Why the fascination with Kimmer? #15

[slickchick]

Originally Posted by WildAngel6

Do we have confirmation that Laurala has finally escaped from Kimkins?

I am SO praying that is true.

I don't have a confirmation, BUT - she last posted on 4/2 in her journal "Re:Laura's Journey 2 Days, 1 Hour ago
All I want is peace and to be healthy "

From her profile:
Personal Info
Username LauraLa
Last Visit Date 2008-04-04 10:44:39

AND all her photos are gone - sounds like she is doing some housekeeping. Glad to hear it.

[Katinsac]

Mine was from Donny too...don't ya just love form letters? Pretty lazy if you ask me. Make you wonder if they even read what we send.

AmyB...good job! You are making a difference..keep it up!! Makes ya wonder just how many Heidi has left over there that are real, doesn't it? lol

[WildAngel6]

Recommended Reading:

mariasol: Kimkins Diet Blogs

Consider The Source « Amy B : Food For Thought

Conquering demons, losing weight: Hidden meanings, hidden purposes

KIMKINS NIGHTMARES: "WE DON'T ENDORSE"......I BEG TO DIFFER

slamboard Blog Archive Why the Fascination?

THE DEADLY KIMKINS STARVATION DIET| Medusa: TIPS FOR REAL WOMEN...

Kimorexia: Is Aspartame Safe? Depends On Who You Ask.

Healthy Low-Carb Living Blog: Dana Takes On Kellogg's New Ad

Wifezilla's Way: Nutrisystem's Deceptive Advertising

Grilled Cheese Sandwich with Pickles: Had to share!

[WildAngel6]

Originally Posted by WOEforever

I don't have a confirmation, BUT - she last posted on 4/2 in her journal "Re:Laura's Journey 2 Days, 1 Hour ago
All I want is peace and to be healthy "

From her profile:
Personal Info
Username LauraLa
Last Visit Date 2008-04-04 10:44:39

AND all her photos are gone - sounds like she is doing some housekeeping. Glad to hear it.

Thank you, WOEforever! That definitely sounds like she is making some steps in the right direction.


Laurala, here's to your peace and your health; two things that will definitely be easier to find AWAY from Kimkins.

We will keep you in our prayers.

[BamaGal]

Originally Posted by Diana

Good Lord, I'd starve if all I had was a 100 calorie shake and then 4 hours later an egg white and ricotta. What is her daily intake 400-500 calories?

Heidi isn't eating like this so no worries about her starving.

Plus how often has Heidi posted over the years she doesn't do breakfast.

Originally Posted by WildAngel6

Do we have confirmation that Laurala has finally escaped from Kimkins?

I am SO praying that is true.

I am too.

It worries me to no end the effects of KK will have on her heart.

Originally Posted by jo2621

Does not appear to be working for her. Must not want it enough.

I think she should let us have a look at her Fitday and maybe we could make some suggestions. Shakes can cause stalls. They are a meal not a snack.

Hidden carbs? Too many veggies? Is she using the jello cup measure? Spices?Is she tracking every mouthful (or gulp?).

Ricotta??? How much? What would she rather have, cheese or a loss??

[Rose1271]

Lurker here...

Ok. I caved and went to her site because well, I'm nosey and wanted to see changes to who's on the cover, the amazon thing, and so forth.

Anyway, my question is anyone know how tall SL is? Because, not to seem like I have this huge ego or anything, but I'm 5'1" and weigh 190. Unless my self-image is distorted (which is a good possibility), I think I look smaller than her. (you can't go by my avi pic, it's 3 years old and about 20 lbs heavier.)

Thanks ladies! You guys rock as always!!!

[jo2621]

Originally Posted by Rose1271

Lurker here...

Ok. I caved and went to her site because well, I'm nosey and wanted to see changes to who's on the cover, the amazon thing, and so forth.

Anyway, my question is anyone know how tall SL is? Because, not to seem like I have this huge ego or anything, but I'm 5'1" and weigh 190. Unless my self-image is distorted (which is a good possibility), I think I look smaller than her. (you can't go by my avi pic, it's 3 years old and about 20 lbs heavier.)

