Kimkins?

em wrote:
:: Any truth/validity to Kimkins? Is it all that great? It seems to be
:: a highly restricted version of old-school Atkins/Stillman. There are
:: some pretty big claims made and quite a bit of press.
::
:: There's soooo much [censored] on the Internet, and this lady doesn't have
:: any qualifications other than "I lost weight". I would normally
:: ignore this kind of thing, but the name keeps coming up.

The best approach is to keep ignoring it.

I recently read SugarBusters and was kinda blown away by how stupid I
thought the program was - used to be a lot of folks here doing it and
I never knew what it was. I can't write a review of that cause I
already tossed the book. But I have gotten curious about what low-
carb plans I'm unfamilair with consist of, so I figured I'd look at
Kimmer's thang and am writing a review.

You can't find out what the plan is from her website unless you join.
If you're a joiner, it's a good deal though - we're talking under $60
for a lifetime membership. Of the diet plans that you have to join,
you can't get a better deal than that. And I think you get a LOT of
emotional support for that $60, so if you need that, it could be a
good thing.

There's no book as of yet. However, you can find out what her plan is
by going to the forum at lowcarbfriends.com where she was a long-time
poster and a bit of a guru to a lot of the folks there. Kimmer
believed in old-style Atkins, meaning you don't subtract fiber or
sugar alcohols and don't eat frankenfoods. She is also a fan of the
Stillman Diet as well as the original Atkins. Although I'd say what
her diet mostly consists of is lots of handholding by Kimmer. She is
BIG on the emotional support thang.

She "modified" Atkins to a degree in that she chose only lean meats
and just enough fat to make food edible and pretty much cut out dairy,
nuts and nut butters, etc. So on the one hand, it is sort of a low-
fat Atkins plan. On the other hand, the carbs are so low that it's
still more than 50% of calories from fat. Basically, it's a calorie-
restricted version of Atkins induction, quite a lot of the folks doing
it are under 1000 calories/day. It's kinda what JC is always posting
around here (but she is a hell of a lot nicer than he is).

The more traditional low-carbers said she wasn't doing Atkins at all,
and one of them named what she was doing "Kimkins" instead and that's
where the name came from. She lost 160 lbs in 7 months while
untreated for a serious thyroid condition and without exercise. This
is why she is a "guru" to folks. She didn't seem to ruin her
metabolism eating low calorie. First off, it was already kinda ruined
what with the thyroid problems. And second, in maintenance, she eats
under 100g carb/day at a calorie level 10-12X her current weight. Not
exactly starvation rations.

I think the main thing she does is provide support for people. I
mean, 50 people would post messages asking her to look at their
Fitdays and asking advice, and she'd answer ALL of them. She'd answer
the same stupid questions again and again, I dunno where she gets the
patience. If you need a lot of handholding to stick to a plan,
Kimmer's would probably be a good plan for you. She's ALL about lotsa
emotional support.

It's not a WOE, but a weight-loss diet. She thinks it's a hell of a
lot more motivating to lose 3-5 lbs/week instead of 1-2. Basically,
that is her plan in a nutshell... lose weight fast. I don't know if
her website has a maintenance plan built-in, but from what I can see
over on the forum, if you did her diet, you'd pretty much need a
separate maintenance plan once you reached goal. I think you'd pretty
much need to know how to low-carb and maintain before you began her
plan else you'd just put it all back on.

She is big on making sure you actually measure everything, know what a
TB of salad dressing really looks like, and enter everything in
Fitday. She's also big on taking a multivitamin daily and getting
your veggies. She admonishes some folks that 1/2 cup of low-carb
veggies is only three bites, how can you not eat that? She thinks
planning is important, plasnning shopping, planning meals, planning
what to do if you have cravings, etc. The only "dessert" type foods
allowed are popsicles made from Crystal Light or diet soda or snow
cones made with DaVinci syrups. No low-carb cheesecake.

The anti-Kimmer contingent felt the calories were too low, starvation
mode would happen and that she was encouraging eating disorders.
There is a section of the forum devoted to fasting and Kimmer herself
felt that weekend fasting was a good thing, though it doesn't seem to
be part of her own plan. Some of the anti-Kimmer contingent think that
the before and after pics of her and her followers are faked, but they
kinda sound like sour grapes.

