PLEASE READ THIS NOTICE CAREFULLY. YOUR RIGHTS MAY BE AFFECTED BY A CLASS-ACTION LAWSUIT THAT IS CURRENTLY PENDING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT, IN RIVERSIDE, CALILFORNIA.

INTRODUCTION

1. On May 20, 2009, the Riverside County Superior Court, located in Riverside, California, issued an order certifying this case to proceed as a class action.

2. The plaintiffs are six individuals who bought memberships to kimkins.com through the kimkins.com Website (www.kimkins.com) from January 1, 2006 to October 15, 2007. The defendants are Heidi Diaz, an individual, and Kimkins (also known as Kimkins.com), a business entity that conducts business in Corona, California.

3. The plaintiffs contend that Diaz and Kimkins.com induced them into buying memberships for kimkins.com through false and misleading information provided on the Kimkins.com Web site. The plaintiffs contend that the defendants violated California Business & Professions Code § 17200, et seq., which authorizes courts to provide relief from unfair, unlawful, and fraudulent business practices. The plaintiffs also contend that Diaz and Kimkins.com violated common law prohibitions against fraud and negligent misrepresentation.

4. This notice provides you with information regarding the litigation, including the plaintiffs’ claims against the defendants and the current status of the litigation. This notice also provides you with information regarding the court’s class-certification order.

THE LITIGATION

The Plaintiffs’ Claims

5. This lawsuit is based on the plaintiffs’ claims that Diaz and Kimkins used unfair, unlawful, or fraudulent business practices to induce them into buying memberships to Kimkins.com. This lawsuit is also based on the plaintiffs’ claims that the false and misleading information contained on the kimkins.com Web site constituted fraud or negligent misrepresentation by Diaz and Kimkins.

6. Here’s a list of the kinds of misconduct that the plaintiffs have alleged:

• that Diaz and Kimkins concocted a false persona, “Kim Drake” or “Kimmer” to sell memberships to Kimkins.com
• that Diaz and Kimkins misled potential members into believing that “Kim Drake” was real by using photos of real women and then falsely claiming that the photos depicted “Drake”
• that Diaz and Kimkins posted lied about “Drake’s” purported weight loss
• that Diaz and Kimkins provided false or misleading information to Women’s World magazine
• that Diaz and Kimkins fabricated 41 “success stories” and published on the Kimkins.com Web
• that Diaz and Kimkins made up celebrity endorsements
• that Diaz and Kimkins misused labels and metatags to steer Internet traffic to the Kimkins.com Website, in violation of the law
• that Diaz and Kimkins misled potential members into believing that they were buying lifetime memberships, when in fact Diaz and Kimkins.com terminated memberships at their whim
• that Diaz and Kimkins intended to mislead potential members and assumed that potential members would rely on her misrepresentations.

The Defendants’ Position

7. Diaz and Kimkins have denied all allegations of wrongdoing and liability, and they continue to deny that they have done anything wrong. Diaz and Kimkins also have asserted various affirmative defenses to the plaintiffs’ claims.

THE COURT’S CLASS-CERTIFICATION ORDER

8. In an order filed May 20, 2009, the Court granted the Plaintiffs’ Motion for Class Certification. The Court certified for class treatment the plaintiffs’ claims for equitable relief, including disgorgement of the subscription fees paid to Diaz and Kimkins by the plaintiffs and the members of the class.

9. The certified class is defined as all individuals who purchased the Kimkins.com diet membership on-line from the Kimkins.com Web site from January 1, 2006 through October 15, 2007.

THE COURT HAS NOT EXPRESSED ANY OPINIONS
REGARDING THE MERITS OF THE PLAINTIFFS’ CLAIMS

10. The Court ordered that this notice be provided to advise class members that this case is pending and that the Court has certified the case to proceed as a class action. You should not consider this notice or its mailing to be a statement by the Court that the plaintiffs are right or that their claims will prevail.

