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

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.

How much fiber should I eat? It’s not easy to find an answer to that question.

FDA says 28 grams, minimum (14 grams per 1,000 calories).

Numerous google hits tell me that “high fat, low fiber” causes constipation. Of course, none of them say anything about the total carb consumption on the low fat diet they recommend. Perhaps it’s the excess carbs and not the lack of fiber that’s the problem?

Some sources cite the study, now disproved, that fiber prevents colon cancer. While others acknowledge that this long established “fact” is not true, they still insist that high fiber intake is required for colon health. Supposedly, it is not good to have this “toxic waste” sitting around in our intestines, and we need fiber to push it out. The now so popular colon cleanse products are also based on this fear of the “toxic waste”. To understand why our body could not handle the waste it was designed for in the first place is beyond me.

Many diets suggests high fiber intake. The higher the better. Fiber is supposed to fill you up, absorb some of the fats/calories you eat and bring them out undigested, and prevent the apparently inevitable constipation from any calorie restricted diet.

Even Weight Watchers is promoting high fiber consumption. In their point formula, fiber is subtracted so the more fiber you eat, the more other foods you can fit into your alloted points. For example, a slice Scandinavian Bran Crispbread (16 cals, 3 carbs, 3 fiber, 1 protein) adds up to minus 0.28 points.

Then there is the other camp that believes fiber is not necessary and might even be harmful. Coincidentally, this camp is also in favor of high fat, low carb.

Of course, this other camp most likely have their own agenda, just as the “low fat, high fiber” camp has.

Barry Groves, the author of “Eat Fat, Get Thin” wrote an interesting article about fiber: The Bran Wagon. Is it true? I have no idea but it certainly provides another point of view in the debate.

Another anti-fiber author is Konstantin Monastyrsky, who is promoting his book Fiber Menace. Again, I have no idea how much of this is true, and I do not recommend buying the book, but I find the website a fascinating read.

And last, perhaps the best anti-fiber article, by Dr Eades: A cautionary tale of mucus for and aft.

Personally, I find much more in the anti-fiber information being true (for me) than the pro-fiber claims. I did an experiment the last couple of weeks, eating a lot of fiber in the form of bran.

The experiment started out unintentionally. I just happen to like the crunch from Scandinavian Bran Crispbread, and can eat a lot of it. I probably have had in excess of 40 grams of fiber as compared to the 10-15 grams I normally get from vegetables.

The result?

• More frequent bowel movements, bordering on diarrhea. I didn’t “need” this as I don’t suffer from constipation and never have.
• Bloating. This amount of bran requires a high water consumption. The two combined certainly filled up my stomach, and not in a pleasant way. Some “high-fiber” diets use this fact to claim that this would diminish appetite. That didn’t happen in my case.
• Gas. And a lot of it. Thankfully odorless. While fiber is not digested directly by the body, the bacteria we have in our guts thrive on it. I think I prefer to starve these particular bacteria for a while.

My experiment convinced me that I don’t need to add fiber to my low carb, high fat diet. And while I like the bran crispbread, it has to be an occasional treat (note, most people find these resembling card board and would never label them as a “treat”).

My results might not be typical. My diet is not low fat and I have never had to rely on laxatives to “help”.

From what I understand, high fat consumption combined with low carbs prevents constipation and fiber supplements are not necessary.

By the way, did you know that oil is a well proven, harmless (as far as I understand) home remedy for constipation? Suggested dosage is 1 tablespoon twice per day. That’s why I’m not surprised that my low carb, high fat diet keeps me regular without any added fiber supplements.

Now, a low fat diet probably needs fiber supplements. At least it seems to be a MUCH better alternative than the laxative abuse recommended by the Kimkins founder, Kimmer.

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.

BMR = Basal Metabolic Rate. This is how many calories the body consumes in a “comatose state”. Calories just needed for bodily functions and to stay alive.

To avoid starvation mode, it is recommended to not go below your BMR level.

