it is a diet or exercise, or whatever.

Weight Watchers has, throughout my life, thrashed my body, and helped me. When I was younger and my doctor put me on the diet, I was passing out at meetings from not enough food. I was miserable and sickly.

As an adult, I put myself on a vastly different version of it, and over three years I had lost, and was very slowly losing, over 65 lbs. I wasn't suffering and it was a very sane way to eat. Very maintainable, as long as I was seeing and feeling some results. Problem is, my doc put me on Depo-Provera, not telling me it could make me gain weight, so that no matter what I ate, or didn't eat, no matter how much I exercised, the weight started pouring back on. I basically said "screw it," and ate what I want, and all the weight came back on and more. But had it not been for the Depo, I believe I would have kept on slowly losing. So, for me, as an adult, WW worked fine and I felt no ill effects from it. I do not, in general, support diets, though, and feel that the best way to increased mobility and health, for those at the supersizes suffering from impaired mobility and ill health, is through sensible eating and exercise. It is the only method that can work long term, and it is the least invasive and most healthful way to actually have a life to live. Unless a person considers being bed or house-bound and in pain all the time to be a life. I didn't.


----------



## James (Jan 10, 2007)

whether it works or not i dunno...

I had the bizarre surprise recently of finding out that an ex girlfriend of about 3 1/2 years ago has become a poster-girl model for them though!

Its kind of strange to see her look that way... especially when my mates are like, I saw your ex in such and such magazine, she looks *amazing *now... I just say nothing as it really isnt my business anymore.

She's marrying some dude though and seems really happy with her lot. Fair play to her I guess.

Whether it was weight watchers or dieting for her fiancé that caused the massive weight loss I couldnt say.


----------



## tinkerbell (Jan 10, 2007)

LillyBBBW said:


> Oh! I was in such a hurry to get out of here and go to bed that I forgot to mention that the name "Eating Disorders Anonymous" is already taken by a pro ana group last I heard.



Actually, I just did a quick search for it, and it doesnt seem like a pro ana site, it seems like its just a supportive site to over come an ED (http://www.eatingdisordersanonymous.org/)


Just wanted to share that


----------



## kerrypop (Jan 10, 2007)

Weight Watchers is alright, for me. The points system is fine, and completely manageable until I have a night where I am just insatiable. I feel like I'm wanting to eat more, because I never eat until I'm full, but only until i'm "not hungry" anymore. At dinner time this is usually okay because I'll go to bed eventually. When it starts at breakfast time though, its superlame! I'm also the type of person who when I don't lose weight for like 3 days, I just think THIS DOESNT WORK I QUIT... which is probably a huge part of my lack of dieting success. Total score? 6/10


----------



## Tina (Jan 10, 2007)

James said:


> I had the bizarre surprise recently of finding out that an ex girlfriend of about 3 1/2 years ago has become a poster-girl model for them though!
> 
> Its kind of strange to see her look that way... especially when my mates are like, I saw your ex in such and such magazine, she looks *amazing *now... I just say nothing as it really isnt my business anymore.



Bizarre world, isn't it? I'm glad you're out there, James, being one of the guys who considered her prettier Before, and not After.


----------



## LillyBBBW (Jan 10, 2007)

kerrypop said:


> ...I feel like I'm wanting to eat more, because I never eat until I'm full, but only until i'm "not hungry" anymore.



I'm exactly the same way only it appears I've developed some slight anger management issues over it.  I hate feeling hungry. To eat a meal and still be hungry, to me, is just unacceptable. It's uncomfortable and distracting. I want to be *satisfied* and all plans I've come across miss the mark at some point so they're not maintainable for me. 

I think the bottom line is that there is so much we don't know about the human body and what it needs. I've been researching books on nutrition and the amount of contrasting views and rebuttals of views are staggering. Nobody agrees on anything and it's near impossible to know what will work for you without some experimentation, which itself can be hazardous.


----------



## LillyBBBW (Jan 10, 2007)

tinkerbell said:


> Actually, I just did a quick search for it, and it doesnt seem like a pro ana site, it seems like its just a supportive site to over come an ED (http://www.eatingdisordersanonymous.org/)
> 
> 
> Just wanted to share that



Thanks Tinkerbell.


