Why the fascination with Kimmer? #9

[CarolynF]

Many of us have been glued to the computer since July, too and we haven't gained 100 plus pounds, have we????????

[gibster]

Originally Posted by HoneyBee2
Was it ever verified under what name this LLC was licensed?
There is no anything under Kimkins with a LLC in California, but I believe Jayed was looking at other possible names.


Hidey posted that Kimkins was owned by an LLC. So I'd assume it's owned by a holding company -- and that could be named who-knows-what.

[susique333]

Originally Posted by CarolynF

From Kimmer's post:


It's tough. I'd say keep the cookies out of the house, but that's hard when you have kids.So, that's why you should keep them in the front seat of your car!! (like I do), so you don't have to share..

Oh my god THAT just creeped me out! To think she kept them in the car cause Brandon might want some!

[CarolynF]

Susique: The red letters were mine..LOL

[susique333]

Originally Posted by Katinsac

hey, do you guys think Heidi used her "charm" on John? do you think it worked? lol

I wondered about this a few pages back! I imagine her batting her eyes at him and saying with a southern accent "Whyyy...whatever do you mean??"

[susique333]

Originally Posted by CarolynF

Susique: The red letters were mine..LOL

LOL I know, you just made a good point that shes the type of mother to hide the goodies for herself! Heck I share everything with my kids except my underwear and my toothbrush!

[beckynett]

Re:Kimmer now weighs 294? See front page of Kimk 33 Minutes ago
Hi Lee Anne and welcome!

There isn't a calorie limit on any Kimkins plan. I suppose Boot Camp would be the most stringent, but there's still calorie variety there, too. Calories count but we don't count calories.

Kimkins: Unlimited lean protein and up to 4 cups of veggies (no calorie limit)
K/E: Unlimited protein (no calorie limit)
Shake Option: Up to 800 calories
Boot Camp: No calorie limit, but portions are limited

Someone wrote me yesterday and said that a former admin told them to keep their calories between 500-800. Huh? I've been reading that Kimkins has a 500 calorie limit and I couldn't figure out for the life of me where that came from! Now I know.

For the Record: There is no limit with Kimkins. If the 500-800 figure was published on this site, that was an error.

On the other hand, I don't believe in the 1200 calorie minimum that floats about when people discuss diets. I don't believe in forcing ourselves to eat or picking foods to reach some "minimum".

Our focus is on nonfatty protein choices and nutrient dense leafy greens plus supplements. Take out junk and superfluous fat and weight loss is rapid.

Anyone who feels mislead because they joined because of the red dress and/or success stories which were a compilation of previous stories over the years, can certainly get a refund and we're asking that those requests by in by 11/17/07

If she means me, she can give up that argument right now. I have too many saved emails of arguing with her over limits, of her directing what the limits were. NO WAY was that anyone's original idea but hers.

Just some highlights, all verifiable with saved screen shots and emails:

She almost always used 500 cals as her baseline number for calculations.

When people stalled or wanted to lose faster, she ALWAYS recommended lower.

She said fat people didn't actually need to eat at all.

She got upset with me for setting Boot Camp to a 2-week limit instead of indefinitely as she intended, and griped to Christin about me.

Then, she made the Boot Camp menu her siggy, stating 500 calories as the standard, and saying, "Stalled? Check your menu against this?" (The one she posted in her siggy, off the top of her head without checking, was even stricter than the first version, and she changed it again, too, making it stricter each time.)

When I complained of slow losses on Boot Camp, and a friend took my case to Heidi, she emailed that I couldn't expect fast losses like others if I wasn't willing to do the 300 calories of egg whites that others were doing.

When Christin really was eating just a few hundred calories a day of mostly egg whites, Heidi told her to cut the Tbs. of creamer in her morning coffee.

Kimkins and K/E say 'unlimited lean protein', but when people doing that asked her for advice to help them lose better, they were told to limit protein portions to 4 oz. at a time, weighed before cooking. If they were already eating that, they were told to take it to 3 1/2 or 3 oz. at a time. (Besides, unlimited lean protein with little or no fat causes the physical and psychological problems known as 'rabbit starvation', which leads to bingeing and drastic hair loss, among worse problems.)

When a 14 year old who was about 8 lbs. from goal asked how best to raise her calories above 500, Heidi told her she didn't need to at all, since she still had fat. (I can say a LOT about this! I think she was just doing this out of spite, to flip you guys here off, as this was a focus at the time. Deni was being excoriated here and elsewhere for supporting the girl, when she and Christin were emailing and PMing her to eat more. That is where she got the idea and why she asked the question. Heidi knew she was being defied. From things I saw, Heidi began deleting some of Deni's PMs to the girl before she got a chance to see them, and went out of her way to leave Deni and the girl twisting in the wind, just to have her say, foolish and wrong and dangerous though it was. All this to a 14-year old girl, after we Admins had gone to her about the situation already earlier, and she had said, in print with 6 witnesses, that if she knew who it was, she would refund and cancel her membership.

