Kimkins is Toxic

26 09 2007

The Kimkins forums can only, at this point in time, be called toxic.

Last night’s display of unbridled rage underscored the growing anger Kimmer (Heidi Diaz) feels as the truth is seeping out for all to see. In what many speculate was a drunken tear by Kimmer, under the guise of a new user name, members were given front row seats to really see how the once supportive forum is damaged beyond repair, how the environment reeks with hate toward anyone speaking the truth, including those members who remain within the site.

Members who paid for membership, who paid for access, who paid for a supportive environment online are finding themselves in the crosshairs; targets to be attacked at any hint they question the plans, the founder or their own experience within the forums. Members asking questions or offering up suggestions for improvement are quickly derided, dismissed and declared unworthy to be among the true believers, told to leave and go elsewhere if they won’t behave and blindly regurgitate the party-line.

When a member asked about calorie limits, Wonderwoman replied,

What limits? What are you talking about? Why not call your doctor if you’re so scared? Or if you’re not doing Kimkins then go away?

My cousin had RouxY gastric reconstruction for obesity and she ate less than anybody here. What’s the danger? What are you afraid of? If you do Weight Watchers with frozen tv dinners you’re healthy? Aren’t they loaded to the gills with carbs? Yeah. Nutritious.

When another member openly suggested a listing of potential health risks and side effects for new members, after reading Deni’s blog entry, her intentions were questioned by admin tarvosK,

I would like to ask the original poster what the purpose of posting this blog entry was? Is there some reason for posting yet more negativity about the plan?

Did this person have success on the plan? It appears so and then they left for whatever reason, as is their right. However I have to wonder about people that involve themselves in something like KK and then when they have gotten the results they wanted, go running off and start bashing it to the rest of the world. It seems to me that there is just something very odd about that, but then I have never been one to really follow the pack that much anyway, so I won’t be running off anywhere to tell people how evil and life threatening this plan is.

Notice tarvosK avoids the issue, potential health risks, and focuses back to fast weight loss as ideal and suggests those who have fled the site and are speaking out have alterior motives, according to him, there is no danger with Kimkins diet plans.

When yet another member dared to suggest posting potential side effects for new members to read and understand, admin Tippytoes stepped to admonish her with,

I am curious since I see you posting the possibility of negativity and doubt across the boards today… What does YOUR Doctor think?

Another member had the audacity to ask about carbohydrate intake after attending a class on nutrition, being told women require 100 grams of carbohydrate each day. Rather than explain gluconeogenesis or point her to articles about meeting glucose requirements while following a low carb diet, she was told by Wonderwoman,

If you’re in danger from not eating carbs, shouldn’t be you at the emergency room? On life support? Or crawling along in weight loss because you really wanted to add carbs and have given yourself permission under a self induced guise? Sign up for the group “yeah I did Kimkins and didn’t lose”.

These examples, and others we could provide, clearly highlight how dysfunctional the site now. Such abuse of members is not only tolerated, but expected; not only from admins, but between member to member.

It is a place where only those emotionally damaged souls really want to stay and want to remain so they can continue to feed on the punishment.

No emotionally healthy person will tolerate such abuse daily, nor willingly continue to remain so they can witness such abuse directed at others. Within Kimkins there is an illness, a sickness so prevalent and contagious, so toxic; an emotional dysfunction so damaging it makes the diet plans look sane.

The Tangled Web at Kimkins

28 08 2007

Kimkins Dangers reported the recent departure of long-term staff member Becky (Littlebit) yesterday, whose introductory biography disappeared from the ‘Meet Your Team’ page over the weekend. The disappearing act followed two weeks of silence from Becky on the site, no new posts and no replies to member queries.

Yesterday it was apparent, even without any word from the site management, that Becky was no longer associated with Kimkins. Her blog was scrubbed of all affiliate links, her Daily Plate was locked and almost all references to Kimkins removed from posts on her blog.

One question remained unanswered, why did Becky leave Kimkins?