INSTRUCTIONS TO CLASS MEMBERS

11. You do not need to do anything to remain a member of the class. If you bought a Kimkins.com diet membership on-line from the Kimkins.com Web site from January 1, 2006 through October 15, 2007—including either of those dates—you are automatically included in the class. Your rights will be represented by the plaintiffs and their attorneys. You will not be personally responsible for any attorney fees or for the any of the costs of this litigation.

OPT OUT OF CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT

12. You have the opportunity to opt out of the class action lawsuit as detailed herein. If you incurred a personal injury as a result of using the Kimkins.com aka Kimkins Diet, you have a right to opt out. Notices to opt must be sent to jtiedt@tiedtlaw.com or mailed to Tiedt & Hurd at 980 Montecito Drive, Suite 209, Corona, California 92879.

WHERE TO GO & WHOM TO CONTACT
SHOULD YOU NEED MORE INFORMATION

13. This notice provides only a brief summary of this litigation. For further details, you should take one or both of the following steps:

• Review the documents in the Court’s file for this lawsuit. Many of these documents may be viewed or obtained on-line at the following URL: http://public-access.riverside.courts.ca.gov/OpenAccess/ . You also may review the Court’s file in person by going to the Office of the Clerk of the Court for the Riverside Superior Court, during regular business hours. The Clerk’s office is located at 4050 Main Street, Riverside, California 92501.

• Write a letter to the attorneys who are representing the plaintiffs and whom the Court has appointed to represent the class. Here are their names and their contact information:

John E. Tiedt & Marc S. Hurd
Tiedt & Hurd
980 Montecito Drive, Suite 209
Corona, California 92879

Michael L. Cohen
Michael L. Cohen, a PLC
707 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 4100
Los Angeles, California 90017

Ray Moore
Moore Winter McLennan LLP
701 N. Brand Blvd., Suite 200
Glendale, California 92103-4232

If you decide to contact one of the plaintiffs’ attorneys, please do so in writing. To make it easier for them or one of their staff members to respond, however, your letter should include both your e-mail address and your telephone number.

There are estimated to be as many as 40,000 members in the class. So please, DO NOT CALL THE COURT OR ATTEMPT TO CONTACT THE COURT BY E-MAIL.

DATE: ___________________________, 2009

____________________________________
Hon. _________________________,
Presiding Judge

Every dieter is looking for the formula that will provide the quickest weight loss possible. Of course, time is critical as we know by experience that we will not be able to stick to the diet for any longer period of time. Sooner or later there will be off plan eating. Sooner or later, the deprivation will lead to a binge. We just hope that it will never happen. Still, it always does.

A “successful” diet is one where the on-plan eating produces a larger pound loss than what is regained during off-plan incidents. We might even reach goal. Yay! And then what?

There is no glory in maintenance. No rewards. Not seeing a lower scale number every day. Nobody telling you: “Wow, you are just as thin now as six months ago!”

Media is not helpful. Programs like the Biggest Loser reinforce the idea that it’s all about losing weight. Quickly. At all costs. Diet sites feature weight loss success stories like “Cindy lost 100 pounds in 8 months.”

Or, the ridiculous Kimkins newsletters that try to sell that diet by saying that someone lost 10 pounds in a week. And that will tell me just what? If you have a substantial amount of weight to lose, it is not difficult to drop 10 pounds in a week by not eating. But how long can you continue to do that? Will those 10 pounds stay off even a month? A year? 10 years?

What’s the point in losing weight if it doesn’t stay off?

Restrictive diets don’t work. Find a way of eating that you can do for life. With healthy choices (and you know what those are) you might not end up model thin, but there is a good chance that you will reach a healthy weight range. That you can maintain.

MAINTENANCE GUIDELINES
Maintenance is an art requiring experimentation and practice
Begin with a 1200 calorie minimum.  Add additional calories depending on your CCE (Carb & Calorie Equilibrium). Older or sedentary people may need to stay around 1200 indefinitely.

