Is this correct for WW points, its from a site that was last updated in 2004

Body weight, Target value
Under 150 lbs, 20
150-174, 22
175-199, 24
200-224, 26
225-249, 28
250-274, 30
275-299, 31

you know i was wondering that myself.. because actually i was reading some of the weight watchers, and one book said that those should be your target points, but another weight watcher book you have to answer questions to find your target points.. so that i am lost myself

Those aren't correct. They use the questions now (job, age, height, etc). Though my mom would have be happier if those were the points! They are off by about 4 for her, but only 2 for me.

Calculating Your Points.

1: Male, Female or Nursing Mom?
Female – 2 points
Male – 8 points
Nursing Mom – 12 points

2: Your Age
17 – 26 = 4 Points
27 - 37 = 3 Points
38 - 47 = 2 points
48 - 58 =1 point
58 and older = 0 points

3: Your Weight
What ever you weigh take the first 2 digits and add them to your points range.

For example if you weight 210 you add 21 points

If under 100 pounds take the first digit. 98 lbs = 9

4: Your Height
Under 5’ ft = 0 points
5’ 1” – 5’ 10” = 1 point
5’ 10” and taller = 2 points

5: Daily Activity Level
How do you spend most of your day?
Mostly Sitting = 0 points
Occasional sitting but most standing = 2 points
Examples are housewife, cook, teacher, loans officer, sales clerk.
Walking mostly = 4 points
Examples are, waiter or mailman.
Hard physical labor = 6 points
Examples are, Gardener, construction or active nurses.

Add up all categories and you have your new points range.

*If your Daily Points goes below 18, it stays at 18. If it goes above 44 Points, you only get 44 Points*

Thanks for the great info

thank you

I'm paying for WW now & using the points guidelines specified here but I did WW once before (I know, I'm a loser - and not in a good way) and the points were closer to what Vettemix mentioned. I lost A LOT rather QUICKLY with those points. Now it's much slower. I'm debating on going back to the old way. I know WW knows what they're doing, but still...