Yesterday, when a thread appeared in the Kimkins Cafe forum asking if Littlebit was okay, Christin explained,

“Kimmer said that Becky (Littlebit) is taking a break and starting a family business, but we hope that she’ll be back to post soon!”

Dissatisfied with that reply some members pushed for the ‘real reason’ Becky left, and late last night Kimmer (Heidi Diaz) stepped up to answer, after confirming that Becky was paid staff, Kimmer went on to say,

“She and I had differences about how the website should be run. She was concerned that her comments as a moderator could leave her vulnerable to liability of some sort. She requested to be removed as moderator a few days ago, although she stopped posting and answering emails several weeks ago.”

Keen eyes noticed within minutes that reply was edited, removing the hint of Becky’s concern over liability, and a member called Kimmer on the revision,

“Kimmer, you above post originally had this sentence in it:
She was concerned that her comments as a moderator could leave her vulnerable to liability of some sort.

But then you removed it!! I think Becky is concerned about the low calorie and low fat aspect of kimkins and that’s why she left.”

To which Kimmer replied curtly,

“You’re right. She is concerned about being legal liability.”

A member pressed on,

“So what did she tell you was her concern?”

Keep in mind, this member has paid Kimmer for her membership as have others within the site. Members paid subscriptions pay the salaries of those on staff and without members no one would be paid. So, members do indeed have a right to ask questions of those they are paying! Yet, Kimmer shut down the member with one short sentence,

“To be honest, you’re bordering on rude.”

Other members and paid moderators swiftly stepped in to defend Kimmer and effectively shut down any continuation of the discussion along the lines of legal liabilites, literally attacking the member who dared to ask questions.

At this point, this morning, the thread is filling with ‘feel good’ let’s all be nice to each other and remain positive type posts.

One critical question must be asked, in Becky’s departure, who lied to members?

Christin initially stepped up to say Becky left to start a new family business. She stated this was what Kimmer told her. Kimmer however candidly offered up the explanation that Becky was concerned about her vulnerability as a paid staff member, thus resigned her position to avoid potential legal liability, with no hint of starting a business or anything else as part of her reason for leaving.

So, did Christin lie to members by offering a benign reason to explain Becky’s departure, even though she was aware of the real reason, or did Kimmer initially lie to Christin who simply repeated the lie she was first told?

If Christin simply repeated what she was told, how does she now feel knowing she was lied to, and then left lying to members with Kimmer’s made-up excuse to her?

If Christin did know the real reason and simply put forward something that sounded better than the truth, how do members feel being lied to?

How do members within Kimkins feel about one of the two, or both Kimmer and Christin lying to them when they’ve paid for a membership subscription, and as such deserve to know what’s happening?


Comments feed for this article

August 28, 2007 at 3:47 pm


Lookie what I found:

August 28, 2007 at 3:58 pm

Kimkins Dangers

We have now heard, but not verified yet, that Becky was actually banned from the site.

As with other people who “left” but were actually banned, the kimkins site administrator left their profiles visible with post count, etc, to make it “appear” as though they were online from time to time.

August 28, 2007 at 4:52 pm


A lot of people are suggesting that those who are “rocking the boat” and asking the wrong questions might be moles…..My thoughts….those who are so vehement in their ass-kissing to Kimmer, they’re the moles! A mole isn’t going to rock the proverbial boat, but someone like OSusana or Vernswifevickie – they’re so far up Kimmer’s butt, she couldn’t see if they were moles or not! Not saying those two are, but a mole is usually someone who really tries hard to portray loyalty and isn’t going to jeopardize their access by rocking the boat is all I’m saying!

August 28, 2007 at 4:54 pm


So typically Kimmer!

Gotta keep the “Negative Nancies” from saying anything, no negativity ladies….you won’t lose weight if you’re negative! As if concern, questions or the like is going to hinder weight loss. How unreal!

If I were Christin and Kimmer lied to me and I then wound up lying to the members, I’d be royally pissed. If Christin willfully lied for Kimmer and I was a member, I’d be royally pissed.