Thanks ladies! You guys rock as always!!!

Hey Rose... quit lurk'n and come on in, the water's fine!

I think I remember SL saying that she is 5'2".

I believe if any of there ladies could find someone else (neighbor, mailman, termite guy, foster kids, total stranger walking down the street) to take their picture instead of doing it themselves/mirror they might be able to "pose" in a more flattering way.

[Rose1271]

Thanks, Jo!

Yep...I don't believe the 186 lbs.

[MomToEli]

Originally Posted by jo2621

Wow... as if Kimkins wasn't the epitome of internet sleaze before, this is what level it has sunken to.

She just put this up on her latest blog entry:

Is Kimkins Right for You?
Give 10 Days, We'll Give You 10 Reasons
Lose 100 Lbs for $79.95!
That's It. Not Another Penny. Ever.

She's trying to go up against people like LA Weight Loss and Jenny Craig ... I'm surprised she doesn't say they don't pay her for their meals. Or maybe she is thinking she is going to launch a food line ...

[rebel]

Originally Posted by MomToEli

She's trying to go up against people like LA Weight Loss and Jenny Craig ... I'm surprised she doesn't say they don't pay her for their meals. Or maybe she is thinking she is going to launch a food line ...

A food line? What food?

[dspotz]

Originally Posted by jo2621

Wow... as if Kimkins wasn't the epitome of internet sleaze before, this is what level it has sunken to.

She just put this up on her latest blog entry:

Is Kimkins Right for You?
Give 10 Days, We'll Give You 10 Reasons
Lose 100 Lbs for $79.95!
That's It. Not Another Penny. Ever.

This is sort of accurate. It costs nothing to join the lawsuit and starting an anti-kimkins blog is free.

[mauitammy]

Originally Posted by MomToEli

She's trying to go up against people like LA Weight Loss and Jenny Craig ... I'm surprised she doesn't say they don't pay her for their meals. Or maybe she is thinking she is going to launch a food line ...

I bet that's it. The Captain Morgan egg white shake! Sounds like magic to me.

[wifezilla]

Hi All,

Just popping in to say HAPPY FRIDAY and thanks WildAngel for recommending my blog

(and thanks to all who stopped by to read it!)

[samredman]

I have read these threads with fascination after being introduced to this rather bizarre subject from a tabloid tv show video (tabloid, meaning a show which portentously appears to be investigative, but in this situation, as they do in many of their "revelations," was really only providing a forum for an opportunistic law firm trying to cash in with a possible class action suit). What was interesting is that this strange saga, known as the "Kimmer" story, has been characterized by so many here as a "scam." However, that subjective evaluation is more of a "buzz" term, which when viewed from an objective perspective in relation to the facts of this case is actually quite a bit of a hyperbole, because, although there may have been some questionable (and even dishonest) business practices, it really does not rise to the level of a "scam."

But, this is a very interesting story with quite a few, not so obvious, facets. My study of all the available materials reveals that all of this is not as clear cut as so many the outraged posters here on this board seem to present it. Quite frankly, it has been quite a bit of fun to explore all of the various links and to see videos and read blogs and to read the literally thousands of historical postings on this board by Kimmer before she started her money making site, dating back to 2004. I have read the various blogs created to wage this campaign against Heidi Diaz. And now, from my vantage point, I believe that I can provide some very candid observations about this situation from the viewpoint of someone who has had quite a bit of personal experience in low carb dieting, (I'm 66 and started on the original Atkins back when I was 31 and have been able to keep the weight off through many variations over these many years... I posted my "story" over in the golden years section of this board) and who has been an executive in consumer products businesses for over 40 years with quite a bit of experience involving various legal tangles.

