Why the fascination with Kimmer?

[CarolinaRocker]

Originally Posted by KarenG

Except she uses her own success as the main selling point, and as we have seen from the pictures, she is morbidly obese.

That is fraud.


I was noticing your stats...you have lost 10 lbs on Kimkins, down to 123 lbs, correct? The length of time you need to do a diet in order to lose down to 123 lbs, from 133 lbs, is much different from someone who needs to lose 50-75-100 lbs. It puts much more stress on the body, and the starvation level calories, and nutritional deficit can not be good for your body in the long run.

JMHO.

yep...thats the point and then some

[Leashy]

Originally Posted by KimATC

I am very emotional and this is about all I can muster right now.

I spent 7 years trusting someone. Believing in someone. Thinking they were a friend. To now find out everything has been a lie from the very beginning. I feel like the biggest fool in the world.

I've spent my whole career trying to help people. I put my heart out there and invest it in people. It has now been squashed and my faith and trust shattered.

It is a very lonely feeling.

I'm glad you're here!

Originally Posted by Cutie

ok, it's stories like this that remind me why we're so intent on seeing kimmer stopped...this was left in a comment on becky's blog:

I, along with some other members, attempted to help a woman who was clearly suffering from an eating disorder. This woman was unable to go an entire day without binging and purging. In addition, she also constantly complained of unrelenting hunger. I felt in my heart that if she could have a few successful days eating proper low carb (eating lean protein until satisfied) plus lots of support, she could get into ketosis, her hunger would diminish, and she could get beyond the ED. She kept trying to get by with eating some ridiculously small amount of food like 3 hard-boiled eggs for an entire day. I, and others, told her to eat more protein (she was still complaining of being hungry). One day, the scale went up instead of down and she freaked. She went to Kimmer and told her that all of us were telling her to eat more and because of us, she gained weight. You can guess Kimmer's response. EAT LESS. YOU WERE RIGHT. EVERYONE ELSE IS WRONG. Eat less than 3 hard boiled eggs? You've got to be kidding! That right there was the green light for this woman to continue with her eating disorder, secure in the fact that she had Kimmer's blessing.

That is disgusting.

Originally Posted by dlslds

Also Leashy, Missi, Jenessa ty for all this info from the emails the dil communicated with you you done did good!!!

Thank you!!



Does anybody know if Kimmer responded to any of this yet? I can't wait to hear what she has to say about the ex gf.

[pixiegirl01]

Okay, just a breakdown of nutritional facts:

Kimmer's Plan (Kimkins) - and this is posted in the Kimkins Quick Reference Thread:

*Up to 20 total carbs (not 'net')
*Up to 3 cups salad type veggies or
*Up to 2 cups salad veggies + .5 cup 'cooked'
*70-90 lean protein grams
*No LC products, treats, junk or alcohol
*Just enough fat to make your menu work (don't overdo)

20 grams carbs (not net) = 80 Calories
70-90 grams lean protein = 280 - 360 calories
Just enough fat to make your diet work (well, this one is obscure, so let's take a range of 20 - 50 grams). At the most, that would = 180 - 450 calories.

So, your basic calorie range on Kimkins would be 540 - 890 calories a day. And, most of us who were around when Kimmer was in the ML saw her replies to further restrict calories and fat when people would post that they were stalled or not losing. Most health guidelines say to never take your calories below 1,200 a day.

Neither Atkins nor Protein Power say to limit healthy fats. And, neither say to restrict calories to those bare-bone levels.

The problem with the plan is that, as written, Kimkins is a vLCD. Research done on very low calorie diets will show a range of adverse side effects. Yes, it works - when you starve your body, you lose weight - I don't think anyone disputes that. I believe it's the healthiness of the WOE and moral character of its creator that are being disputed.

*back into lurk mode


ETA: I thought part of the reason for the thread was to also educate about the harmfulness of vLCDs? (If not the case, feel free to ignore the above information)

[missis36]

Originally Posted by pixiegirl01

Okay, just a breakdown of nutritional facts:

Kimmer's Plan (Kimkins) - and this is posted in the Kimkins Quick Reference Thread:

*Up to 20 total carbs (not 'net')
*Up to 3 cups salad type veggies or
*Up to 2 cups salad veggies + .5 cup 'cooked'
*70-90 lean protein grams
*No LC products, treats, junk or alcohol
*Just enough fat to make your menu work (don't overdo)

20 grams carbs (not net) = 80 Calories
70-90 grams lean protein = 280 - 360 calories
Just enough fat to make your diet work (well, this one is obscure, so let's take a range of 20 - 50 grams). At the most, that would = 180 - 450 calories.