The people on the forum were split into two camps - either for her or
against her. She became a bone of contention there. Someone offered
to help her set up her own web site. Of course, this is a big
criticism against her too - that she was in it for the bucks all
along. But... she was posting for several hours a day for a couple
years with no idea she'd attract followers and wind up with a
business, so I find that kind of hard to swallow.

She seems genuinely sweet to me. Not that I like her much, she's
kinda sickeningly sweet. But a lot of the criticism seems kinda
bogus. One of the major criticisms is her plan isn't doctor-
supervised... as if you need an MD to give advice on diet. She says
straightup that her plan is to maximize weight loss, that it's not a
WOE, and that you need to do something else for maintenance. The
point is ketosis for appetite supression then low calories to maximize
weight loss - along with lotsa hand-holding.

Her first "plan" is what she calls Kimmer's Experiment. Basically, it
is a test to see if you are really in ketosis or if you still have
some stores of glycogen left. You eat nothing but lean meat and eggs
for 3-5 days and see if you get a big water weight loss. So the idea
is... if you get a big water woosh from doing the experiment, you were
eating too many carbs for really efficient weight loss.

Her experiment is pretty much similar to a protein-sparing modified
fast, which is a medical plan they put you on if you have to lose
weight fast like prior to surgery or something.
http://www.drblythe.com/weightloss/chptr6txt.htm describes a protein-
sparing modified fast. The difference with her experiment is she
doesn't allow cheese.

Used to be some folks around here would do something similar, but they
called it a "meat fast" - it was recommended for breaking stalls. If
your carbs have crept up and you have glycogen stores, it makes sense
that this would break stalls.

In Kimmer's Experiment, you can eat as much as you want because you're
looking for what she calls "deep ketosis" which supresses appetite.
She recommends the experiment as sort of a pre-induction induction.

Her ongoing plan, Kimkins, is basically Atkins induction with minimal
calories. Basically, you add some veggies to the experiment "phase".
Never eat unless you're hungry, and if in "deep ketosis", you're not
hungry much. From what I can see, it looks like people tend to eat
700-1000 calories or so on her plan.

She also recommends for fastest loss to fast every weekend. That does
not seem to be part of her main plan though; she recommends lots of
links to other people's fasting experience. Maybe this is why she's
controversial, cause she suggests to not eat at all a couple days a
week if you don't find it too unpleasant to do.

In short, while I'm not terribly fond of her plan or her, the anti-
Kimmer folk seem kinda irrationally combatative. The objections don't
make a heck of a lot of sense. If you don't want to do what she does,
then don't. No biggie.

Frankly, I can't really see either the worship of her fans or the
vehemence of her enemies. Like... whatever.

Some basic definitions for her plan:
lean meats -
beef (trim all visible fat before cooking): round, loin or chuck
cuts, 85% or better ground beef
pork (trim all visible fat before cooking): canadian bacon, center
loin chop, ham, leg steak, tenderloin cuts
poultry: unbreaded with skin removed
fish & seafood: unbreaded fresh or frozen, water-packed if canned

salad veggies (2 cups/day) - lettuces, cabbage, cucumbers, tomatoes,
celery, mushrooms, green onions, asparagus, garlic, radishes, green
beans, peppers

other low-carb veggies (limited to 1/2 cup serving) - zucchini,
cauliflower, tomatoes, green beans, broccoli, turnips and round
onions

Here's the guidelines for the Kimmer Experiment (K/E):
* Length of time is 3-5 days depending on how 'carbed up' you are
* As much lean protein as you desire (lean meat and eggs only)
* No "junk" meats: hot dogs, pepperoni, etc.
* Unlimited diet drinks, plain coffee & tea (plain as in no cream,
half/half)
* No alcohol, no cheese
* No cream, butter, mayo, cheese or other extra fats (for example,
instead of butter, trying cooking with PAM)
* Unlimited use of artificial sweeteners
* Purpose is to experience 'real' ketosis (weight loss, no
appetite)
* Useful as a springboard for other LC programs
* Basic condiments and spices OK (watch catsup & A1 sauce)
* If you lose 3 or more lbs. in 3 days, then you were over on
carbs on previous diet.

For the Kimkin's diet, you add to the K/E some veggies:
* 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 grams lean protein.
* No dairy, no nuts.
* No LC products, treats, junk or alcohol
* Just enough fat to make your menu work (don't overdo)
* It's important to measure veggies. One cup of lettuce is a
small, loose handful. Watch the salad dressing! Better yet, use a low
calorie one.
* Keep TOTAL carbs 20 or under-do not subtract fiber or Sugar
Alcohols
* No frankenfoods.

