<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Weight Watchers Ad Gets Banned</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.faintstarlite.com/2009/02/weight-watchers-ad-gets-banned/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.faintstarlite.com/2009/02/weight-watchers-ad-gets-banned/</link>
	<description>Milwaukee mom working to stay sane.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 15 Jan 2012 13:33:28 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: average alcohol content of beer</title>
		<link>http://www.faintstarlite.com/2009/02/weight-watchers-ad-gets-banned/comment-page-1/#comment-7409</link>
		<dc:creator>average alcohol content of beer</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Oct 2011 08:19:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.faintstarlite.com/?p=583#comment-7409</guid>
		<description>I think that is among the most vital information for me. And i am satisfied reading your article. But should observation on few normal things, The site style is great, the articles is in reality great : D. Excellent process, cheers</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think that is among the most vital information for me. And i am satisfied reading your article. But should observation on few normal things, The site style is great, the articles is in reality great : D. Excellent process, cheers</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: how to get clear skin</title>
		<link>http://www.faintstarlite.com/2009/02/weight-watchers-ad-gets-banned/comment-page-1/#comment-7393</link>
		<dc:creator>how to get clear skin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Oct 2011 04:55:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.faintstarlite.com/?p=583#comment-7393</guid>
		<description>I will immediately grasp your rss feed as I can&#039;t to find your email subscription hyperlink or newsletter service. Do you have any? Please allow me recognize so that I may subscribe. Thanks.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I will immediately grasp your rss feed as I can&#8217;t to find your email subscription hyperlink or newsletter service. Do you have any? Please allow me recognize so that I may subscribe. Thanks.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Denise</title>
		<link>http://www.faintstarlite.com/2009/02/weight-watchers-ad-gets-banned/comment-page-1/#comment-3076</link>
		<dc:creator>Denise</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 16 Mar 2009 19:38:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.faintstarlite.com/?p=583#comment-3076</guid>
		<description>Thank you for blogging about this. I&#039;ve been skimming the internet for WW insight as I&#039;m starting this evening, and this was fantastic.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thank you for blogging about this. I&#8217;ve been skimming the internet for WW insight as I&#8217;m starting this evening, and this was fantastic.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: deb</title>
		<link>http://www.faintstarlite.com/2009/02/weight-watchers-ad-gets-banned/comment-page-1/#comment-3065</link>
		<dc:creator>deb</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 07 Mar 2009 15:16:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.faintstarlite.com/?p=583#comment-3065</guid>
		<description>This is really interesting.  I think the big distinction isn&#039;t in the word diet, but in the concept of the Diet Industry.  Which is a huge industry, and WW has a vested interest in promoting the concept behind the industry, which is that individuals should pay money to companies who in exchange help you (though systems, books, communities, products, whatever) lose weight or change your diet, your lifestyle, your relationship with food.  The big problem is their tagline is trying to change the definition of diet that is used in the Diet Industry, but they are of course in the Diet Industry.  I think it is manipulative, but I don&#039;t know if it should be censored, because a lot of advertising is manipulative.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This is really interesting.  I think the big distinction isn&#8217;t in the word diet, but in the concept of the Diet Industry.  Which is a huge industry, and WW has a vested interest in promoting the concept behind the industry, which is that individuals should pay money to companies who in exchange help you (though systems, books, communities, products, whatever) lose weight or change your diet, your lifestyle, your relationship with food.  The big problem is their tagline is trying to change the definition of diet that is used in the Diet Industry, but they are of course in the Diet Industry.  I think it is manipulative, but I don&#8217;t know if it should be censored, because a lot of advertising is manipulative.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Z-lot</title>
		<link>http://www.faintstarlite.com/2009/02/weight-watchers-ad-gets-banned/comment-page-1/#comment-3064</link>
		<dc:creator>Z-lot</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 01 Mar 2009 00:29:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.faintstarlite.com/?p=583#comment-3064</guid>
		<description>I do understand the legal standpoint but still - why isn&#039;t anyone questioning the very existence of such a censorship authority in the first place?
I know it&#039;s almost off-topic since this is diet oriented post, so let me first state my definition of a diet as &quot;the pool of consumables for regular individual consumption&quot;... and then move back to the fact that it is downright insane to allow this type of gate-keeping (or censorship if you will) today.

