Counting the Points

So, I've been stewing this posting around in my little noggin' for a while and trying to figure out just what exactly I wanted to say about it. Sure enough, an article was posted today that prompted me to finally post it.

Here's the deal. I don't get Weight Watchers. Look, I know the system works for lots of people (some of my readership included) and I'm not knocking it. I completely understand how the support group can be appealing and helpful in the incredibly difficult journey to losing weight. The part of the program I've never gotten, and it's a pretty major part of the program, is the point system.

Here's what I don't get. The FDA requires certain information to be labeled on prepared foods sold in stores. At the very top of these labels is an important bit of information called calories (just after the serving size info). Next to the calories is a number. The number of calories in 1 serving. And while there are many diets and nutritional recommendations out there, I think most can agree that caloric intake is a very important part of any eating plan. Okay...with me so far? Here's where it gets weird to me. Here comes Weight Watchers, takes the calories already listed on a food and creates a new system with different numbers, which you have to look up and\or memorize, and banks millions upon millions of dollars from the American public a year for this system.

Again, I'm not knocking the system. In fact, I wish I had been the genius mastermind thinking up this new arbitrary system and charging people for information that's already, by law, available. If I had, I would not be going to work everyday, but rotating between one of my many, world wide vacation homes.

Perhaps some of you can explain the appeal to me and why counting points is easier than counting calories. Smaller numbers? In any case, I thought it was interesting that Weight Watchers is now (as described in this article) changing their number system to something more in line with current theories on food intake. Points will now be more of a nutrition\caloric combo than straight calories.

While this point adjustment is in line with my personal beliefs on creating a balanced, healthy diet (so I applaud it), it's also interesting to note other articles that have come out recently that are somewhat in opposition. The one that I am most intrigued by is the story of the professor who lost weight by the "Twinkies diet." In this article that describes his diet, he limits his caloric intake but subsists, primarily, on junk food. What's most fascinating about it all is not that he lost weight, but that even though he did not follow what our general knowledge of what a healthy diet is, other health indicators (cholesterol and triglyceride counts) improved.

What's the lesson in all of this? Well, I didn't really post these things as any kind of lesson. I'm certainly no expert when it comes to health and nutrition. However, I do know what I've learned from my life experiences. And in the weight loss and diet change life experiences, I do have more than a few under my belt (pun intended). I've learned that when you have too much weight, losing it is a good thing. I honestly feel the difference even in just a couple of pounds. And, even though I still want to eat foods that aren't the most nutritional dense (aka junk) from time to time, if I stick to eating better foods for me, I feel good because of those choices.