Active Low-Carber Forums
Atkins diet and low carb discussion provided free for information only, not as medical advice.
Home Plans Tips Recipes Tools Stories Studies Products
Active Low-Carber Forums
A sugar-free zone


Welcome to the Active Low-Carber Forums.
Support for Atkins diet, Protein Power, Neanderthin (Paleo Diet), CAD/CALP, Dr. Bernstein Diabetes Solution and any other healthy low-carb diet or plan, all are welcome in our lowcarb community. Forget starvation and fad diets -- join the healthy eating crowd! You may register by clicking here, it's free!

Go Back   Active Low-Carber Forums > Main Low-Carb Diets Forums & Support > Low-Carb Studies & Research / Media Watch > Low-Carb War Zone
User Name
Password
FAQ Members Calendar Mark Forums Read Search Gallery My P.L.A.N. Survey


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #331   ^
Old Sun, Apr-15-18, 07:38
GME's Avatar
GME GME is offline
New Member
Posts: 5
 
Plan: General low carb
Stats: 250/220/175 Female 5'7"
BF:
Progress:
Default

I know a few folks that have had long-term success on WW. None of them were very overweight- they lost 20, 30, 40 lbs and kept it off. That's great for them, but someone that has 30 lbs to lose is (probabbly) not metabolically deranged, so what WW suggests worked fine.

The problem comes when they extrapolate that out to people that have whacked metabolisms.

Look at the people on shows like My 600 Pound Life. They go home and can gain (or lose) a hundred pounds in a few months. Sure they eat tons of bad food, but there is no way I could gain 100 lbs in a short period of time like that. I could gain 20 or 30 for sure, but no where near what I have seen on that show and others like it. Those people have a very different metabolisms.
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
  #332   ^
Old Sat, Feb-09-19, 18:49
Calianna's Avatar
Calianna Calianna is online now
Senior Member
Posts: 1,852
 
Plan: Atkins-ish (hypoglycemia)
Stats: 000/000/000 Female 63
BF:
Progress: 50%
Default

I'm actually feeling sorry for Oprah that she still seems to believe so much in weight watchers - this is a still photo from a "Girl's Getaway Cruise" just a few days ago:
Reply With Quote
  #333   ^
Old Sat, Feb-09-19, 20:23
GRB5111's Avatar
GRB5111 GRB5111 is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 4,036
 
Plan: Very LC, Higher Protein
Stats: 227/186/185 Male 6' 0"
BF:
Progress: 98%
Location: Herndon, VA
Default

Another case of The Emperor's New Clothes.
Reply With Quote
  #334   ^
Old Sat, Feb-09-19, 21:16
bluesinger's Avatar
bluesinger bluesinger is offline
Doing My Best
Posts: 4,924
 
Plan: LC/CancerRecovery
Stats: 170/135/130 Female 62 inches
BF:24%
Progress: 88%
Location: Nevada Desert, USA
Default

The most I ever had to lose was 40lbs. On WW after an excruciatingly long time I lost some of it, but always gained it back quickly. The only thing that has been effective for me (and I've tried them ALL) is LC. "Lose it slow to keep it off" is a crock designed to keep ppl on WW.
Reply With Quote
  #335   ^
Old Sat, Feb-09-19, 23:03
Meme#1's Avatar
Meme#1 Meme#1 is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 12,456
 
Plan: Atkins DANDR
Stats: 210/194/160 Female 5'4"
BF:
Progress: 32%
Location: Texas
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Calianna
I'm actually feeling sorry for Oprah that she still seems to believe so much in weight watchers - this is a still photo from a "Girl's Getaway Cruise" just a few days ago:



Oh wow, what happened?
I don't see much difference compared to what she looked like years ago.
Her last words "If you want your bread you can keep your bread"
Reply With Quote
  #336   ^
Old Sun, Feb-10-19, 06:38
WereBear's Avatar
WereBear WereBear is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 14,608
 
Plan: EpiPaleo/Primal/LowOx
Stats: 220/125/150 Female 67
BF:
Progress: 136%
Location: USA
Default

I’ve gathered over the years that Oprah is an emotional eater. That is a tough one I struggled with myself. A case of one’s “Drug of Choice” being cheap and easily available and legal and reliable.

I also consider how busy she is; a high stress life increases cortisol, and poundage.

