I did get some new tidbits from the book. Like supplementing with leucine (an amino acid) and melatonin. I tried melatonin way back for sleep problems but as it didn’t help, I stopped. The Eades, however, is saying that lack of melatonin is not beneficial for fat loss, so I might start up again.

As with regards to the cause of the middle-age middle gain, there were no big surprises. Hormones. That is pretty obvious as the vast majority of people my age (50+) have problems with the middle expanding, despite eating sensibly and exercising. The 6-week cure supposedly helps to get a flat stomach back.

The cure consists of three 2-week steps.

The first step includes a liver detox phase where all substances causing the liver to work hard are to be avoided. This includes alcohol, caffeine and any unnecessary medications. The diet during these two weeks consist of 3 protein shakes per day and one LC meal with very limited vegetables.

Two things about this surprises me. First that Splenda is allowed. To me, Splenda is a chemical and while it hasn’t proved to be detrimental to the body, I don’t think it’s a good think to use when you are trying to do a detox. However, there are protein powders out there with Stevia, so perhaps that is a viable alternative.

There are also rumors in the Zero Carb community that this book promotes a “meat-only” diet. It doesn’t. There are vegetables and even berries with every meal, although in very limited quantities.

Week 3-4 are lowcarb meals, again with very limited quantities of non-starchy vegetables and berries. Alcohol and caffeine can be reintroduced.

Week 5-6 looks like a maintenance diet to me.

When it comes to exercise, they recommend only 30 minutes of weight training per week. Plus a simple ab exercise that can be done anywhere at any time.

The Eades are sharing their own experience with their middle-age middle gain and I can identify with Mary Eades. I also did not have any weight problem until I entered peri-menopause. What is disappointing though is that they say that Mary was not successful with the 6-week cure only until she got her hormones adjusted but they don’t go into detail about any of the hormone theraphy. Personally, I don’t know if it makes sense to feed your body hormones to stay at a perpetual 35 year old level for life. But then, I’m not a doctor and they are.

I have approached my middle gain differently. I maintain a relatively flat stomach by regular exercise, and it’s not enough with just 30 minutes per week. I need 30 minutes 4 or 5 times per week at the minimum. No cardio. Heavy weights. I have proven over and over again that, for me, this is the only thing that makes any difference to my “muffintop.” I don’t fully understand why. Hormones? I wish they had addressed this fact as I’m sure I am not unique.

While my review may not sound all that positive, I do recommend the book. It’s a good read and the recipes alone are worth the money. The cure is probably also a good plan for someone that quickly needs to shed some pounds and likes to follow a strict routine with given meal suggestions.

Finally, I wonder what the Eades’ target audience is. The book is not directed towards people that have a lot of weight to lose (even though it might work well as a starting point for transition into Protein Power). The book seems more directed towards people that have not been overly overweight and now find themselves with 20-30 stubborn pounds extra. If this means that lowcarb will be sold to a larger audience, I’m all for it. In my opinion, we can all benefit from lowcarb becoming more mainstream.

I wish the Eades the best of luck and great success with this book. They do a lot of free work on their blog for the lowcarb community.

What is a healthy diet? The answer will vary depending on who you ask. Everything from the food pyramid with a “balanced” diet from all food groups, to the calorie counting Weight Watchers to the carb limited Low Carb diet. All of these groups have their own definition of what “healthy” is.

I think it’s easier to agree on what unhealthy is. Very few would disagree that fried foods (carbs + fat) or desserts/donuts/cakes (carbs + fat) are not the best food choice. But to actually agree on what we should eat is much more difficult.

We have the Food Pyramiders that insist that we have to eat from all food groups as an “unbalanced” diet is bad. They advocate a lot of fruit, vegetables and “good” grains (= high in fiber) and a small amount of “healthy” fats (= vegetable fats). Meat should be served in small portions and chicken is preferred over beef and pork due to the lower fat content.

While excessive use of sugar is not encouraged, the emphasis for low fat is more important. We can see their influence on the food industry on a daily basis. Fat free or low fat everything. Yogurt where the fat has been replaced by sugar and the end result is higher calories than plain, full fat yogurt. Or, fat free cheese that has no resemblance to the original product any more. Not to mention the oxymoron of low fat margarine.