August 28, 2007 at 5:01 pm


Notably, Cutie last “logged” into her kimkins account on July 15 but we know Cutie was banned back in April. So there’s evidence of Kimmer faking log ins of banned members.

August 28, 2007 at 5:42 pm


Most likely, she didn’t ban any of them, but just changed their passwords so that she could control their accounts. And read their PMs. Or post as them.

August 28, 2007 at 8:19 pm


Oh what a tangled web kimmer weaves!

August 30, 2007 at 4:29 pm

The Meet-up That Wasn’t « Kimkins Exposed

[…] the recent departure of the beloved moderator Becky, how long until others begin to jump the sinking ship called […]

Kimkins Supporter is Truth Challenged

23 08 2007

An interesting site appeared recently that we were alerted about, The Weightless Answer.

The first post was made on August 13, 2007 and is quite an intriguing read. The blog owner obviously has a beef with many of the sites now exposing the problems surrounding the Kimkins diet and the diet founder, Kimmer (Heidi Diaz) but wrote in such haste that they simply couldn’t keep facts straight which leaves much of the content suspect throughout.

For example, the site owner, who goes by Weightless, shared with readers they started the diet in the middle of June. In comments on another blog, this same blogger stated they joined Kimkins on June 24, 2007, not exactly the middle of June, but really more the end of June.

That was problem one.

Problem two is the claim that in making a decision about paying to join the site, they read all the negative information, “So then I read the negatives… there were the “kimkins-haters” who made annonymous claims over the net that kimkins was based on an overweight woman making false claims taking money to teach the members unhealthy habits which would lead to poor health. They spouted the word: kimknsrexia and balked that “something must be done to shut’er down!”

The problem with this statement is that this is impossible given the date they joined Kimkins was June 24th and the start of the Fascination with Kimmer thread at Low Carb Friends was June 27th.

In comments on Jimmy Moore’s blog, the username Kimmerexia didn’t appear until July 2007, the first Slamboard article didn’t appear until June 30th, and the first criticism of Kimkins as a diet or of the creator, Kimmer, didn’t heat up on Active Low Carber Forums until early July. In June, when Jimmy Moore claimed to be starting Kimkins a thread was started and the discussion revolved around him and whether he was actually doing Kimkins.

So here we find the owner of this site is making up things. If the diet and site were not at the time under fire as this person suggests, how much did she really investigate before joining? This is one more blog set up to portray Kimkins in a positive light, except like others out there, this one too suffers problems of integrity and, to use a Colbertism, truthiness.

Of course our question is who is this anonymous blogger promoting Kimkins with no affiliate ID? Is it Kimmer (Heidi Diaz) with one more alias? Is this new blog the reason Kimmer hasn’t been posting to answer questions asked of her in her forum that claims members have direct access to her?


Comments feed for this article

August 23, 2007 at 4:22 pm


And interestingly, the first 2 people to comment on this blog were Deni and Christin, both of whom have a vested interest in I think that the person who is writing this blog is either Kimmer herself or was hired by Kimmer. And then Kimmer asked Deni and Christin to comment positively.
Also, the doctor’s comments? Those comments have nothing to do with the Kimkins diets, but the author of the blog would lead you to believe that they do.

August 23, 2007 at 4:23 pm


Truth challenged is very accurate for your title!

August 23, 2007 at 4:52 pm

Kimkins Dangers

This “weightless” person continually leaves odd comments on my blog full of circular logic and rationalizations that honestly don’t make any sense. Whoever she is, she seems to be another of the Kimmer Lap Dogs Club and simply goes around spouting untruthful information in an attempt to shift the focus away from Kimmer’s lies and the dangers of Kimkins and onto the “evil bloggers”. She does not however, seem to be able to counter the factual information presented in the anti-kimkins blogs, odd, huh? 🙂

August 23, 2007 at 8:46 pm


Ducky sez: “In comments on Jimmy Moore’s blog, the username Kimmerexia didn’t appear until July 2007″.

