Why the fascination with Kimmer?

[espresso cup]

I joined the Kimkins site 11 months ago. I don't remember what it cost, but she definitely gave me personal support. I wasn't losing weight even eating only chicken breasts (my decision, not her recommendation). With her help I saw that the fiber supplement I was taking combined with too much protein (even if lean)probably hindered my weight loss. She recommended that I supplement my diet with real vegetables, not the powder I was using. For me, she also suggested that I lower my protein. While I have seen her recommend mom, I have also seen her recommend that people eat more vegetables--how few calories they have and how good they are for you. She said many times that the vegetables were a better choice than mom or epsom salts. I chose not to eat them in the beginning because I was following a Stillman's type diet. Did I lose weight? Yes, very quickly. I knew it wasn' a healthy diet to follow forever, rather it was a short-term bandaid. . I never saw a mean side of Kimmer--never. She always seemed to be very generous with her time and advice. Recently, with so many new members who are new to low-carb, the atmosphere has changed, but, it is really inspiring to see all these people lose at such terrific rates.

If the rda for protein is about 60 grams, what honestly is wrong with a diet that recommends eating about that as well as small servings of vegetables? I agree that the herd mentality is present there--not in a mean way, though. When one person who soon never was heard from again started an egg white thread, it was not Kimmer(Heidi) who endorsed it. She almost seemed surprised by it. So many people were looking for the fastest way to lose weight--it was the subscribers themselves who seemed to advocate an unhealthy way of eating.

It's hard for me to understand all that's happened. I joined. I lost weight. I gained some of it back (as I have done with any diet). I decided to add a lot more fat to my diet. I found that if I kept my protein at about 60 grams and my carbs at about 20, I would still lose weight no matter how high my fat was. This might just be for me, but that's what worked. I never posted this there, because it might just be my own metabolism, but I did write to her, asking if she thought I should keep the higher fat while I lost the last 10 lbs. She agreed that I should and gave me some other advice.

None of this addresses whether or not she exists or if she's ruined her teeth/health etc. I just wanted to say she helped me and from my own limited experience, I don't feel the diet was that unhealthy in the short run. Please correct me if I'm wrong. My calories were low, under 800 most days, but I did eat enough protein and a serving of vegetables. She doesn't advertise a maintenance program--but a majority of the successful maintainers found their own and shared what they learned in their personal journals. One last thing, my doctor endorsed the original(not added fat) diet, as long as I stayed at 1200 calories a day. What she eats for maintenance seems very healthy to me (yogurt, berries, veggies, lean protein). Don't you agree?

She really did support people, answer questions and pms, etc. In fact, I assume that's why she hasn't been on the forums much lately--that so many people are pming her for advice.

[heather2578]

I'm so appalled by Kimmer's repeated advice (from the copy & pasted posts) to use Milk of Magnesia (hello a laxative!!!). That's another form of bulimia!!!


The constant, frequent use of laxatives as a form of weight control actually cause serious health problems including, but not limited to:
severe dehydration
nervousness
restlessness
insomnia
high blood pressure
severe headaches
fatigue
hyperactivity
heart palpitations
irregular heart beats
congestive heart failure
heart attack
stroke
vomiting
diarrhea
constipation
excessive perspiration
blurred vision
high fevers
urinary tract infections
tremors
confusion
hallucinations
renal failure
convulsions
death

[silversunfire]

Originally Posted by heather2578

I'm so appalled by Kimmer's repeated advice (from the copy & pasted posts) to use Milk of Magnesia (hello a laxative!!!). That's another form of bulimia!!!


The constant, frequent use of laxatives as a form of weight control actually cause serious health problems including, but not limited to:
severe dehydration
nervousness
restlessness
insomnia
high blood pressure
severe headaches
fatigue
hyperactivity
heart palpitations
irregular heart beats
congestive heart failure
heart attack
stroke
vomiting
diarrhea
constipation
excessive perspiration
blurred vision
high fevers
urinary tract infections
tremors
confusion
hallucinations
renal failure
convulsions
death

I totally agree here! My mother used to use laxatives all the time. Now she has major *bathroom* issues. Your body becomes dependant on the laxatives then when you stop using them, it doesn't know how to do things on its own!

I saw a few posts by people that apparently are now using MOM everyday because thats what they were "told" to do!

[ixtapacheryl]

Originally Posted by espresso cup

She really did support people, answer questions and pms, etc. In fact, I assume that's why she hasn't been on the forums much lately--that so many people are pming her for advice.