On the considerable other hand, she could hire two Keto chefs and a massage therapist and if I could do that, I would.
Reply With Quote
  #337   ^
Old Mon, Feb-11-19, 14:20
Calianna's Avatar
Calianna Calianna is online now
Senior Member
Posts: 1,852
 
Plan: Atkins-ish (hypoglycemia)
Stats: 000/000/000 Female 63
BF:
Progress: 50%
Default

To be fair, it's really not the most flattering outfit she could have chosen to wear - Actually, it's probably the worst thing she could have possibly chosen to wear - everything about it accentuates every excess pound.

Remember Rhoda (Valerie Harper) from the Mary Tyler Moore Show? She wasn't truly overweight while doing that show, even though she was not nearly as model thin as MTM, but then they purposely dressed her in clothes that made her look overweight, just for the role of Mary's chubby best friend. So they had horizontal lines everywhere on her outfits - horizontal yokes on tunics, boxy looking vests and tunics with a straight hem that landed right below the hip, tops that were too tight across the bust (causing horizontal stretch lines across the bustline), slacks with an extra wide pant leg, and that bohemian head scarf she often woreformed a horizontal line across her forehead. Any diagonal lines in her outfits were placed to draw the eye horizontally and accentuate width.

That's what Oprah's outfit does to her too - the wide off the shoulder (horizontal) peasant blouse ruffle, the bunching up of that top around her waist and hips, the miles of chiffon in that skirt (whether or not vertical stripes are slimming depends entirely on the proportions of the stripes to the overall outfit as well as the proportion of the stripes to the body that's wearing them), and the diagonal lines where it switches from orange to white draws the eye horizontally, rather than vertically. The loose cuffs on the shirt draw the eye horizontally, right at the hipline. (it's amazing how much slimmer a woman looks when a blouse or shirt cuff is snug around the wrist) - the entire design adds pounds to her look.



She probably has gained weight though, or else surely she would have opted for something more form-fitting.
Reply With Quote
  #338   ^
Old Mon, Feb-11-19, 14:45
Nrracing Nrracing is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 747
 
Plan: Custom 22/2 Clean Fast
Stats: 290/258/210 Male 72.5
BF:
Progress: 40%
Location: Missouri
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Calianna
To be fair, it's really not the most flattering outfit she could have chosen to wear - Actually, it's probably the worst thing she could have possibly chosen to wear - everything about it accentuates every excess pound.

Remember Rhoda (Valerie Harper) from the Mary Tyler Moore Show? She wasn't truly overweight while doing that show, even though she was not nearly as model thin as MTM, but then they purposely dressed her in clothes that made her look overweight, just for the role of Mary's chubby best friend. So they had horizontal lines everywhere on her outfits - horizontal yokes on tunics, boxy looking vests and tunics with a straight hem that landed right below the hip, tops that were too tight across the bust (causing horizontal stretch lines across the bustline), slacks with an extra wide pant leg, and that bohemian head scarf she often woreformed a horizontal line across her forehead. Any diagonal lines in her outfits were placed to draw the eye horizontally and accentuate width.

That's what Oprah's outfit does to her too - the wide off the shoulder (horizontal) peasant blouse ruffle, the bunching up of that top around her waist and hips, the miles of chiffon in that skirt (whether or not vertical stripes are slimming depends entirely on the proportions of the stripes to the overall outfit as well as the proportion of the stripes to the body that's wearing them), and the diagonal lines where it switches from orange to white draws the eye horizontally, rather than vertically. The loose cuffs on the shirt draw the eye horizontally, right at the hipline. (it's amazing how much slimmer a woman looks when a blouse or shirt cuff is snug around the wrist) - the entire design adds pounds to her look.



She probably has gained weight though, or else surely she would have opted for something more form-fitting.



I do agree with you on what she is wearing. I like her body type and size. I have seen her wear form fitting stuff and she looks very nice. Not really sure why she wore that. maybe having fun on vacation.

I know she is busy but she has more money then we could think about and she could take 6-8 months off and get some low carb cooks and little exercise and she would be golden. If I had that money I would be making dang sure I had the LC foods I needed to get the job done. All that money means nothing if your health goes in the pot.
Reply With Quote
  #339   ^
Old Tue, Feb-12-19, 06:28
JEY100's Avatar
JEY100 JEY100 is online now
Posts: 13,371
 
Plan: P:E/DDF
Stats: 225/150/169 Female 5' 9"
BF:45%/28%/25%
Progress: 134%
Location: NC
Default

The Oprah magazine arrived yesterday, some subscription pitch from a now defunct magazine my DD had well in the past. Whatever reason, I flipped through it and noticed a casual photo of her at the Thanksgiving table. Without the photoshopped and designer dresses to slim her body, she looks at least the same size if not more as before she started WW. I don’t follow the WW forums and FB, but we can’t be the only ones to notice.

