Flexpoints???

Discussion in 'Food and nutrition' started by Mette, Jan 26, 2004.

  1. Mette

    Mette Guest

    Uhm..when I started WW four years ago it was called 1-2-3 points. My range was 18-25 points daily.
    Now I suddenly heard the term "flexpoints" - how does that work? Is it more effective?
     
    Tags:


  2. Joyce

    Joyce Guest

    Guess it all depends on who you talk to. Some seem to like it, others don't.

    It is almost exactly like the 1-2-3 plan as far as points are concerned, when you figure with
    flexpoints you aren't allowed to bank points (that's why they call them flex - you can use them
    anytime you want). In 1-2-3 your range allowed you 175 points per week, plus activity points. In
    flex, you now are given a strict daily target - 20 being what your old 1-2-3 range would be
    assigned. Based on this you would work with 140 daily points PLUS 35 weekly flex points ... for a
    total of 175 points per week. You can earn activity points, but can not bank them
    - they must be used the same day they are earned. Another change between these two programs is that
    in 1-2-3 there was no cap on the fiber grams when calculating points. In newer programs, you can
    only use a maximum of 4 g fiber.

    Where the complaints come in (and I still complain). WW replaced 1-2-3 with a newer points program
    (winning points). In this program they lowered the daily ranges by 2 points, so the equivalent of
    your old 1-2-3 range would change to 18-23. Banking was allowed. Based on this you were allowed 161
    max weekly points, plus activity points which also could be banked. So switching to flex points from
    the winning points program, you have the allowance to consume 14 additional points per week. Many of
    us felt that adding 14 points per week hindered our weightloss, or made it very difficult to
    refigure the maintenance routine - so just stuck with the winning points program. One thing to
    definitely keep in mind is that you don't HAVE to use those flexpoints (and if we don't then it
    makes me think we still are going right back to the old winning points program
    - only the banking is done for us. <g>).

    Joyce

    On Mon, 5 Jan 2004 21:14:29 +0100, "Mette" <[email protected]> wrote:

    >Uhm..when I started WW four years ago it was called 1-2-3 points. My range was 18-25 points daily.
    >Now I suddenly heard the term "flexpoints" - how does that work? Is it more effective?
     
  3. Mette

    Mette Guest

    Thank you Joyce!

    Ya know, I think Ill just stick to my good ol' 1-2-3 - it worked then and it must work now:eek:)

    "Joyce" <[email protected]> skrev i en meddelelse news:[email protected]...
    > Guess it all depends on who you talk to. Some seem to like it, others
    don't.
    >
    > It is almost exactly like the 1-2-3 plan as far as points are concerned,
    when you
    > figure with flexpoints you aren't allowed to bank points (that's why they
    call
    > them flex - you can use them anytime you want). In 1-2-3 your range
    allowed you
    > 175 points per week, plus activity points. In flex, you now are given a
    strict
    > daily target - 20 being what your old 1-2-3 range would be assigned.
    Based on
    > this you would work with 140 daily points PLUS 35 weekly flex points ...
    for a
    > total of 175 points per week. You can earn activity points, but can not
    bank them
    > - they must be used the same day they are earned. Another change between
    these
    > two programs is that in 1-2-3 there was no cap on the fiber grams when
    calculating
    > points. In newer programs, you can only use a maximum of 4 g fiber.
    >
    > Where the complaints come in (and I still complain). WW replaced 1-2-3
    with a
    > newer points program (winning points). In this program they lowered the
    daily
    > ranges by 2 points, so the equivalent of your old 1-2-3 range would change
    to
    > 18-23. Banking was allowed. Based on this you were allowed 161 max
    weekly
    > points, plus activity points which also could be banked. So switching to
    flex
    > points from the winning points program, you have the allowance to consume
    14
    > additional points per week. Many of us felt that adding 14 points per
    week
    > hindered our weightloss, or made it very difficult to refigure the
    maintenance
    > routine - so just stuck with the winning points program. One thing to
    definitely
    > keep in mind is that you don't HAVE to use those flexpoints (and if we
    don't then
    > it makes me think we still are going right back to the old winning points
    program
    > - only the banking is done for us. <g>).
    >
    > Joyce
    >
    > On Mon, 5 Jan 2004 21:14:29 +0100, "Mette" <[email protected]> wrote:
    >
    > >Uhm..when I started WW four years ago it was called 1-2-3 points. My
    range
    > >was 18-25 points daily. Now I suddenly heard the term "flexpoints" - how does that work? Is it
    > >more effective?
    > >
    > >
     