Although I don't have the time to do it all now, I might pop in here now and then and give some of my conclusions about this situation. In the meantime, I might suggest that, if those who feel that Kimkins should be "brought to justice" want to succeed, that they understand that it is a vary dangerous course to take action independently against a business. You need to use only appropriate legal means and activities handled by licensed attorneys (which, as everyone here knows, is already in place) if you want your objectives to be met. Much of what I have seen by many of the "bloggers" and some of the posters on this board, looks very much like "tortious interference" and my supposition is that those attorneys who are handling this case would also advise you accordingly to avoid those actions which can be regarding as malicious and tortious and which could alter the outcome of this situation completely. Go read this discussion about tortious interference: Tortious interference - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia , plus Google for other documents about this subject. What I have to offer to those who actually believe that actions against Heidi Diaz are warranted and to those want them to succeed is that you should know that many, many lawsuits have been corrupted and rendered invalid by the well-intended, but grossly misguided, efforts of the very people who were bringing the action, because they, independent of their attorneys, attacked and intentionally damaged their opposition in vicious tortious ways. Don't forget that the "other side" will have very competent attorneys (and be very wary of those who wage a quiet battle... they will surprise you in court) and you are (and many probably already have) providing them with a lot of defensive mechanisms. When you read that tortious interference discussion, ironically, you will see that the very first "tort" of this nature involved, of all things, "ducks."

The tort was first described in the case of Keeble v. Hickeringill, (1707) 103 Eng. Rep. 1127, styled as a "trespass on the case". In that case, the defendant had used a shotgun to drive ducks away from a pond that the plaintiff had built for the purpose of capturing ducks. Although the ducks had not yet been captured, the Justice Holt wrote for the court that "where a violent or malicious act is done to a man's occupation, profession, or way of getting a livelihood, there an action lies in all cases."

[Sheridan]

Hey y'all! I don't think SL looks like her stated weight, either. We have ample proof she's also a deceiver, so I'd have to personally witness her getting on a certified scale before I'd believe it. JMO.

Originally Posted by dspotz

This is sort of accurate. It costs nothing to join the lawsuit and starting an anti-kimkins blog is free.

Originally Posted by mauitammy

I bet that's it. The Captain Morgan egg white shake! Sounds like magic to me.

Sounds positively snatty to me!

[WildAngel6]

Happy FRIDAY, Everyone!

[Sheridan]

It's FRIDAY!

[LosingToLive]

Originally Posted by WildAngel6

Happy FRIDAY, Everyone!

Same to you !
At least we're back on schedule.

[Mayberryfan]

samredman ~

Your points are well taken, however, I fully believe that the class action attorney John Tiedt would have warned any of us he thought might be jeopardizing the case against Heidi Diaz. I would also firmly, but respectfully, disagree that what she has done does not rise to the level of a "scam".

Having spent many years of my life as a professional journalist and seeing the affects that heavy media coverage has on all kinds of cases, there is no instance that I am aware of where bloggers, or posters on a message board harmed a case. Such material is heresay and never admissible in court.

But, thanks for the warning. As long as John Tiedt has no problem with it, I think we're comfortable in how we are proceeding.

[LosingToLive]

Originally Posted by Mayberryfan

samredman ~

Your points are well taken, however, I fully believe that the class action attorney John Tiedt would have warned any of us he thought might be jeopardizing the case against Heidi Diaz. I would also firmly, but respectfully, disagree that what she has done does not rise to the level of a "scam".

Having spent many years of my life as a professional journalist and seeing the affects that heavy media coverage has on all kinds of cases, there is no instance that I am aware of where bloggers, or posters on a message board harmed a case. Such material is heresay and never admissible in court.

But, thanks for the warning. As long as John Tiedt has no problem with it, I think we're comfortable in how we are proceeding.

Well said !

[dhuff81096]

Originally Posted by Mayberryfan

samredman ~

Your points are well taken, however, I fully believe that the class action attorney John Tiedt would have warned any of us he thought might be jeopardizing the case against Heidi Diaz. I would also firmly, but respectfully, disagree that what she has done does not rise to the level of a "scam".

Having spent many years of my life as a professional journalist and seeing the affects that heavy media coverage has on all kinds of cases, there is no instance that I am aware of where bloggers, or posters on a message board harmed a case. Such material is heresay and never admissible in court.