How do you know for sure it is actually her answering these pm's? Before all this erupted at LCF I had written to her for advice(on her website) and never got answers and this was on the Thread that she had for questions for Kimmer.... I've noticed over the last few months or even longer that she was very absent from the site....

[ixtapacheryl]

What's interesting is that if you go to Kimmer/Heidi's site you can easily get into her clothing site to order. Hmmm you don't have to be a member to buy t-shirts, etc.?

Anyway I kept refreshing the home page every second or so and those numbers that show how many people are on line, etc. changed by 100's every few seconds. Didn't notice if the members changed .... I can't believe that every second you would have that amount of traffic.

[RockyMtnAngelEyes]

I just wanted to say.. Having done Stillmans forever, in all that time I have never, ever, ever, had a 'bathroom' problem.. NEVER! When I'd read all these posts over there, from people with this problem, I couldn't understand it at all... The plan, AS WRITTEN, I really don't think would cause this.. It's the lowering of everything so drastically, that may be the problem..

I also never have experienced 'SNATT', doing Stillmans the way Stillmans is laid out...

I don't know, just my guess...

[cleochatra]

Anyway I kept refreshing the home page every second or so and those numbers that show how many people are on line, etc. changed by 100's every few seconds. Didn't notice if the members changed .... I can't believe that every second you would have that amount of traffic.

Most traffic by far on any site is by google or MSN or other bots which crawl the net and take information back to their hosts. I've been a moderator and administrator at other boards, and if you saw 900 guests online, usually 700-850 of them at any given time were bots, leaving unique users in the vast minority).

A single bot can also be dozens of guests depending on how many actions it takes while at the site. A guest is usually something that has been active in nthe last five minutes, so even one lurking member can count as several guests if skimming threads quickly.

Bots and software implementation can make a place look vastly more busy than it really is.

[RockyMtnAngelEyes]

Originally Posted by ixtapacheryl

What's interesting is that if you go to Kimmer/Heidi's site you can easily get into her clothing site to order. Hmmm you don't have to be a member to buy t-shirts, etc.?

Anyway I kept refreshing the home page every second or so and those numbers that show how many people are on line, etc. changed by 100's every few seconds. Didn't notice if the members changed .... I can't believe that every second you would have that amount of traffic.

The clothing site is just a site like those online 'stores' anyone can set up to hock 'their' wares.. Anyone can set up a 'store' and sell.. Anyone can buy... That's why you don't have to be a member to buy... She couldn't keep it private...

[CaliforniaGirl]

Originally Posted by ixtapacheryl

Anyway I kept refreshing the home page every second or so and those numbers that show how many people are on line, etc. changed by 100's every few seconds. Didn't notice if the members changed .... I can't believe that every second you would have that amount of traffic.

I've wondered if the actual paid membership count was/is embellished as well.

[cleochatra]

Cheryl, I just popped over and saw this: We have 1667 guests and 667 members online

Drawing from the mention of bots and software, depending on the board software being used, one member can register as many if opening threads duplicates member activity. With some software, each action acts as a single user action. If you open a thread, open a dialog box to post, hit send and the board refreshes, sometimes that counts as four individual page views or actions. It's silly, but it depends on the board software.

Also, at many sites I've belonged to, if you don't log out, you're left online indefinitely, even when not there, and this will also account for a large number of people online.

[arcbeav]

Originally Posted by espresso cup

If the rda for protein is about 60 grams, what honestly is wrong with a diet that recommends eating about that as well as small servings of vegetables?

Because the RDA for protein is set assuming that you are eating 300 grams of carbs a day with it. Your body must regulate its blood sugar levels at a reasonable level to keep from going hypo. It has to get that glucose from somewhere and on a low carb diet, it gets it primarily from converting protein to glucose.

The body can run on ketones for the most part but needs about 130 g of glucose too for processes that can't use ketones and to maintain blood glucose (it obviously can't fall to zero). It can get a little glucose from the few carbs you eat and from some areas like triglycerides but the majority of the difference comes from converting protein.

This conversion is lossy. It takes one gram of protein to make .7 grams of glucose. So, if the body needs say 70 grams of glucose to round out its requirements, it takes an additional 100 grams of protein a day just to function. This doesn't count the protein needed to grow your nails and hair, replace lost muscle tissue, replace dead cells, etc. That level is about .5-.6 grams of protein per pound of lean tissue (can be calculated from various on-line calculators like http://home.fuse.net/clymer/bmi/ ).