----------



## James (Jan 10, 2007)

Tina said:


> Bizarre world, isn't it? I'm glad you're out there, James, being one of the guys who considered her prettier Before, and not After.



yeah... its kinda odd. Its quite shallow really but I couldnt help but think that I wouldnt have given her a second look if i'd met her now.

still... i hope i get an invite to the wedding...lol... free food and drink!


----------



## Tina (Jan 10, 2007)

Hey, we're attracted to what we're attracted to. I don't think there is anything wrong with that. What is wrong, IMO, is when society tells us -- loudly -- who we should and should not find attractive.

Free food and drink is a good thing.  And James, how's the new place?


----------



## James (Jan 10, 2007)

Tina said:


> Hey, we're attracted to what we're attracted to. I don't think there is anything wrong with that. What is wrong, IMO, is when society tells us -- loudly -- who we should and should not find attractive.
> 
> Free food and drink is a good thing.  And James, how's the new place?



well i wont hi-jack this thread but its AWESOME....

If it isnt too conceited I'll start a new thread in the lounge and put some pics up once I've finished a few bits and bobs (putting in the cast-iron fireplace and painting the hallway mainly)...


----------



## Tina (Jan 10, 2007)

I would love that, James! And don't forget pics of the new bed.


----------



## James (Jan 10, 2007)

Tina said:


> I would love that, James! And don't forget pics of the new bed.



well here's one... just after i put the bed together... apparently its "double re-inforced" (which I think means that it has 6 legs rather than 4? - there are two extra ones under the middle of the bed...) anyway it looks a little different now with all the covers and pillows n stuff ...

Lots more housepics soon! 

View attachment bed.jpg


----------



## kerrypop (Jan 10, 2007)

LillyBBBW said:


> I'm exactly the same way only it appears I've developed some slight anger management issues over it.  I hate feeling hungry. To eat a meal and still be hungry, to me, is just unacceptable. It's uncomfortable and distracting. I want to be *satisfied* and all plans I've come across miss the mark at some point so they're not maintainable for me.



I am on board there. The other night it was about 10:30 and I knew that I didn't need anything to eat, but I WANTED something to eat... so i had 3 giant pickles. Why pickles? because they're 0 points, so I could have a picklefest if I wanted to, and never feel guilty. I hope I never get sick of pickles though....


----------



## Tina (Jan 10, 2007)

That is a nice, big, sturdy bed, James. You and your future honey will fill it out nicely! 

Kerry, many of us deal with mouth hunger, and maybe sometimes pickles solve that, but not always. One thing I do know for sure is that starvation, and even regular hunger, won't cut it for long. It will not be sustainable in the long term. There is a reason why many of us feel as we do about diets. I also believe in being reasonable and recognizing that often fat people have to lose weight for reasons that have nothing to do with society or the 'health and beauty' corporations; but in my experience, the ability to be reasonable about it comes from a certain amount of distance and time from those crappy imposed childhood diets and fearmongering from doctors that made my mother feel pressured to put me on diets and act crazy when it came to food. Even from the diets I felt pressured to put myself on when I was a younger adult, like the Optifast liquid diet sham, for instance.

Like Lilly, I don't deal well with being hungry, and certainly not if I am hungry because someone is trying to 'manage' my food, or if it is for some reason beyond my control. Let's just say it's not a pretty sight. :batting:


----------



## LillyBBBW (Jan 11, 2007)

kerrypop said:


> I am on board there. The other night it was about 10:30 and I knew that I didn't need anything to eat, but I WANTED something to eat... so i had 3 giant pickles. Why pickles? because they're 0 points, so I could have a picklefest if I wanted to, and never feel guilty. I hope I never get sick of pickles though....



Years ago a friend of mine said something to me that has kinda stuck. She talked about thinking of food as a reward for your body. Instead of picking empty things like ricecakes and other forms of dreck that serve no nutritional purpose, have something that is filled with nutrients and things that your body will benefit from like a banana. If you're going to eat something anyway you may as well make it somethig good that will work for you. Tell 'em you're fighting cancer. :eat2:


----------



## BeautifulPoeticDisaster (Jan 11, 2007)

kerrypop said:


> I am on board there. The other night it was about 10:30 and I knew that I didn't need anything to eat, but I WANTED something to eat... so i had 3 giant pickles. Why pickles? because they're 0 points, so I could have a picklefest if I wanted to, and never feel guilty. I hope I never get sick of pickles though....