And then weirdly...also arrived in mail from the UK, Dr. Zoe Harcombe's new book the Diet Fix. It starts with a quote from Oprah:

Quote:
I still have the check I wrote to my first Diet Doctor. Baltimore, 1977, I was 23 years old 148 pounds a size 8 and I thought I was fat. The doctor put me on a 1200 calorie regimen and in less than two weeks I have lost 10 pounds (there’s nothing like the first time) Two months later I had regained 12. Thus began the cycle of discontent, the struggle with my body. With myself.
Reply With Quote
  #340   ^
Old Tue, Feb-12-19, 13:13
deirdra's Avatar
deirdra deirdra is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 4,324
 
Plan: vLC/GF,CF,SF
Stats: 197/136/150 Female 66 inches
BF:
Progress: 130%
Location: Alberta
Default

I was in grad school in Baltimore in 1977, where Oprah had her original local show that I enjoyed. I was also 23 years old ~148 pounds a size 8 and I thought I was fat (actually that feeling started at ~15 and 139 lbs, which in retrospect was an ideal weight for my 5-6" and frame, and that old size 8 would be called size ~12 now). I couldn't afford a diet doctor, but through all of my pre-LCHF years dieted on 1000-1200 calorie regimens with a similar history of yo-yoing.
Reply With Quote
  #341   ^
Old Tue, Feb-12-19, 15:34
uberfat's Avatar
uberfat uberfat is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 229
 
Plan: mine
Stats: 222/185/143 Male 175
BF:
Progress:
Default

all the money in the world, all the best dietians at your service can't make a diffrence as butter
Reply With Quote
  #342   ^
Old Wed, Feb-27-19, 15:52
JEY100's Avatar
JEY100 JEY100 is online now
Posts: 13,371
 
Plan: P:E/DDF
Stats: 225/150/169 Female 5' 9"
BF:45%/28%/25%
Progress: 134%
Location: NC
Default

A lot less money as of today.....

https://www.marketwatch.com/amp/sto...99-434730CA90CC

Quote:
Weight Watchers stock debacle is a harsh reminder of another, pre-Oprah crash

CEO not giving in to keto craze, even though stock nears biggest-ever selloff on 4th anniversary of previous biggest-ever selloff

Shares of WW, formerly known as Weight Watchers International Inc., were on the verge Wednesday of suffering their worst day since going public more than 18 years ago, as a number of analysts soured on the company following a dismal earnings report and outlook.

The company WTW which moved “beyond weight to wellness” to become WW five months ago, reported late Tuesday fourth-quarter results that missed expectations, according to FactSet, and provided profit guidance that was less than half what analysts had projected.


Chief Executive Mindy Grossman said on the post-earnings conference call with investors that the weak outlook was a result of a “very disappointing” winter recruitment campaign, amid a “particularly competitive” diet-support environment.

Don’t miss: Market share, stock price for the former Weight Watchers take a beating from wellness startup Noom.

No less than six of the 15 analysts surveyed by FactSet have downgraded WW shares, and seven have slashed their price targets, with the average target now 61% below what it was at the end of January.

Regarding competition from the keto diet craze: “We’ve lived through this for 57 years and we’re not going to play a game and we never have. We’re going to be science informed and we’re sustainable for the long-term.”

J.P. Morgan analyst Christina Brathwaite, who was bullish on the stock as recently as November, reiterated her underweight rating while cutting her price target to $14 from $25. She also added the stock to J.P. Morgan’s U.S. Equity Analyst Focus List, as the top “short” idea.

Edward Yruma at KeyBanc Capital cut his rating to sector weight, giving up on the bullish view he’s had since July, writing in a note to clients that “there’s no coming back from a weak January.”


WW’s stock plummeted 34% in very active afternoon trade, enough to pace all decliners trading on major U.S. exchanges. Volume swelled to 33.8 million shares, compared with the full-day average of about 2.7 million shares.


The selloff might seem like déjà vu for some long-term investors, as it comes on the fourth-anniversary of what is currently the worst one-day performance since the stock went public about 18 years ago.