So what happens if you don't eat enough protein to make up this requirement? It takes it from your lean tissue, primarily muscle. It will also reduce the amount it sends to your nails, hair and cells. It will also reduce your metabolism (people that complain to be cold all of the time while dieting are usually not getting enough protein).

Diets like the protein sparing modified fasts are designed to provide enough protein so that this doesn't happen (the "protein sparing" part is that it spares the body's protein, not that protein you eat is sparse). Diets like Kimkins (or at least the advice given outside the written part of the plan) that keep advising to "cut the protein" will indeed result in weight loss, but a lot of it is lean tissue weight loss, not fat weight loss which is what we really want. Losing lean tissue wrecks your metabolism and will make it very difficult to keep the fat off later.

Regina posted a study a while ago on her blog that showed that our hunger was driven primarily by our protein intake. Not enough protein leads to greater and greater hunger as our bodies become desperate to maintain the lean tissue. It isn't very surprising to me that the people on the Kimkins board are constantly having problems with binging. They are starving their bodies of protein.

[cleochatra]

However, protein can still be broken down into sugars in the blood stream. I'd argue that fats, being the only thing which cannot be broken down into sugar, is what provides greatest satiety and staying power, especially when in conjunction with protein.

Great post, and welcome to LCF!

[HevinMonkey]

Originally Posted by ItsTheWooo

Again, this is exactly how I used to feel when I felt like crap a good lot of the time because of not eating enough and being too thin. A part of you *enjoys* the pain of it (well, not physically, but psychologically, it's comforting and reassuring).

I always shook my head when normal dieters tried to do kimkins... and didn't seem to "get" it. A normal person can't have kimkins work for them, because a normal person doesn't get a psychological high from all the painful symptoms of metabolic conservation and starvation.

ItsTheWoo...this is really informative...thanks for sharing such good insight.

[espresso cup]

Cheryl,

I don't know it's she answering--I can't know who is answering or even if she is currently answering. Someone answered mine though and it seemed to be sensible advice. If I chose to not eat the veggies, that was my decision. She knew I had other health problems and she was always very considerate and kind. Dare I say it...she was almost wise.

I have been on so many diets ever since I was 14 (almost 40 years of dieting and being overweight). I started with hi-protein diets when I was 14--some kind of drinking man's diet, I think. My weight was never out of hand though until I got caught up in macrobiotics. For whatever reason, I really started bingeing on foods I would never have binged on before. That also coincided with having 4 children and being at home with them. By the time I found Atkins again in my 40s, I weighed over 260. I consistently lost weight until I had another child. I never gained back the 80 lbs I lost (180 then), but Atkins seemed never to work again. I'm sure it was something I was doing, but Kimmer-Heidi really did seem to be an answer to prayer. I quickly got down to 118, but I have a hard time staying there. So there you have it. Was my Pritikin diet from 1982 healthy? I don't think so, and even with very few calories (I think the QWL version of Pritikin was 600 calories), I lost 1 to 2 lb a week if I was lucky. I know macrobiotics wasn't healthy, even though I was a vegetarian eating what seemed very balanced at the time. So I came to kimkins and she recommends lower fat, fewer carbs, and the rda of protein. I don't know--it seems okay to me.

Some people here have mentioned the diet leads to anorexia--I just don't see it. Maybe I'm too lost in the forest here, but I had a weight problem before Kimkins. I once weighed 260 at 5'2''! I've lost weight many times, doing many different things and none led to permanent weight loss. I am back at 130 now and I feel fat. Even though I wear size 4, I feel fat. I am not normal, and it will take a long time to find normalcy with my weight. Kimkins didn't do this to me--at least she gave me a fighting chance to find it--the same as Atkins did.

So many people harp on the MOM thing--as if it's a conspiracy over there to get people to take it. I believe Stillman does recommend it, doesn't he? I promise you all that while I read about it quite a bit there, Kimmer/Heidi didn't recommend it to me either in private pms or in her Ask Kimmer forum. She said she didn't understand why people didn't eat more veggies. We can't blame her for our bad choices--if in fact they were bad.

[arcbeav]

Thanks for the welcome.

Protein is only converted to blood sugar if it is necessary. There is a belief among low carbers that excess protein automatically gets converted to blood sugar but that isn't true. It is too metabolically expensive to happen "just because".

