Thanks for checking. I still have not found them at a convenient
location where they would not melt on a longer drive home with them.

On Sat, 27 Mar 2004 01:28:54 -0600, Joyce wrote:

I believe the s'mores are 3 points ... gonna go run and check it out for you. Ok,
actually came out to 2.68 US Points ... 150calories/1g fat/2g fiber. These are
currently my favorite.

Joyce

On Wed, 24 Mar 2004 19:42:17 -0800, Fred wrote:

They are the Skinny Cow Sandwich. They are 2-3 points, I believe. It
is not listed on their site - new flavor.



On Thu, 25 Mar 2004 01:10:49 GMT, "Laura"
wrote:

How many points? I have 1 fudge bar left so I might just try these Smores if
they are any good. Bulk or indiv wrapped?

"Fred" wrote in message
...
Great, oh, I mean wonderful, er, terrific, ahem - get well soon.

But my WW's-leader-secretary introduced me to the Skinny Cow Smores
today. I really liked the graham cracker cookie and the filling was
not bad either (G)



On Tue, 23 Mar 2004 19:15:57 GMT, "Lesanne"
wrote:

Ha, not to worry, the antibiotic is making me want to graze all day.

"Fred" wrote in message
.. .
You know killing yourself is not a permissable way to beat me in this
weight game. Take care of yourself.

On Tue, 23 Mar 2004 14:07:29 GMT, "Lesanne"
wrote:

yeah, I know. This morning I am resorting to a dose of antibiotics,
first
time in years that I have gotten sick enough to do that.

"Prairie Roots" wrote in message
.. .
Can't fool me, Lesanne. Your getting sick has nothing to do with
your
weight loss. I'm in agreement with some others that your caregiving
responsibilities are taking their toll. Not that you can change the
fact...

I worry about you.

On Sun, 21 Mar 2004 13:52:48 GMT, "Lesanne"
wrote:

You know, I am the original healthy girl too, or I was. Back when
I
was
school nurse to 800 middle school viral bombs I went 4 years with
perfect
attendance. And here I am falling apart. I am the only person I
know
who
got sicker when they lost weight....

"Prairie Roots" wrote in message
.. .
You were recovering from a cold not too long ago and here you are
again. Take care of yourself girl.

On Sat, 20 Mar 2004 13:35:55 GMT, "Lesanne"

wrote:

I am eating what it suggests in calories, and up a bit this
week,
but
I
have
a really rotten cold and have actually not exercised for 4 out
of
the
last 5
days. So not me. But I am really sick here. And Hungry. Go
figure.
I
am
still okay (within two pounds of goal) though.

"Joyce" wrote in message
.. .
Today was really interesting. I ate an incredible amount of
calories -
based on
me totally guessing on quantities and using generic food
choices
available
in the
data base as opposed to actual more accurate counts as I am
used
to.
Yet
it was
the lowest NQ rating I have ever had at the end of the day
(think
I
ended
at a B).
Obviously, the foods I ate were not of much nutritional value.
G
It
does open
your eyes quite a bit.

Interesting point #2: Last week I figured I could use the
average
for
my
official
weigh in, since I did have readings for every day. My average
for
the
week was
exactly to the ounce what the scale said on Friday. Ok,
figured
it
was
just a
total fluke. Today was official weigh-in day again. I hit
the
scale
bright and
early, disappointed a teeny bit as the weight has gone up the
past
few
days ...
but average for the week again was exactly to the ounce what
the
scale
told me
this morning ... 130.9. Go figure! Probably a fluke again,
but
it
is
pretty neat
to see it turn out this way two weeks in a row. G

This last week I have gone back and entered my points into the
note
section, is
pretty interesting also. The points are pretty close to what
I
*thought*
I should
be at - all that good fiber and 0 point veggies/salads tend to
balance
things out
calorie wise.

Joyce

On Wed, 17 Mar 2004 13:18:34 GMT, "Lesanne"

wrote:

I have used it for years, but go months sometimes without
logging,
then I
erase myself and start over in there. I am being reinspired
by
it
now
too.
I just upgraded it this year to the newest version and am
loving
it.