The minimal amount of fat allowed should be “good” fats; olive oil, other vegetable oils and fish oils. Butter and lard are shunned citing the high saturated fat content. This despite that nobody has actually shown that saturated fats are bad for us. All studies looked at saturated fats with carbs, and then just blaming the fats without even considering the carbs. This fact has not yet been acknowledged by this group.

For weight loss, the Food Pyramiders recommend portion control and exercise. It’s all about calories in and calories out. We can see how well this has worked by just looking around us. This has been the mantra for the last 30 years and people have just gotten heavier.

Then we have the Lowcarbers. For many of them, anything and everything is allowed as long as it has a low carbohydrate count. Fat is not limited, nor the type of fat. Any type of meat is allowed as is low glycemic vegetables.

Many that start out on a low carb diet initially are looking for low carb versions of high carb foods. Enter Frankenfoods.  The label Frankenfood is typically given to a food item which is trying to emulate a high-carb original by replacing carbs by some chemical and/or fiber. Artificial sweeteners such as sugar alcohols is a typical example. Sugar alcohols have theoretically very low carb count and are used to sweeten coffee and make lowcarb desserts.

The food industry has responded here as well, even though there are less low carb products now than just a few years ago. I think many of them disappeared as no matter what chemical conoction they used, they just didn’t manage to make them taste good.

So what is a healthy diet for me? Now eating low carb and maintaining my weight loss for 5 years? Even though I don’t always adhere to it 100%, I try to stay with the basics; meat, fish, vegetables. No calorie counting. No limit on fats, but I don’t add any either. The only dairy I eat is hard cheese and the only grain is rye crisp bread. These last two are not good for weight loss for many people, me included, but I can get away with it in maintenance.

I don’t like processed foods. If it has a list of 30 ingredients where I only recognize two or three, it is not something I want to put in my body. I also find that it doesn’t taste anywhere near as good as home made foods.

I don’t drink diet soda or other artificially sweetened drinks. I do use splenda, davinci or stevia on occasion. Perhaps once per month at the most. It’s not because I don’t have a sweet tooth. Or, rather had a sweet tooth. I lost it after lowcarbing for some time. I used to have a serious Snicker’s bar habit. Now, fruits and berries taste sweet enough for me without any artificial addition. Diet soda is sickening sweet. I had a taste of ketchup yesterday night for the first time in years, and that was much, much sweeter than how I remember it.

If a food is sugar free, carb free and/or fat free, has no nutritional value and only contain chemicals, what would be the purpose for me to eat/drink it? For me, food implies that it will provide nutrition for my body.

But that’s my personal preference. I would never berate anybody for using artificial sweeteners or drinking diet soda. If that helps them to stay on the diet and to lose weight, more power to them. I would however suggest that if weight loss comes to a halt, it might be a good idea to limit the use of these before abandoning the diet altogether.

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.

So who wouldn’t lose weight eating just 500 calories? Why would you need to pay for expensive HCG injections when the calorie limitation will cause you to lose just as much weight in itself?

The HCG proponents (sock puppets) share their wisdom. The tiny HCG amount supposedly enables you to draw from your fat stores, and the HCG makes you not being hungry.

How funny then that the Kimkins starvation diet produced the same results, without the HCG. Kimmer suggested 500 calories or less. Lean protein, just as the HCG protocol does. People following Kimkins did lose a huge amount of weight, quickly. But they also suffered health complications due to it.

There is no reason to think that HCG would work any different, in my opinion. The dieters starting out on Kimkins didn’t feel hunger initially either. Ketosis does that to you.

