09/10/2019
Whilst adherence to Slimming World ideals may result in fat loss for some, for others it’s system prohibits the necessary understanding required for long term progress.
-
-
A calorie deficit is required to lose fat. But adherence to slimming world does not guarantee that calorie deficit. Because the model’s encouragement to eat unregulated quantities of ‘free foods’ becomes problematic when there is no structured caloric control of those foods. ‘Free’ is to imply that it doesn’t count. But it does count - irrespective of that food’s overall quality.
-
-
Designing an eating system in such a way denies the consumer factual nutritional values and thus the meaningful information required to make informed choices in relation to their goal. As a result, one may over-consume ‘free’ foods and unknowingly counteract the calorie deficit required to lose fat.
-
-
SW success is judged by weekly measurement of total body weight (which includes water). Therefore, progress or failure could be defined by going to the toilet or drinking a bottle of water prior to the weigh in. Despite this, members are required to pay £20 per month for the privilege of this ‘assessment’, along with ‘educational’ discussions conducted by SW ‘coaches’ who teach customers how to manage their ‘syns’.
-
-
As a fat loss intervention, it is unnecessarily complex. It also serves to potentially worsen one’s relationship with food. Replacing facts with fictional buzzwords in a ‘win or lose’ arena defy what is required for sustainable fat loss and positive food relationships. A gradual, tracked calorie deficit, including factual appreciations of food is a cheaper, better informed, long term solution.
-
-
Some may have accidental success with slimming world. But if calories define fat loss, surely caloric recognition ought to be translated by SW to their customers. Instead, it is not.
-
-
For those who can’t afford £20 a month for an irrelevant system, unskilled advice and yo-yo results, maybe it’s time to step back into the real world. 🙂
-
-