The lesson here should be that every person should have their own definition of a diet... and if someone&#039;s interested in WW&#039;s take on it, they should come take a look :&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I do understand the legal standpoint but still &#8211; why isn&#8217;t anyone questioning the very existence of such a censorship authority in the first place?<br />
I know it&#8217;s almost off-topic since this is diet oriented post, so let me first state my definition of a diet as &#8220;the pool of consumables for regular individual consumption&#8221;&#8230; and then move back to the fact that it is downright insane to allow this type of gate-keeping (or censorship if you will) today.</p>
<p>The lesson here should be that every person should have their own definition of a diet&#8230; and if someone&#8217;s interested in WW&#8217;s take on it, they should come take a look :&gt;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: D. Claude Katz</title>
		<link>http://www.faintstarlite.com/2009/02/weight-watchers-ad-gets-banned/comment-page-1/#comment-3063</link>
		<dc:creator>D. Claude Katz</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 28 Feb 2009 18:05:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.faintstarlite.com/?p=583#comment-3063</guid>
		<description>I guess the legal standards are different in the UK than in the US (or at least in my state).  A long time ago, I took a course in real estate sales (never actually tried to put it into practice, though), and they said that if you say something patently ridiculous, you&#039;re not liable for anyone who is foolish enough to take it seriously.  It seems to me that, depending on your definition of &quot;diet&quot;, Weight Watchers&#039; claims are either defensible as true or else patently ridiculous.  

Everyone knows that you can&#039;t eat anything you want and &lt;i&gt;as much as you want&lt;/i&gt; of it and still lose weight (unless you exercise more).  Obviously any weight loss program (unless it&#039;s an exercise-based fitness program) is going to involve some limitations on what or how much you can eat.  Anyone who thinks you can seriously claim otherwise is a fool.  For any reasonable person who defines &quot;diet&quot; to include any program with such restrictions, WW&#039;s claims will be absurd and therefore no more misleading than if you said you had a diet based on eating green cheese taken from the moon.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I guess the legal standards are different in the UK than in the US (or at least in my state).  A long time ago, I took a course in real estate sales (never actually tried to put it into practice, though), and they said that if you say something patently ridiculous, you&#8217;re not liable for anyone who is foolish enough to take it seriously.  It seems to me that, depending on your definition of &#8220;diet&#8221;, Weight Watchers&#8217; claims are either defensible as true or else patently ridiculous.  </p>
<p>Everyone knows that you can&#8217;t eat anything you want and <i>as much as you want</i> of it and still lose weight (unless you exercise more).  Obviously any weight loss program (unless it&#8217;s an exercise-based fitness program) is going to involve some limitations on what or how much you can eat.  Anyone who thinks you can seriously claim otherwise is a fool.  For any reasonable person who defines &#8220;diet&#8221; to include any program with such restrictions, WW&#8217;s claims will be absurd and therefore no more misleading than if you said you had a diet based on eating green cheese taken from the moon.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Monique in Oregon</title>
		<link>http://www.faintstarlite.com/2009/02/weight-watchers-ad-gets-banned/comment-page-1/#comment-3062</link>
		<dc:creator>Monique in Oregon</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 28 Feb 2009 07:52:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.faintstarlite.com/?p=583#comment-3062</guid>
		<description>I like the way you put it. you have also given me a new outlook on ww. its changed a lot since my mom did it a hundred and fifty times when i was a kid.  even when debbie did it waay back then.  i don&#039;t like the points. its okay for a while but that&#039;s training people to look at only that.  now that i&#039;ve been reading your blogs and such i learned that WW does teach people, its what the people want to take from it. if they want to succeed then the results will be typical (hence the saying at the bottom of every add.  

monique
ps you are the cutest pregnant momma ever. i am so glad that jude has decided to join your life. its truly a miracle. i would love to go to lunch with you somtime when your in oregon.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I like the way you put it. you have also given me a new outlook on ww. its changed a lot since my mom did it a hundred and fifty times when i was a kid.  even when debbie did it waay back then.  i don&#8217;t like the points. its okay for a while but that&#8217;s training people to look at only that.  now that i&#8217;ve been reading your blogs and such i learned that WW does teach people, its what the people want to take from it. if they want to succeed then the results will be typical (hence the saying at the bottom of every add.  </p>
<p>monique<br />
ps you are the cutest pregnant momma ever. i am so glad that jude has decided to join your life. its truly a miracle. i would love to go to lunch with you somtime when your in oregon.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