Your CCE will depend on your maintenance weight, age, sex, height, activity level, fitness level and personal metabolism. After age 40 we burn approximately 10% less calories each decade due to aging.

For these calorie examples we used a 10-12X multiplier for women and 12-14X for men:

Susie, 34, 5′5″, 125 lbs — Maintenance Calories about 1250-1500 depending on CCE  (add 115 calories for walking 2 miles daily)

Barbara, 62, 5′2″, 110 lbs — Maintenance Calories about 1000-1100 depending on CCE  (add 100 calories for walking 2 miles daily)

John, 48, 6′0″, 190 lbs — Maintenance Calories about 2300-2500 depending on CCE  (add 200+ calories for walking 2 miles daily)

Harold, 62, 5′8″, 165 lbs — Maintenance Calories about 1600-1900 depending on CCE  (add 100+ calories for walking 2 miles daily)

Fiber may be subtracted from total carbs.  Do not subtract fiber alcohols (all sugar alcohol calories are eventually used by the body).

Aim for 30 grams of fiber daily as recommended by the USDA.  Some highest fiber foods include artichoke hearts and beans. Beans are also an incomplete protein. Whole wheat products are better choices for carb items, but check labels to ensure you’re aware of net carbs.  Typically they don’t have as much fiber as we might think.

For successful maintenance make the best food choices possible. Everyone will have a fast food burger at some point, but that shouldn’t be a diet staple. Vegetables, whole grains and low fat dairy should be chosen ahead of junk food, sugar and alcohol.

CCE (Carb & Calorie Equilibrium)? What is it? How do you determine it? Of course, it has been copied from Atkins ACE (Atkins Carbohydrate Equilibrium). But Atkins was looking at carbs only. Not calories.

Then she goes on to list the well known 10-12 multiplier. However, typically this multiplier is used for weight loss and not maintenance. But then, if you have been following the Kimkins Diet, you have to stay low calorie or the pounds will start to come back.

Fiber may be subtracted from total carbs? What total carbs? There are no carbs mentioned in the maintenance plan. Except as part of CCE. Which is not explained.

Aim for 30 grams of fiber daily as recommended by the USDA? Should we also eat 45-65% carbs as recommended by the USDA?

And then the self-proclaimed diet guru ends with the very profound recommendation: “For successful maintenance, make the best food choices possible”.

My recommendation for anybody that has followed the Kimkins Diet, in maintenance or not yet to goal, would be to start Atkins and follow it by the book. Atkins induction as a transition from Kimkins and then follow the book as written, climbing the carb ladder towards maintenance.

After all, there are other low calorie diets out there. Just look at the latest issue of Women’s World or some other women’s magazine and I can guarantee that the recommended diet is low calorie. It may not be announced as such but adding up the suggested foods end up with 1000 cals or less. For example, egg white omelet for breakfast, 3 oz chicken for lunch, 6 oz salmon for dinner plus the rest fat free or low fat. Salads (with fat free dressing of course), a slice of whole wheat bread and half a cup of brown rice will not increase the calorie count by much.

So why is the Kimkins Diet so much worse? Especially now when there supposedly is no calorie limit on it any longer? Not that the recommended 70-90 gram protein, 3 cups salad veggies, with minimal fat easily add up to more than 500-600 cals.

What I see as the main danger with the kimkins diet is not the diet in itself. It’s the cult-like atmosphere on Kimkins “support” forum. Where people are encouraged to starve themselves. Where feeling icky is applauded.

Other crazy, fad, diets might produce the same physical ill effects (and quick weight loss), but there is nothing to motivate you to keep on doing them. You just abandon them as not doable. Another failed diet attempt.