  4. Rick Larsen

    Rick Larsen Guest

    Is anyone able to post, please, the "old" 1-2-3 range of points / day for various weights? Would be
    much appreciated. Regards Rick

    On Mon, 5 Jan 2004 22:25:22 +0100, "Mette" <[email protected]> wrote:

    >Thank you Joyce!
    >
    >Ya know, I think Ill just stick to my good ol' 1-2-3 - it worked then and it must work now:eek:)
    >
    >"Joyce" <[email protected]> skrev i en meddelelse news:[email protected]...
    >> Guess it all depends on who you talk to. Some seem to like it, others
    >don't.
    >>
    >> It is almost exactly like the 1-2-3 plan as far as points are concerned,
    >when you
    >> figure with flexpoints you aren't allowed to bank points (that's why they
    >call
    >> them flex - you can use them anytime you want). In 1-2-3 your range
    >allowed you
    >> 175 points per week, plus activity points. In flex, you now are given a
    >strict
    >> daily target - 20 being what your old 1-2-3 range would be assigned.
    >Based on
    >> this you would work with 140 daily points PLUS 35 weekly flex points ...
    >for a
    >> total of 175 points per week. You can earn activity points, but can not
    >bank them
    >> - they must be used the same day they are earned. Another change between
    >these
    >> two programs is that in 1-2-3 there was no cap on the fiber grams when
    >calculating
    >> points. In newer programs, you can only use a maximum of 4 g fiber.
    >>
    >> Where the complaints come in (and I still complain). WW replaced 1-2-3
    >with a
    >> newer points program (winning points). In this program they lowered the
    >daily
    >> ranges by 2 points, so the equivalent of your old 1-2-3 range would change
    >to
    >> 18-23. Banking was allowed. Based on this you were allowed 161 max
    >weekly
    >> points, plus activity points which also could be banked. So switching to
    >flex
    >> points from the winning points program, you have the allowance to consume
    >14
    >> additional points per week. Many of us felt that adding 14 points per
    >week
    >> hindered our weightloss, or made it very difficult to refigure the
    >maintenance
    >> routine - so just stuck with the winning points program. One thing to
    >definitely
    >> keep in mind is that you don't HAVE to use those flexpoints (and if we
    >don't then
    >> it makes me think we still are going right back to the old winning points
    >program
    >> - only the banking is done for us. <g>).
    >>
    >> Joyce
    >>
    >> On Mon, 5 Jan 2004 21:14:29 +0100, "Mette" <[email protected]> wrote:
    >>
    >> >Uhm..when I started WW four years ago it was called 1-2-3 points. My
    >range
    >> >was 18-25 points daily. Now I suddenly heard the term "flexpoints" - how does that work? Is it
    >> >more effective?
    >> >
    >> >
    >> >
    >
     
  5. Sandy W

    Sandy W Guest

    Oh oh. I didn't realize that you can only use 4 fiber points. Thanks for telling me.