So, your basic calorie range on Kimkins would be 540 - 890 calories a day. And, most of us who were around when Kimmer was in the ML saw her replies to further restrict calories and fat when people would post that they were stalled or not losing. Most health guidelines say to never take your calories below 1,200 a day.

Neither Atkins nor Protein Power say to limit healthy fats. And, neither say to restrict calories to those bare-bone levels.

The problem with the plan is that, as written, Kimkins is a vLCD. Research done on very low calorie diets will show a range of adverse side effects. Yes, it works - when you starve your body, you lose weight - I don't think anyone disputes that. I believe it's the healthiness of the WOE and moral character of its creator that are being disputed.

*back into lurk mode


ETA: I thought part of the reason for the thread was to also educate about the harmfulness of vLCDs? (If not the case, feel free to ignore the above information)

You forget didn't that used to read 0-20 carbs and so on. Then she changed it at becky's request because it sounded as though 0 would be ok

Also if the sons ex is right and she's an alcoholic, how the hell does she get off telling others not to drink?!?!?! Oh wait...I'm acting schocked again I reminded myself to stop that.

[Jayelgee]

Originally Posted by Elloise

I have a question. Since Heidi certainly appears to be a seasoned con artist, why in the world would she use her real name? And the names of her children and home town? I have no doubt that the woman posting under the name of Kimmer is the lady seen in the survailence photos. I also have no doubt that this woman committed all crimes that have been dug up, but I'm beginning to doubt that Heidi Diaz and Brandon are the real names for these people.

It's just that con artists tend to stay under the radar as much as possible and spending years on a website like this giving out all of this personal information just doesn't seem like the actions of an experienced scam artist. Unless, of course, that Heidi Diaz really isn't her name.

When did the term "con artist" become synonymous with Smart, bright or intelligent? Crooks and liars who get caught do stupid things all the time.

[Divabunny]

Regarding the posting of the myspace accounts--I was the one that pointed them out, I do feel a bit bad about VS and I hope she didn't get a huge influx of emails sent to her account but she has a right to know her name was being used the way it was because it was obvious why kimmer chose that name. Regarding the two sons, hell no do I feel bad. First off they are both ADULTS, not kids. Second it's freakin myspace, if you don't want to be found don't put up a myspace it's that simple or make your account private. They know what their mother is doing they are a part of the scam, makes them as bad as her. And third it was THEIR MOTHER that posted and used their names, not us.

[AllieCat0817]

Originally Posted by pixiegirl01

Okay, just a breakdown of nutritional facts:

Kimmer's Plan (Kimkins) - and this is posted in the Kimkins Quick Reference Thread:

*Up to 20 total carbs (not 'net')
*Up to 3 cups salad type veggies or
*Up to 2 cups salad veggies + .5 cup 'cooked'
*70-90 lean protein grams
*No LC products, treats, junk or alcohol
*Just enough fat to make your menu work (don't overdo)

20 grams carbs (not net) = 80 Calories
70-90 grams lean protein = 280 - 360 calories
Just enough fat to make your diet work (well, this one is obscure, so let's take a range of 20 - 50 grams). At the most, that would = 180 - 450 calories.

So, your basic calorie range on Kimkins would be 540 - 890 calories a day. And, most of us who were around when Kimmer was in the ML saw her replies to further restrict calories and fat when people would post that they were stalled or not losing. Most health guidelines say to never take your calories below 1,200 a day.

Neither Atkins nor Protein Power say to limit healthy fats. And, neither say to restrict calories to those bare-bone levels.

The problem with the plan is that, as written, Kimkins is a vLCD. Research done on very low calorie diets will show a range of adverse side effects. Yes, it works - when you starve your body, you lose weight - I don't think anyone disputes that. I believe it's the healthiness of the WOE and moral character of its creator that are being disputed.

*back into lurk mode


ETA: I thought part of the reason for the thread was to also educate about the harmfulness of vLCDs? (If not the case, feel free to ignore the above information)

THANK YOU for breaking it down!

