Beverly wrote:
kmd wrote:

On Wed, 30 Nov 2005 22:05:25 +0900, Doug Lerner
wrote:


On 11/30/05 9:32 PM, in article ,
"kmd" wrote:

On Wed, 30 Nov 2005 15:21:03 +0900, Doug Lerner
wrote:

[...] I think I fashioned my diet
in a way that ended up following the ideas of WW very closely. I just use
straight calories instead of points. But I think, mathematically, they
really are statistically equivalent.

By the numbers they might be. By the nutrition value, they definitely
are not.

Does WW say you must eat certain kinds of foods, other than just watching
your flex points?

Yes.

But you're missing the point. The calculation for points incorporates
a low-fat, high-fiber bias. Some of that will show up in calorie
counts, some of it will not.

My personal experience from Atkins and other diets demonstrates that
low-fat, high-fiber matters for every health metric (weight,
cholesterol, blood pressure, energy levels i.e. metabolism) more than
calories or low carb.


Keeping the fiber count at the recommended level certainly helps me.
Here's an article on the benefits of fiber in our diets.

http://www.whfoods.com/genpage.php?t...trient&dbid=59


Me too. Actually, DH has made some requests for higher fiber foods as
well. We both find that eating a diet high in fiber helps with satiety.

--
jmk in NC