The stock had plummeted 35.5% on Feb. 27, 2015, after the company reported disappointing results and provided a full-year profit outlook that was less than half what was expected, amid a drop in active subscriber bases and lower recruitments.


On the bright side, while the stock fell much further over the next several months, to a record closing low of $3.78 on July 9, 2015, the company was eventually able to right the right the ship. The first big win was getting Oprah Winfrey to buy a large equity stake, take a leadership role and help promote its products and services.

See related: Weight Watchers stock plunge means Oprah’s stake has shrunk by $558 million in 8 months.


The stock got a further boost in April 2017 after it named Mindy Grossman as its new CEO, who had spent the previous nine years as CEO of HSN Inc.

But since peaking at a record close of $103.09 on June 20, 2018, the stock has lost more than 80% of its value, and about $5.6 billion in market capitalization. Analysts seem unsure how the company will right the ship this time.

“Beyond the 2019 challenges, we believe the pathway for [WW] to return to subscriber growth in 2020 is unclear, despite management planning to launch new diet program innovation in 2020, given the increasingly competitive environment, particularly as the company’s rebranding initiative to wellness from weight loss seems to have fallen flat,” wrote J.P. Morgan’s Brathwaite.

Since the company changed its name to WW on Sept. 24, 2018, the stock has tumbled 72%. In comparison, the S&P 500 index SPX has lost 4.9% over the same time. Meanwhile, WW shares are still nearly triple the price Oprah paid for them, and could pay to buy more if she chooses.

Analyst Michael Swartz at SunTrust Robinson Humphrey downgraded the stock to hold from buy and lopped 63% off his price target to $25. He said that while he preferred not to “pile on a stock” by downgrading it after such a large selloff over the past eight months, the post-earnings conference call provided little comfort that a change to the marketing message and near-term investments will bear fruit this year.


“With this likely to be an early 2020 event, at the earliest, we prefer to move to the sidelines,” Swartz wrote.

Linda Bolton Weiser at D.A. Davidson cut her rating to neutral from buy, and slashed her price target to $23 from $137. Among her concerns is “uncertainty over the duration of the keto diet craze,” which WW said is affecting its business and how rewards in the new loyalty program will hurt gross margin.

Regarding keto, CEO Grossman stood firm, saying crazes like that happen very often, so the company was not going to change its DNA. The keto, or ketogenic, diet is a high quality fat, adequate protein and low carbohydrate diet meant to force the body to burn fat rather than carbohydrates.

“We’ve lived through this [competition from trend diets] for 57 years and we’re not going to play a game and we never have,” Grossman said on the post-earnings call, according to a transcript provided by FacSet.

“We’re going to be science informed and we’re sustainable for the long term,” she said.


More stories in Media: https://forum.lowcarber.org/showthread.php?p=9318049
Reply With Quote
  #343   ^
Old Wed, Feb-27-19, 17:45
bkloots's Avatar
bkloots bkloots is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 10,147
 
Plan: LC--Atkins
Stats: 195/162/150 Female 62in
BF:
Progress: 73%
Location: Kansas City, MO
Default

I admire Oprah Winfrey for many reasons, including her goodwill towards the healthy and happiness of humanity, even if she does fall for about as many fads of all kinds as the rest of us do (with less money).

Too bad about WW. At this point, they can't very well add Keto to their ever-evolving menu of dietary choices, for PR reasons alone. But they will. They will.
Reply With Quote
  #344   ^
Old Wed, Feb-27-19, 17:54
deirdra's Avatar
deirdra deirdra is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 4,324
 
Plan: vLC/GF,CF,SF
Stats: 197/136/150 Female 66 inches
BF:
Progress: 130%
Location: Alberta
Default

The problem with WW is they make most of their money selling calorie-limited low-fat processed food, but with keto I eat zero processed food, just real food with fat. Some people may need the encouragement and ideas that WW offers, but I get that here.

Last edited by deirdra : Wed, Feb-27-19 at 18:00.
Reply With Quote
  #345   ^
Old Wed, Feb-27-19, 18:01
Meme#1's Avatar
Meme#1 Meme#1 is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 12,456
 
Plan: Atkins DANDR
Stats: 210/194/160 Female 5'4"
BF:
Progress: 32%
Location: Texas
Default

I keep thinking that they'll come around to low carb but so far they haven't.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:16.


Copyright © 2000-2024 Active Low-Carber Forums @ forum.lowcarber.org
Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.