Not so with Kimkins. When struggling to stick to the diet (and who wouldn’t?) you just log on to Kimkins.con to get support for why you shouldn’t give in to your body’s demand for nutrition. Hear people saying KUTGW (keep up the good work). Look at you! You have lost so much! Keep going! Don’t be weak!

You get inspired by the success stories on the site. Big losers. Real or not, who cares? They have pictures! They look pretty and skinny in the “after” photos.

No negativity at all on the site. Just upbeat posts. Friendly challenges where you get to know people. Checking in daily to say hello and read about your friends’ overnight whooshes. How many pounds they dropped. Hoping to do the same.

To me, that is really the danger with Kimkins. Not the diet, but the website. Without the brainwashing that goes on there, nobody could stick to the diet long enough for it to do much harm. Without the forum and people posting there (even if they are mostly sockpuppets by now) there wouldn’t be a Kimkins.con.

I have great hope that Kimkins.con will soon be gone from the internet. The site was funded by members that signed up based on fraudulent weight loss claims (Kimmer’s 198 pounds) and an article in Women’s World that had fake pictures (Kimmer’s Russian bride photo). The Class Action Lawsuit may force the shut down. Or, Heidi Diaz might decide to shut it down due to lack of new members. Sockpuppets don’t bring in any money.

The Kimkins Diet website was launched in June 2006 but had a rather obscure existence until an article in Women’s World magazine caused a large influx of customers one year later.

Many people tried the diet but rightly decided that the diet was not sustainable and disappeared. The $59.95 membership fee was written off as yet another waste of money on a fad diet gimmick. There are plenty of those around, and most of us have tried more than one.

These were the lucky ones. They left before they were harmed; physically or psychologically. The not so lucky ones stayed around a little longer, but eventually most of these abandoned the diet as well. The Kimkins starvation diet can not be followed for a longer period of time and the most natural reaction is binges.

Not surprisingly, the weight comes back on. Often as fast as it came off with starvation level of calories. The months of sacrifice and counting every morsel ended up with no results, or very little lasting weight loss to show for it.

So what do these dieters do? They return to Kimkins for another starvation cycle. Expecting a different result this time. Why? What has changed? The diet is still nutritionally bankrupt and the deprivation will lead to the same binges as last time. Why wouldn’t it?

But, the diet works, they say.

No it doesn’t. A diet you can not stick to does not work. What’s the point in keeping losing the same pounds over and over again?

Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.
Albert Einstein

I do hope that all the exposure the Kimkins Diet is getting on the blogs is brought to the re-starters attention. This information was not available a year ago, and hopefully it will make a difference. Their life might depend on it, or at the minimum, their health.

One consolation is that Kimmer, a.k.a. Heidi Diaz, does not get any more money from the returning dieters. They already paid their “lifetime” membership fee. I’m sure Heidi is kicking herself for not making it a monthly fee instead.

Kimmer, the founder of the Kimkins Diet, has always insisted that starvation mode does not exist as long as there is body fat to burn for energy. Her diet suggested a daily calorie limit of 500 or less, later adjusted upwards to 710. The rest of the body’s needs would be taken from body fat.

For example:

“I don’t believe in starvation mode. I cannot and will not say anything about minimum calories. A grilled chicken breast and a 1 cup USDA serving of mixed greens is 200 calories. It just is. Adding fats or starches isn’t “healthier” to up the calories.”

“Don’t panic about low calories. . . . Bottom line, as long as you have sufficient body fat you don’t need to eat calories — you’re carrying them with you.”

“I don’t think we can fight the “1200 calorie a day mentality”. Some people cannot understand that your body takes the calories it needs from body fat if the calories you eat are too low to sustain current weight. If you need 2500 calories (250 lb person) and eat 500 (number picked for easy math), the other 2000 are taken from body fat.”

