The supposition is that people will deliberately choose foods that add to their long-term physical well-being by decreasing their threat of chronic disease. There is a slight doubt that a diet well-suited to human biological requirements is necessary to the existence of the species (Clifford, Keeler, 2002).Satter is a model developed by Ellyn Satter, and that is based on her clinical observations of how people do well with eating. Essentially, eating competence explains how normal people eat. It is descriptive in that sense, and rigid only for that group who are not comfortable with their current eating or who are concerned about their diet and health, and seek to make a dietary transformation.Still, Weight Watchers, which a lot of people hype as the finest of the diet centers because of its dependence on real, unmarked food and flexible menu options, does not help people in understanding and knowledge about the inner competence on eating. This comes down to the issue of trust against control, according to the nutritionist Ellyn Satter…who takes care of ‘dieting casualties’ in her practice. She trusts that people require learning to believe that they will get filled, even on the food they think as highly desirable, and recognize that they can reliably control their own food intake, instead of depending on exterior rules to control those choices. Weight Watchers is good at easing up food choices, teaching people how to eat carefully, and encouraging them to add to the diversity of food in their diet, states Satter. But it is still essentially a control stance they apply (Satte, 2007, p. 56). When people rely on exterior rules, ranges, and diet cops to control their eating, their association with food remains delicate.