When protein is ingested, it causes a raise in insulin, so that the amino acids can be taken into the muscles. This would normally cause a drop in blood sugar but glucogon is also released when protein is ingested. The glucogon counter balances the insulin and keeps the BG stable. in people who don't produce enough insulin, like Type 1 diabetics, the glucogon isn't countered by the insulin and causes a BG rise. I think this is where the idea that protein raises BG comes from but isn't true for the vast majority of people. Extra protein is much better for you than not enough.

Dr. Mike Eades (Protein Power) had a post in his comments in his blog about it today:

“Protein causes some insulin response, but it’s not a problem unless you have type I diabetes because it stimulates a glucagon response as well.”

Could you expand on this a little bit? I am a type 1 diabetic and have recently been reducing my protein intake to prevent spikes up to 200 two - three hours after meals. Could this be a result of glucagon and not protein being converted to sugar? I follow a low carb diet (30 grams a day) but find my insulin needs climb if I go over about 120 grams of protein a day.

Thanks, Clint

Hi Clint–

Here’s what I wrote in an earlier response to a comment:

In your case you have unopposed glucagon. The pancreatic cells that make insulin are nonfunctional in those with type I diabetes, but the cells that make glucagon work just fine. When you eat protein, it stimulates ONLY the glucagon part of the response, which makes your liver produce more sugar. That’s why you have a problem. If you eat more protein - as you’ve discovered - you need more insulin.

Hope this helps.

Cheers–

MRE

[controlledcarb]

If the rda for protein is about 60 grams, what honestly is wrong with a diet that recommends eating about that as well as small servings of vegetables?

See, this is just one more example of her offering up advice with no real qualification. Please bear with me on this one because it's not a simple "yes" or "no" type reply.

Protein requirements are specifically individual, and even the US government is quite clear that there is NO across the population minimum recommended daily allowance (RDA) that can be offered to meet the needs of the majority of individuals in our population.

She is misinformed if she has not taken the time to read the "how and why" protein is not calculated as a "DV%" on nutrition facts labeling - go look, the nutrition facts panel, as mandated by NLEA regulations, forbids the inclusion of a Daily Value % of the food in the package. That is because, even with the standardized "2000-calorie a day diet" that labeling regulations are based upon, the protein requirement of an individual may or may not be met within the percentages used for fat and carbohydate DV%, because individuals may weigh more (need more protein) or less (need less protein) or just about right for where the protein falls within the percentages based on the labeling regulations for DV% of fat and protein. I hope this makes sense....I'm typing fast....

If she'd taken the time to read through the extensive documentation published by the Institutes of Medicine (IOM) on the subject, she would know the reasons why there is no RDA much more clearly - it is becuase the requirement for essential amino acids, which are provided by protein, are consistently based on body weight - total body weight, not lean body mass per se (as she implies in much of what I've read that she's posted).

The absolute MINIMUM - and that is minimum of COMPLETE protein that provides for all essential amino acids (those we cannot make within our own body and require from diet) is 0.8g per kg of total body weight for a "normal, healthy individual" - that qualification is further explained that that those with disease, metabolic disorders, muscular, obese, and/or attempting to lose weight may, and often do, require more complete, quality protein each day.

In addition to this, the IOM has also found, after evaluating massive amounts of data, that for those who are lower in weight - well they have a minimum requirement that may be higher than the 0.8g per kg of body weight, because regardless of their weight, the human body has a specific minimum requirement that must be met, even at a lower weight. For men this minimum is 56g and for women 46g.....if a man/woman weighs more to require more, they should include more and ensure what they are eating is COMPLETE for all amino acids that are "essential".

How this translates to someone who is trying to lose weight, at say, 250-pounds.....250-pounds = 113.64kg.....0.8g x 113.64kg = 90.9g minimum requirement and it must be complete and provide for all amino acids (so it's not simply "total protein" if one is including foods recognized as having a "limiting protein" like beans or grains).

When someone does not habitually consume adequate protein, all sorts of things begin to go wrong in the endocrine system because it relies on protein (amino acids) for proper function. The derangements to the endocrine system are not horrible at first and the "system" will continue to function as well as it can in a deficiency (thank you famines past), but if it is a prolonged state of deficiency, things will start to go horribly wrong in time and can (rarely) be fatal.

[HevinMonkey]

Originally Posted by happy cricket

You're an open and honest person, Allie. I really appreciate that about you.

I totally agree! I have found so many new favorite people on this thread! I think we should do as Lala suggested and create a new thread whent this is done that has nothing to do with Kimmer. It seems like something far more important than her, far deeper than all of this has been revealed, and I am struggling to understand what I am feeling about all of this, but feel less overwhelmed by knowing there are people like Allie, Lala, Angel Eyes and Tooter - along with SO many others - right here to help. Thank you all for your honesty - I feel like some of it has to be a little bit uncomfortable and painful but you are willing to deal with it to help others. What awesome people you all are.