If you wanna try her plan and don't need a lot of handholding, I just
saved you $60.

Quoted message said:

The anti-Kimmer contingent felt the calories were too low, starvation
mode would happen and that she was encouraging eating disorders.
There is a section of the forum devoted to fasting and Kimmer herself
felt that weekend fasting was a good thing, though it doesn't seem to
be part of her own plan. Some of the anti-Kimmer contingent think that
the before and after pics of her and her followers are faked, but they
kinda sound like sour grapes.

Hi, Jackie --

Thanks for the great post.

I read her posts about fasting, and I just wanted to throw in here
that she fasts one weekend a month (while her son is away). As I
understand her goal here, the purpose of the fast wasn't so much to
contribute to weight loss -- she said what she does lose during the
weekend, she gains back immediately on Monday or Tuesday. It was a
"girlie weekend" -- writing letters, reading, doing her nails -- she
just didn't eat. She used the weekend to recharge spiritually and
physically -- something that sounds pretty darn good to me! LOL!

Anyway, I'm not a Kimmer advocate, or one of her detractors -- I had
just started reading that board after she left and went back through
the old posts to try to figure out what the big deal was -- and
apparently it was quite a big deal.

HTH

--
BlueBrooke
254/233/135

Hi Jackie,

I recently switched from low-cal to low-carb and have two days left of the
two-week induction. I haven't lost any more, so far anyway, then I would
have if I had stuck with low-cal. I was expecting a little whoosh from the
water weight or something, but nope, I'm only down two pounds after almost
two weeks.

I know, for sure, that I am right in there with the carb count. I'm not
missing any hidden carbs in my counting, etc. More than anything else, I
could really use a nice little ego boost -- this has been a real long haul
for me.

I'm going to stick out induction through Sunday and see where things stand.
If I magically drop some weight, great. If I don't, I'm going to look at
what my options are. My options appear to be Kimkins
Experiment/Stillman's/Meat Fast/Protein Sparing, etc.

Thanks for all the info!

<[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Some of the anti-Kimmer contingent think that
the before and after pics of her and her followers are faked, but they
kinda sound like sour grapes.

Some say she refuses to give a face to face interview, and has only talked
to people on the phone. 'Could be a privacy issue. Or maybe she isn't who
she claims to be.

http://www.lowcarbfriends.com/bbs/kimkins/502606-why-fascination-kimmer.html

em said:

I'm going to stick out induction through Sunday and see where things stand.
If I magically drop some weight, great. If I don't, I'm going to look at
what my options are. My options appear to be Kimkins
Experiment/Stillman's/Meat Fast/Protein Sparing, etc.

If you try it, let us know how it works for you.

It'd be nice to hear from someone who wasn't part of the Kimmer-cult
or Kimmer-haters. Someone a bit more neutral.

I have been reading some about this diet on several different websites
lately. It appears that some of the people at Lowcarbfriends have known
kimmer for a long time and that is where she started out.
It appears that some of her advice (the posts are still there) have been
things like cutting calories to 500 per day with her boot camp plan, doing
water fasts some for a week at a time. However, she does not drink water so
she does her fasts with Diet Coke. She also advises people to take a
laxative every day and not to eat fiber as it bulks you up. As I said these
posts are still hanging around in her thread from before the kimkins website
got started so if you really want to research it you can without joining. I
had looked into because I read the article is Women's World a few weeks ago.
THere is a lot of controversy because her pictures seem to change all of the
time including one that is clearly a picture of a well known celebrity. She
has refused to meet anyone in person and Jimmy Moore did a phone interview
with her this week you can go to his podcast and hear some of the things she
has to say.
Some of them are pretty evasive and some are just downright wrong. She has
no medical degree and some of the things she talks about are incorrect.
I think a lot of people want to know if they are paying for someone to tell
them how to diet that they would like to know that she really lost her
weight. She does profess to be very experienced in crash dieting.
I was put off by the wacky diet advice that she had given out before she
started kimkins site.

"em" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Any truth/validity to Kimkins? Is it all that great? It seems to be a
highly restricted version of old-school Atkins/Stillman. There are some
pretty big claims made and quite a bit of press.

There's soooo much [censored] on the Internet, and this lady doesn't have any
qualifications other than "I lost weight". I would normally ignore this
kind of thing, but the name keeps coming up.