    Sandy

    "Mette" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
    > Thank you Joyce!
    >
    > Ya know, I think Ill just stick to my good ol' 1-2-3 - it worked then and
    it
    > must work now:eek:)
    >
    > "Joyce" <[email protected]> skrev i en meddelelse news:[email protected]...
    > > Guess it all depends on who you talk to. Some seem to like it, others
    > don't.
    > >
    > > It is almost exactly like the 1-2-3 plan as far as points are concerned,
    > when you
    > > figure with flexpoints you aren't allowed to bank points (that's why
    they
    > call
    > > them flex - you can use them anytime you want). In 1-2-3 your range
    > allowed you
    > > 175 points per week, plus activity points. In flex, you now are given a
    > strict
    > > daily target - 20 being what your old 1-2-3 range would be assigned.
    > Based on
    > > this you would work with 140 daily points PLUS 35 weekly flex points ...
    > for a
    > > total of 175 points per week. You can earn activity points, but can not
    > bank them
    > > - they must be used the same day they are earned. Another change
    between
    > these
    > > two programs is that in 1-2-3 there was no cap on the fiber grams when
    > calculating
    > > points. In newer programs, you can only use a maximum of 4 g fiber.
    > >
    > > Where the complaints come in (and I still complain). WW replaced 1-2-3
    > with a
    > > newer points program (winning points). In this program they lowered the
    > daily
    > > ranges by 2 points, so the equivalent of your old 1-2-3 range would
    change
    > to
    > > 18-23. Banking was allowed. Based on this you were allowed 161 max
    > weekly
    > > points, plus activity points which also could be banked. So switching
    to
    > flex
    > > points from the winning points program, you have the allowance to
    consume
    > 14
    > > additional points per week. Many of us felt that adding 14 points per
    > week
    > > hindered our weightloss, or made it very difficult to refigure the
    > maintenance
    > > routine - so just stuck with the winning points program. One thing to
    > definitely
    > > keep in mind is that you don't HAVE to use those flexpoints (and if we
    > don't then
    > > it makes me think we still are going right back to the old winning
    points
    > program
    > > - only the banking is done for us. <g>).
    > >
    > > Joyce
    > >
    > > On Mon, 5 Jan 2004 21:14:29 +0100, "Mette" <[email protected]> wrote:
    > >
    > > >Uhm..when I started WW four years ago it was called 1-2-3 points. My
    > range
    > > >was 18-25 points daily. Now I suddenly heard the term "flexpoints" -
    how
    > > >does that work? Is it more effective?
    > > >
    > > >
    > > >
    >
     
  6. It is not 4 fiber points. It is 4 grams of fiber per item when calculating the points the old 1-2-3
    program, had unlimited fiber grams, so it really adjusted the points significantly.