Here is a study that shows no difference in weight loss or hunger with or without the HCG:

Our investigation was designed to retest the hypothesis of the efficacy of human chorionic gonadotropin (HCG) on weight reduction in obese women in a clinic setting. We sought to duplicate the Asher-Harper study (1973) which had found that the combination of 500 cal diet and HCG had a statistically significant benefit over the diet and placebo combination as evidenced by greater weight loss and decrease in hunger. Fifty-one women between the ages of 18 and 60 participated in our 32-day prospective, randomized, double-blind comparison of HCG versus placebo. Each patient was given the same diet (the one prescribed in the Asher-Harper study), was weighed daily Monday through Saturday and was counseled by one of the investigators who administered the injections. Laboratory studies were performed at the time of initial physical examinations and at the end of the study. Twenty of 25 in the HCG and 21 of 26 patients in the placebo groups completed 28 injections. There was no statistically significant difference in the means of the two groups in number of injections received, weight loss, percent of weight loss, hip and waist circumference, weight loss per injections, or in hunger ratings. HCG does not appear to enhance the effectiveness of a rigidly imposed regimen for weight reduction.

[Am J Clin Nutr. 1976 Sep;29(9):940-8. Ineffectiveness of human chorionic gonadotropin in weight reduction: a double-blind study. Stein MR, Julis RE, Peck CC, Hinshaw W, Sawicki JE, Deller JJ Jr.]

Getting calories from body fat doesn’t mean that you get ALL nutrition your body needs. The body fat doesn’t contain vitamins or essential fatty acids. And don’t fool yourself that a vitamin pill will provide what should be gotten from food.

Coincidentally, many Kimkins dieters complained about “excessive” hunger around week 4 – 5. The HCG protocol is following the 500 calorie diet for 3 weeks, when food is added.

But how many of the HCG dieters stop at 3 weeks? Perhaps they, just as the Kimkins dieters, decide to fight the hunger by filling up on non-calorie food such as broth and diet soda? After all, they all want to get to goal as quickly as possible.

And how many of the HCG dieters regain the weight like most of the Kimkins dieters did? A 500 calorie diet teaches you nothing about how to eat to maintain weight loss.

HCG is just another quick fix, in my opinion. A magic pill for a desperate dieter that wants to find an easy way to get the weight off. And of course, HCG is a big money maker for the companies selling it. They most likely use sockpuppets to help promote the product. As with other fad products, support threads on diet boards are populated by people new to the board, that post on that thread only, that have “fantastic success” with the product, and encourage other board members to buy it.

TIPPING THE SCALES TO HEALTH

is now open!

The online world has a wonderful new resource
for desperate dieters and
anybody else who is determined to make health a priority in 2009.

Join old friends and new as we kick the New Year off
with a renewed dedication to health and weight loss!

While it is possible to lose weight without exercise it might not be all that healthy. Especially not if the weight loss is achieved by starvation level of calories. There are “Kimkins Survivors” that can testify to that.

Kimmer justifies her recommendation by referencing calorie calculators to point out how little we burn by exercising.

I can agree that calories burned during light or moderate exercise is not going to make much of a difference. This is also commonly repeated on diet boards where they typically say that weight loss is 90% diet and 10% exercise.

Gary Taubes (Good Calories, Bad Calories) is often incorrectly quoted as saying that exercise has no effect on weight loss. That’s not really what he said. Gary Taubes said that there are no studies that support that exercise makes any difference. But what subjects would the studies have been made on? Morbidly obese people on a weight loss program, I’m sure. So, to me, it is more correct to say that exercise does not make a difference for the weight loss of morbidly obese people. That doesn’t mean that the same is necessarily true for people closer to their goal weight.

Kimmer wouldn’t know as I doubt she has ever been anywhere near goal weight. She doesn’t know anything about the challenge to take off the remaining 10 pounds. This is where I think exercise makes a huge impact.

Speaking from my own, anecdotal, experience, exercise makes all the difference in the world. The scale wouldn’t budge at all until I added exercise. Granted, I didn’t follow a starvation diet. I do eat lowcarb but without any restriction of the amount of food I eat.

All slim people I know at my age are exercisers. Every single one of them. Exercise is also pointed out as an important factor for the maintainers reporting to the National Weight Loss Registry. To keep the weight off, they had to exercise.

So should you exercise or diet? In my opinion, both. Perhaps exercise is not required, or even practical, when starting out but for reaching goal it will be necessary. For staying at goal, even more so.