When I and the other Admins expressed concern to her about the low calories, asking her to increase them, she got mad and refused, saying no one needed more than the 200 calories from a piece of chicken and a cup of salad a day. Again, she said this in print, to all 6 of us who were Admins back then.

She argued with me about whether we could allow 2 servings (1/2 cup each) of sugar-free Jello or just 1. When I pressed to ask why she allowed unlimited Crystal Light, but only 1 Jello, she replied, "Do I really have to explain the difference between a 5-calorie Crystal Light and a 15-calorie Jello?"

Her Boot Camp siggy and multiple statements stressed NO beef, No cheese, no creamer, no fatty meats, no restaurant meals, and stipulated Wishbone spritzers. (I argued with her about the dressing, too.). With those limited portions and restrictions on choices, there is no reasonable way to get more than 800 calories consistently. She clearly intended it to be, in her own words, "500ish."

The Shake Option she herself lists is capped at 800 calories MAXIMUM, to be derived from 3 - 4 protein shakes or no more than 180 - 200 calories each.

So, there is the 500 - 800 calorie range THAT SHE HERSELF TAUGHT.

(She did allow up to 1000 calories for her unworkable Vegetarian Option, but stressed that losses would be slower, since calories were higher than all the other plans.)

She and Tippy and the desperate members may try to blame it on the former Admins, but there is too much proof to the contrary. Kimkins is Kimmer's baby. She developed it here, took it there, taught her members, and selected and coached her Admins. There are years of posts, emails, and PMs which will disprove her claims that it was our doing, not hers. If anything, we moderated her extremity. When we could no longer do so, we left.

(After all, she is on record as saying she would fast off the first 100 or more pounds, and actually encouraged someone on Kimkins to try to do just that.)

Her spin may fool the willingly deceived remaining on her private site, but it won't hold up in court.

She must REALLY be desperate to allow any tweaks now.
Before she would rather someone be hospitalized than admit she was wrong.
She wasn't willing to change the extremity of the diet to save others, but she will, to save herself.


(Not to mention the hidden offer of refund by Nov. 17 is meant to make the lawsuit go away before the 40,000 WW mag readers can know about it. Nice try, but, it is not going to work.)

[Magicsmom]

Originally Posted by CarolynF

I can't believe that post that Kimmer said there was no calorie limit to her plan.
WOW..You can eat all the meat you want!! and still lose weight? WOW..

As we all know, this is NOT the case..Those peeps will hear it and start stuffing themselves and wonder why they aren't losing weight. Too much protein acts like carbs..DUH!!!

This should be interesting..

Now it's an all you can buffet!!!

The plan changes every time the wind blows! People get to ante up $60 a pop just to see Kimmer change her starvation plan to Atkins. Hmmmm, didn't Kimmer say something about being careful not to tweak it so much that it mimics another published plan? I'm sure she won't do this, but if she had any sense, she'd just abandon the idea of selling a plan and market her site as a membership only support community. But that ego will never let her take that route.

[Katinsac]

Becky...nice post. Those of us in the "know"...know!

[susique333]

Originally Posted by CarolynF

Many of us have been glued to the computer since July, too and we haven't gained 100 plus pounds, have we????????

Hummm....that equals out to about 20#s per month.....3500 calories per pound.....thats 3500 X 20= 70,000 EXTRA calories per month....man thats alotta sugar cookies!



(Im a typoqween today blah)

[CarolynF]

Originally Posted by beckynett

If she means me, she can give up that argument right now. I have too many saved emails of arguing with her over limits, of her directing what the limits were. NO WAY was that anyone's original idea but hers.

Just some highlights, all verifiable with saved screen shots and emails:

She almost always used 500 cals as her baseline number for calculations.

When people stalled or wanted to lose faster, she ALWAYS recommended lower.

She said fat people didn't actually need to eat at all.

She got upset with me for setting Boot Camp to a 2-week limit instead of indefinitely as she intended, and griped to Christin about me.

Then, she made the Boot Camp menu her siggy, stating 500 calories as the standard, and saying, 'Stalled? Check your menu against this?" (The one she posted in her siggy, off the top of her head without checking, was even stricter than the first version, and she changed it again, too, making it stricter each time.)