July 16, to be exact. 🙂

August 23, 2007 at 10:28 pm

Gravely concerned..

This sounds like Kimmer’s style of writing..Another sock puppet maybe?

August 24, 2007 at 5:35 am


well lets see…
I seem to recall stating that most of the kimkins haters are very good at pointing to “half truths” instead of whole truths…
I actually wrote on my blog that I decided to write my blog based on a subject I had been working feverishly with over the past two months.
Yes I started Kimkins June 24th to be exact, maybe it would have been better if I gave you the time including minute and hour so you could investigate it further. You are saying I am lying based on saying I started in the middle of June, wow what a difference a week makes ladies, call me out on that one. Can we grasp at a few more straws? As far as the remarks about my research… My research involved something alot more costly than the $60 spent to pay for joining kimkins or the comments made by the kimkins haters. I reflect on my blog about the kimkins haters to give the reader a chance to read both positive and negative so that they can make a determination of what is right for them. You may also recall, I noted I read the article in Woman’s World, and that I visited with my doctors and showed them the article, (or didn’t you read that part?) Not just one doctor said they felt safe with me giving it a go. Mostly because I am a 10 yr recovered cancer patient, so I see a host of different doctors regularly. The research involved my being tested for full blood workups and putting the basic kimkins plan in the hands of my doctors to determine if my chemistry could handle it… I don’t feel it is necessary to quote my doctors one by one… they aren’t being paid by Kimkins to recommend it and if they choose to later write any mdeical brief based on my trial of this program that is their business.
Gee, and what a surprise that two kimkins admin would simply notice my blog after I supported them on one of your witchhunt remarks about them.
That is a hard one to figure out., huh?
For the record I am not even an affiliate of the kimkins website… I started to add myself to the ranks, but of course if I did, it would be misconstrued by each of you reading that I was a paid ‘lap dog’. But oh– once again you have each made that “assumption” regardless of there not being any basis for it.
Nothing so glamourous ladies, just a very content person with more than 35 lbs in weightloss who works 40hrs a week out of the home instead of in front of a computer making up drama.
So attack as you will… Neener- neener guess what?
I’m 35 lbs leaner!!

Will the Real Kimmer Please Step Forward?

7 08 2007

Heidi Kimberly Miller was born May 10, 1958 and grew up in California. She attended South Torrance High School, had a baby at 16, and graduated in 1976. Soon after graduation she married Hector M. Diaz and took his name. Together Heidi and Hector Diaz had another child, Brandon. and they continued to live in southern California.

After sixteen years of marriage, on August 12, 1997, Heidi Diaz filed for a dissolution of marriage (divorce). Over the next few years she and Hector fought bitterly in the courts over money and the terms of child support. By her own account, she topped the scales at 318 pounds by her 40th birthday, May 10, 1998.

In email interviews Heidi claims she took the initative to lose her excess weight soon after her 40th birthday when her oversized belly lit the gas stove in her home as she reached up to fetch something from a cabinet above.

Her story meanders away from factual dates in her recent interview, via phone, with Jimmy Moore. In the podcast interview, she stated that she’d lost the weight and has maintained it now for 5 1/2 years. This statement takes Heidi back to late 2001, early 2002 as the start date for her weight loss if her statements with Jimmy Moore are accurate, or starting her weight loss when she was 43 years old, not her earlier claim of 40 years old.

Which is it?

Did she start to lose weight at 40 or 43? She also claims to have lost 198 pounds in eleven months, and to have maintained her weight since it was lost. But, how did she do it when the records she offers are proof do not support her claims? At the online forum,, she linked to a FitDay food diary as her proof to support her claims.

Yet, when we review this online diary, we find a starting weight lower than her claimed high weight of 318 pounds, with a starting weight of 285 pounds on December 4, 2000, at age 42.

From there, we find ups and downs with her weight, with an alleged dramatic weight loss recorded just one month from her starting her FitDay journal in January 2001 when she posted her weight at less than 200 pounds in her diary. This would be an 85 pound loss in less than a month. By early February she records a weight of 150 pounds, an astonishing and unbelievable 120 pound loss in less than two months! But if this is unbelievable, she also stopped entering food and weight again until August and recorded a new weight of 240 pounds, which would mean a gain in weight of 90 pounds!