My calories were 1600 – 1800 per day. And no, I didn’t exercise a lot. I did go to the gym 4 times but burned no more than perhaps 200 calories per time.

So what did I eat? Pork spareribs, beef stew, egg salad, hamburger, bacon, salami, egg salad, cheese, and nuts. Even peanut butter. About 70% fat. Less than 20 carbs from veggies (cauliflower, broccoli, celery). Not as strict as Atkins induction (which does not allow nuts and peanut butter, plus I ate more cheese than allowed).

Sure, the weight lost is mostly water, but so is Kimkins when starting out. But the point is that I did not have to restrict calories at all. I did not have to go hungry (appetite suppression from ketosis has never worked for me, possibly due to lower bodyfat?).

Why would you even consider Kimkins (lean meat, just enough fat to make your menu work) when you can lose better doing Atkins and not feel deprived at all?

So why did I need to lose the weight in the first place? I, that have successfully maintained at 124 – 126 lbs for 4 years. Without counting carbs or calories. Without thinking about what I’m eating (or not eating). Well, every Fall I gain some weight, 4-5 pounds. Generally in October, it just came early this year. I then maintain (over the Holidays!) at a higher weight until late January or so when I effortlessly drop down to my normal range.

To me it seems to be a seasonal cycle my body likes, but if I had tracked my food I could possibly find the explanation there as well. Fall is a busy work period for me with a lot of traveling. This year there wasn’t any down period during the summer so perhaps that’s why the gain occurred earlier than usual.

It will be interesting to see if October brings with it the normal weight gain, or if I have already gone through this year’s cycle. Leaving for another business trip today so I will know soon enough.

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.

To my understanding, the diet was never intended to include a maintenance plan. It was to be used as a crash diet and as the vast majority of people couldn’t stick to the diet all the way to goal, a maintenance plan was never needed.

For sure, Heidi Diaz never needed a maintenance plan herself. I doubt that the “thousands of people” she has “helped” on the boards and via email during “more than 10 years” have needed it either. Reading the Ask Kimmer thread at Low Carb Friends it is obvious that the diet provided only short term weight loss.

But following a request from a dieter on Kimkins, Heidi took a shot at starting to formulate a Kimkins Maintenance Plan. Not a very good shot, in my opinion. Actually, I was surprised at how bad it was considering that while Heidi never followed her own plan, she did a lot of reading about diets and has never been shy of stealing ideas from someone else. Surely she could have come up with something better than this:

Designing a Maintenance Plan – Feedback!

OK, let’s take a look at “maintenance”. Let me jot down a few ideas and you all let me know what you’re thinking. My vision of a successful Kimkins Maintenance Plan should be focused on high nutrient whole foods. Brown rice instead of instant white rice, whole fruit instead of juice drinks, 7 grain bread instead of white, lower calorie higher carb choices (fresh fruit or winter squash) over high calorie lower carb (faux cheesecake). Kimkins Maintenance should be as simple as Kimkins. A few easy to remember rules that you’ll always have with you. Nobody is going to drag a diet sheet in their purse or wallet for eternity or whip out a calculator at a restaurant — not for long anyway.

After 10 years as a self-proclaimed diet guru, and “30 years of diet experience”, a maintenance plan is still just a “vision” for Heidi? Isn’t that proof enough that the Kimkins Diet doesn’t lead to goal? No maintenance strategy is needed.

Kimkins Maintenance must be very simple. I think regular Kimkins is ultra simple, but some newbies have problems at the beginning figuring it out. Maintenance will more complicated, but it needs to be simple.

Yes, the regular Kimkins is simple. Just eat at starvation level calories and the weight will come off. Newbies are getting confused when they follow the new rules (unlimited protein, 3 cups of veggies) and don’t see the weight coming off as fast as promised.

I don’t see why maintenance has to be complicated. It isn’t for me. However, it might be complicated for Kimmer to put a plan together as she has no clue what she is talking about. Has no clue what amount of carbs or calories would be required on maintenance.

