 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion GroupsGeneral TopicsLow CarbWeightWatchers WeightAdviser.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Weight Loss Forum / WeightWatchers / October 2004WW Core Quiz/Question for leaders
This is from the WW site, but it is available to the general public, not just paying members. http://www.weightwatchers.com/util/qzs/questions.aspx?quiz_id=6471 The answers for questions 1 & 4 are understandable. You can not make a non Core item from Core foods. Nor can you make Baked goods since they are not a Core food item. That folks should understand and accept that rule. Unfortunately there are some on the message boards that are doubting this rule because WW has not formally issued the corrections or updated the Online/eTools guidelines. The answers for questions 2 & 3 are causing quite a commotion on the WW message boards. Many people are upset that WW is changing the rules for core again. That is NOT something we've seen anywhere in the core information. Apparently they are now saying if you add 2 or more non-core ingredients, your dish is no longer core and you must use your WPAs for the entire dish. Can anyone state where this is printed in the materials we were given at the meetings? My leader has always been saying that if you cooked it yourself and know exactly how much is non core that those are the only items that you have to count. I know that there are some leaders reading this group. Have you heard of this new rule that dictates that more than 2 non-core items makes a dish Non core? For example, bake some tilapia (core) with some bread crumbs and low fat cheese (2 non core items) and the entire dish is now non core and you have to count the points for the fish too? This certainly is NOT what they wrote in the Getting Started Manual nor is it what my leader has been tell us. Comments please. ************************************************* 1. Ice cream made from fat-free milk, Splenda and vanilla extract is definitely a Core food. After all, a recipe made from all Core ingredients is automatically considered Core. Answer: False. Ice cream is not a Core food; no matter what it's made from. Core foods are wholesome foods that fill you up without providing a lot of empty calories or triggering overeating. That's not to say that ice cream cannot be enjoyed in moderation. If you're in the mood for some mint chocolate chip, spend some of your weekly POINTS Allowance. As far as other recipes made with all Core ingredients go, remember: It's a Core recipe as long as you use only Core ingredients and the final product is either already on the Core foods list (such as homemade lentil soup) or it has the potential to be on the list (such as meatballs made with Core beef). 2. You make fajitas (without the tortillas) with all Core ingredients. If you jazz it up with just a touch of regular sour cream, low-fat shredded cheese and some broken up tortilla chips, you only have to count the POINTS values for the toppings. Answer: False Adding all those toppings makes this dish a lot more indulgent. If you were only adding a tablespoon or two of regular sour cream, you could consider the fajitas a Core dish and just count the POINTS value for the sour cream toward your weekly POINTS Allowance. But two or more ingredients puts it over the top, and you should count the POINTS value for the entire recipe. 3. Top a fresh bowl of berries with fat-free whipped topping and you've got a fabulous Core snack or dessert. Answer: True You're only adding one ingredient to the berries, so they remain a Core food. Technically, you need to count the POINTS value of the topping. Lucky for you, two tablespoons of fat-free whipped topping has a POINTS value of zero anyway, so it would not affect your weekly POINTS Allowance total. But if you were topping the berries with frozen yogurt, you'd have to count the yogurt's POINTS value. 4. Whole oats are a Core ingredient. Grind some up and you can use the oat "flour" to make Core baked goods. Answer: False If you're trying to find a loophole to make Core muffins, cookies or cakes by processing Core ingredients at home, forget about it. The above items are not Core foods due to their abuse potential and higher energy density. In other words, higher-calorie, higher-fat content foods tend to be less nutritious per serving as well as less satisfying in terms of long-term appetite control. You can enjoy baked goods in moderation though - just make sure to count the POINTS values for them. Laura, there is a fuzzy line between Core and non-Core when combining both types of ingredients, but in the member's materials there are allusions to what the WW site is saying. The Getting Started book from Week 1, on page 32, gives two examples of adding ONE non-Core ingredient to an otherwise Core food and having to count only the added non-Core ingredient towards your Weekly Points Allowance. On the same page it says "Use your common sense when judging whether or not a dish ... is a Core Food." It also says "if you find yourself dissecting a recipe, ingredient by ingredient, consider using your weekly Points Allowance ..." The "official" WW rule book, in all the WW meeting rooms, says if a member wants to add just one non-Core Food ingredient they only need to count that ingredient but if they have a dish that has a combination of Core and non-Core then the whole dish should be counted. The assumption is that with one non-Core you count only the ingredient, with more you count the