"Joyce" wrote in message
.. .
Ahhh, don't know why but I had the impression you had been
logging
with
diet power
all the way through. I agree, it really is fun - but also
has
opened
my
eyes a
little more. I find I am eating better, not sure why.
Maybe
because I
am
logging
everything, so am thinking more about my choices? You
know,
do I
REALLY
want that
one teeny finger cookie that accounts for a quarter of a
point
which
I
usually
don't log ... but have logged it in dietpower. g I also
had
felt
that
for the
past 3 weeks I had really been struggling. Nothing major,
but
my
weight
has been
swinging greatly. For some reason (probably the choices
I'm
making,
could
also be
TOM finally gave way) looking at the calories has helped a
lot
the
past
2
weeks,
and the weight has been steadily declining ... back to 130
today
...
finally. Now
what I find really interesting, and maybe things are
starting
to
balance
out and
will continue to do so, is that my budgeted calories
totalled
26726
since
I've
started dietpower ... and I've eaten 26185 ... which is
pretty
dang
close.
Granted, I've logged 3317 exercise calories, but heaven
only
knows
if
those are
logged correctly. LOL! Regardless, something appears to be
correct
if
the
weight
has come back down. I still have a tough time believing
that
my
metabolic
rate is
2200 and I'm not willing to eat that high yet. I'm giving
it
more
time
to
continue adjusting.

And that NQ is really neat! What is funny is if you log
your
daily
vitamin in ...
you go right up to *A* status. G It is motivating
though,
learning
what
the
body needs, what you are getting too much of, etc. It
really
does
have
me
rethinking many of my food choices.

Joyce


On Tue, 16 Mar 2004 20:37:19 GMT, "Lesanne"

wrote:

I had stopped logging at diet power and was just writing a
WW
journal.
I
started again with diet power this last week for fun, and
it
is
improving
the general quality of my diet in a big way. For some
reason
seeing
that
NQ
is very motivating to me.

"Joyce" wrote in message
.. .
My email went through, and I did receive the standard
automated
*you'll
hear from
us within 24 hours* reply. I probably sent it to the
wrong
place
though -
went
for the support option. Tech support is probably
shaking
their
heads
and
whooping
it up right about now.

I'm with you, will remain anal and diligent. I was
happily
surprised
to
see my
weight creeping down again this week .. all the way
right
back
to
130
this
morning. Journaling, weighing, whatever ... it all
seems
to
work
correctly if I
do the work. When I get lazy, I have problems.

Joyce

On Tue, 16 Mar 2004 13:21:40 GMT, "Lesanne"

wrote:

I am getting an error message from my e mail to them, I
probably
sent
it
to
the wrong addy or something. I don't give a hoot if I
am
anal
about
this, I
am NOT going back up!!!!!!!!!!!!!!11

"Joyce" wrote in message
.. .
Did you get any kind of answer from them? I emailed
them
this
evening
(just a few
minutes ago), had some other questions regarding the
exercise
log
...
such
as how
the heck do I know what incline on the treadmill is
equivalent
to
a
light,
moderate or steep hill grade. I'm sure they're gonna
shake
their
heads
and figure
I'm over complicating things ... but I wanna know,
and
want
to
have
a
better idea
of what I am doing! I tried using the polar monitor
while
on
the
treadmill, so
far it hasn't worked at all. At the end of 40
minutes
it
tells
me
I've
burned a
whopping total of 9 or 15 calories. I'm reasonably
sure
it
has
something
to do
with the possibility of interference from the
treadmill
monitors,
but
no
way I can
turn them off. I might try again this week, am
thinking
about
hanging
the
watch
around my neck (on a string) instead of on my wrist -
might
get
it a
bit
further
from the treadmill's electronic devices. If it still
doesn't
work,
then I
guess
I'm back to punting.

I'm also a stickler on the food entires, had added
most
of
my
own
to
even
the ww
website - as I found many of theirs to not be
accurate.
Like
you, I
either put
the calories, or weight into the description to make
it
easy
for
me
to
know which
item I actually want to log. We might be overly anal
on
much
of
this,
but
I
figure I've worked too dang hard to get here - I want
to
make
sure I
get
everything right to give me a better chance of
staying
here.