When I complained of slow losses on Boot Camp, and a friend took my case to Heidi, she emailed that I couldn't expect fast losses like others if I wasn't willing to do the 300 calories of egg whites that others were doing.

When Christin really was eating just a few hundred calories a day of mostly egg whites, Heidi told her to cut the tbs. of creamer in her morning coffee.

Kimkins and K/E say 'unlimited lean protein', but when people doing that asked her for advice to help them lose better, they were told to limit protein portions to 4 oz. at a time, weighed before cooking. If they were already eating that, they were told to take it to 3 1/2 or 3 oz. at a time. (Besides, unlimited lean protein with little or no fat causes the physical and psychological problems known as 'rabbit starvation', which leads to bingeing and drastic hair loss, among worse problems.)

When a 14 year old who was about 8 lbs. from goal asked how best to raise her calories above 500, Heidi told her she didn't need to at all, since she still had fat. (I can say a LOT about this! I think she was just doing this out of spite, to flip you guys here off, as this was a focus at the time. Deni was being excoriated here and elsewhere for supporting the girl, when she and Christin were emailing and PMing her to eat more. That is where she got the idea and why she asked the question. Heidi knew she was being defied. From things I saw, Heidi began deleting some of Deni's PMs to the girl before she got a chance to see them, and went out of her way to leave Deni and the girl twisting in the wind, just to have her say, foolish and wrong and dangerous those it was. All this to a 14-year old girl, after we Admins had gone to her about the situation already earlier, and she had said, in print with 6 witnesses, that if she knew who it was, she would refund and cancel her membership.

When I and the other Admins expressed concern to her about the low calories, asking her to increase them, she got mad and refused, saying no one needed more than the 200 calories from a piece of chicken and a cup of salad a day. Again, she said this in print, to all 6 of us who were Admins back then.

She argued with me about whether we could allow 2 servings (1/2 cup each) of sugar-free Jello or just 1. When I pressed to ask why she allowed unlimited Crystal Light, but only 1 Jello, she replied, "Do I really have to explain the difference between a 5-calorie Crystal Light and a 15-calorie Jello?"

Her Boot Camp siggy and multiple statements stressed NO beef, No cheese, no creamer, no fatty meats, no restaurant meals, and stipulated Wishbone spritzers. (I argues with her about the dressing, too.). With those limited portions and restrictions on choices, there is no reasonable way to get more than 800 calories consistently. She clearly intended it to be, in her own words, "500ish."

The Shake Option she herself lists is capped at 800 calories MAXIMUM, to be derived from 3 - 4 protein shakes or no more than 180 - 200 calories each.

So, there is the 500 - 800 calorie range THAT SHE HERSELF TAUGHT.


She and Tippy and the desperate members may try to blame it on the former Admins, but there is too much proof to the contrary. Kimkins is Kimmer's baby. She developed it here, took it there, taught her members, and selected and coached her Admins. There are years of posts, emails, and PMs which will disprove her claims that it was our doing, not hers. If anything, we moderated her extremity. When we could no longer do so, we left.

(After all, she is on record as saying she would fast off the first 100 or more pounds, and actually encouraged someone on Kimkins to do just that.)

Her spin may fool the willingly deceived remaining on her private site, but it won't hold up in court.

Not to mention the hidden offer of refund by Nov. 17 is meant to make the lawsuit go away before the 40,000 WW mag readers can know about it. Nice try, but, it is not going to work.

Yeah, Becky!! We all know the REAL Kimmer, but unfortunately you gals experience the wrath of Kimmer up close and personal..I wonder about the comment that "fat people don't need to all at all" would go over at the KKsite?

[Awakened]

Originally Posted by beckynett

If she means me, she can give up that argument right now. I have too many saved emails of arguing with her over limits, of her directing what the limits were. NO WAY was that anyone's original idea but hers.

Just some highlights, all verifiable with saved screen shots and emails:

She almost always used 500 cals as her baseline number for calculations.

When people stalled or wanted to lose faster, she ALWAYS recommended lower.

She said fat people didn't actually need to eat at all.

She got upset with me for setting Boot Camp to a 2-week limit instead of indefinitely as she intended, and griped to Christin about me.

Then, she made the Boot Camp menu her siggy, stating 500 calories as the standard, and saying, 'Stalled? Check your menu against this?" (The one she posted in her siggy, off the top of her head without checking, was even stricter than the first version, and she changed it again, too, making it stricter each time.)

When I complained of slow losses on Boot Camp, and a friend took my case to Heidi, she emailed that I couldn't expect fast losses like others if I wasn't willing to do the 300 calories of egg whites that others were doing.

When Christin really was eating just a few hundred calories a day of mostly egg whites, Heidi told her to cut the tbs. of creamer in her morning coffee.