whole dish. But again, common sense should prevail. In the example of the fajita, three non-Core ingredients have been added to "jazz it up" which also makes it more "indulgent" (i.e., has a higher abuse potential). For your example of the fish, I would use common sense. If adding the bread crumbs and cheese would cause you to eat more of the dish than if it were prepared plain then you have created a higher potential for abuse and the final dish is no longer Core. The factor here is a food's potential for abuse, something your leader should talk about. That's why plain 94% fat-free popcorn is Core, while 94% fat-free kettle corn is not. Same nutritional value, but very different abuse potential. HTH. - Fred #2 > This is from the WW site, but it is available to the general public, not > just paying members. [quoted text clipped - 101 lines] > make > sure to count the POINTS values for them. I understand the interpretations and common sense still prevails when determing core vs non core. Are people trying to stretch things? Proably. I think the bigger issue is that people are just wishing that WW had taken the time to spell things out completely in the materials. Since this was included in the "official" rule book then why wasn't it included in our materials from the very beginning? People are objecting to being told these things after the fact and from non official sources. We also seem to be getting different stories about the corrections. Many have not gotten any. The online databases including eTools apparently have not been updated yet. My leader went through some of them but not the entire list. She has not mentioned the corrections in a month. It is almost as if they did not exist and she was told to stop discussing them. > Laura, there is a fuzzy line between Core and non-Core when combining both > types of ingredients, but in the member's materials there are allusions to [quoted text clipped - 135 lines] > > make > > sure to count the POINTS values for them. We received lists of correction (which we do every time there's a new program rolled.. was the same with Flex) and WW is updating the material. People are forever finding new ways to get around the program.. which are ways that didn't come up while testing the program.. (again same thing hapenened when they first rolled the first point system) If you were to put in the material every detail, every possible variation that members come up with along with every rules for every one of those variations... can you imagine how big the Week 1 book would be ? The only difference with the previous big roll outs, is that now people are online.. and rumors and tricks and "ways around the program" are rolling around faster than WW can keep up.. I read the message boards.. and it's ridiculous to think that WW would be able to keep up with everything that's going on there.. rumors starts.. then WW has to step in to set things right.. The boards are a good thing for the members, no doubt about that and as a member I use them and enjoy them.. but they make things difficult for us.. it's amazing the things members show up with in the meeting room saying "I saw that on the message board..." not to mention scary sometimes.. So in short... ignore the message board rumors, and stick to what your leader is telling you (and ask tons of questions because sometimes leader things it's all clear and figured out for everyone)... and it's gonna be a lot easier to understand the program.. unfortunately, the online members can't do that.. :o( but again.. stick with the official word.. and if you got question ask WW.. not Joe know it all on the message board.. more chance to get a straight (and real) anwser.. Every big change in the programs have brought the same problems.. and now with the online community they are multiplied a thousand times.. be patient.. this works.. I got the belly (or the no belly) to prove it ;op The core program has been very well researched and thought out.. there's a few sticky points because it's brand new... but lots of members are very succesfull with it !  SignatureWill~ 196.2 / 133.4 / 137 lbs 89 / 60.5 / 62.1 Kg Personal goal 125 lbs / 56.7 Kg > I understand the interpretations and common sense still prevails when > determing core vs non core. Are people trying to stretch things? Proably. [quoted text clipped - 177 lines] > > > make > > > sure to count the POINTS values for them. One reason I prefer this newsgroup to the message boards on the WW site is that here we state what works for us and then allow people to figure out for themselves what works best. What happens on the WW boards is that everyone is looking for absolutes, the definitive word on exactly what to do. I've seen a lot of blaming of WW, a lot of attempts to "bargain" with the program, a lot of anger, a lot of denial. Sounds a lot like the stages a person goes through when handed a diagnosis of incurable cancer. I've also seen acceptance on the WW boards, though not as predominantly as I experience here on a consistent basis. All the regulars here seem to have come to the place in their weight loss journey where we've accepted the hard reality, and sure, we're not always happy. We struggle. We groan. But as a group, we all seem to understand that the key to our ultimate success is us. Negativity is contagious. That's why I don't spend much time on the WW boards. I'm afraid it would hurt my program more than help it--from the way some people talk, you'd think WW was administered by the devil. I think people should