    Debbie

    "Sandy W" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]_s03...
    > Oh oh. I didn't realize that you can only use 4 fiber points. Thanks for telling me.
    >
    > Sandy
    >
    > "Mette" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > news:[email protected]...
    > > Thank you Joyce!
    > >
    > > Ya know, I think Ill just stick to my good ol' 1-2-3 - it worked then
    and
    > it
    > > must work now:eek:)
    > >
    > > "Joyce" <[email protected]> skrev i en meddelelse news:[email protected]...
    > > > Guess it all depends on who you talk to. Some seem to like it, others
    > > don't.
    > > >
    > > > It is almost exactly like the 1-2-3 plan as far as points are
    concerned,
    > > when you
    > > > figure with flexpoints you aren't allowed to bank points (that's why
    > they
    > > call
    > > > them flex - you can use them anytime you want). In 1-2-3 your range
    > > allowed you
    > > > 175 points per week, plus activity points. In flex, you now are given
    a
    > > strict
    > > > daily target - 20 being what your old 1-2-3 range would be assigned.
    > > Based on
    > > > this you would work with 140 daily points PLUS 35 weekly flex points
    ...
    > > for a
    > > > total of 175 points per week. You can earn activity points, but can
    not
    > > bank them
    > > > - they must be used the same day they are earned. Another change
    > between
    > > these
    > > > two programs is that in 1-2-3 there was no cap on the fiber grams when
    > > calculating
    > > > points. In newer programs, you can only use a maximum of 4 g fiber.
    > > >
    > > > Where the complaints come in (and I still complain). WW replaced
    1-2-3
    > > with a
    > > > newer points program (winning points). In this program they lowered
    the
    > > daily
    > > > ranges by 2 points, so the equivalent of your old 1-2-3 range would
    > change
    > > to
    > > > 18-23. Banking was allowed. Based on this you were allowed 161 max
    > > weekly
    > > > points, plus activity points which also could be banked. So switching
    > to
    > > flex
    > > > points from the winning points program, you have the allowance to
    > consume
    > > 14
    > > > additional points per week. Many of us felt that adding 14 points
    per
    > > week
    > > > hindered our weightloss, or made it very difficult to refigure the
    > > maintenance
    > > > routine - so just stuck with the winning points program. One thing to
    > > definitely
    > > > keep in mind is that you don't HAVE to use those flexpoints (and if we
    > > don't then
    > > > it makes me think we still are going right back to the old winning
    > points
    > > program
    > > > - only the banking is done for us. <g>).
    > > >
    > > > Joyce
    > > >
    > > > On Mon, 5 Jan 2004 21:14:29 +0100, "Mette" <[email protected]> wrote:
    > > >
    > > > >Uhm..when I started WW four years ago it was called 1-2-3 points. My
    > > range
    > > > >was 18-25 points daily. Now I suddenly heard the term "flexpoints" -
    > how
    > > > >does that work? Is it more effective?
    > > > >
    > > > >
    > > > >
    > > >
    > >
    >
     
  7. Sandy W

    Sandy W Guest

    Thanks, That what I meant.

    Sandy

    "Deb in Northern California" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:mvednb5wLdoh12eiRVn-
    [email protected]
    > It is not 4 fiber points. It is 4 grams of fiber per item when
    calculating
    > the points the old 1-2-3 program, had unlimited fiber grams, so it really adjusted the points
    > significantly.
    >
    > Debbie
    >
    > "Sandy W" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]_s03...
    > > Oh oh. I didn't realize that you can only use 4 fiber points. Thanks for telling me.
    > >
    > > Sandy
    > >
    > > "Mette" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > > news:[email protected]...
    > > > Thank you Joyce!
    > > >
    > > > Ya know, I think Ill just stick to my good ol' 1-2-3 - it worked then
    > and
    > > it
    > > > must work now:eek:)
    > > >
    > > > "Joyce" <[email protected]> skrev i en meddelelse
    > > > news:[email protected]...
    > > > > Guess it all depends on who you talk to. Some seem to like it,
    others
    > > > don't.
    > > > >
    > > > > It is almost exactly like the 1-2-3 plan as far as points are
    > concerned,
    > > > when you
    > > > > figure with flexpoints you aren't allowed to bank points (that's why
    > > they
    > > > call
    > > > > them flex - you can use them anytime you want). In 1-2-3 your range
    > > > allowed you
    > > > > 175 points per week, plus activity points. In flex, you now are
    given
    > a
    > > > strict
    > > > > daily target - 20 being what your old 1-2-3 range would be assigned.
    > > > Based on
    > > > > this you would work with 140 daily points PLUS 35 weekly flex points
    > ...
    > > > for a
    > > > > total of 175 points per week. You can earn activity points, but can
    > not
    > > > bank them
    > > > > - they must be used the same day they are earned. Another change
    > > between
    > > > these
    > > > > two programs is that in 1-2-3 there was no cap on the fiber grams
    when
    > > > calculating
    > > > > points. In newer programs, you can only use a maximum of 4 g fiber.
    > > > >
    > > > > Where the complaints come in (and I still complain). WW replaced
    > 1-2-3
    > > > with a
    > > > > newer points program (winning points). In this program they lowered
    > the
    > > > daily
    > > > > ranges by 2 points, so the equivalent of your old 1-2-3 range would
    > > change
    > > > to
    > > > > 18-23. Banking was allowed. Based on this you were allowed 161 max
    > > > weekly
    > > > > points, plus activity points which also could be banked. So
    switching
    > > to
    > > > flex
    > > > > points from the winning points program, you have the allowance to
    > > consume
    > > > 14
    > > > > additional points per week. Many of us felt that adding 14 points
    > per
    > > > week
    > > > > hindered our weightloss, or made it very difficult to refigure the
    > > > maintenance
    > > > > routine - so just stuck with the winning points program. One thing
    to
    > > > definitely
    > > > > keep in mind is that you don't HAVE to use those flexpoints (and if
    we
    > > > don't then
    > > > > it makes me think we still are going right back to the old winning
    > > points
    > > > program
    > > > > - only the banking is done for us. <g>).
    > > > >
    > > > > Joyce
    > > > >
    > > > > On Mon, 5 Jan 2004 21:14:29 +0100, "Mette" <[email protected]>
    wrote:
    > > > >
    > > > > >Uhm..when I started WW four years ago it was called 1-2-3 points.
    My
    > > > range
    > > > > >was 18-25 points daily. Now I suddenly heard the term
    "flexpoints" -
    > > how
    > > > > >does that work? Is it more effective?
    > > > > >
    > > > > >
    > > > > >
    > > > >
    > > >
    > > >
    > >
    >
     