Was she simply playing around with FitDay trying to understand how it worked initially and her claimed weight loss between December 2000 and February 2001 was not accurate, or was she trying to set the stage to establish herself as a weight loss guru and started to lay the ground again for that with entries beginning in August 2001?

Le’ts give her the benefit of the doubt and take her FitDay forward from August 2, 2001, when her entries start to become more consistent to record foods eaten and alleged weight. Again, a review finds an incredible rate of weight loss. In August 2001 she recorded a weight of 240 pounds. Six weeks later in September, 180 pounds, a loss of 60 pounds in that time. A month later she recorded her weight at 155, an additional loss of 25 pounds in less than a month and a total of 85 pounds in less than three. By mid-December she records a weight of 145, claiming a weight loss of 95 pounds in just four months.By March 2002 she records a weight of 125 pounds, which creeps back up into the 130’s in July and August, only to decline again to 128 pounds in November 2002.Again we find no support for her claims of weight loss totaling 198 pounds over 11 months.

No one online or within her new website community has ever questioned the authenticity of her claims which are clearly figments of her imagination by her own records offered up as proof of her claims.

Weight Loss Tips, in their interview (email) with her did not challenge her claims.Jimmy Moore, in his email interview and podcast with her, did not challenge her claims.

At no period of time within her records did she lose 198 pounds within eleven months.</font><font size=”2″ face=”Arial”>At no period of time within her records did she lose 160 pounds in seven months, another claim she’s made online. Yet no one has challenged her claims even with the discrepancies that are glaring in her FitDay records.Today she claims a weight of 118 pounds. By her own statements, she stands 5′6″ tall. At that height and 118 pounds, her BMI would be 19, the low end of normal. The latest photo online, of a woman in a red dress, which she claims is a recent photo of her, is neither as tall as Heidi is (from measurement analysis of the arms and hands in the photo), nor is she sporting a BMI of 19. While the woman in the red dress is indeed a normal weight, her BMI is estimated to be hovering around 23.Over the years Kimmer/Heidi has posted few pictures as evidence of her weight loss and maintenance. One picture we do believe is Heidi Diaz is found on Weight Loss Tips:

Kimmer Heidi Diaz Kimkins

This woman appears to be in her forties and appears to be somewhere between 275 and 325 pounds if she is 5′6″ tall. We have no reason to not consider this photo as an authentic photo of Heidi Diaz at her high weight claim of 318 pounds.We also believe that the avatar graphic found at is also Heidi Diaz, with her claimed after picture being her in high school and her before picture being her current photo:

kimmer kimkins heidi diaz kimmer kimkins heidi diaz

This conclusion is reached after reviewing the recent photo of Heidi (Miller) Diaz on that is a photo of the same woman on, taken on the same day, in the same outfit, with the same hairstyle and sunglasses:

kimmer kimkins heidi diaz According to publicly available records, the driver’s license information on Heidi Diaz includes indentifying information with her height of 5′6″, eye color hazel, hair color brown and weight at 215 pounds.

It is commonplace for the weight on a drivers license to be less than actual weight, so with the drivers license information, both the photo of Heidi Diaz on and the avatar on LowCarbFriends, appears to be a woman between 220 and 240 pounds.

Add to this, if she had indeed lost the weight she claims, and had kept the weight off for 5 1/2 years, her drivers license would have renewed at least once, if not twice, since losing the weight. It is unbelievable that she would not update her driver’s license weight after losing an incredible claimed 198 pounds! It’s also incredible that she would include a fat picture as representative of herself on if she lost 198 pounds and weighs just 118 pounds now.Yet, her claims remain unchallenged because people so desperately want to believe in her assertions because they too want to lose weight like they believe she did. Expect she hasn’t lost weight and she still remains an overweight woman living in southern California. Only now she is charging an entry fee to her website to provide advice on how to lose weight just like she supposedly did, and without any proof that she actually lost any weight at all. In fact, the evidence points to her remaining overweight and unable to lose the weight despite all attempts to lose it and maintain the weight loss


Comments feed for this article

August 7, 2007 at 7:18 pm


Great work, Ducky — according to this post she got her driver’s license renewed in April of 2006!