[Binsk]

Divabunny, I don't think VS is the son's ex, her name is Tyna and I've never seen use Vanessa Sharp. I'm sure her last name isn't Sharp. It was wonderful of her to tell us what she knows of Kimmer and to verify the PI pictures.

[CarolinaRocker]

Another Kimmer blog from today:

Jonny Bowden Weight Maintenance: 1250-1450 Cals for Women
Posted by Kimmer in Untagged


All weight loss is ultimately a calorie deficit, although thermogenic diets (Kimkins, old Atkins) give you a boost.

For some this is a good option, for other Weight Watchers is the way to go, although it's been published they have a 97% relapse rate.

We ran across this article written by Jonny Bowden, fitness expert in the CVS Pharmacy publication, "Taking Extra Care of Your Diabetes".



Here's one excerpt of his tips for maintaining goal weight:



Learn From Winners

"Finally a clear way -- using both new and time tested idea -- to lose weight, keep it off and get happier, all at the same time."

Whenever I want to learn how to master something, I go to the experts. A few years ago when I took up tennis, I went to a pro ... and my game got much, much better. Well, guess what? The same approach works for weight loss.

[He then talks about the National Weight Control Registry, a database of 5000 people who have lost 30 pounds and kept them off for a least a year.]

#2: They eat a low calorie diet, with about 25% of calories coming from fat, though whether this percentage is important or not is highly debatable. What is important is the lower intake of calories:

Participants reporting an average of about 1,400 calories [to maintain]. (We can assume there was some underreporting, but probably not by much.)

For years I've said that most women will lose weight and maintain the lower weight on anywhere from 1,250-1,450 calories a day, and most men will lose on about 1,800 calories. Yes this is lower than the internet calculators, but guess what? Those calculators actually overestimate the fuel you need!

If you're eating the right foods and cutting out calorie-dense desserts, 1,400 calories can be a lot to consume. You probably wouldn't even be able to finish 150 calories of spinach.

(article continues)

by Jonny Bowden, PhD, CNS

[Divabunny]

Originally Posted by Binsk

Divabunny, I don't think VS is the son's ex, her name is Tyna and I've never seen use Vanessa Sharp. I'm sure her last name isn't Sharp. It was wonderful of her to tell us what she knows of Kimmer and to verify the PI pictures.

I know who Tyna is, I was takling about VS because she clearly has nothing to do with any of it her name was just used.

[CarolinaRocker]

sounds like she is trying to change her tune now.(above)

[vintagecoils]

Originally Posted by stews

again, and quite simply put. this is wrong. they are NOT the same concept. low carb, yes, but I don't care how many times you say it's the same in an obscure manner, that just is NOT true. Kimmer's starvation concept (ultra low calories is NOT the same as Atkins or protein power).

For one Protein Power and Atkins does say that creating a deficeit in calories may be a course you have to take to reduce. They mostly push no calorie counting but it is there in their books.

Also based on the Kimmers plan I for one can not see how one can be eating only 300 calories as I read in the blog of one person.
I followed the program as laid out in the Ask kimmers thread.
If I am not mistaken 1 gram of protein is 4 calories and 1 gram of carb is 9 calories. She also allowed fat at minimum with some additional veggies.

at 70-90 grams of protein Or as much as you desire on the 3 day experiment, with a natural amount of fat that even the leanast meat could have would put you at hypethetically 450cal min. a day(fish would be the only thing that could squeeze into those numbers) On average a piece of extra lean beef 220 cal. per serving. lean chicken 190 cal. Each at least 3 times a day. Now this does not include the allowed fat to cook nor the allowed carbs and vegetables. This could never add up to only a 300 cal day menu. Her plan talks of food not artificial protein and food supplements to eat so this is why when I read what the plan stated and what some people say it said it does not add up.

Rules for Kimkins and K/E

Here's the guidelines for Kimkins:

*Up to 20 total carbs (not 'net')
*Up to 3 cups salad type veggies or
*Up to 2 cups salad veggies + .5 cup 'cooked'
*70-90 lean protein grams
*No LC products, treats, junk or alcohol
*Just enough fat to make your menu work (don't overdo)


Here's the guidelines for the Kimmer Experiment (not M/E):

*As much lean protein as you desire
*Length of time is 3-5 days depending on how 'carbed up' you are
*Purpose is to experience 'real' ketosis (weight loss, no appetite)
*Useful as a springboard for other LC programs
*No alcohol, no cheese
*Basic condiments and spices OK (watch catsup & A1 sauce)

It is clear that some people some how was able to distort the diet to be harmful in their execution of it but to say they followed the plan as suggested I cannot see.

