Monday, August 24, 2009
Friday, August 21, 2009
Heidi Diaz finally allowed a thread about the lawsuit on kimkins.con. AmyB reported on what Kimmer had to say in her post a few days ago: Why am I surprised.
What Heidi Diaz seems to have the most difficulty to understand is why her own weight would be an issue. Why her own failure at losing weight on the Kimkins Diet would reflect on the effectiveness of the diet. If that is really the case, why did she have to lie about it in the first place? Clearly, she knows that she would never have had any members if she had put up a real photo of herself.
She now argues that she has lost 100 pounds (several times!) and just couldn't keep it off. The diet works, in her opinion. So why would you want to starve off 100 pounds just to turn around and regain it all, even faster than you lost it? Possibly having damaged your health permanently in the process? To me, that just seems like self-inflicted torture.
Heidi also claims that members got what they paid for: a weight loss diet that works. That's not quite accurate. If Heidi cares to re-read her own promises on former front pages on the Kimkins.con website, she can easily see that Kimkins promised not only weight loss, but being able to maintain that loss. And, she offered up her own alleged weight loss success with 4 years maintaining at 118 lbs as proof (or 5 or 6 or 7 years, depending which version you read).
Heidi correctly says that the class action seeks an injunction against the Kimkins website; to have it shut down. Again, she can't really understand why and compares Kimkins with other diets like Jenny Craig and Weight Watchers where dieters also often end up regaining. She fails to see that these other diets don't necessarily jeopardize your health. If you did follow Kimkins as prescribed; 500 cals or less of lean protein and veggies, you more likely than not suffered health consequences. Just read the testimonials on Kimkins Survivors. We want Kimkins.con to be shut down so not any more unsuspecting, desperate, dieters get hurt.
Heidi also has a lot to say about money. She claims that the plaintiffs are all in the lawsuit to get back the money they paid for the membership. Nothing could be further from the truth, and I think Heidi knows this. I don't expect to see a dime in refund. I just don't want Heidi to get to keep the money she fraudulently obtained from me. And, I don't want Heidi to continue to operate a business that was built on fraud.
Wednesday, August 19, 2009
Monday, August 3, 2009
Yo-yo dieting, also known as weight cycling, is a repeated loss and gain of body weight due to excessive dieting. ... The reasons for yo-yo dieting are varied but often include embarking upon a diet that was initially too extreme. At first the dieter may experience elation at the thought of loss and pride of their rejection of food. Over time, however, the limits imposed by such extreme diets cause effects such as depression or fatigue that make the diet impossible to sustain. The dieter reverts to their old eating habits, and with the added emotional effects begins to rapidly regain weight.
This kind of diet is associated with extreme food deprivation as a substitute for good diet and exercise techniques. As a result, the dieter may experience loss of both muscle and body fat during the initial weight-loss phase (weight-bearing exercise is required to maintain muscle). After completing the diet, the dieter is likely to experience the body's famine response, leading to rapid weight gain of only fat. This is a dangerous fat-cycle that changes the body's fat to muscle ratio, one of the more important factors in health. One study in rats showed those made to yo-yo diet were more efficient at gaining weight.
I find this being a very accurate description of the Kimkins Diet. And it has held true for the majority of her members.
Lately, the only "new" members showing up in the Kimkins forum are people that originally tried the diet around the time of the Woman's World article in June 2007. Lost a little weight then but could not stick to it. They are now returning as the "diet did work" the first time. No, it didn't. A diet you can not stick to does not work. A diet that does not lead to lifelong weight loss maintenance is not even worth trying, in my opinion. What's the point of losing the same weight over and over again?
The good news with the returning members is that they don't generate any new revenue for Heidi Diaz. As they purchased a life time membership, there is no additional fees that she can add to the fraudulently obtained money she already has.
The Kimkins board has undergone changes since the June 2007 peak. There is very little activity and there is no peer pressure to drop calories to starvation levels. Sure, lean proteins with minimal fats are still recommended, but most of the members fall off or cheat on a regular basis. Even the few maintainers are not doing a very good job at maintaining these days.
Despite that the board does no longer appear to promote a diet that would be dangerous to your health, it still should be shut down. The entire venture was based on fraud and should not be allowed to continue in any form.
[The rat study Wikipedia references might not fully apply to people, but the results would scare me off any extreme diet attempt. Even if I would be able to starve myself all the way to goal, How would I deal with the "four-fold food efficiency" while trying to maintain? Continue to starve the rest of my life?
This study examined the metabolic effects of weight cycling, i.e., repeated periods of weight loss followed by regain. There were three groups of adult, male Sprague-Dawley rats: (1) Chow Controls (a normal weight control group fed chow throughout); (2) Obese Controls (animals fed a high-fat diet throughout); and (3) Obese Cycling (obese animals cycled through two bouts of caloric restriction and refeeding). The cycled animals showed significant increases in food efficiency (weight gain/kcal food intake) in the second restriction and refeeding periods compared to the first, i.e., weight loss occurred at half the rate and regain at three times the rate in the second cycle. Several physiological changes were associated with this cycling effect. At the end of the experiment, cycled animals had a four-fold increase in food efficiency compared to obese animals of the same weight who had not cycled. These data suggest that frequent dieting may make subsequent weight loss more difficult. The possible metabolic and health consequences of “yo-yo” dieting are discussed. ]