August 7, 2007 at 7:28 pm

Who is Kimmer? » Kimkins Controversy

[…] Kimkin’s Exposed reports all the lies and inconsistencies and explores the question, Who is Kimmer? According to publicly available records, the driver’s license information on Heidi Diaz includes indentifying information with her height of 5?6?, eye color hazel, hair color brown and weight at 215 pounds. […]

August 7, 2007 at 7:49 pm


You know what I dont get? All the ignorance. All of the pointing of fingers and determination to prove someone wrong. Privacy is a BIG issue to some ppl, including myself. So her name is Kimberly Heidi Diaz. Big deal! How many AUTHORS you know have changed their name for pulicaion purposes? Actors? Musicians? It’s all the same really, just wanting to protect her *right* to privacy. And we all have the right, dont we?

As far as the pictures go……backin the 80’s we all had big hair. By the 90’s we were highlighting it. Cant expect her to have the same cut all the time do you? SHe has OPENLY admitted to having some plastic surgery done. You can bet your butt that I’ll have a tummy tuck done too after I realy my goal weight. So WHAT if she also had some facial surgery done? The features in the pics ARE the same. Same chin, smae bsic cheekbones, same nose. After loosing THAT much weight, dont you think you’d look different too?

What’s it truly matter that no one has ever met her? Maybe she’s a very private person with social anxieties. It’s possible isn’t it? Of course it is, but here we go back to that thing, our determination to PROVE someone is full of it…..

I have rad so many statements where ppl have put words into her mouth and are bending over backwards just to call her a liar. Just because YOUR ass is still fat, you dont have to make trouble for the ones of us who are losing ours…….

August 7, 2007 at 8:04 pm


Steph, you can’t be serious! Really, have you been reading or are you just BLIND?

August 7, 2007 at 8:26 pm

satisfied reader

eh missy…

it’s a side effect of the koolaid…to be blind to kimmer’s faults

and to respond to any questioner with a childish “you’re just jealous” attitude, usually exhibited by a “fat ass” or “go eat your greasy hamburger” comment.

August 7, 2007 at 8:27 pm


If she is such a private person who wants her privacy why did she start a big website that charges $60 to be a member? If I wanted to maintain my privacy I probably wouldn’t be putting myself ‘out there’ in the first place and making very bold claims of weight loss.

As Laura Dolson said in her article “Extraordinary claims demand extraordinary proof.”

What is so bad about Kimkins is not just her being a fraud but the actual dangers of this diet. I believe that this is a money making scheme that is putting people’s health in jeopardy.

August 7, 2007 at 9:06 pm


Steph sez: “So her name is Kimberly Heidi Diaz.”

No. Actually, it’s Heidi Kimberly [Miller] Diaz.

Steph sez: “So WHAT if she also had some facial surgery done? The features in the pics ARE the same. Same chin, smae bsic cheekbones, same nose. After loosing THAT much weight, dont you think you’d look different too?

Her diet is truly a miracle. She didn’t just lose 198 pounds, she lost 198 MONTHS (16.5 YEARS) if the pic in the red dress is actually her.

Imagine that…the fountain of youth has been discovered for a one-time fee of $60. Such a deal!

August 7, 2007 at 9:09 pm


satisfied reader sez: “it’s a side effect of the koolaid…to be blind to kimmer’s faults”

The sugar-free Kool-Aid is Diet Coke flavored. Makes fasting much more convenient.

August 7, 2007 at 10:00 pm


Isn’t Brandon Diaz listed as the webmaster for

If he’s the same guy, he also is listed as webmaster for a site called Corrupted Canvas.