Kimkins and K/E say 'unlimited lean protein', but when people doing that asked her for advice to help them lose better, they were told to limit protein portions to 4 oz. at a time, weighed before cooking. If they were already eating that, they were told to take it to 3 1/2 or 3 oz. at a time. (Besides, unlimited lean protein with little or no fat causes the physical and psychological problems known as 'rabbit starvation', which leads to bingeing and drastic hair loss, among worse problems.)

When a 14 year old who was about 8 lbs. from goal asked how best to raise her calories above 500, Heidi told her she didn't need to at all, since she still had fat. (I can say a LOT about this! I think she was just doing this out of spite, to flip you guys here off, as this was a focus at the time. Deni was being excoriated here and elsewhere for supporting the girl, when she and Christin were emailing and PMing her to eat more. That is where she got the idea and why she asked the question. Heidi knew she was being defied. From things I saw, Heidi began deleting some of Deni's PMs to the girl before she got a chance to see them, and went out of her way to leave Deni and the girl twisting in the wind, just to have her say, foolish and wrong and dangerous those it was. All this to a 14-year old girl, after we Admins had gone to her about the situation already earlier, and she had said, in print with 6 witnesses, that if she knew who it was, she would refund and cancel her membership.

When I and the other Admins expressed concern to her about the low calories, asking her to increase them, she got mad and refused, saying no one needed more than the 200 calories from a piece of chicken and a cup of salad a day. Again, she said this in print, to all 6 of us who were Admins back then.

She argued with me about whether we could allow 2 servings (1/2 cup each) of sugar-free Jello or just 1. When I pressed to ask why she allowed unlimited Crystal Light, but only 1 Jello, she replied, "Do I really have to explain the difference between a 5-calorie Crystal Light and a 15-calorie Jello?"

Her Boot Camp siggy and multiple statements stressed NO beef, No cheese, no creamer, no fatty meats, no restaurant meals, and stipulated Wishbone spritzers. (I argues with her about the dressing, too.). With those limited portions and restrictions on choices, there is no reasonable way to get more than 800 calories consistently. She clearly intended it to be, in her own words, "500ish."

The Shake Option she herself lists is capped at 800 calories MAXIMUM, to be derived from 3 - 4 protein shakes or no more than 180 - 200 calories each.

So, there is the 500 - 800 calorie range THAT SHE HERSELF TAUGHT.


She and Tippy and the desperate members may try to blame it on the former Admins, but there is too much proof to the contrary. Kimkins is Kimmer's baby. She developed it here, took it there, taught her members, and selected and coached her Admins. There are years of posts, emails, and PMs which will disprove her claims that it was our doing, not hers. If anything, we moderated her extremity. When we could no longer do so, we left.

(After all, she is on record as saying she would fast off the first 100 or more pounds, and actually encouraged someone on Kimkins to do just that.)

Her spin may fool the willingly deceived remaining on her private site, but it won't hold up in court.

Not to mention the hidden offer of refund by Nov. 17 is meant to make the lawsuit go away before the 40,000 WW mag readers can know about it. Nice try, but, it is not going to work.

Thank you Becky! Your proof of the truth is so spot on. I am so amazed at the backpeddling she's doing now... but looking at her "menu" I know she will let the real "kimkins" plan shine thru soon. And with 3 pound losses a day to boot to keep people thinking her way is best.

I can't wait for the day when she is shut down and unable to reel in innocent people with her lies and sickly sweet manipulation of those that remain in the dark.

[celeste]

I have a question that I don't know if it has been discussed or not. Has anyone looked into or considered sueing Kimkins for the damages to their health. It would seem to me that there would be potentially much larger damages leading to larger judgements against Kimkins, and maybe force her to shut her doors. Personal injury litigation might be a possible next step for those with verifiable injuries.

[SMP]

Originally Posted by CarolynF

I can't believe that post that Kimmer said there was no calorie limit to her plan.
WOW..You can eat all the meat you want!! and still lose weight? WOW..

As we all know, this is NOT the case..Those peeps will hear it and start stuffing themselves and wonder why they aren't losing weight. Too much protein acts like carbs..DUH!!!

This should be interesting..

Now it's an all you can buffet!!!

Not to mention all that lean protein WILL do a number on their hearts, kidneys and other somewhat essential body parts, unless some vital fat sneaks in via binges.

[Magicsmom]

Originally Posted by celeste

I have a question that I don't know if it has been discussed or not. Has anyone looked into or considered sueing Kimkins for the damages to their health. It would seem to me that there would be potentially much larger damages leading to larger judgements against Kimkins, and maybe force her to shut her doors. Personal injury litigation might be a possible next step for those with verifiable injuries.