Why is it then that so many of the Kimkins Dieters experience starvation symptoms, such as:

• Feeling cold and having a lower-than-normal body temperature.
• Hair loss, brittle nails, and dry skin.
• Muscle weakness and muscle wasting.
• Constipation, slow emptying of the stomach, and belly pain.
• Sleep problems, hyperactivity, or extreme fatigue.
• Difficulty concentrating and solving problems or poor judgment.
• Dizziness, fainting spells, low blood pressure, slow heartbeat, heart palpitations.
• Frequent colds and other infections.
• Bruising.

You can find the individual accounts on Kimkins Survivors.

All these people were told to take a daily multivitamin, as if that would solve the problem. Obviously, it didn’t. Neither did the excess body fat they had. All of them were still overweight.

There are other obvious problems with a starvation diet. While ketosis initially may curb appetite, eventually hunger will reappear. Kimmer always claimed that hunger is not present as long as carbs are low enough. How she knew this, I have no idea. Certainly not from her own experience, considering that she is still obese.

I know for a fact that you can be in deep ketosis and still be hungry, and I am not alone to have experienced this. I read many accounts on Kimkins where people complained about hunger and cravings appearing around week 4 – 5 of the diet. Some of them followed K/E at the time; just eggs and meat.

Of course, the advice was to curb hunger by ignoring it, drinking water, soda or fat free broth. I am sure many people fell off the diet at this point (luckily for them) and never returned.

A diet you can not stick to is not a good diet. Your body is trying to tell you something. Listen to it.

Another issue is how to maintain the weight loss. If the above problems do not make the dieter stop the diet, eventually calories need to be increased. Nobody can live on 500 calories for life. The previous successful dieter now finds that she can not add anything without gaining weight. Even an extra cup of salad will cause the scale to go up.

The typical result is the start of a yo-yo diet. Eat more a few days and then back to starvation for a week or two. The lucky ones put in a lot of hard work to slowly increase their calories, ignoring the scale for a while, to raise their metabolism and have thus managed, with difficulty, to transition to a healthy weight loss regimen.

Why would anyone even consider starting a diet where there is a blog dedicated to SURVIVORS of the diet? With some 100 accounts of severe problems from it.

I do hope that anyone that happens to find the now year old article in the Woman’s World magazine takes a minute to google Kimkins before they go to the Kimkins.con website where Kimmer a.k.a. Heidi Diaz promises “Join today for only $79.95. That’s it. Not another penny.” That one time membership fee doesn’t include ER costs, medical bills or any compensation for long term health problems.

Edited to add: After I wrote this article, I came across this comment by a survivor that was made just two days ago:

KK has left me bald, wounded, sick and recovering from surgery and fear of food……no please don’t try Heidi’s Diet of Death!

Please take her advice. She knows what she is talking about. Unfortunately.

One of the main concerns for people starting a low carb diet is the apparent lack of fiber in the diet. I say “apparent” because it’s really a misconception. One of those accepted “truths” that keeps on being repeated over and over again.

The FDA recommends 28 grams of fiber for a 2,000 cal diet. Using their other recommendations for servings, I fall just short of that. For example:

• 4 servings of fruit (2 cups)
• 5 servings of vegetables (2.5 cups)
• 6 oz grain (6 slices of bread)
• 5 oz meat
• 3 cups milk

add up to only 24 grams of fiber. And this is only because I used “100% whole grain wheat” for the grain servings. Whole grain bread was introduced to help increase fiber intake so it can really be compared to a fiber supplement in my opinion. If I replace it with white bread, the total fiber ends up being 15 grams.

On a low carb diet, staying at induction level carbs (<20 when subtracting fiber) I can easily achieve the same 15 grams of fiber as on the “normal” diet. My sample menu included 2 cups cooked cabbage, 1 cup cooked green beans, three cups lettuce and one tomato.

So do I need to be worried about just getting half the recommended daily fiber intake? No, I do not. Why would I need more fiber?

The FDA fiber myth claims:

• Lack of fiber causes colon cancer. This “fact” was never proved in the first place and has been shown not to be true.
• Lack of fiber causes constipation. This is just not true. Lack of fat causes constipation.

