Monday, December 31, 2007

Santa Claus, Santa Claus You Are Much too Fat....



Santa Claus, Santa Claus You Are Much too Fat

I heard a reindeer hoof, then Santa dressed in red,
came crashing thro’ the roof and landed on my bed.
I thought it was a dream, but quickly did I wake,
as soon as I heard Santa scream, “I want a piece of cake!”

CHORUS
Oh, Santa Claus, Santa Claus, you are much too fat;
I was sleeping peacefully but now my bed is flat. Oh!
Santa Claus, Santa Claus, how much do you weigh?
I’m glad I’m not a reindeer that has to pull your sleigh!

He got up off the floor and said, “How do you do?”
I said, “My back is sore, my head is black and blue.”
“So sorry!” he replied, and then he asked my name.
He offered me a ride, I said, “No, thank you just the same!”

CHORUS

I heard a “ho, ho, ho,” the sleigh was in the sky.
but it was moving slow and wasn’t very high.
It wobbled in the air, I hoped it wouldn’t fall;
Said Santa, chewing cookies, “Merry Christmas, one and all!”

CHORUS


I found this in a good blog post titled Cute or Horrifying?, Make sure you check out the rest of the post.

It seems this is the type of Christmas songs they teach in schools these days. I know its good to have a sense of humour and all that but for those on the receiving end it is pretty mortifying, ESPECIALLY when you're a kid. People always say that children are very resilient but frankly I don't buy that, I don't believe children are as tough as we give them credit for, they just appear tough because they don't know how to or feel they can't express themselves. E.g. show hands if you have or had some type of hang up that relates back to when you were kid?

Well that's just my unprofessional opinion :)

But not only do we feel it is fine to mock fat children in our schools, now our governments feel it is fine to mock them too, even to the extent of scrutinising children that may be simply tall and solid because their BMI says they are fat?

For example in America, Regina Wilshire had this to say about new recommendations to tackle childhood obesity:

"A new report, Expert Committee Recommednations Regarding the Prevention, Assessment, and Treatment of Child and Adolescent Overweight and Obesity: Summary Report, issued by the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) this month, is designed to tackle the growing prevalence of childhood obesity in the United States.

Its recommendations should make any parent shudder - not only does the position of the AAP assume overweight and obesity in children is a problem of behavior, it assumes every child in the United States, with the exception of those classified as "underweight" by BMI, is in need of routine intervention and prevention to avoid overweight and obesity in adulthood.

I kid you not.

Every child in the United States, except those with a BMI classifed as "underweight," will now be subject to a risk assessment and prevention measures at every doctor visit. The implication within the document is clear - parents simply cannot be trusted to know how to raise normal healthy weight children over the long-term, even when their child is a normal weight, thus routine, repeated messages must be delivered at each and every opportunity."


Read the rest here: Growing Pains

It is starting to happen here in Australia too, with a four year health check being introduced next year, excerpt taken from Sydney Morning Herald:

"ALL four-year-old children will have their weight checked as part of a Federal Government strategy to make tackling chronic levels of overweight and obesity a national priority.

The Minister for Health, Nicola Roxon, told a Sydney conference yesterday that from next year there would be a $45 Medicare rebate for GPs and community clinics to conduct the Healthy Kids Checks.

By 2009 all four-year-old children - about 255,000 each year - will have their body mass index (a measure of a person's weight scaled according to their height) measured when they are immunised.

The idea was first raised as a pre-election commitment by Labor in April last year and was designed to give professional advice to parents on how to look after their children's weight, Ms Roxon said.

"The Healthy Kids Check will help ensure all our four-year-olds are healthy, fit and ready to learn when they start primary school," she said yesterday."


Oh Great!

I am sure this great nutritional advice will get them ready to learn... just like their great nutritional advice helps diabetics manage their diabetes [sarcasm]

This has me concerned for my daughter, as she was a big baby being above the top percentiles for both age/height and age/weight on the old formula growth charts despite being fully breastfed. I would imagine they would have a field day with her!

Of course if you look at the photos I put up in my post just under this you can see at just over 2 years and 8 months, she looks very healthy. When I checked recently, on those same old growth charts she was still over the top percentile for height but under the top percentile for weight, in fact I think she went for a year or close with out gaining weight as she went through a huge growth spurt.

I don't immunise Maya anymore so hopefully she will slip through.

Thursday, December 27, 2007

Belated Merry Christmas and Happy New Year

Sorry I haven't wished everyone a Merry Christmas but I have been very busy. Also sorry I haven't been updating much but apart from being busy I have also been feeling a bit burnt out with kimkins and have been spending lots of time trying to help with the cause where I can. I haven't really known what to blog about.