Email contact for him is

Same address as used for Kimkins too! From the WHOIS database:

Brandon Diaz
2220E. Treemont Place
Apt. 101
Corona, California 92879
United States

Registered through: FreeWebs Domains
Created on: 12-Nov-06
Expires on: 13-Nov-07
Last Updated on:

Administrative Contact:
Diaz, Brandon
2220E. Treemont Place
Apt. 101
Corona, California 92879
United States

August 7, 2007 at 11:16 pm

Interested, but curious

The white shirt picture does not look to me like a mid-1970s photograph. The hair styling, makeup, lip color, fabric, shoulder padding, earrings, eyebrow shaping and photo color tonality and quality are all wrong for that era.

I would put it in the early half of the 1980s.

August 12, 2007 at 12:27 am

Digital Scales Center

I just came across your blog about digital scales and wanted to drop you a note telling you how impressed I was with the information you have posted. I also have a web site & blog about digital scales so I know what I’m talking about when I say your site is top-notch! Keep up the great work, you are providing a great resource on the Internet here!

August 20, 2007 at 6:28 pm


I hope this fake gets busted soon. I can’t stand it when people sell deadly diets to make money. She’s pretty sick if you ask me.

October 11, 2007 at 2:54 pm

The Sleuth Behind the KimKin Diet

[…] […]

November 12, 2007 at 9:44 pm


What kind of moron would go on a diet consisting of 500 calories a day?
That is so stupid that it is not to be believed. You don’t have to pay
$60 to find out that eating nothing would result in weight loss.
I am not surprised their hair fell out……….who knows what sort of organ and bone damage has occurred.

Just shows once more, if it sounds too good……….

Kimkins Very Low Calorie Diet Courts Health Risks, Death

1 08 2007

When we search the internet to learn about weight loss, one particular diet stands out because there are strong reservations about its use.

It is the very low calorie diet (vLCD).

Defined as a diet which provides 800 or less calories each day, vLCD is reserved for the morbidly obese under medical supervision. Extensive research, hundreds of studies, conducted in various settings, repeatedly finds such diets have extreme risks to short and long term health, thus should not be undertaken without proper monitoring, and should not exceed three months duration.

When one finds a vLCD promoted to the general public as a dietary approach to lose weight fast, without need for medical supervision or specific nutritional supplements, and without a complete list of known risks for an individual to consider, this should raise alarm bells.

The Kimkins diet options carry no warning about the risks from vLCD, the site promotes the idea that a simple multivitamin is sufficient to meet any nutritional deficiency from the plans, and none of the plans provide any review of documented risks to health if one follows them without medical supervision.

An analysis of the five plans finds that none will exceed 1000 calories in a day without ignoring the rules of the different plan options:

  1. the ’shake option’ limits caloric intake to 800 calories daily;
  2. the “boot camp’ option limits caloric intake to just 500 calories per day and expects one to also engage in vigorous exercise 30 minutes each day;
  3. the ‘vegetarian’ option limits caloric intake to 1000 calories each day;
  4. the ‘K/E’ option does not state a caloric limitation, but the rules of the option leave one with little more than 400-700 calories each day and;
  5. the last option, ‘kimkins’ does not state a caloric limit, but the rules of the option leave on with little more than 500-1000 calories each day

Such extreme caloric restriction requires one to limit food consumed and cannot adequately meet nutrient requirements without specific nutritional supplementation as part of the calorie restriction. This is one reason why medical supervision is critical. When a healthcare professional determines a vLCD is appropriate for an individual, this is because they are in a situation where rapid weight reduction is primary for health and the benefit of that rapid weight loss outweighs, in the short term, the risks to their health.