Joyce

On Sun, 14 Mar 2004 13:17:57 GMT, "Lesanne"

wrote:

I e mailed em already. I use my polar monitor also
when I
have
a
doubt
about what they are getting, and then I Add an
exercise,
and
in
the
description I put "walk/jog, 250 calories" so I know
what
I
am
dealing
with
then I add enough details in the actual entry to be
sure I
have
the
time,
etc. the same. I do a lot of that for food
additions
too.
I
found
that
there are slight differences for instance in the
counts
on
soy
cheeses,
so I
put the calories into the Name of the food. Ex Yves
cheese
30,
or
Yves
cheese 35. Then it is easy for me to get it right.
Like
you
say..
Anal.

"Joyce" wrote in message
.. .
Ahhhh, so this is a real problem then? I looked
in
the
help
section,
then
got
sidetracked ... never got as far as the FAQ's.
Thanks
for
checking
for
me!

What is really odd, is that when I enter the
exercise
as
treadmill,
it
does
compute the calories burned to within just a few
of
what
the
treadmill
says I have
burned - so I just made the assumption that it was
correct.
AND
wierder
... in
the dietpower program I can enter walking on an
incline
(hill)
for
3.5MPH
but it
doesn't give me that option for 4MPH ... which
probably
would
compute
to
the same
caloric expenditure as what I am logging as
treadmill
walking.
And
I
can't get a
good reading on the polar monitor to verify
anything.
The
damn
thing
seems to get
interference from the monitors on the treadmill,
which
can't
be
turned
off. sigh
Oh well, I guess even if things are logged wrong,
it
still
will
balance
out
eventually because the weight and food are correct
(although I
did
have
to
somewhat guess at tonites dinner buffet).

I went back and changed all those exercise logs,
will
have
to
now
have
to
decide
how I want to log things ... as a flat 4MPH walk,
or
as
a
mild
hill
at
3.5
(even
though I walk that constant incline at 4MPH).
Like I
said,
it
should
balance out.
Maybe I should email them and ask that when they
fix
it
to
also
factor
in
the
incline for treadmills? Or hill walking at a
faster
pace?
G
I
bet
anal people
like me drive then nuts!

Joyce

On Sun, 14 Mar 2004 01:37:50 GMT, "Lesanne"

wrote:

I went into the help screens and read the FAQ and
lo
and
behold
they
have
a
note that it is Wrong, and to log it as regular
walking
until
they
get
it
fixed....

"Lesanne" wrote in message
...
ooo ooo ooo gotta go look at diet power and
see....
I think there is a mistake in the program
there.
Gonna send em mail about it from here.... that
is
too
strange

"Joyce" wrote in message

news Ok, one for you gurus ... if there even is an
explanation.
And
if
there
is,
please give it to me in terms I can
understand.
g

I'm using the diet program Lesanne has spoken
about
and
noticed
what
I
think is a
*quirk* ... maybe it is, maybe it isn't, I
don't
have
a
clue.
But
since
this is
automatically calculated based on my weight
and
height
along
with
the
info
I add
(miles/time), I'm making an assumption that
there
must
be
some
kind
of a
difference in these activities. So here goes
... I
work
out
on
the
treadmill,
which is a speed factored activity (so this
program
tells
me).
This
program says
that someone my weight and height will burn
0.0874
calories/minute
if
walking at
roughly 4MPH. BUT ... if going for a non
speed
factored
brisk
walk
at
4MPH (15
miles per minute) it says I will burn at a
rate
of
0.03174/minute.
Can
anyone
explain to me why the difference rate of
caloric
expenditure
between
the
two
activities? Or is it solely because on a
treadmill
it
is
a
constant,
automated
speed?

I am sooooooooooo confused! g

Joyce















Linda P
232/157.2/WW goal 145
joined WW Online 22-Feb-2003


Linda P
232/157.2/WW goal 145
joined WW Online 22-Feb-2003