Anyway I wanted to share my Christmas present with you guys, Garry booked me in for a joy flight in an old warbird, I was packing it at first but it was really fun and left me wanting more :)

Here is a pic of my parachute, you will notice there is padding down the bottom as the seats in the plane are just metal bucket seats:



Here's a pic of me in the plane that the pilot took, it didn't turn out very good in that it it was very washed out/bright on me so I tried to fix it up a little but I don't know how to use photoshop so this will have to do lol



This is one of the plane just before we start to go down the runway:



Here is a pic of Maya whom is a little scared of what was going on at first. She is watching whilst the pilot does an engine test before we take off:



Now, when Maya does something good like a wee in the potty we always cheer her on saying "you did it, you did it!" same thing is we do something cool together, we cheer each other on. Apparently as the plane took off Maya was cheering me on saying "You did it, you did it, mummy did it!"

I thought it was very cute :)

Tuesday, December 04, 2007

Kimkins, dieting and eating disorders

I was reading this post and was really moved by it so I wanted to share, it is kimkins related but I found it to be much more then that:


"People don’t see eating disorders with fat people. They see desperation and lack of self control. They’ve eaten so much they deserve to be that way. They’ve let themselves go. They’re disgusting, it’s their fault.



I am fat. I am overweight. I do not overeat. I am not lazy. I am not gluttonous. I have not let myself go. I do not sit on my ass all day. And I have an eating disorder."




Friday, November 16, 2007

Kimkins Diet Scam



An alleged picture of Kimkins founder Heidi Diaz (aka Kimmer) taken during her deposition on the 12th of November 2007. See kimkins works! :p


Okay, I just wanted to make hopefully one last post on this controversial diet scam named Kimkins. I have been procrastinating on this for a while, because as passionate as I am about the potential health risks of the kimkins diet I do feel that posting on the other aspects of the kimkins scam doesn't really fit with this blog and is much better left to the others. But, with the latest publicity Kimmer and her kimkins diet has had from the Morning Show, which apparently is pretty major, I have been a little concerned that this would send a lot more her way especially considering the 40,000 new members kimkins received after the womans world article in just a few short weeks. Granted, this wasn't positive like the WW article, but we all know how easy it is to let our desperation to lose weight get the better of us, as well as how damn convincing Kimmer can be.

A diet that promises fast weight loss - we all know how the quick fix (or pop a pill) mentality feels like and how easy it is to think:

"oh it won't happen to me"

or

"I will get the weight off quick and then get the heck out of there before anything bad happens"

Also, I am sure there are still a lot of people whom think they are untouchable so long as they are fat. For those that don't know, she also allegedly spouted this rubbish to a 14 year old girl whom wasn't even overweight consuming just 500 calories a day. Even if that may be true in some instances, just keep in mind, how are you going to get off that roller coaster once you are slim and the risks more dangerous?

How do you think you will feel about food mentally?

You might scoff at me for saying that, but I have heard so many stories now of people coming off kimkins with disorded views on food, it is seriously not funny. A quick squizz on kimkins survivors will show you what I mean.

Another come back I see often is in reference to WLS (weight loss surgery). Heidi often says that people are put on diets of 500 calories after weight loss surgery to justify her very low calorie diet. Here is a great post by someone whom has had gastric bypass whom explains why this isn't so: weight loss surgery

I have wrote a few times on the risks as well as working on a page outlining some of the risks shown in research on VLCD diets (you can also do a search on my blog for kimkins posts) so I won't repeat myself:

Research on the risks of very low calorie diets

Gallstones

Muscle Mass, Rabbit Starvation and Thyroid

Also here is an article by Carol on losing muscle mass.


Also if you followed kimkins and have not received a refund you can join the lawsuit that began last Monday...

You can find the blog with information about it here: Kimkins lawsuit plus you can find a video explaining the process of how to join the lawsuit here: Kimkins lawsuit video.

Also kimkins scam has a page of links to what you can do to take action here.

For those interested in the scam part of it you can find some of the blogs in my menu to the right of this page plus you can find all the links to both The Morning Show with Mike and Juliet and KTLA TV stories as well as links to the surveillance videos done by the private investigator on the left of BG's blog here and you can find all the current photos of Kimmer by the person whom hired the private investigator on his blog here. Plus Juliet mentioned Mondays show on her blog here.

I also wanted to mention for those that have watched the Morning Show last Monday, please don't let that turn you off from considering a low carb diet, they can be very beneficial for many reasons (see low carb research), particularly if combined with resistant training. Both the doctor and nutritionist really didn't appear to be that informed about the importance of fats and the merits of low carbohydrate diets thus the doctors confusion regarding ketogenesis, ketosis and ketoacidosis plus you don't have to be in ketosis to do a low carbohydrate diet.

*Kimkins Update*

I have updated this post with a picture of Heidi taken during her deposition for the kimkins lawsuit on the 12th of November. I would also like to add a link to a news story that aired last night on KTLA TV showing a video tape of Heidi during her deposition: 11/29 - Founder "Kim Kin Diet" Admits Diet was a Lie, Chip Yost Reports

This was the same day Kimmer made her IMO pathetic attempt at an apology and uploaded a photo of what she claimed to now look like on her website. As you can see by the picture I have added to the top of this post, the picture she uploaded to her site does not appear to be accurate as it is not consistent with the women in the deposition photo. Whilst I believe it is her, in my opinion, it looks like it has been heavily altered in photoshop or a similar program.

