Would you rather eat 1 bag of M&M's (236 calories) or 1 broiled skinless boneless 5 oz chicken breast (230 calories)?

Given a choice, I'd rather have a 6 oz. glasses of wine (200 calories) but hey, that's me.

Nonetheless, the debate rages. Weight Watchers, after it's 48 year history of having you indulge in double chocolate muffins, with reckless abandon mind you–as long as you don't exceed your alloted points, are now saying…oh my…it's EMPTY calories.

Really?

They have revamped their point system.  Now you can eat your body weight in fruit. 0 points.  Eat foods high in protein and fiber, beware of carbs and fats.

I ask you, how many bananas, unless your name is Cheetah, can you consume in a day?

To add to the confusion a friend sent me this article The Twinkie Diet.  A Professor of Nutrition, clearly experiencing an adolescent redeux, ate pretty much nothing but Twinkies, supplemented by Ring Dings, Oreos, and Doritos. The chaser, apparently, was a multi vitamin. His caloric intact did not exceed 1800 calories.  In two months he lost 27 lbs. 

The jury appears to be out on the healthy/unhealthy debate. His markers to measure this, gulp, improved. What's a body to do?

Let's look at this realistically.

Any chubbette I know who signs up for Weight Watchers is looking to lose weight. Period. Healthy? Not so much. Except when asked, "do you eat healthy?" Then, of course, the answer is, "certainly. I just eat too much of healthy."

Right.