AMR = Activity Metabolic Rate. These are the additional calories we burn by moving around during the day. Some calculator just provide choices between sedentary, active, and heavy lifestyle. In others, you can plug in the minutes you perform of each activity.

Your daily calorie requirement is BMR + AMR. Theoretically, eating anything less than this should result in weighloss.

Using myself as an example, my BMR is 1252 cals, and if only adding 10 hours of “sitting”, my total calorie requirement goes up to 2092. Exercise days add up to 2400.

Weight loss experts (and I’m not counting Heidi Diaz, the 500 cals starvation guru, among them) generally recommend that you eat 500 cals less than the total calorie requirement so I would eat around 1500 calories to lose weight, 2000 to maintain.

The BMR/AMR counter I used is here: Body for Life

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 term addiction is used to describe a recurring compulsion by an individual to engage in some specific activity, despite harmful consequences to the individual’s health, mental state or social life.

Is there such a thing as food addiction? No, not according to the author of Breaking out of Food Jail, Jean Antonello R.N., B.S.N.

People who do not eat enough food on a regular basis tend to get compulsive about food and eat without control at times. This is an adaptive response, not the result of an addiction. There is, however, an addictive process involved; it’s the addiction to dieting.

I agree with Jean. I have never known anybody that could be described as “obsessed” with food unless they were dieting. Diet addicition is a much more fitting term.

I also believe that dieting causes eating disorders, and not the other way around. Severe calorie restriction, like the starvation diet Kimkins, will surely result in an unhealthy relationship with food.

The most natural reaction to excessive food restriction is cheats or binges. Or anorexia. Neither of them is a result you want from a diet, and it will not make you any healthier. Isn’t that the most important with weight loss? Health?

What is strange is that dieters keep on going back again and again to the too restrictive diet after a cheat or binge episod. The diet works. Uh, no, it doesn’t. If you can not stay on it, it doesn’t work.

That the diet doesn’t work is not to blame on the dieters, it’s the fault of the DIET. Look for something else. Less restrictive. Higher calories typically means slower losses, but over time it will surely equal or exceed what can be accomplished on starve/binge yo-yo cycles.

I doubt it but it wouldn’t hurt to try. Kimkins Review has a call-out for how you can help. Only by getting some low carb proponents on the panel can we influence how the new food pyramid will look. At least we can hope for some improvement.

And quoting Dr. Michael Eades who got the question why it matters as nobody follows the USDA recommendations anyway:

I explained that although he may not pay attention to them, plenty of other people do. The law that established the guidelines mandates that every bit of food or money for food that the government doles out has to follow the Nutritional Guidelines. Approximately 54 million people are fed daily by the government, and they all have to be fed according to the guidelines. Who does the government feed? The military, people in the prison system, school lunch programs, numerous people who receive commodities from Uncle Sam, Federally funded daycare centers, the list goes on and on. So the Nutritional Guidelines are not a meaningless, harmless little bit of government doodling – they are of great importance. It would be nice to see them move away from a diet that composed primarily of carbohydrate. The only way this will happen is to get some low-carb advocates on the panel.

I never paid much attention to the food pyramid but looked at it on Dr. Eades blog. It looks a lot more scary when you see it that way than just looking at the numbers above (not that 65% carbs don’t look scary in themselves). No wonder people get fatter and fatter.

Just to amuse myself, I decided to redo the food pyramid for a low carb woe (way of eating). I didn’t add any food items so the “fats” segment ended up pretty empty – just a jar of mayo that is on the top in the USDA version.

It didn’t surprise me that the pyramid is pretty much flipped upside down. But notice that the “oh so important veggie” segment is in the same place and no smaller in the lowcarb variant.

And to further amuse myself, I created a Kimkins food pyramid. This one was simple. Just erase most of the food items. The pyramid ended up a lot smaller too as the typical Kimkins menu is 500 – 600 calories as compared to the 2,000 in the USDA pyramid.

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.