*update* she has since removed the altered picture from her website and replaced it with a more realistic one. If I find a picture of her altered one for those whom missed out I will edit the link in here so you can see for yourself :)


Sept 22: The Low Fat side of the Kimkins Diet: Rabbit Starvation, Sudden Death and Resting Metabolism.
Sept 11: The Low Fat side of the Kimkins Diet: Gallstones.
Aug 17: My reply to Deni
Aug 13: The low fat side of the Kimkins Diet, Part 1
July 18: Is Kimkins okay simply because it is low carb?
July 15: Kimkins and Kimmer
June 13: Okay Some Kimkins Stuff...

Thursday, November 15, 2007

A Low-carb Diet May Stunt Prostate Tumor Growth

Hey, I just came across this today in Science Daily. We all know how beneficial low carbohydrate diets are for various cancers and there are more and more studies out there that show this. Now, another on prostate cancer, but be warned - it is a mice study. This will lead to a human one and hopefully more recognition for low carb diets.

In the study they compared tumour growth in mice fed a low carb diet, a low fat diet and a western diet that is high in both fat and carbohydrates. The low fat diet had a shorter survival time and large tumour but western diet faired the worst with the shortest survival time and biggest tumour out of all three. Naturally the low carb diet faired the best with the longest survival and smallest tumours but as well as that not only did they share lower insulin levels like the low fat group they also had lower levels of the form of IGF, which is capable of stimulating tumor growth.

I liked this quote:

"This study showed that cutting carbohydrates may slow tumor growth, at least in mice," said Stephen Freedland, M.D., a urologist at Duke University Medical Center and lead researcher on the study. "If this is ultimately confirmed in human clinical trials, it has huge implications for prostate cancer therapy through something that all of us can control, our diets."

:)

Sunday, November 04, 2007

Mother Jailed, Put On Trial for Curing Her Son of Melanoma

I was reading this after one of the ladies posted about this today on our forum. Have you guys in the US, heard about this?

Mother Jailed, Put On Trial for Curing Her Son of Melanoma


Very freaky... what do you think?

*update*

I just wanted to say I found an article with a different perspective here. I did mention it in the comments but the link didn't work so thought it best to add here.

I also found a few records of traffic violations dating from 2004 for a Laurie Jessop born in 1961 and a Chad Jessop born in 1990 so there does appear to be a 17 year old Chad Jessop in Orange County. I also found records of a family court battle between a Laurie Jessop and a Markus Jessop whom have a child dating back from 2003 which seems to have been revived this past August. So it may be true, or at least these identities exist, maybe someone should try to contact them to see if it actually happened?

Thursday, October 25, 2007

Low carb diet now extends benefits to IBD

Hey I was just reading this news article and thought I'd share, I found it interesting that they removed onions, I wonder if it was because of fructans anyway here it is:


Low carb diet now extends benefits to IBD

A special low-carbohydrate diet has been found to relieve the distressing symptoms that afflict people with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) – an umbrella term that covers Crohn’s disease and ulcerative colitis.

The Australian study, from Box Hill Hospital Victoria, found the diet, which involves cutting back on foods including wheat, onions, milk, ice-cream, apples, honey, stone fruits and legumes, to be effective in more than 50 per cent of patients with IBD who have co-existing irritable bowel syndrome (IBS).


Read the rest here


I found the abstract if anyone is interested: The effect of reduction of poorly absorbed, highly fermentable short-chain carbohydrates (FODMAPs) on the symptoms of patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) (scroll down)

 

Avocado, Pancetta and Pine Nut Salad

I found this recipe in the Delicious magazine, it is a Jamie Oliver recipe and looks really yummy and would be very low carb!

Avocado, Pancetta and Pine Nut Salad

12 thin slices of pancetta
6 Avocados (ripe)
4 large handfuls of baby spinach
50g pine nuts
2 Tbs of Olive oil (extra virgin)
1 Tbs balsamic vinegar
extra oil for frying

Fry pancetta in a little olive oil until crispy, remove and set aside. Add pine nuts to pan and lightly toast until golden, set aside.

Peel and cut avocados into wedges and toss with with pancetta, pine nuts and spinach.

To make dressing, with a whisk, combine balsamic vinegar with the olive oil and season with freshly ground salt and pepper then drizzle over salad.

Kimmer, Defammation of Character

I just got word that Kimmer is allegedly suing Jeanessa's attorney John for defamation.

How did she work that one out? I assume the KTLA series? LOL

Monday, October 22, 2007

The Right Brain vs Left Brain















I keep meaning to post this here for some fun, have a go! :)

The Right Brain vs Left Brain test ... do you see the dancer turning clockwise or anti-clockwise?