  8. Joyce

    Joyce Guest

    I think that is pretty much the same attitude many of us took ... if it ain't broke, why fix it?
    I've become fairly accustomed to the flexpoint plan now, just have to remember to drop off 14
    flexpoints at the beginning of the week. I also DO bank my activity points, and bank uneaten
    food points - but the weekly totals come out to the same amount of points as the old program.
    I've had to make adjustments because I do ww online, and their journal *forces* us to use their
    flexpoint system.

    Joyce

    On Mon, 5 Jan 2004 22:25:22 +0100, "Mette" <[email protected]> wrote:

    >Thank you Joyce!
    >
    >Ya know, I think Ill just stick to my good ol' 1-2-3 - it worked then and it must work now:eek:)
    >
    >"Joyce" <[email protected]> skrev i en meddelelse news:[email protected]...
    >> Guess it all depends on who you talk to. Some seem to like it, others
    >don't.
    >>
    >> It is almost exactly like the 1-2-3 plan as far as points are concerned,
    >when you
    >> figure with flexpoints you aren't allowed to bank points (that's why they
    >call
    >> them flex - you can use them anytime you want). In 1-2-3 your range
    >allowed you
    >> 175 points per week, plus activity points. In flex, you now are given a
    >strict
    >> daily target - 20 being what your old 1-2-3 range would be assigned.
    >Based on
    >> this you would work with 140 daily points PLUS 35 weekly flex points ...
    >for a
    >> total of 175 points per week. You can earn activity points, but can not
    >bank them
    >> - they must be used the same day they are earned. Another change between
    >these
    >> two programs is that in 1-2-3 there was no cap on the fiber grams when
    >calculating
    >> points. In newer programs, you can only use a maximum of 4 g fiber.
    >>
    >> Where the complaints come in (and I still complain). WW replaced 1-2-3
    >with a
    >> newer points program (winning points). In this program they lowered the
    >daily
    >> ranges by 2 points, so the equivalent of your old 1-2-3 range would change
    >to
    >> 18-23. Banking was allowed. Based on this you were allowed 161 max
    >weekly
    >> points, plus activity points which also could be banked. So switching to
    >flex
    >> points from the winning points program, you have the allowance to consume
    >14
    >> additional points per week. Many of us felt that adding 14 points per
    >week
    >> hindered our weightloss, or made it very difficult to refigure the
    >maintenance
    >> routine - so just stuck with the winning points program. One thing to
    >definitely
    >> keep in mind is that you don't HAVE to use those flexpoints (and if we
    >don't then
    >> it makes me think we still are going right back to the old winning points
    >program
    >> - only the banking is done for us. <g>).
    >>
    >> Joyce
    >>
    >> On Mon, 5 Jan 2004 21:14:29 +0100, "Mette" <[email protected]> wrote:
    >>
    >> >Uhm..when I started WW four years ago it was called 1-2-3 points. My
    >range
    >> >was 18-25 points daily. Now I suddenly heard the term "flexpoints" - how does that work? Is it
    >> >more effective?
    >> >
    >> >
    >> >
    >
     