But, IF you don’t want to try a low carb diet with just these 15 grams of fiber, the problem is easily solved by fiber supplements that do not add much to your net carb count. I routinely eat Wasa rye crackers and the Bran Crispbread I order from Netrition. But that isn’t because I think I need more fiber. I just happen to like them. Actually, I have to be careful with the bran crispbread as too much fiber will give me diarrhea.

However, a NO fiber diet that is also LOW FAT is bound to cause constipation. Look at the K/E menu below. The plate has the food for ONE FULL DAY, i.e. 3 meals.

K/E is short for Kimmer’s Experiment. It was a diet devised by Kimmer/Kimkins to produce heavy ketosis (or as she calls it, “real” ketosis) and quick weight loss. Lean meats and eggs only. No vegetables. Originally suggested for 3 days to jump start weight loss, the time limit was soon removed and it was recommended for long term use.

The problem with this diet is not really related to fiber. It is LOW calorie and LOW fat. This particular menu, based on Kimkins recommendations, provides just 376 cals (only 12 grams of fat) for ONE DAY!

Kimmer, or Heidi Diaz, does not recommend fiber supplements. They are bulking and a negative reflection on scale weight before the “bulk” has been eliminated is to be avoided. Instead, she suggests laxatives. On a daily basis.

Beware of the Kimkins Diet! Don’t be fooled by its claim to be a low carb diet. It’s low everything. Low carb, low fat, low calorie.

Who didn’t start their first diet when they were just a few pounds overweight? Dropped some weight and then put it back on, plus a few pounds more? Kept on repeating this cycle with each attempt ending up at a higher weight?

This dieting pattern is called a “feast and famine cycle” and is caused by restrictive diets.

The body’s natural response to excessive calorie restriction is:

• Reduced metabolic rate. As much as 15 – 30% fewer calories are burned.
• Cravings, especially for sweets and fat.
• Increased ability to store calories as fat, whenever excess calories become available again.

The result? A binge, and/or quitting the diet. Or for the unfortunate that “manage” to fight the hunger, anorexia.

During the period of re-feeding, weight is put back on. Even worse, while the weight loss was both muscle and fat, the regain is primarily fat. We end up bigger and with lower metabolism than before the weight loss as fat doesn’t burn as many calories as muscle does.

After this episode, or a period of time, the restrictive diet is restarted. The diet works, I did lose weight. I just wasn’t strong enough to stick with it.

Wrong! If the diet is not sustainable, the diet is wrong. It’s not the dieter’s fault. It’s the diet’s fault.

So what works for weight loss then? It’s obvious that restrictive diets are not doing us any favors. I strongly believe in lowcarb and “healthy eating” which to me means to eat the right foods, but not limit how much I eat.

With lowcarb, there is no need to feel deprived. There is no need to go hungry. If hungry, then eat. It’s not a diet, it’s a Way of Eating (WOE) that can be sustained long term.

And guess what? When we are ready for maintenance, we have learned how to eat. Do yourself a favor and follow Atkins as written, climbing the carb ladder. Then there is no sudden change from “weigh loss mode” to maintenance, with the common regain and struggle.

Beware of quick fixes that promises fast weight loss, like Kimkins. Not even the founder has been successful on the diet, but still keeps on promoting it. While starvation produces weight loss, the damage done to your body in the process might be permanent even when the weight loss isn’t.

The results from the study are really confusing, but they indicate that weight loss is not indicative of better health, at least not when it comes to mortality rate.

To summarize (numbers adjusted for smoking, alcohol, and other factors):

• Wanting to lose weight and doing so increased mortality by 87%
• Wanting to lose weight but not doing so decreased mortality by 16%
• Wanting to lose weight but gaining weight decreased mortality by 7%
• Not wanting to lose weight and staying stable was used as baseline
• Not wanting to lose weight but doing so increased mortality by 17%
• Not wanting to lose weight and gaining weight increased mortality by 58%

The study provides a lot of details, but the one detail that is lacking is what diet the subjects used. However, considering the time frame (1975 – 1999) I bet that the participants were on low fat, high carb diets.