If clockwise, then you use more of the right side of the brain and vice versa.

Most of us would see the dancer turning anti-clockwise though you can try to focus and change the direction; see if you can do it. MORE

Saturday, October 13, 2007

Some Home Made Dairy Recipes


photo courtesy of geek philosopher

I love buying cooking magazines, I try to buy one every fortnight during our main grocery shop. This time I bought one called Donna Hay Magazine, I had never bought this one before and it was really good. I found a bunch of LC suitable recipes and shared some of them here

But what was even better was the home made dairy recipes inside which looked very simple. There's ricotta cheese, curd cheese, clotted cream and yoghurt. With Maya being sensitive to the proteins in regular cows milk I have to give her A2 milk. I have yet to come across any cheese or yoghurt's (which she loves) that are made with this milk so I thought some of these recipes would come in handy.

Anyway I thought you guys might like them too :)

Keep in mind that the cup measures are metric cup measures so use the other measure in brackets if you don't use metric and metric tablespoon are 20ml where as US tablespoons are 14 ml which is about half an ounce, measurements and conversions.



Ricotta

Makes 1¼ cups or 10 oz


1.5 litres of full cream milk (48 fl oz)
2 TBL white vinegar
candy thermometer
fine muslin

Pour milk into saucepan with thermometer and heat to 80°C (176°F). Remove from heat, add vinegar and set aside for 5 minutes to curdle.

Sit colander over a deep bowl and then line colander with the muslin. Using a slotted spoon, gently spoon the curds into the colander and leave to drain for 5 minutes. Need to be gentle with the curds so they don't go dry and grainy.

Next just gently spoon into a class or ceramic dish and cover loosely with cling wrap. Can store in fridge for up to a week.


Curd Cheese

Makes 400g or 14 oz

¼ cup (2 fl oz) water
1 tsp liquid rennet
2 litres (64 fl oz) full cream milk
table salt
candy thermometer
fine muslin

Bring water to boil and then cool completely. Stir in rennet and set aside.

Pour milk into saucepan and with candy thermometer heat to 32°C (90°F). Remove from heat, add water/rennet mixture and gently combine for 5-8 mins until curds form.

Place colander over a deep bowl and line with muslin, pour the curd mixture in to the muslin and allow to drain. Using the muslin shape the curd into an oval and twist any excess whey out.

Remove the cheese from the muslin, sprinkle with salt and then place in an airtight container and refrigerate for 2 hours before its ready.

This cheese will last for 2 days. I wonder if you can freeze it? Anyone know?
I just noticed there's some recipes where they fry it, maybe it could be fried and then frozen?


Clotted Cream

750ml (24 fl oz) of double cream


Preheat oven to 80°C (176°F).

Place cream in a ceramic baking dish and cover with foil. Bake for 8 hours or until thickened slightly with a pale yellow skin on top.

Allow to cool completely then cover with cling wrap and chuck in fridge overnight to set. Once set it should be firm.

Carefully scrape off the buttery top with a spoon before serving. Can be stored in fridge for 3-4 days.


Yoghurt

Makes 1 litre or 32 fl oz

1 litre (32 fl oz) full cream milk
¼ cup (2 ¼ oz)natural thick yoghurt.
1 sterilsed glass jar with tight fitting lid.

Using a candy thermometer, heat milk in saucepan until it reached 95°C (203°F)
Pour into sterilised jar and cool to 42°C (108°F), stir in yoghurt then put on lid.

Wrap jar in a cloth and leave for 8-12 hours to sit in room temperature until yoghurt has thickened.

Drain excess liquid from the top of the yoghurt and your done. Can be stored in fridge for up to 2 weeks.

Wednesday, October 03, 2007

Kimkins and Kimmer on TV!!!

Check it out: KTLA Exclusive: Internet Diet Scam Exposed

Oh and notice how she sounds just like Jimmy's podcast!!! :)

Oh and by the way, for those on Dial up, Serenity from LCF went to the trouble of writing out a transcript and sharing some pics from the video, check it out here

Also now that this is all out I wanted to mention a new blog post on the PI's blog that you will find interesting :)

Private Investigator's Notes: The Surveillance of Southern California Diet Scammer Heidi Diaz of Kimkins

Edited to add I changed the link to KTLA above to a direct link as it saves looking for it plus the viewing window is larger but the original link is here. There is another show tonight which I believe is covering the lawsuit and health risks. Use this link when waiting for the next show to come online, the first one uploaded after the show had finished airing so I'd expect the same to happen this time. The news program airs at 10pm pst and goes for an hour so expect it to go online after 11pm sometime.

Enjoy :)

Tuesday, October 02, 2007

BMI

Hey I was just visiting Burning the Scale blog and came across this flickr gallery displaying photos of people representing various BMI's

Some are really surprising: Illustrated BMI Categories

Saturday, September 22, 2007

The Low Fat side of the Kimkins Diet: Rabbit Starvation, Sudden Death and Resting Metabolism.