do what works for them. If counting the additional items as points but the basic recipe as core works for someone (as evidenced by continued weight loss), then they should continue to work the program that way. But if weight loss is difficult or in reverse, then it might make sense to examine with rigorous honesty whether to follow the current WW guidelines more carefully. For example, WW core says fat-free plain yogurt is core. Well, not for me. I'm discovering that dairy of almost any kind is a trigger food for me. Some people find that they can eat one chocolate a day and have their sweet tooth satisfied. Not for me. One chocolate soon has me eating chocolates by the bag. In short, do what works. IMHO. A-MEN Well said M'lady! I've discovered the "guys on a diet" board.. and there the "spirit" is somehow different.. though I'm still new.. but yeah.. the other boards are getting way too negative for me.. SignatureWill~ 196.2 / 133.4 / 137 lbs 89 / 60.5 / 62.1 Kg Personal goal 125 lbs / 56.7 Kg > One reason I prefer this newsgroup to the message boards on the WW site is > that here we state what works for us and then allow people to figure out [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > > In short, do what works. IMHO. Well said. I think I will stop visiting the WW message boards myself. I turned to them because this group had gotten so quiet. I am an internet junkie so if it is quiet here I go wondering on the message boards. They have been very negative lately. I also like what Willow said about listening to my leader. And if I question what she says I will call WW directly. Go right to the source. I am just disappointed that WW seems to be falling down on the job distributing the corrections that the leaders were given. Mine has stopped talking about them as if they don't exist. I'm not sure if that is fair to us as paying members. It certainly is not fair to the Online members that none of the updates have been incorporated into their databases. I have worked with computers and data bases for decades and their lag time on updating the Food databases just does not make any sense to me. > One reason I prefer this newsgroup to the message boards on the WW site is > that here we state what works for us and then allow people to figure out [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > > In short, do what works. IMHO. I agree with the last paragraph, to a point. But that would mean I should also be disappointed that they don't include in the database every brand name out there. Actually, I AM disappointed that they don't. I mean, how many of us indulge in Skinny Cows and yet those buggers aren't in the database. Yeah, I know about being an Internet junkie. And when I'm in the mood for Jerry Springer-like entertainment on the Internet, I visit the WW boards. But when I'm looking for good information and honest-to-goodness support and encouragement, I go to Dotti's board. >Well said. I think I will stop visiting the WW message boards myself. I >turned to them because this group had gotten so quiet. I am an internet [quoted text clipped - 42 lines] >> >> In short, do what works. IMHO. -- Linda P Even the CFC does not carry everything. That I can understand. From what I understand the companies had to pay to be listed in the book. But to not update the materials with known corrections in a timely fashion just is not fair to the paying members. That's really what many are upset about. You are also correct about the difference bwt WW and Dotties board. I guess I got wrapped up in the Jerry springer like entertainment. Back to Dotties board for me. > I agree with the last paragraph, to a point. But that would mean I > should also be disappointed that they don't include in the database [quoted text clipped - 56 lines] > -- > Linda P Maybe I have more sympathy for WW than the average bear because I work for a publisher, and I know how it can go with the introduction of a new line of publications. Murphy's Law definitely comes into play: as the accuracy of content increases in importance, so does the certainty that embarassing errors will not be caught. I'm in the annals of my company's Legendary Errata files for being responsible for causing the most letters to the editor for a single error in a publication. (I might just have won another awrad for the most prepositions in a sentence.) Despite five proofings, I never caught the misspelled phrase "bowel of soup" (should have been "bowl of soup"). It happened 7 years ago, and I'm still hearing about it. If you think the members of the WW community boards are nasty, you should read how some church people talk to other church people. And then sign off with, "Yours in Christ." You've never been properly chewed on until you've been eaten alive by an irate Lutheran pastor. So I think I'll cut the WW leadership a little slack. Practicing forgiveness is better for my health. Maybe anger and general pissiness should be deductible from the 35 WPAs. At least for me, those two emotions are definitely binge triggers. And you know what else, Laura? You are my role model for looking with brutal honesty at why you aren't losing weight and figuring out what to do to make changes. When you've plateaued, you haven't blamed WW mgmt for not publishing corrections. You've taken a hard look within and said, maybe I'm not counting my eating out points correctly. Or you've gone back to meetings when you thought that might help. (Your example is one reason I decided to give meetings a try.) Or you've looked