[email hidden] wrote:
:: On Jul 26, 7:54 pm, "em" <[email hidden]> wrote:
::
::: I'm going to stick out induction through Sunday and see where
::: things stand. If I magically drop some weight, great. If I don't,
::: I'm going to look at what my options are. My options appear to be
::: Kimkins Experiment/Stillman's/Meat Fast/Protein Sparing, etc.
::
:: If you try it, let us know how it works for you.
::
:: It'd be nice to hear from someone who wasn't part of the Kimmer-cult
:: or Kimmer-haters. Someone a bit more neutral.

2phat? Isn't there some drug injections, too?

Roger Zoul said:

2phat? Isn't there some drug injections, too?

I think you're thinking of another plan.

I read... maybe 60 pages of an "Ask Kimmer" thread on
lowcarbfriends.com and the only drugs I ever saw her mention were
epsom salts and/or fiber pills for constipation and a side-
conversation about retin-A for wrinkle-reduction.

It could take *days* to read all her posts on lowcarbfriends.com, and
of course I'm not giving anybody $60 just to see their website, so my
review is likely as complete as it's gonna get. I posted it mostly
because I'm a neutral party and I thought that might be interesting
given that there seem to be so few reviews that don't either gush or
bash.

I also read some of the thread Tom G. posted. I had previously read
the first few pages of it, and frankly, at the beginning, it looked
mostly like a bunch of whiners. But I skipped some pages and jumped
ahead and it gets more intriguing as it goes on. A lot of the anti-
Kimmer contingent in that thread were previously pro-Kimmer people.
So apparently, she [censored] an awful lot of people off.

Anyone looking to spend a few days watching a soap opera unfold...
Kimmer is it!

PB said:

It appears that some of her advice (the posts are still there) have been
things like cutting calories to 500 per day with her boot camp plan, doing
water fasts some for a week at a time. However, she does not drink water so
she does her fasts with Diet Coke. She also advises people to take a
laxative every day and not to eat fiber as it bulks you up. As I said these
posts are still hanging around in her thread from before the kimkins website
got started so if you really want to research it you can without joining.

Yeah, I did. I read a few hundred posts by her.

While I saw lots of people claiming she said these things, I never saw
her say them.

What she said was eat as much as you want until ketosis kicks in on
the K/E thing and then continue eating as much as you want on the
Kimkins thing cause you'd have appetite suppression happening. The
people who did this reported they were taking in very low calories.
And lots of them also reported losing large amounts of weight pretty
fast.

I saw her recommend specific brands of fiber for having no non-fiber
carbs... and adding up the fiber in vegetable choices to show it was
better to eat salad and broccoli than take fiber.

And she does discuss fasting, but it's not part of the plan she
advocates per se. She gives references to other people who teach
fasting. And yeah, she says she fasts with diet soda and Crystal
Light. I don't really consider this part of my review as it isn't
part of her plan, anymore than when she was answering someone about
how she used Retin-A. Some posts were obviously off-topic to her plan
itself.

Now, I can't say for sure she never said those things... as there's
thousands more posts I haven't read. And I'm not gonna. I'm not
planning to make Kimmer a serious research subject, I just wasted a
few hours being curious.

Quoted message said:

Some of them are pretty evasive and some are just downright wrong. She has
no medical degree and some of the things she talks about are incorrect.

I just don't understand why she gets "accused" of not having a medical
degree.

I've been giving advice on this newsgroup for years without being an
MD.

Are only MDs allowed to discuss diet now? Do we have to get an MD in
to write the newsgroup FAQ or to approve Saffire's weekly tips?

The only known MD we've ever had around here that I'm aware of is a
complete nutcase. So I'm not terribly impressed with the degree as
conferring expertise in low-carb dieting.

Quoted message said:

I think a lot of people want to know if they are paying for someone to tell
them how to diet that they would like to know that she really lost her
weight. She does profess to be very experienced in crash dieting.
I was put off by the wacky diet advice that she had given out before she
started kimkins site.

I didn't see anything *terribly* wacky in her plan directly.

Some of the fasting stuff she likes includes that one nutty doctor who
wants you to drink piles of epsom salts to pass gallstones or whatever
to cure everything under the sun. No one seems to think that is "OK"
cause the crazy fasting lady has an MD!

Her refusal to ever meet anyone from the site, not even meeting anyone
from the magazine that's writing her up or people interviewing her -
that definitely seems pretty weird. You'd think she'd be out there
promoting the thing.