Low Fat Side of Kimkins parts 1 and 2

As discussed in the previous article, very low calorie diets like kimkins can cause gall stones due to rapid weight loss as well as the lack of fat that is commonly seen on this diet. This, may also be a danger for low calorie diets like Tony Ferguson which also commonly results in rapid weight loss, very low fat and can easily slip into the VLCD category for some as well.


Liquid Protein diets and Sudden Death


A concern is the sudden deaths associated with the liquid protein shake VLCD diets in the 70s and 80s. Now yes, there was a major issue with the type of protein used but it wasn't the only issue. Of course there have been improvements in the quality and thus safety of these liquid meal replacement diets over the short term (though they still carry lots of risks) BUT they do not show any safety for unsupervised diets, let alone ones that are simply a stab in the dark and offer no real nutritional guidelines and minimums, to avoid risks associated with VLCD dieting and fasting.


I should add to this that a little while back in the space of a little over a week I had heard of two incidents by people whom had allegedly run into heart trouble whilst following Kimkins. The last person apparently had dangerously low levels of potassium, that is not something to be messed with. The fitday in which allegedly belonged to this person appeared to be kimmers experiment with fat under 30g but mostly under 20g. Protein choices were mostly protein shakes, chicken, egg, fish and turkey and went back to early June so this person would appear to have been on this diet for over 2 months when they ended up in hospital. I haven't heard any more of these two incidences since.


"IN 1976 a book entitled The Last Chance Diet was published and almost immediately, several liquid-protein-modified-fast (LPMF) diets became very popular and fashionable as means of rapid weight reduction. These diets were intended to serve as the dieter's only source of calories. Between January 1, 1977 and December 31, 1977, it was estimated that more than 100,000 persons had used one or more of the LPMF diets as their sole source of nourishment for at least 1 month. By August 1977, however, sudden death in several young LPMF diet users was reported to either the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) or the Center for Disease Control (CDC), and between July 1977 and January 1978 at least 60 deaths among avid users of the LPMF diet were reported to the FDA and CDC. " [16]


One study discussing the dieters that died from sudden death in the late 70's and cardiac dysfunction, speculated that "Although little is known about the pathogenesis of the acquired QT syndrome exhibited by certain persons during and for a variable periods of time after prolonged caloric restriction, it is likely that severely obese individuals who have lost 30% or more of their body weight rapidly, either by fasting or by means of VLC diet, are at substantial risk of developing this dangerous cardiac disorder. Less obese persons who reduce their weight rapidly on similar regimens may develop a prolonged QTc interval after losing as little as 10 to 15% of body weight, In such individuals, death from ventricular arrhythmia could occur within 2 months of dieting." [17]


Some other studies regarding these PSMF shake diets and sudden deaths [18, 19]


This is why I have a problem with the kimkins diet for ANYONE. Who is to say, that a or a future member or two (or three) of kimkins does not have the potential for sudden death through following her diet plans and advice? How do we know that her plan as vague and nutritionally unsound as it appears to be, is any better then the old liquid protein diets of the past that were associated with sudden deaths?


Don't forget she also has a shake plan, a shake plan I might add that even allows for home made shakes that have no proper nutritional guidelines other then protein and carb limits and thus are pretty much left up to the dieter to formulate. Dieters that will have no experience or knowledge in formulating such a thing in order to ensure adequate safety. This is why I believe her shake plan has the potential to be one of the worst plans of hers though eating 4 bites of lean chicken and a coffee is certainly not any better!


But to make things worse, not only does she have an 800 calorie shake plan (4 x 200 calorie protein shakes) amongst her official plans, she has also advised on her forum her recommendation to do, a 450 calorie version of her shake plan, consisting of 3 x 150 calorie protein shakes and that's it... for fastest results. This 450 calorie version, she claims is her fastest plan.


Rabbit Starvation


But there's more , there is also concern regarding diets consisting of mostly lean protein, a concern that was commonly shared by arctic explorers.


The term "Rabbit Starvation" is well known amongst explorers. I have seen this term mentioned in a lot of discussions regarding lean protein and low carb including low carb research papers. If you have been keeping up with this whole kimkins controversy then you have probably seen the term mentioned many times amongst kimkins related discussions as well. The one they usually refer to is, Vilhjalmur Stefansson whom spent many years with the Eskimos, which included eating their diet. I found some of his writings which I will share:


Quoted by Vilhjalmur Stefansson in an article on the weston A Price web site [20]:


"The groups that depend on the blubber animals are the most fortunate in the hunting way of life," wrote Stefansson, "for they never suffer from fat-hunger. This trouble is worst, so far as North America is concerned, among those forest Indians who depend at times on rabbits, the leanest animal in the North, and who develop the extreme fat-hunger known as rabbit-starvation. Rabbit eaters, if they have no fat from another source-beaver, moose, fish-will develop diarrhea in about a week, with headache, lassitude, a vague discomfort. If there are enough rabbits, the people eat till their stomachs are distended; but no matter how much they eat they feel unsatisfied."