Im on a couple of WW boards When it comes to eating...I like lots and LOTS! The zero point foods help alot. And I use their old points system, not their new crap (my opinion, lol). I'm not a fan of pickles...but tomatoes...mmmm, lol. A cup of cottage cheese and 2 tomatoes..is 3 points...and will fill you up for a few hours

Ok Im going to be struck by lightening now, lol. I just gave WW advice on the Dim boards....I'm going to Fat Hell, lol.


----------



## kerrypop (Jan 11, 2007)

BigBellySSBBW said:


> Im on a couple of WW boards When it comes to eating...I like lots and LOTS! The zero point foods help alot. And I use their old points system, not their new crap (my opinion, lol). I'm not a fan of pickles...but tomatoes...mmmm, lol. A cup of cottage cheese and 2 tomatoes..is 3 points...and will fill you up for a few hours



I totally agree though, like I feel guilty if I'm eating stuff that I feel like I "shouldn't" be eating.... but I too like to eat a lot. I will have to try tomatoes with cottage cheese... that sounds delicious!


----------



## Tina (Jan 12, 2007)

Kerry, you feel guilty because you have been brainwashed to feel guilty by a money machine driven by the diet, health & beauty corporations and the advertisers who do their bidding. This particular brand of shit has trickled down to become almost genetically coded into women's DNA so that we assign attributes to food that really should never apply.

All of this isn't to say that I don't sometimes feel that I am letting myself down when I eat something that I know will undermine my health. Sugar in particular does me in, as I am pre-diabetic; it raises my blood pressure, which isn't good because I have HBP, and it also makes me swell, which isn't a good thing for someone with lymphedema. But the particular feeling of guilt just after eating something fattening, because us girls should 'watch our girlish figures' (Heh! I have a girlish figure alright -- all 340+ lbs of it!), is definitely a result of societal brainwashing, and should be discarded, as it will not serve you -- believe me.


----------



## kerrypop (Jan 12, 2007)

Tina said:


> Kerry, you feel guilty because you have been brainwashed to feel guilty by a money machine driven by the diet, health & beauty corporations and the advertisers who do their bidding. This particular brand of shit has trickled down to become almost genetically coded into women's DNA so that we assign attributes to food that really should never apply.
> 
> All of this isn't to say that I don't sometimes feel that I am letting myself down when I eat something that I know will undermine my health. Sugar in particular does me in, as I am pre-diabetic; it raises my blood pressure, which isn't good because I have HBP, and it also makes me swell, which isn't a good thing for someone with lymphedema. But the particular feeling of guilt just after eating something fattening, because us girls should 'watch our girlish figures' (Heh! I have a girlish figure alright -- all 340+ lbs of it!), is definitely a result of societal brainwashing, and should be discarded, as it will not serve you -- believe me.



It isn't about my figure, it's not about the machine. I don't want to be a size 2, and even if I did, it wouldn't happen. The women in my family are all large, and built just like me. However... in my family diabetes runs rampant. There are foods that I love that I shouldn't eat for genuine health reasons, which are high in pointage, and lots of foods that are good for me and that I also like a lot, and generally those foods fit into the "zero point" category. I personally have found that weight watchers is a good way to get me to snack on healthier things. The points system has really gotten me to think about what exactly I am consuming, and I think that's a good thing. Whether you're a health nut or not, eating a whole bag of dorritos (which I was known to do) isn't generally considered to be a healthy snack. I'm 21, and concerned with things like nutrition, for reasons like osteoperosis, diabetes.. etc. I realize that there isn't any general consensus on exactly what is healthy, but I'm doing what works for me. I am in a wonderful relationship with someone who appreciates me for what I am, and then some, and has helped me to appreciate myself as I am. This doesn't mean that I'm going to go crazy and gain a bunch, because that isn't what I want to do. This system gets me thinking about what I eat and when I eat, and I think that's a good thing for me. I don't reccommend this plan for everyone, hence my original rating of 6/10.


----------



## Tina (Jan 12, 2007)

Ah, okay. I have no idea what size you want to be, but wanted to comment upon how women are brainwashed to feel guilty about eating. Didn't mean to make it sound as if I know your mind, but I can see how it did.


----------



## kerrypop (Jan 12, 2007)

's cool. I totally understand that a lot of people 'round these parts have strong feelings about dieting. I am one of them!


----------