[CaroleKI61]

Several weeks ago, I became fixated on food and chose a limited range of what I would eat. I decided that I would not eat fat, and would restrict myself calorie-wise. I thought what I chose to do would be healthy, but I was fooling myself. Within two days, it started to become an emotional disorder. My thoughts were consumed with what types of food I would allow myself to eat, and I felt badly about myself when I failed to stick to my plan.
So many friends were following the almost no fat, almost no carb and extremely low calorie diet and were having amazing weight losses. I suffered from shame because I couldn’t achieve what others could.

I sincerely tried but could not enjoy limiting the number of foods I could eat. (Chicken and lettuce) Just didn’t cut it for me!
I experienced isolation (because my diet made it difficult for me to eat with others at a table filled with no-no’s!
My family were critical of me because I was not eating well. I was
Skipping foods, I once enjoyed in order to eat the "right" foods
In addition, I was feeling guilt and or self-loathing when I strayed from my diet.
I resented my friends who were feeling in "total" control as they were eating the correct diet… or thought they were.

I think that it is important for everyone to be aware of the advice we often read and take, regarding plans that are not particularly sound or healthy. So much of that advice originated from friends whom I highly respect and believe. I fear that others might end up where I am. I fell for the story that exercise was not necessary in order to have a huge weight loss, and drinking water was not very important either. I did lose a lot of weight but what I lost was water, muscle, and barely have the strength to move on land. I have huge amounts of deflated ugly wrinkled skin hanging off a pale weak body. I have plenty of fat left and thank God, I have learned that fat can only be burned off through exercise. I must also begin some weight bearing exercises to build up the muscles I need to carry myself around. I am drinking water now instead of diet pop and I am hoping that it will hydrate my body and flush out the toxins. I fought hard to get away from weighing 414 pounds…and never want to weigh that much again.
It is entirely possible for me to return to eat extremely healthily and still lose weight. Following Dr. Atkins guidelines always worked for me.
love Carole

[controlledcarb]

Originally Posted by cleochatra

However, protein can still be broken down into sugars in the blood stream. I'd argue that fats, being the only thing which cannot be broken down into sugar, is what provides greatest satiety and staying power, especially when in conjunction with protein.

Great post, and welcome to LCF!

Glycerol, which is one of the two components dietary fat is initially metabolized to (the other is fatty acids), can be used to manufacture glucose. It's just not as "energy efficient" to use as amino acids are - glycerol requires more energy to covert to glucose than amino acids do by entering the citric acid cycle as pyruvate or coverted in the liver by means of gluconeogenesis to manufacture glucose.

[espresso cup]

Thank you, Arcbeav and Controlledcarb, for your posts. I still don't understand. I have had things happen to me recently--but I am also a cancer patient. I have become hypothyroid--my doctors tell me this is a common result of chemo/rads. My immune system seems to be messed up--my onc thinks it's a result of chemo--some people just don't bounce back and then again, I could have mds. We won't know for sure until I have a bone marrow biop this fall. So I'm wondering, hoping, and this is why I read this thread so much, could it just be my diet? I would much rather that than adding a new cancer to by original one. I am willing to try almost anything--so how much protein should I use? Forgive my poor chemobrain, but I just don't see. Somewhere on line at something called optimal diet, it seems this Polish doctor recommends something similar to what I was doing with controlling protein and adding fats. And he supposedly cures cancer as well as obesity. Now I'm following quidelines from Sally Fallon or trying to anyway. I just wish it was easy.

[Deb294evr]

Originally Posted by Boujie

"Kimmer" DOES advertise "personal coaching" from her...

If that's not false advertising, I don't know what is.

All you have to do is ask her a question in the "Ask Kimmer" thread and she answers it, how is that false advertising?

I know its her answering these questions, because I conversed with her on this site many times. Her style of writing is unmistakable.

[HevinMonkey]

Originally Posted by Yansa

Checking with my doctor and having her cosign it all was the kiss of death for me. Because she okayed everything, it took a LONG time for me to register that the way I felt and the way I was eating was extreme. I was right at the precipice before I backed away from the edge. That's the scary part, to me.

I'm sure no one is going to be mad at you. Atkins gets bashed all the time - even by well meaning doctors - although I am