The list of risks, both during a vLCD period and in the period following includes:

  • Sudden death
  • Sensitivity to light (sunshine)
  • Hypotension (low blood pressure)
  • Cholelithiasis (gallbladder disease)
  • Increased risk of loss of lean body mass (including heart, lungs, liver, kidneys)
  • Heart palpitations and irregular beat
  • Bleeding gums
  • Intolerance to cold
  • Dry skin
  • Brittle, cracked or peeling nails
  • Hair loss on both head and body
  • Loss of hair pigmentation
  • Dry mouth
  • Fatigue and lethargy
  • Increased requirement for sleep
  • Potassium loss, electrolyte imbalance
  • Loss of coordination
  • Decline in motor function
  • Dizziness and fainting
  • Feeling light headed
  • Headache
  • GI distubance with diarrhea or constipation
  • Nausea and/or abdominal cramps
  • Muscle aches, twitching and cramps
  • Loss of libido, infertility in women, impotence in men
  • Oseoporosis
  • Bone and joint pain
  • Immune system suppression
  • Suicidal thoughts and increased risk of attempt
  • Depression or the opposite, aggressive behavior
  • Slow wound healing
  • Decline in cognitive function (memory lapse, forgetfulness, confusion)

The above list of risks are documented from hundreds of research studies, observed while those following a vLCD were under medical supervision. Note, even with medical supervision, the risk of sudden death is at the top of the list and remains a risk for up to six months following the period of vLCD.

Kimkins diets contain no warning about the potential risks noted above, nor does the website make it clear that this level of calorie deficit requires medical supervision for risk containment.

In a sane world, when one is offered a vLCD as an option and thus undertakes such an approach with informed consent, the healthcare professional closely monitors progress to identify if and when someone is in trouble if and when one of the known risks or side effects presents a greater risk than the low caloric intake. In such a situation a reversal of course is immediate and swift to prevent continued injury to the individual or death.

With no such risk containment included within the Kimkins diet, individuals are left on their own with no way to understand, identify or prevent a catastrophy. That’s not only irresponsible, it’s shameful.


Comments feed for this article

August 1, 2007 at 4:20 pm


thank you for this insightful site…it’s sobering and hard to read…but unfortunately, necessary.

August 1, 2007 at 6:47 pm

Healthy LCer

I was wondering if someone got sick from doing Kimkins, can Kimmer be sued? Just wondering..

August 2, 2007 at 2:23 pm


Wow that is a trip!! Even Amy said that she was have issues with sunlight a while back.

October 5, 2007 at 7:45 pm

Let’s Review Important Information « Kimkins Exposed

[…] Kimkins Very Low Calorie Diet Courts Health Risks, Death (must read for anyone who has actually followed the diet plans as written) […]

October 7, 2007 at 11:17 pm


i was on kimkins and i was extremely sick. at first i just thought that i had a flu or something. but i was nausaus, vomiting. diareah. migraines! it was horrible. but i just thought it was the flu. i went to the doc put me on antibiotics and nothing fixed it. then after about 1 month i stopped the kimkins plan and within a week i was completely back to normal. it was horrible. i wish i would have known the side effects i would have never paid someone to make me sick!

October 10, 2007 at 4:17 am


I am so very glad you are getting this information out there. Kimmer is just one in a long line of diet scam artists to take advantage of the vulnerability of people with weight to loose.

Keep up the good work and never be afraid to speak the truth!

God Bless,

November 12, 2007 at 4:09 pm

Shannon RH

I just learned of this diet and all its lies. That is really too bad. People want to lose wait to look good, but also to FEEL good. Kimkins should be ashamed of themselves.

November 12, 2007 at 4:13 pm

Shannon RH

Correction. I mean wieght. On the Mike and Juliet show this morning, the PR rep for Kimkins totally got busted. She sent an email to the show on accident, saying she was nervous about the nutritionist being there. LOL!

November 23, 2007 at 2:40 pm


Kimkins is the most vile thing I have seen in the world of diets. Who thought starving yourself, and promoting anorexia, with a fancy name, was a good idea. Then you see that the person who created the diet is still a FAT COW and wonder what is wrong with society that there are people out there defending her. It’s scary to think people would take a life threatening approach to losing weight over good old fashion exercise. Losing weight is a ilfe style change and a very difficult thing to, but in my opinion, if it doesn’t include exercise you are wasting your time.