Should Kimkins Maintenance be calorie or carb oriented? If a combination, what limits? The accepted definition of “low carb” is 100 carbs or less per day. To us that sounds very generous until we realize that much fast food, fruits, grains and carb snacks can easily meet that limit with 1 serving. If a limit of 300 carbs is chosen, then any maintenance plan fits the bill including Weight Watchers.

What a dilemma. Kimkins is marketed as low carb, low fat, low calorie. So what to increase in maintenance? The answer is really that after following the Kimkins Diet, maintenance is still low carb, low fat, low calorie. Or, why not suggest that any maintainers find another plan, like WW? After having provided Heidi with “before” and “after” pictures, they have served their purpose. She has no use for them. She will get no more money from them and they are just using up bandwidth on kimkins.con.

How do we add back junk food? Few people are willing to give up cheeseburgers (on buns), pizza, spaghetti & garlic bread, beer, Grandma’s fudge, Hot Pockets, mashed potatoes & gravy, Girl Scout cookies, or nachos for the rest of their life. My vote would be that they not be included in Kimkins Maintenance choices, but I don’t think that’s realistic.

Junk food is now defined as higher carbs items? What happened with the 300 carbs WW plan?

What about restaurants? Would a good solution for Maintenance to state a calorie limit and advice to check the restaurant website in advance?

Hey, Kimmer! Don’t you remember when you recently spammed the internet with an article with diet advice for eating out? Perhaps you didn’t read the borrowed article before submitting it. Seems that there were some practical ideas in there that you could have adopted as your own. Which you did.

I’m reminded of Dr. Atkins research. A criticism of Dr. A was that high fat went hand in hand with heart disease and other conditions. Dr. Atkins’ research over 30+ years showed that it is high fat WITH high carb that triggers heart disease and poor cholesterol profiles. If Kimkins Maintenance leans toward typical American diet aren’t we leaning toward typical American health problems?

??? Is she really suggesting that Kimkins maintenance should be high fat, high carb? Or is she just rambling?

If we suggest a calorie limit will people be shocked to realize that they can’t eat as much as they think? Permanently? I’ve talked with thousands of people about low carb and weight loss over the past 10 years. One of the top 3 questions people have (or want to argue) is calories. Particularly for people who once weighed 300+ pounds (eating maybe 3500 calories a day or more) it’s a shock to learn that at 125 pounds they’re looking at 1300-1500 calories for life — and 1500 calories might require 30-60 minutes of exercise a day.

No Heidi. It’s not a shock and if you had ever been 125 lbs you would know this. 1500 calories might not sound much when you are 300+ pounds (as you are, or at least you look as if you are). For a 125 lbs person (like myself) it is plenty of food. When making healthy choices.

Will people “modify” Kimkins Maintenance? If so, is it really Kimkins?

Modify how? There is no “Kimkins Maintenance” to modify. Didn’t Heidi suggest WW?

Should we design our ideal “Kimkins Maintenance” as the official plan and those who find it too healthy or strict can follow other plans? Do people really want a “low carb” maintenance plan?

An “ideal” Kimkins maintenance plan would have to be the Kimkins Diet so I can see that it would be too strict. But anything else would result in weight regain. So she just wants the “other plans” to blame when people find it impossible to maintain?

What do you think? The perfect maintenance plan for me won’t necessarily be what’s best for others. As an example I would look forward to adding back fruit, yogurt and milk — but others can’t wait to add back spaghetti, rice, tortillas and Sara Lee.

Heidi “looks forward to adding back fruit, yogurt and milk”? Did she ever cut them out? The latest photos certainly don’t suggest that she has been on any diet lately.

[Kimmer's quotes copied from fellow blogger Mayberryfan, who also provides an excellent commentary to Heidi's "maintenance plan". Kimmer's picture copied from another fellow blogger; AmyB.]

As someone that has maintained for several years, my maintenance approach is very simple: Avoid white stuff, limit carbs (fruits and grains but unlimited non-starchy veggies). I never count anything. I don’t limit fats but don’t go out of my way to add any either. I eat desserts and higher carb items on rare occasions but I don’t make a habit of it. Most importantly, I do not let myself feel deprived, ever. I can have one cookie but I don’t need an entire box. Why would I? I can have another cookie another day.

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.