Also I recall her stating how it could be used as a kick start or transition or just to break plataue's. Additionally, all of the many threads that were started and allowed for such a back and forth with alot of people using the plan and being successfull. It was not isolated to one website closed to the general public. I read several of the peoples accounts and how they conducted unhealthy eating habits of which many did not reflect the Kimmers plan. If I can find my copy of protein power I will get that page to you.

[StephanieK]

Originally Posted by pixiegirl01

Okay, just a breakdown of nutritional facts:

Kimmer's Plan (Kimkins) - and this is posted in the Kimkins Quick Reference Thread:

*Up to 20 total carbs (not 'net')
*Up to 3 cups salad type veggies or
*Up to 2 cups salad veggies + .5 cup 'cooked'
*70-90 lean protein grams
*No LC products, treats, junk or alcohol
*Just enough fat to make your menu work (don't overdo)

20 grams carbs (not net) = 80 Calories
70-90 grams lean protein = 280 - 360 calories
Just enough fat to make your diet work (well, this one is obscure, so let's take a range of 20 - 50 grams). At the most, that would = 180 - 450 calories.

So, your basic calorie range on Kimkins would be 540 - 890 calories a day. And, most of us who were around when Kimmer was in the ML saw her replies to further restrict calories and fat when people would post that they were stalled or not losing. Most health guidelines say to never take your calories below 1,200 a day.

Neither Atkins nor Protein Power say to limit healthy fats. And, neither say to restrict calories to those bare-bone levels.

The problem with the plan is that, as written, Kimkins is a vLCD. Research done on very low calorie diets will show a range of adverse side effects. Yes, it works - when you starve your body, you lose weight - I don't think anyone disputes that. I believe it's the healthiness of the WOE and moral character of its creator that are being disputed.

*back into lurk mode


ETA: I thought part of the reason for the thread was to also educate about the harmfulness of vLCDs? (If not the case, feel free to ignore the above information)

Yes it was because the fact is that the diet is insufficient for longterm health.

[SoHappy]

Originally Posted by Yelnats

Thanks for the welcome. I am reading, and reading and...... However, both of them have received many hateful comments, some from names of current posters here. And now Tippy Toes is on the receiving end. I may show as a new poster here, but I have been around the boards for a while, first lowcarbed in 2000. (Never should have quit, 'cause high carb = a big booty on me!) I am currently cycling plans as TT suggests, Kimkins /Atkins, and it is working for me so far. 55# - since end of June. I'll keep reading, and ......

I must have missed some posts because I would certainly not call any of the posts here concerning TippyToes HATEFUL! People are pretty shocked that she is aligning herself with Kimmer/Heidi/Kimkins now, after all that has been found out, and there was a comment or two from people who had thought TT had been snarky/snotty/mean in talking to them, but I haven't read anything at all posted from anyone here that would be called HATEFUL.

I don't think expressing dismay and regret and shock at her choice to go to Kimmer is HATEFUL.

[AllieCat0817]

Originally Posted by vintagecoils

For one Protein Power and Atkins does say that creating a deficeit in calories may be a course you have to take to reduce. They mostly push no calorie counting but it is there in their books.

Also based on the Kimmers plan I for one can not see how one can be eating only 300 calories as I read in the blog of one person.
I followed the program as laid out in the Ask kimmers thread.
If I am not mistaken 1 gram of protein is 4 calories and 1 gram of carb is 9 calories. She also allowed fat at minimum with some additional veggies.

at 70-90 grams of protein Or as much as you desire on the 3 day experiment, with a natural amount of fat that even the leanast meat could have would put you at hypethetically 450cal min. a day(fish would be the only thing that could squeeze into those numbers) On average a piece of extra lean beef 220 cal. per serving. lean chicken 190 cal. Each at least 3 times a day. Now this does not include the allowed fat to cook nor the allowed carbs and vegetables. This could never add up to only a 300 cal day menu. Her plan talks of food not artificial protein and food supplements to eat so this is why when I read what the plan stated and what some people say it said it does not add up.