He and other explorers termed this diet 'Rabbit Starvation' or 'Rabbit Malaise'.


I was reading his book titled, My life With The Eskimo on google book search [21] and I found this on page 27 and 28:


"In certain places and in certain years rabbits are an important article of diet, but even when there is an abundance of this animal, the Indians consider themselves starving if they get nothing else, ~~ and fairly enough, as my own party can testify, for any one who is compelled in winter to live for a period of several weeks on lean meat will actually starve, in this sense : that there are lacking in his diet certain elements, notably fat, and it makes no difference how much he eats, he will be hungry at the end of each meal and eventually he will lose strength or becomes actually ill."


Then page 140:


"Of our entire seven I was now the only one not actually sick, and I felt by no means well. Doing hard work in cold weather on a diet nearly devoid of fat is a most interesting and uncommon experiment in dietetics, and may therefore be worth describing in some detail. The symptoms that result from a diet of lean meat are practically those of starvation. The caribou on which we had to live had marrow in their bones that was as blood, and in most of them no fat was discernible even behind the eyes or in the tongue. When we had been on a diet of oil straight, a few weeks before, we had found that with a teacupful of oil a day there were no symptoms of hunger; we grew each day sleepier and more slovenly, and no doubt lost strength gradually, but at the end of our meals of long haired caribou skin and oil we felt satisfied and at ease. Now with a diet of lean meat everything was different. We had an abundance of it as yet and we would boil up huge quantities and stuff ourselves with it. We ate so much that out stomachs were actually distended much beyond their usual size ~~ so much that it was distinctly noticeable even outside of one's clothes. But with all this gorging we felt constantly hungry. Simultaneously we felt like unto bursting and also as if we had not had enough to eat. One by one the six Eskimos of the party were taken with diarrhea.


By the 10th of January things were getting to look serious indeed. It was apparent not only that we could not go on indefinitely without fat, but it was also clear that even our lean meat would only last a few days longer. We had on December 11th estimated that we had two months' supplies of meat, and now in a month they were gone. Our estimate had not been really wrong, for if we had had a little fat to go with the meat, it would no doubt have lasted at least sixty days, but without the fat we ate such incredible quantities that it threw all our reckoning out of gear. "


[I can't access the next page so I have no idea how much more he goes into it, if anyone does please share :)]


I found another book by Stefansson on google books titled, Unsolved Mysteries of the Arctic [22], here's an excerpt from page 248-249 which whilst discussing rabbit starvation also discussed something that is so relevant today, lets see if you can pick it:


"It is widely accepted, and probably correct, that the chief difficulty in shifting from a mixed to a meat diet is psychological~~a digestive revulsion based upon the idea that meat is dangerous. For, until recently, it has been a common belief that you cannot be healthy unless you have a varied diet, that meat is injurious if taken in large quantities, and that you become "tired of a monotonous diet". The Andree party do not seem to have had any such inhibitions. This may have been because they were familiar with the history of human diet and knew that nations and races have lived for centuries and millenniums on a diet mainly or exclusively meat. More likely they expected the desirability and palatability of a meat diet through the recent experience of Nansen and Johansen who, as we have noticed more then once, spent a whole winter (a little farther north than the Andree party would be spending theirs) on an exclusive meat diet, coming out in the spring with the best of health.


It is a nearly universal experience, when a shift is being made from a mixed to a meat diet under such conditions as those of the Andree party, that there is little or no prejudice against the lean of the Arctic animals but considerable against the fat. This fat is called blubber, is supposed to be a reprehensible, and the very thought of it commonly nauseates the inexperienced.


But it has been found in various parts of the world that a diet of lean meat exclusively will cause diarrhea in from three days to a week. If no fat can be added to the lean, the diarrhea becomes serious and will lead to death. A well known field where such deaths occur is the northern edge of the forest in Canada where Indians are sometimes unable to find any food except rabbits. The expression "rabbit starvation," frequently heard among the Athapsc Indians north-west of Great Bear Lake, means not that people are starving because there are no rabbits but that they are going through the experience of starvation with plenty of rabbit meat. For this animal is so lean that illness and death result from being confined to its flesh.


When a party like Andree's are making a gradual shift from a mixed to a meat diet, no diarrhea will appear in the early stages; for there is still a considerable percentage of sugars, starches and the accustomed fats such as butter and bacon. When these elements are materially lowered, and meat begins to play a larger and larger part, you approach the diarrhea stage. The trouble, once begun, will continue until the party overcomes its prejudice against "blubber" and begins to use fat enough to make up for the things (like potatoes, bread and sugar) which are normally eaten by a man fond of beefsteak who, when he eats steak, trims the fat away."


They also did a study a few years later where both Stefansson and Anderson lived for one year on an exclusive meat diet [23]. Also if you are interested in reading more there is an old article by Stefansson available called Adventures in Diet [24].