Not even the researchers could interpret the results and they speculate that loss of lean mass or release of toxins in body fat could play a role. The simple answer is that they don’t really have a clue.

My non-expert interpretation of the results is that changing your lifestyle and eating better will decrease mortality rate. The study subjects who wanted to lose weight but didn’t do so were the ones benefiting the most from their efforts. Even the ones wanting to lose weight but failing to do so decreased their mortality rate!

Eat healthy, live longer! And healthy does not mean low fat!

What is painfully obvious is that being successful on a low fat diet is not beneficial if you want to live a long life.

I really, really hope that people avoid low fat diets like Kimkins that possibly could be the most deadly of them all.

Illustration by Squeakie

Laxatives are not useful for weight loss. They cause loss of water weight. Not fat loss. The drop on the scale is not permanent. As soon as you replace the lost water, your scale will be back where you started. 

You would think that a diet “guru” like Heidi Diaz would know this. And I think she does. Is she also aware that her advice to take laxatives to produce a temporary scale loss might end up killing someone?

Extensive laxative abuse can cause:

• Dehydration.  Dehydration can cause weakness, blurry vision, fainting, kidney damage, and (in cases of severe dehydration) death.
• Electrolyte imbalance.  Electrolytes are minerals (sodium, potassium, calcium, etc.) that are in body fluids in very precise amounts and ratios.  Electrolytes are responsible for proper functioning of nerves and muscles. Laxative abuse can upset a person’s electrolyte balance and cause improper functioning of vital organs, like the heart!
• Laxative dependence.  This is when the colon requires larger and larger doses of laxatives to produce bowel movements.  People often become so dependent on laxatives that their body loses the ability to produce bowel movements on it’s own without the aid of laxatives.

Or listen to the advice of someone that tried it:

Okay, I had a really long reply typed but here’s what I was going to say in a nutshell. I’m only 23 years old, and I have been dealing with this problem for 10 years already. And, don’t do it, seriously, please read this and seriously consider the truth, and hopefully you will realize that it doesn’t help you at all in the long run.

Okay, yes taking laxatives or I should say abusing them will actually help you lose weight. But, the ways that they do it are as follows:

• You realize hey I weigh less today!
• Then, you convince yourself that you don’t want to eat because you don’t want to gain the weight back.
• You find yourself drinking less.
• You get nauseated when you attempt to eat.
• And, you constantly have diarrhea, you can’t control when where or who is in the public restroom at work/school when you have it.

Look, it’s not pretty, but it gets worse. If you still think it’s worth it, listen to the rest. Picture yourself thinner, and then picture yourself smiling, and when you look at that smile, broken and thin brittle teeth. Pretty huh? True though, because laxatives can remove the calcium from your body because it won’t let your body absorb the calcium Hardly no one seems to realize that this is a horrible side effect. Your teeth can practically crumble. And your bones…easily broken.

Also, you can end up in the hospital for any of many many reasons, where they will pump you full of potassium (oh, and that reallllllly hurts!! It causes your arms to swell, and every vein they put the iv in with that crap, collapsed).

And, you can get jaundice (where your skin turns yellow) from your liver enzymes being high because of organs failing, and end up with a not so pretty scar on your stomach.

And, think about your colon, no seriously think about it for a second, think about the alternatives to keeping it healthy.

Okay, so those are the physical problems.

I’ve tried to sum it up for ya, but it’s not a short list. I hope that you realize that this is a baddddddd decision, and not one easily kicked.

The TRUTH recently posted a series of PM’s from Kimmer (aka Heidi Diaz) where laxative abuse is recommended.