at your portion sizes. I bet none of the whiners on the WW boards can claim the same willingness to look in the mirror and face the truth. That's what I love about this group. The personal accountability here is unbelievable. >But to not >update the materials with known corrections in a timely fashion just is not >fair to the paying members. That's really what many are upset about. -- Linda P > Maybe I have more sympathy for WW than the average bear because I work > for a publisher, and I know how it can go with the introduction of a [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > should be deductible from the 35 WPAs. At least for me, those two > emotions are definitely binge triggers. After that boo-boo I can understand you cutting them some slack. Plus you've been on the inside of the publishing industry. You see what goes on. I can understand the possibility of errors. Its just the way that WW is handling them that has me upset. > And you know what else, Laura? You are my role model for looking with > brutal honesty at why you aren't losing weight and figuring out what [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > the truth. That's what I love about this group. The personal > accountability here is unbelievable. Wow! I've never considered myself a role model before. Thankyou. I know that I have been struggling through this since I started. Lots of baggage in this soul. But you are right I have not been a whiner. Just a confused soul trying to figure out what/why this body is doing what it is doing half of the time. And you are also correct that the folks at the ww board are whining a bit too much over these changes. I promise I'll let this go. But one more thing came to mind while I was walking the dog this evening. There's a phrase that gets used in 12-step groups whenever anyone starts to complain about the proceedings or what someone said or the lack of whatever: Take what you need and leave the rest. I say, if something helps my program, then I'll give it consideration. But anything that doesn't help my program, I do my best to ignore it. In this endeavor, I'm all about filtering out the noise and anything that distracts me from what I need to do to stay on program. This work is hard enough without picking up other people's baggage. My own is plenty heavy. Ok, I think I'm done. There's lots of noise going on at work this week to which I'm trying really hard to apply all this same thinking. Did fine till today when I slipped. Thank goodness this is the day after WI and not the day before. I have enough WPAs to cover me. >> Maybe I have more sympathy for WW than the average bear because I work >> for a publisher, and I know how it can go with the introduction of a [quoted text clipped - 40 lines] >the time. And you are also correct that the folks at the ww board are >whining a bit too much over these changes. -- Linda P That sounds like excellent advise. I tend to get caught up in the noise and I need to stop doing that. Sometimes it is to divert attention from the real noise here at home and work. Especially work. I'm not sure how much longer I want to work there. I actually quit a few weeks ago but one of the directors convinced me to give them until the end of the year to make some very necessary changes in the way they were conducting business. Well, he came to me yesterday and said that he has not seen any signs of them being willing to make the changes and that he was leaving. So my "protector" is jumping ship leaving me holding the bag. That and TOM refuses to show up. I'm a mess. I slipped last night and had some real ice cream. Did no measure it either. Had some in a coffee mug as it was the closest clean container in the sink. Man, did that taste good. > I promise I'll let this go. But one more thing came to mind while I > was walking the dog this evening. There's a phrase that gets used in [quoted text clipped - 59 lines] > -- > Linda P Sometime we need those "lapse"... how the work front turns around somehow.. SignatureWill~ 196.2 / 133.4 / 137 lbs 89 / 60.5 / 62.1 Kg Personal goal 125 lbs / 56.7 Kg > That sounds like excellent advise. I tend to get caught up in the noise and > I need to stop doing that. Sometimes it is to divert attention from the real [quoted text clipped - 77 lines] > > -- > > Linda P Thanks. I think I may just disappear after Christmas. It might just be the easiest way of quitting there. Go on vacation and not return. No fuss...No mess... > Sometime we need those "lapse"... how the work front turns around somehow.. > [quoted text clipped - 89 lines] > > > -- > > > Linda P Sounds good to me ! SignatureWill~ 196.2 / 133.4 / 137 lbs 89 / 60.5 / 62.1 Kg Personal goal 125 lbs / 56.7 Kg > Thanks. I think I may just disappear after Christmas. It might just be the > easiest way of quitting there. Go on vacation and not return. No fuss...No [quoted text clipped - 118 lines] > > > > -- > > > > Linda P this is so on the money. I have had etools since January 1 2004, have never read a message board because this group is just what I need, I can eat 1 or 2 Hershey's kisses without a problem, but it is a struggle to eat one serving of plain yogurt. Lee > One reason I prefer this newsgroup to the message boards on the WW site is > that here we state what works for us and then allow people to figure out [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > > In short, do what works. IMHO. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2012 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.