I find these excerpts above very interesting... Here's a quote from a study on hunter gatherer diets [25]


"Many historical and ethnographic accounts have documented the deleterious health effects that have occurred when humans were forced to rely solely on the fat-depleted lean meat of wild animals. Excess consumption of dietary protein from the lean meats of wild animals leads to a condition referred to by early American explorers as "rabbit starvation," which initially results in nausea, then diarrhea, and then death. Clinical documentation of this syndrome is virtually nonexistent, except for a single case study."


"Muscle tissue of wild ungulates typically contains 2.0–3.0% fat by weight. Lean muscle meat of ungulates (2.5% fat by wt) is composed of 79.8% of energy as protein and 20.2% as fat. Consequently, consumption of lean ungulate meat as the sole daily energy intake would rapidly exceed the ability of the liver to eliminate nitrogen as urea and, hence, produce symptoms of rabbit starvation."


According to the nutrition data web site, stewed chicken breast without the skin and bone contains only 18% fat as energy whilst, roasted turkey breast meat 5% fat, light canned tuna in water (drained) 6% fat, egg whites are a mere 3% and protein shakes most likely even less. Keep in mind that the lean meat they are referring to in the quote above is 20% fat. Then we have a quote by Loren Cordain [26]:


"The human physiologic protein ceiling is, in short, the upper limit of dietary protein that humans can digest. Small animals have less fat and more protein for their size than large animals do. The total protein content of a rabbit may be as high as 75%, with 25% fat, while a large animal may be only 35% protein and 65% fat. The maximum amount of protein humans can process at one time is about 35% to 40%. Therefore, using rabbits as a food source will rapidly exceed our protein ceiling, causing a syndrome referred to by early arctic explorers and frontiersmen as "rabbit starvation." Despite eating huge amounts of lean meat, men afflicted with rabbit starvation quickly became lethargic and developed diarrhea; death eventually followed."


So if you think this couldn't possibly happen to you or someone close, think again...


I know of quite a few that have tried kimmers experiment (KE) where they eat lean meat and egg only and after a few days they go nuts and start binging through no fault of their own. I wonder, if there was nothing else available-so that all they could binge on was the lean meat, if they would then get diarrhea and so on as described by Stefansson?


Of course, granted there are tons of people doing kimkins that have the opposite problem, so I am not sure what that means. I have read in the ask kimmer thread of others having unexplainable diarrhea, and I recall Kimmer in her reply to one of the ladies who had diarrhea saying that her sister suffers the same thing and she doesn't know why. Makes me wonder if this was the same?


Muscle and Metabolism


Stefansson speaks of this unsatisfying hunger, I feel it certainly fits with the thought that excess protein converts to glucose, doesn't it? [27] it would also explain some of the incidences where people go right off the rails despite doing every thing right... of course I do think this protein theory as in how much you convert to glucose and how often and how it effects you is individual, but I have seen it myself where some people seem to do this very easily.


The worst bit about the possibly in that environment, is that if your protein is being converted into glucose so much as to invoke such hunger, then would that also keep your glucose metabolism dominant and thus more likely to burn muscle when calories are low?


Burning muscle is something you really want to minimise when trying to lose weight. Other then the more obvious benefits of having muscles, it also uses up more energy then fat just to maintain thus the higher your muscle mass the higher your energy needs. The more muscle we lose the more we lower our energy output which for obvious reasons impedes weight loss. Granted, some muscle is going to be lost during weight loss anyway, but if we lose too much particularly in comparison to our fat loss, we pretty much shoot ourselves in the foot.


There is a good article I found a while back that explains it really well [28]


Being a fertile woman I found this paragraph towards the end of the article scary:


"PHYSIOLOGICAL PHENOMENA OPPOSING WEIGHT REDUCTION


As we saw, if the energy intake is permanently reduced, body weight also reduces until it produces en energy expenditure equal to the intake, and the size of the reduction is inversely proportional to the consumption of the weight loss, which in turn depends on its composition that is determined by the starting weight. As already mentioned, a drastic diet, either in absolute terms (less than 1,200 Cal/day) or in relative (more than 500 Calories less than the starting TEE), causes the loss of a weight containing a percentage of lean body mass greater than what would be physiological for that definite starting weight. This phenomenon, which was proved in fertile women, while the clinical experience and the results of our studies suggest that it does not occur in postmenopausal women or in men, has two types of negative consequences. On one side, starting from the same body weight, since the weight loss consumes more, for a definite cumulative reduction of energy intake less weight is lost, even if in shorter time, than what would be if the weight loss composition was the physiological one. On the other side, with the weight attained being the same, since more lean than due was lost, body weight contains less lean and more fat, and then it consumes less. This means that to maintain any weight after a drastic diet one has to eat less than another person who has lost the same weight with the physiological composition, or a person with equal body weight who never lost weight. But the worst aspect of this phenomenon is that the alteration of body composition that it causes is permanent. In fact, in the case of weight regain after a drastic diet, the composition of the weight regain is the one physiological for the starting weight. Thus, less lean and more fat are regained in comparison with what was lost, and consequently also the maintenance of a weight equal to that prior to the diet entails an energy intake smaller than that before dieting. And, since the alternative is to go back to the previous energy intake stabilizing at a higher weight than that before dieting, it is easily understood how a series of such ups and downs (which is defined as "weight cycling") may lead to a progressive weight gain progressively more difficult to control. Many young women with no genetic predisposition to obesity, misled by mass media and not protected by specialized surveillance, vainly pursue unrealistic beauty ideals and eventually condemn themselves to become obese or to stay on a diet all their life."


