Joint action is first step in halting sale of the products

Lowcarbfriends, a popular lowcarb bulletin board, established a support forum for the HCG diet about a year ago. This coincided with Netrition, the company that owns Lowcarbfriends, starting to sell the homeopathic hhCG drops and pellets.

Netrition’s response to the FDA/FTC action was to declare:

Netrition has not been contacted by the FDA but will comply with all FDA rules and regulations. Therefore, we are removing all marketing text from all of the HCG products that we sell.
As of this moment, we will continue to sell HCG products but be advised that HCG products could be taken off the market at any time. If this is a concern to you, you may want to stock up as soon as possible.

Now, I’m sure that FDA and FTC know that the actual drops and pellets are harmless as they don’t actually contain any HCG. However,

The labeling for the “homeopathic” HCG products states that each product should be taken in conjunction with a very low calorie diet. There is no substantial evidence HCG increases weight loss beyond that resulting from the recommended caloric restriction. Consumers on a very low calorie diet are at increased risk for side effects including gallstone formation, electrolyte imbalance, and heart arrhythmias.

The prescribed “very low calorie diet” for hhCG consists of 500 calories of low fat and relatively low carb foods. Considering the controversy that surrounded the Kimkins diet, another starvation diet that was initially also sponsored by Lowcarbfriends, you would think that they would know that such a diet is not healthy. In case you don’t recall, you can read about it on Kimkins Survivors.

Following the HCG forum on Lowcarbfriends over some time, there has been many reports of similar adverse effects as previously reported for Kimkins. The non-existent HCG in the homeopathic hhCG will not protect against damage from an extreme low calorie diet, no matter how much you believe in homeopathy. FDA is asking anybody that has suffered adverse affects due to hhCG use to report it on MedWatch.

While I do not believe that the hhCG drops and pellets do any harm, I find it sad to see how people now rush to “stock up” before they are taken off the market, and the suppliers, like Netrition, take advantage of this panic in order to increase sales.

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.

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.

Of course, we feel that the body failed us in the first place by becoming overweight. Why did it?

Looking back to the evolution of man, there really doesn’t seem to be an advantage to survival by packing on excessive fat. On the contrary. The logical conclusion would then be that the body in itself has no desire to become overweight. So why does it?

The first reason, in my opinion, is that perhaps we were not overweight in the first place when starting a diet the first time. Yes, we might not have been as skinny as the present fashion ideal dictates, but perhaps we were at an healthy weight based on our body build and genetics.

Any diet attempt at that time would have started the evil “feast and famine cycle” I wrote about the other day. Clearly, that doesn’t help “letting the body take care of itself”.

Another reason, again in my opinion, is long term carbohydrate “abuse”. I don’t think we were made to eat a high amount of carbohydrate. Think about it. The hunter/gatherer survived mainly on proteins and fats, with the occasional carbs from grains, nuts, fruits and roots. A find of honey provided a rare indulgence of “pure sugar”.

This scenario has little comparison to how I grew up eating. Sugar, sugar and more sugar. Soda, candy, sweets. White bread, pasta, potatoes and rice. Combined with fat.

Carbs promote fat storage and make us hungry. Increased appetite may cause us to eat more than our body was intended for. The natural hunger/full signals become distorted.

While some people manage to stay slim when they are still young, the weight gain eventually catch up with most of them. Could it be that we build up carb sensitivity over time? How long time depending on genetics? That “naturally skinny” people have genes that handle carbs better?

I’m not arguing that hormones, thyroid issues and medical conditions do not have an effect on weight gain. I’m just wondering what came first. The hormonal/medical issue, or the carb sensitivity. Or are the issues a result from the “famine” during the “feast and famine cycles”?

The “famine” theory is supported by Kimkins Survivors‘ stories, where many report thyroid issues after following this starvation diet.

Restrictive dieting is obviously to be avoided. It’s been shown again and again that diets do not work. Why would there otherwise be so many of them?

I think that dieting is the main cause of weight gain and a HUGE impact on the “obesity epidemic” is from the skinny ideal promoted by the fashion industry. It will lead teenagers (and even children) to dieting at a young age, starting the “feast and famine cycle” which more likely than not will end up in obesity.

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.