But her diet plan doesn't seem "wacky" particularly. Overall, her
advice seems to be, if you aren't losing weight, maybe you should eat
less. If you want to lose weight faster, maybe you should eat less.
While I'm sure we could have arguments here about whether this is the
best possible diet advice or not, there's really nothing "wacky" about
it - it's a pretty mainstream view.

[email hidden] wrote:
:: On Jul 26, 9:59 pm, "Roger Zoul" <[email hidden]> wrote:
::
::: 2phat? Isn't there some drug injections, too?
::
:: I think you're thinking of another plan.
::
:: I read... maybe 60 pages of an "Ask Kimmer" thread on
:: lowcarbfriends.com and the only drugs I ever saw her mention were
:: epsom salts and/or fiber pills for constipation and a side-
:: conversation about retin-A for wrinkle-reduction.
::
:: It could take *days* to read all her posts on lowcarbfriends.com, and
:: of course I'm not giving anybody $60 just to see their website, so my
:: review is likely as complete as it's gonna get. I posted it mostly
:: because I'm a neutral party and I thought that might be interesting
:: given that there seem to be so few reviews that don't either gush or
:: bash.
::
:: I also read some of the thread Tom G. posted. I had previously read
:: the first few pages of it, and frankly, at the beginning, it looked
:: mostly like a bunch of whiners. But I skipped some pages and jumped
:: ahead and it gets more intriguing as it goes on. A lot of the anti-
:: Kimmer contingent in that thread were previously pro-Kimmer people.
:: So apparently, she [censored] an awful lot of people off.
::
:: Anyone looking to spend a few days watching a soap opera unfold...
:: Kimmer is it!

2phat posts here sometimes....in fact, she posted a message not too long
ago....

But she was interested/using kimkins and some other drug, I believe...IIRC.

Roger Zoul said:

2phat posts here sometimes....in fact, she posted a message not too long
ago....

But she was interested/using kimkins and some other drug, I believe...IIRC.

I vaguely remember 2phat; I think I skipped most of those threads.
Wasn't it some extract from pregnant women's urine or something?

Anyways, that has nothing to do with the Kimkins plan as far as I can
tell.

The plan itself is like a lowered-fat Atkin's induction, or Stillman's
or the protein-sparing modified fast minus the cheese. Not that I
think those are ideal diets, but they don't seem controversial
*within* the low-carb community the way Kimkins is; they're only
controversial when you get into the low-fat crowd.

Kimkins seems controversial mostly because Kimmer is controversial.
Looks like a cult-of-personality type of thing to me.

It's really quite weird. People gush about her like she's the
messiah, or hate her like she's the devil incarnate. And some switch
from one to the other. It's like a religious thang. Very weird.

[email hidden] wrote:
:: On Jul 27, 3:22 am, "Roger Zoul" <[email hidden]> wrote:
::
::: 2phat posts here sometimes....in fact, she posted a message not too
::: long ago....
:::
::: But she was interested/using kimkins and some other drug, I
::: believe...IIRC.
::
:: I vaguely remember 2phat; I think I skipped most of those threads.
:: Wasn't it some extract from pregnant women's urine or something?

Yes, that's it. I thought the two somehow went together.

::
:: Anyways, that has nothing to do with the Kimkins plan as far as I can
:: tell.
::
:: The plan itself is like a lowered-fat Atkin's induction, or
:: Stillman's or the protein-sparing modified fast minus the cheese.
:: Not that I think those are ideal diets, but they don't seem
:: controversial *within* the low-carb community the way Kimkins is;
:: they're only controversial when you get into the low-fat crowd.
::
:: Kimkins seems controversial mostly because Kimmer is controversial.
:: Looks like a cult-of-personality type of thing to me.

Well, Kimkins is a diet of last resort, right? After the radical diets like
Atkins don't work, you switch over to low everything! Low fat, low carb, and
low calorie. Seems like the right idea, right!? 🙂

::
:: It's really quite weird. People gush about her like she's the
:: messiah, or hate her like she's the devil incarnate. And some switch
:: from one to the other. It's like a religious thang. Very weird.

For some it must work, so they sing songs of praise. For those who don't
like to starve or the thought of getting others to strave, the obvious
response is hate.

<[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

On Jul 26, 9:33 pm, "PB" <[email hidden]> wrote:

I just don't understand why she gets "accused" of not having a medical
degree.

I've been giving advice on this newsgroup for years without being an
MD.