That is a risky situation. From day one, the KK site has had a disclaimer that they are not doctors and the advice they give is not meant to substitute seeing your personal physician. While KK is at liability for personal injury, I can't imagine them, even in the most severe cases, being held liable for greater than 50% of the damages. Perhaps a lawyer would like to chime in on this, but it seems to me that the dieters bear some responsibility legally.

[HoneyBee2]

Originally Posted by Magicsmom

LOL, "Noelle" sent me an e-mail too! My response:

"Noelle", thanks but no thanks. I prefer to join the lawsuit against you.

Oh, that is priceless!

Originally Posted by buzzybee

Quote:

I agree she probably does read these boards, and it looks like we are "biting the hand that feeds us". Not very nice and we are above that.

You didn't quote me or reference my words but I did post in a similar fashion to those that you did.
I'll admit I was in a goofy mood and being flippant when I said she was like "a Chihuahua with its rhinestone collar too tight!" I also said in a post "I think she was just hyped up over the nutritional issues with Kimkins. After all, I am sure as a dietitian, she is insulted that Kimmer is giving nutritional advice. Much like I would imagine a Medical Doctor would be offended if they realized that an Acupuncturist was labeling himself a Primary Care Physician and doling out half-truths."

So I understand the reasoning for Ms. Glassman's passion, but I also think she appeared to be biting at the bit when she got her turn at TT. It was definitely a good thing that she knew the Kimkins background and reviewed its shortcomings, but it did make for a very let's say zealous point of view.

I was not trying to be cruel or insult her overall image but rather the attack mode of Ms. Glassman, but my phrasing could have been better.

BBee- I am not "above it" all the time but I a girl can try.

However, I don't agree with the notion that those who make the decisions on whether a Network will provide media coverage will make their decision based on our reaction to an expert guest on their show.

But I do feel comments regarding FOX in general or the idea that they (meaning producers of the show) were the ones who altered the audience reactions, which they didn't, that some of us heard while listening to the youtube videos, would be something that is a concern to me at least based on feedback I read from the producer.

[Melly]

Originally Posted by ixtapacheryl

So there is a name for this? You're pulling my leg!!!



Didn't we tell you that if you are a LCF member in good standing, you are allowed spelling errors.

[LowcarbFan]

Originally Posted by SMP

I dunno, she claims to have lost 100 pounds 4 times now. Maybe it was one of these that triggered her alopecia. She may even have been thin ... for 30 seconds between the losing fast and gaining fast. I figure one weekend of stolen joy with the Captain probably shot her up at least 10 pounds. Who cares if it's mostly water weight? You still can't pour yourself into that red dress. And unlike the sleek outlines of many dieters (not me!), she'd have odd bumps, lumps and protrusions unless cinched to a last gasp in a body corset thingamabob. I feel that at one time, Heidi was near enough normal size to remember what it was like - but likely not in the last 10 years!

I don't think she has ever been thin because if she was she would have pictures. heck If I lost a lot of weight I would take a ton of pictures and I would post recent ones because I would be so proud to come that far. And if she ever was thin her pictures would of been real on her site, but because shes never been thin she had to get pictures off of the russian bride site. Kimmer has lied over and over again and I just can't believe that people are still defending her over there. If they want to do Kimkins why not get your money back now and come to LCF because the information is here for free and you won't have to pay a pathelogical liar. I think she should have to pay all the money back to everyone.

[susique333]

Originally Posted by Magicsmom

That is a risky situation. From day one, the KK site has had a disclaimer that they are not doctors and the advice they give is not meant to substitute seeing your personal physician. While KK is at liability for personal injury, I can't imagine them, even in the most severe cases, being held liable for greater than 50% of the damages. Perhaps a lawyer would like to chime in on this, but it seems to me that the dieters bear some responsibility legally.

And then you wonder if your attending Dr. would have to get involved in a personal injury claim. It could be pretty tricky to get a private Dr to agree to that. I came clean with my Dr. after I tied my hospital stay with this diet, he agreed that is was possible but would be hard to prove.

[celeste]

It would seem to me that if people get large settlements because their coffee was hot at McDonalds, that Hidey could be held culpable for her part in this. My ex husband is an attorney - I will send him an email and see what he thinks. I do know personal injury lawyers work on contingency basis, so they would only take the case if they think the case has warrant, and there would not be retainer fees. Just one big judgement would bring this thing to its knees - Hidey's biggest "asset" is the website, and the person awarded the judgement could conceiveablly be the next "new owner" - thus hopefully bringing this saga to an end. Seems like its worth investigating.