  9. Joyce

    Joyce Guest

    That was another change that was made from the 1-2-3 program, to the Winning points program. I
    believe the logic was that people were loading up on highfiber items, counting them as zero or
    extremely low points in higher servings - and then wondering why no weightloss (or minimal) was
    happening. So the 4g fiber cap was introduced.

    Joyce

    On Tue, 06 Jan 2004 02:50:59 GMT, "Sandy W" <[email protected]> wrote:

    >Oh oh. I didn't realize that you can only use 4 fiber points. Thanks for telling me.
    >
    >Sandy
    >
    >"Mette" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    >news:[email protected]...
    >> Thank you Joyce!
    >>
    >> Ya know, I think Ill just stick to my good ol' 1-2-3 - it worked then and
    >it
    >> must work now:eek:)
    >>
    >> "Joyce" <[email protected]> skrev i en meddelelse news:[email protected]...
    >> > Guess it all depends on who you talk to. Some seem to like it, others
    >> don't.
    >> >
    >> > It is almost exactly like the 1-2-3 plan as far as points are concerned,
    >> when you
    >> > figure with flexpoints you aren't allowed to bank points (that's why
    >they
    >> call
    >> > them flex - you can use them anytime you want). In 1-2-3 your range
    >> allowed you
    >> > 175 points per week, plus activity points. In flex, you now are given a
    >> strict
    >> > daily target - 20 being what your old 1-2-3 range would be assigned.
    >> Based on
    >> > this you would work with 140 daily points PLUS 35 weekly flex points ...
    >> for a
    >> > total of 175 points per week. You can earn activity points, but can not
    >> bank them
    >> > - they must be used the same day they are earned. Another change
    >between
    >> these
    >> > two programs is that in 1-2-3 there was no cap on the fiber grams when
    >> calculating
    >> > points. In newer programs, you can only use a maximum of 4 g fiber.
    >> >
    >> > Where the complaints come in (and I still complain). WW replaced 1-2-3
    >> with a
    >> > newer points program (winning points). In this program they lowered the
    >> daily
    >> > ranges by 2 points, so the equivalent of your old 1-2-3 range would
    >change
    >> to
    >> > 18-23. Banking was allowed. Based on this you were allowed 161 max
    >> weekly
    >> > points, plus activity points which also could be banked. So switching
    >to
    >> flex
    >> > points from the winning points program, you have the allowance to
    >consume
    >> 14
    >> > additional points per week. Many of us felt that adding 14 points per
    >> week
    >> > hindered our weightloss, or made it very difficult to refigure the
    >> maintenance
    >> > routine - so just stuck with the winning points program. One thing to
    >> definitely
    >> > keep in mind is that you don't HAVE to use those flexpoints (and if we
    >> don't then
    >> > it makes me think we still are going right back to the old winning
    >points
    >> program
    >> > - only the banking is done for us. <g>).
    >> >
    >> > Joyce
    >> >
    >> > On Mon, 5 Jan 2004 21:14:29 +0100, "Mette" <[email protected]> wrote:
    >> >
    >> > >Uhm..when I started WW four years ago it was called 1-2-3 points. My
    >> range
    >> > >was 18-25 points daily. Now I suddenly heard the term "flexpoints" -
    >how
    >> > >does that work? Is it more effective?
    >> > >
    >> > >
    >> > >
    >> >
    >>
    >
     
  10. Laura

    Laura Guest

    That is the explanation we got from our WW leader.