Rules for Kimkins and K/E

Here's the guidelines for Kimkins:

*Up to 20 total carbs (not 'net')
*Up to 3 cups salad type veggies or
*Up to 2 cups salad veggies + .5 cup 'cooked'
*70-90 lean protein grams
*No LC products, treats, junk or alcohol
*Just enough fat to make your menu work (don't overdo)


Here's the guidelines for the Kimmer Experiment (not M/E):

*As much lean protein as you desire
*Length of time is 3-5 days depending on how 'carbed up' you are
*Purpose is to experience 'real' ketosis (weight loss, no appetite)
*Useful as a springboard for other LC programs
*No alcohol, no cheese
*Basic condiments and spices OK (watch catsup & A1 sauce)

It is clear that some people some how was able to distort the diet to be harmful in their execution of it but to say they followed the plan as suggested I cannot see.

Also I recall her stating how it could be used as a kick start or transition or just to break plataue's. Additionally, all of the many threads that were started and allowed for such a back and forth with alot of people using the plan and being successfull. It was not isolated to one website closed to the general public. I read several of the peoples accounts and how they conducted unhealthy eating habits of which many did not reflect the Kimmers plan. If I can find my copy of protein power I will get that page to you.

Time for somebody to dig up some posts, again, which were already posted in this thread, showing where KIMMER herself suggested DROPPING CALORIES, even if a person was only getting 500. I aint got the energy to dig it but its right in this thread.

It's what we call the 'plan behind the plan'.

[missis36]

Originally Posted by CarolinaRocker

sounds like she is trying to change her tune now.(above)

Is it just me or did anyone else laugh at the fact that it was info obtained from cvs pharmacy and that's where the bags are from in the pi pics. She prolly picked up one of their flyers while there that day

[emeraldskye]

Vintagecoils, I really suggest you read more of this thread and you will discover that the main problem with this woe is the, "Plan behind the Plan."

I will admit that some of the ideas are sound but when taken to an extreme, as Kimmer pushed, that is where the problems arise.

[stews]

Originally Posted by vintagecoils

For one Protein Power and Atkins does say that creating a deficeit in calories may be a course you have to take to reduce. They mostly push no calorie counting but it is there in their books.

I have done atkins 72. thanks, but I KNOW exactly how to do it. it is NOT pushed to do an ULTRA low calorie plan. NOT even close.

that is all I am going to say on this because I WANT the thread to continue.

this thread is supposed to be about the SCAM heidi pulled.

[Tryin2drop40]

Originally Posted by SoHappy

I must have missed some posts because I would certainly not call any of the posts here concerning TippyToes HATEFUL! People are pretty shocked that she is aligning herself with Kimmer/Heidi/Kimkins now, after all that has been found out, and there was a comment or two from people who had thought TT had been snarky/snotty/mean in talking to them, but I haven't read anything at all posted from anyone here that would be called HATEFUL.

I don't think expressing dismay and regret and shock at her choice to go to Kimmer is HATEFUL.

ITA! I think for the most part everyone is shocked and concerned. And bewildered - or maybe that's just me

ps great job detectives! It's been a pleasure to catch up lately! Yowza! Kudos to the women that contacted someone from Kimmer's/Heidi's RL & getting a few answers for us. Oh the tangled web she's a weaving...

[Doodle_in_MA]

Latest from Ducky:

"We’d like to extend a warm welcome to those reaching us via the Kimkins Chat Room! Yes, we are always checking our logs and indeed were surprised to see traffic flowing in here from Kimkins Chat.

Welcome everyone stopping by! Hope you take the time to read what’s posted and learn the truth about Kimmer (Heidi Diaz) and her diet plans. Keep posting our link as often as you can in the chat room so your friends see it and visit here too!"

[missis36]

Originally Posted by Tryin2drop40

ITA! I think for the most part everyone is shocked and concerned. And bewildered - or maybe that's just me

ps great job detectives! It's been a pleasure to catch up lately! Yowza! Kudos to the women that contacted someone from Kimmer's/Heidi's RL & getting a few answers for us. Oh the tangled web she's a weaving...

Well she was honest no one knows Kimmer, from what I gathered from the ex, it seems she didn't even tell anyone, because she used the name Kim Drake so no one in her family would have known this was her diet. Pretty snazzy right?