Are only MDs allowed to discuss diet now? Do we have to get an MD in
to write the newsgroup FAQ or to approve Saffire's weekly tips?

You did not set up a website and charge people 60 bucks a crack to get your
advice either did you?
Some of the information I got came from people that are members of her
current community and no they are not members of the lowcarbfriends board.
I did do a lot of research because I was very interested after reading about
it in the WW magazine. If her own members are saying these things that
definitely threw up a flag for me.

I feel that if you are going to put yourself out there as an expert and
charge money for it you should have some type of back up to show that you
actually know what the heck you are talking about. If you refuse to be
interviewed live, even when the interviewer says he will come to your house
since you are so afraid to speak in public then there must be a reason for
it. Yes these are pretty much her own words in the interview she did with
Jimmy Moore. If there was the ability to join for a time without having to
give your paypal info I would have done that. IMHO it seems like there is no
willingness to put out any proof that she is even able to sustain the weight
loss she reports. If I was making the money she has made since the write up
in the WW mag I would figure it was my responsibility to answer a few
questions like what my real name is and let people see that I really did
lose the weight.

PB wrote:
:: <[email hidden]> wrote in message
:: news:[email hidden]...
::: On Jul 26, 9:33 pm, "PB" <[email hidden]> wrote:
:::
::: I just don't understand why she gets "accused" of not having a
::: medical degree.
:::
::: I've been giving advice on this newsgroup for years without being an
::: MD.
:::
::: Are only MDs allowed to discuss diet now? Do we have to get an MD
::: in to write the newsgroup FAQ or to approve Saffire's weekly tips?
:::
:: You did not set up a website and charge people 60 bucks a crack to
:: get your advice either did you?
:: Some of the information I got came from people that are members of
:: her current community and no they are not members of the
:: lowcarbfriends board. I did do a lot of research because I was very
:: interested after reading about it in the WW magazine. If her own
:: members are saying these things that definitely threw up a flag for
:: me.
::
:: I feel that if you are going to put yourself out there as an expert
:: and charge money for it you should have some type of back up to show
:: that you actually know what the heck you are talking about. If you
:: refuse to be interviewed live, even when the interviewer says he
:: will come to your house since you are so afraid to speak in public
:: then there must be a reason for it. Yes these are pretty much her
:: own words in the interview she did with Jimmy Moore. If there was
:: the ability to join for a time without having to give your paypal
:: info I would have done that. IMHO it seems like there is no
:: willingness to put out any proof that she is even able to sustain
:: the weight loss she reports. If I was making the money she has made
:: since the write up in the WW mag I would figure it was my
:: responsibility to answer a few questions like what my real name is
:: and let people see that I really did lose the weight.

Thing is, there are zillions of people with "back up" to show that the know
what they're talking about and yet we still get a bunch of conflicting BS
advice, when taken as a whole. Also, what may work for once person may not
work for another. Bottom line: diet doctors are a dime a dozen and worth
even less. There any many roads that can lead to weight loss, too. Keeping
it off is much trickier and anyone can fall off the wagon.

That's why I'm very dubious of any kind "low everything" plan or some
special version of "Atkins" or anything else. Is there anything surprising
at all if you eat 500-1000 kcals a day on any kind of plan that most/many
people are going to lose weight?

Of course, some people do need coaching. From what Jackie wrote, this
Kimmer person was providing a lot of support for that $60. That may
actually be of value to someone on a starvation plan. Even Atkins, IIRC,
provided support of similar nature to his weight loss patients.

Roger Zoul said:

[email hidden] wrote:

:: On Jul 26, 7:54 pm, "em" <[email hidden]> wrote:
::
::: I'm going to stick out induction through Sunday and see where
::: things stand. If I magically drop some weight, great. If I don't,
::: I'm going to look at what my options are. My options appear to be
::: Kimkins Experiment/Stillman's/Meat Fast/Protein Sparing, etc.
::
:: If you try it, let us know how it works for you.
::
:: It'd be nice to hear from someone who wasn't part of the Kimmer-cult
:: or Kimmer-haters. Someone a bit more neutral.

2phat? Isn't there some drug injections, too?

That was this poster who KF'ed everyone who gave her advice rather
than cheerleading.
She wanted to inject some hormones to lose weight and kill her hunger
because she wanted it off fast. I suggested Kimkins. She did it for a
month and went on to injectable hormones. Kimkins and injectable
hormones don't share space.