But, thanks for the warning. As long as John Tiedt has no problem with it, I think we're comfortable in how we are proceeding.

ITA. It might be different if what the posters and bloggers were saying wasn't true, but since there is substantiated evidence proving the scam and fraud that's a different story.

What possible recourse could Heidi have? Ask the judge to stop everyone from telling the truth about her because it's hurting her business?

[TerryC]

Originally Posted by samredman

I have read these threads with fascination after being introduced to this rather bizarre subject from a tabloid tv show video (tabloid, meaning a show which portentously appears to be investigative, but in this situation, as they do in many of their "revelations," was really only providing a forum for an opportunistic law firm trying to cash in with a possible class action suit). What was interesting is that this strange saga, known as the "Kimmer" story, has been characterized by so many here as a "scam." However, that subjective evaluation is more of a "buzz" term, which when viewed from an objective perspective in relation to the facts of this case is actually quite a bit of a hyperbole, because, although there may have been some questionable (and even dishonest) business practices, it really does not rise to the level of a "scam."

But, this is a very interesting story with quite a few, not so obvious, facets. My study of all the available materials reveals that all of this is not as clear cut as so many the outraged posters here on this board seem to present it. Quite frankly, it has been quite a bit of fun to explore all of the various links and to see videos and read blogs and to read the literally thousands of historical postings on this board by Kimmer before she started her money making site, dating back to 2004. I have read the various blogs created to wage this campaign against Heidi Diaz. And now, from my vantage point, I believe that I can provide some very candid observations about this situation from the viewpoint of someone who has had quite a bit of personal experience in low carb dieting, (I'm 66 and started on the original Atkins back when I was 31 and have been able to keep the weight off through many variations over these many years... I posted my "story" over in the golden years section of this board) and who has been an executive in consumer products businesses for over 40 years with quite a bit of experience involving various legal tangles.

Although I don't have the time to do it all now, I might pop in here now and then and give some of my conclusions about this situation. In the meantime, I might suggest that, if those who feel that Kimkins should be "brought to justice" want to succeed, that they understand that it is a vary dangerous course to take action independently against a business. You need to use only appropriate legal means and activities handled by licensed attorneys (which, as everyone here knows, is already in place) if you want your objectives to be met. Much of what I have seen by many of the "bloggers" and some of the posters on this board, looks very much like "tortious interference" and my supposition is that those attorneys who are handling this case would also advise you accordingly to avoid those actions which can be regarding as malicious and tortious and which could alter the outcome of this situation completely. Go read this discussion about tortious interference: Tortious interference - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia , plus Google for other documents about this subject. What I have to offer to those who actually believe that actions against Heidi Diaz are warranted and to those want them to succeed is that you should know that many, many lawsuits have been corrupted and rendered invalid by the well-intended, but grossly misguided, efforts of the very people who were bringing the action, because they, independent of their attorneys, attacked and intentionally damaged their opposition in vicious tortious ways. Don't forget that the "other side" will have very competent attorneys (and be very wary of those who wage a quiet battle... they will surprise you in court) and you are (and many probably already have) providing them with a lot of defensive mechanisms. When you read that tortious interference discussion, ironically, you will see that the very first "tort" of this nature involved, of all things, "ducks."

I can see how someone could attempt to use the tortious interference argument in this case, but to me it doesn't seem to have any merit. Heidi's ablility to do business has been hampered by the writ of attachment which as you know was put in place by a judge who obviously agreed with it. Not by us.

In terms of driving business away from kimkins - well we aren't doing anything that any other consumer activists against fraudulent or dangerous products hasn't done since Lady Godiva rode through the streets of Coventry to protest global warming or whatever it was (I'm a little fuzzy on the details, sorry). And our claims are not false. Any that are usually get fleshed out quickly and rejected.

Also, we are not inducing anyone to break their contract with heidi, although she has broken a few contracts by banning some of us from her site. My IP address on my home computer is completely blocked from