Of course, I point this out as I do not want anyone to start a diet like Kimkins. In no way do I wish that anybody that has followed the Kimkins diet regain their weight.

That this isn’t obvious was made clear to me from a great post on Kimkins Diet Truth: We’re all on the same side, right?

Yes, we are on the same side. I just want people to give up the Kimkins diet not to damage their health. I do not want them to regain any weight lost.

So what to do when leaving Kimkins and realizing that the diet is not a good way to lose weight? Of course, I’m no more expert in diets than Heidi Diaz but I will share my opinions.

First, read the very informative thread Atkins Nutritional Interview (Repairing your metabolism and more) on LCF.

Be prepared to have a lot of patience, and expect a scale increase initially. Don’t panic. It’s most likely water weight and not fat regain. If possible, put away the scale for a while. Use a pair of pants that fit well as your measuring tape. You might be surprised to find that a scale increase does not reflect on your size. Nobody sees your scale number, just your size.

Exercise. I have been at a “maintenance” range in all of my weight loss and every time I stop exercising I regain weight. For me, I don’t think it’s the number of calories I burn (cardio) but building muscle (weight training) that makes a difference. Weight training is known to increase metabolism. Again, patience is needed. I don’t see any effect from starting an exercise regimen until after 4 – 6 weeks.

What about the diet? How to increase calories? In my opinion, there has to be a slow change, and done step by step. I know it must be tempting to go hog wild which is the natural reaction after deprivation on a low calorie diet. Clearly, that will not work.

My suggestion would be to increase by slowly adding one food item at a time. For a week or two. Then one more until a reasonable amount of calories is achieved with no size gain (again, the scale shows water weight and is not a reliable measure of fat loss).

Or to borrow from 2big4mysize’s advice to AmyB:

I’d suggest all Kimkinettes stop weight loss, see their docs and be honest about portion size with copies of your menus for the last month. Saying “I’m eating low glycemic veggies and lean proteins” sounds a lot healthier than those 800 cal Kimkins’ limited menus you have been eating of those lean proteins and veggies.

Repair any and all metabolic issues with more carbs, proteins and fats. Now don’t go nuts and slur a 44 ouncer of bacon grease through a straw while eating refined white foods or HFCS as your carbs, but do drizzle your veggies with EEOV or any other healthy fat you like. Roast or saute them as part of your meal prep and you will be having a healthy transitional meal.

Please remember y’all are going to be adding back lean body tissues too so do not panic if the scale goes up a few pounds. You may even replenish some of your glycogen stores but remember that is about 3 to 1 water by weight which is why it comes off so fast when you jump back to Kimkins or induction.

Please use your tape measure and see that if you switch to Atkins those added pounds are lean tissue and you are still small.

UConn did a study on folk eating Atkins at MAINTENANCE levels vs folk eating USDA high carb diets. Neither group was trying to lose weight. Each group was allowed to eat as much as they wanted. Neither group exercised. The Atkins group lost body fat and added muscle tissues just by eating according to the plan. Just as your body will be replenishing its protein stores when you give it more protein and fat in the diet.

Will you ever be able to eat the way you used to when you were heavier? Nobody can correctly answer that for you. But you will be healtheir growing old with your loved ones if you take the time right now to fix your metabolism and get off the road to an ED kimkins has placed y’all on.

Professional help like Christen is getting would be best but since I know most folk aren’t there is a free repairing your metabolism topic stickied at the top of most LCFS forums. And an excellent discussion on altering Kimkins and how to make it healthy on LCF’s Building a Healthy WOE if possible based on Kimkins

I tried to think of all the possible ways a Kimkinette could misinterpret the facts so all your questions should be answered. Except the one all of us have and that is what limits to place on total amount of carbs y’all should be eating.

I wish y’all would use the DANDR OWL carb ladder as that allows each person to discover what type of carb foods they can and can’t tolerate in a very controlled manner with immediate corrective steps should a food or carb food group have a negative impact on your craving control or weight loss.

Amy I wish you and all the other transitioning kimkinettes much success as you take the first steps on that scary journey to recovery and away from the ED many are heading for.

I, like 2big4mysize, wish ex-Kimkins dieters success with finding a healthy woe that will maintain their weight loss and/or help with continued weight loss.

We are on the same side.

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.