    "Joyce" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
    > That was another change that was made from the 1-2-3 program, to the
    Winning
    > points program. I believe the logic was that people were loading up on
    highfiber
    > items, counting them as zero or extremely low points in higher servings -
    and then
    > wondering why no weightloss (or minimal) was happening. So the 4g fiber
    cap was
    > introduced.
    >
    > Joyce
    >
    > On Tue, 06 Jan 2004 02:50:59 GMT, "Sandy W" <[email protected]> wrote:
    >
    > >Oh oh. I didn't realize that you can only use 4 fiber points. Thanks for telling me.
    > >
    > >Sandy
    > >
    > >"Mette" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > >news:[email protected]...
    > >> Thank you Joyce!
    > >>
    > >> Ya know, I think Ill just stick to my good ol' 1-2-3 - it worked then
    and
    > >it
    > >> must work now:eek:)
    > >>
    > >> "Joyce" <[email protected]> skrev i en meddelelse
    > >> news:[email protected]...
    > >> > Guess it all depends on who you talk to. Some seem to like it,
    others
    > >> don't.
    > >> >
    > >> > It is almost exactly like the 1-2-3 plan as far as points are
    concerned,
    > >> when you
    > >> > figure with flexpoints you aren't allowed to bank points (that's why
    > >they
    > >> call
    > >> > them flex - you can use them anytime you want). In 1-2-3 your range
    > >> allowed you
    > >> > 175 points per week, plus activity points. In flex, you now are
    given a
    > >> strict
    > >> > daily target - 20 being what your old 1-2-3 range would be assigned.
    > >> Based on
    > >> > this you would work with 140 daily points PLUS 35 weekly flex points
    ...
    > >> for a
    > >> > total of 175 points per week. You can earn activity points, but can
    not
    > >> bank them
    > >> > - they must be used the same day they are earned. Another change
    > >between
    > >> these
    > >> > two programs is that in 1-2-3 there was no cap on the fiber grams
    when
    > >> calculating
    > >> > points. In newer programs, you can only use a maximum of 4 g fiber.
    > >> >
    > >> > Where the complaints come in (and I still complain). WW replaced
    1-2-3
    > >> with a
    > >> > newer points program (winning points). In this program they lowered
    the
    > >> daily
    > >> > ranges by 2 points, so the equivalent of your old 1-2-3 range would
    > >change
    > >> to
    > >> > 18-23. Banking was allowed. Based on this you were allowed 161 max
    > >> weekly
    > >> > points, plus activity points which also could be banked. So
    switching
    > >to
    > >> flex
    > >> > points from the winning points program, you have the allowance to
    > >consume
    > >> 14
    > >> > additional points per week. Many of us felt that adding 14 points
    per
    > >> week
    > >> > hindered our weightloss, or made it very difficult to refigure the
    > >> maintenance
    > >> > routine - so just stuck with the winning points program. One thing
    to
    > >> definitely
    > >> > keep in mind is that you don't HAVE to use those flexpoints (and if
    we
    > >> don't then
    > >> > it makes me think we still are going right back to the old winning
    > >points
    > >> program
    > >> > - only the banking is done for us. <g>).
    > >> >
    > >> > Joyce
    > >> >
    > >> > On Mon, 5 Jan 2004 21:14:29 +0100, "Mette" <[email protected]>
    wrote:
    > >> >
    > >> > >Uhm..when I started WW four years ago it was called 1-2-3 points. My
    > >> range
    > >> > >was 18-25 points daily. Now I suddenly heard the term "flexpoints" -
    > >how
    > >> > >does that work? Is it more effective?
    > >> > >
    > >> > >
    > >> > >
    > >> >
    > >>
    > >>
     
Loading...