FWIW: I like my diet to come from someone with some clinical
experience with getting people to lose weight. And I like to read it
in a book rather than a website. So, not a Kimkins person. Curious
about the veil of anonymity around her, but like everyone says, just
cause it's out there doesn't mean I have to do it, or even try it, or
even hold an opinion.

"While I saw lots of people claiming she said these things, I never
saw
her say them. "

These are things she was sending in private messages as part of her
ongoing "support". I was very interested in Kimmer at first, and even
bought the copy of Women's World with her in it. Then I started doing
research.

My conclusion is she is someone who is making a lot of money off of
vulnerable people. I have nothing against making money, but when you
are making money off of your weight loss and then refuse to release
evidence that the photos you are showing the public are really
you...well, then you are just a fraud.

Instead of giving her $60, find a copy of Atkins 72 or Stillmans. That
is basically what her plan is anyway, but without the epson salts,
starvation or other dangerous activities.

Quoted message said:

I also read some of the thread Tom G. posted. I had previously read
the first few pages of it, and frankly, at the beginning, it looked
mostly like a bunch of whiners. But I skipped some pages and jumped
ahead and it gets more intriguing as it goes on. A lot of the anti-
Kimmer contingent in that thread were previously pro-Kimmer people.
So apparently, she [censored] an awful lot of people off.

I read some of that thread, too. Lots of questions which aren't being
answered -- and lots of speculation.

The thing that had me literally laughing out loud was the fact that
the thread is still there. At this writing it is now 193 pages! And
even the posters realize that the conversation is marginal as far as
the LCF TOS is concerned -- several times they have thanked the mods
for not shutting it down.

"Mean-spirited" posts are supposedly not allowed, but it appears that
they *are* acceptable if you're talking about someone who isn't there.
Sometimes it looks like, with the cat looking the other way, some of
the mice are having a grand time taking pot shots that wouldn't
ordinarily be allowed. Although it does appear that "Kimmer" is
following that thread herself -- just not posting to it -- and culling
the undesireables from her neck of the woods based on their statements
on LCF.

There are a lot of very valid questions being asked there -- over and
over and over -- and it appears that "Kimmer" is only digging herself
in deeper by her refusal to behave like a responsible adult. But
there is also much wailing and gnashing of teeth as regards freedom of
speech and privacy -- and the fact that LCF isn't a bastion of free
speech itself seems to be lost on all but a few of the posters there.

The "Kimmer" supporters seem to be shell shocked -- those that venture
from her insulated playground, anyway -- and her detractors are
rubbing their hands in glee. The rationale seems to be that they are
"supporting" the people who have been deceived by "Kimmer."

--
BlueBrooke
254/233/135

Roger Zoul said:

PB wrote:

Quoted message said:

Of course, some people do need coaching. From what Jackie wrote, this
Kimmer person was providing a lot of support for that $60. That may
actually be of value to someone on a starvation plan. Even Atkins, IIRC,
provided support of similar nature to his weight loss patients.

Actually, I don't know what she provided for the $60. I saw what she
provided for several years for free on lowcarbfriends.com

I think I generally post supportive and informative posts, both here
and elsewhere. But... I don't have a fraction of her patience. If I
had the same people asking me the same stupid questions all that time,
I'd have lost it with them.

Some of the criticism of her come from her inner circle... apparently
she [censored] a lot of people off. When she became a business, she did
the same lying [censored] many in the weight-loss industry do - posted fake
before and after shots and testimonials, wrote fake reviews on other
web sites to drum up business, spammed Freecycle lists across the
country, all while refusing to support the plan with public
appearances herself. So her partners and supporters asked questions
and Ms. Guru didn't take being questioned well and banned lots of
folks and such, often without refunds.

But it's just not this one-sided story that people on either side make
it out to be. She could not have been doing all that posting for all
those years just for the money as there wasn't any - and no way to
know there would be eventually. She might have been doing it for ego
purposes, but then who *doesn't* post from that motivation to some
extent? She seems to have genuinely cared and been supportive for a
rather long time which seems a difficult thing for someone working
purely out of selfish motives to have faked.

The people who are on either side of the whole thing seem equally
wacked to me. Both the pro and anti Kimkins groups make ridiculous
arguments and seem extremists.

And the diet itself doesn't seem so terribly controversial to me. Not
something I'd sign up for, but then most diets aren't. Hell, I *like*
both Bernstein and the Eades and I don't do their diets either.