I will have to see if I can find anything that backs this up, but its not just about muscle mass as there is also an impact on our thyroid which regulates our metabolism amongst having an effect on other important things such as our cardiovascular system, central nervous system (e.g.: mental state), growth and development and our reproductive system [29].


An interesting study I found explores the effect of a high protein VLCD on resting metabolism, thyroid hormones and energy expenditure of obese middle-aged women. [30]. Whilst they found that RMR dropped due to muscle loss they also found that the extended dieting itself had an effect on T3 levels which did not return to normal within 5 weeks of refeeding. RMR dropped significantly during the diet and upon refeeding returned to near baseline but still lower then baseline.


They note that changes in thyroid metabolism may be a factor in decreased BMR which occurs as a result of prolonged severe caloric restriction. They mention that fasting or semi-starvation leads to decreases in serum T3, increases in rT3 and little change in T4. Whilst rT3 initially increased, they found by 10 weeks it had returned to baseline and kept on dropping until significantly below baseline which they feel may indicate an adaption to prolonged caloric restriction. During the 5 weeks of refeeding that followed the VLCD they found that rT3 and T4 did return to baseline but serum T3 whilst increased, it did not reach baseline levels. They state that declined serum T3 resulting from severe caloric restriction has been linked to diet induced decline in BMR. They mention a study by Moore et al that found that those whom had the slowest weight loss during a 320 cal liquid diet had the lowest RMR and serum T3 levels. They also mention supplementing T3 to counter this was not effective and if I am reading this right suggested that such supplementation promotes protein wasting in luei of fat loss. I should note for those interested that they mention a link between carbohydrate restriction and decreased plasma T3 levels during caloric restriction, click on the link above and scroll down to thyroid hormone changes. I thought I would mention that tidbit as some members on LCF (Low Carb Friends) have been recommending that those with thyroid problems shouldn't go below 30g to 40g per day.


Another study [31] found that RMR was still depressed 2 months after the completion of a PSMF (protein sparing modified fast) and that reductions in fat free mass again did not account for all of the reductions in RMR. Here's an interesting quote I found in this paper in regards to RMR changes in lean and obese individuals:


"Refeeding experiments with lean individuals suggested that the RMR decrement associated with severe caloric limitation reverses within days of resuming maintenance caloric consumption. However, the RMR of our obese subjects remained depressed after massive weight loss despite increased caloric consumption to a level that allowed body weight stabilization."


Leibel and Hirsch [32] found that during weight maintenance some reduced-obese or even partially reduced patients must restrict their food intake to approximately 25% less than that anticipated on the basis of metabolic body size.


This study [33] found a significant reduction in serum T3:


"Serum T3 decreased by as much as 66 percent in VLCD (Very Low Calorie Diet) patients during consumption of the 400 kcal/day diet, whereas rT3 increased by as much as 27 percent. T3 increased when patients were realimented with a 1000 kcal/day balanced diet but remained a significant 22 percent below baseline."


Plus another study on the metabolic adaption in women during a very low calorie diet found that after 21 days the decrease in RMR-LBM ratio was near to that of those suffering chronic under nutrition[ 34 ].


Carol Bardelli also discusses the issue of lean body mass and VLCD dieting which you might find interesting [35]


If anyone comes across any more research on this topic please feel free to share so I can add it to my VLCD Research page and possibly this page as well. The list of references for this article as well as the previous article on gallstones is available here: Low Fat and Very Low Calorie Diets: References if needed but I have provided the links to the references through the article, just click on the relevant number to go there.



Other Kimkins articles by me:

Nov 16: Kimkins Diet Scam
Sept 11: Gallstones
Aug 17: My reply to Deni
Aug 13: The low fat side of the Kimkins Diet
July 18: Is Kimkins okay because its simply low carb?
July 15: Kimkins and Kimmer
June 13: Okay Some Kimkins Stuff...

Tuesday, September 11, 2007

The low fat side of the Kimkins Diet: Gallstones

Low Fat Side of Kimkins parts 1 and 3

Hey guys sorry its taking me a while but I've been very busy and keeping up with this whole kimkins controversy isn't helping LOL

Anyway the article is still very long so I am breaking it up more, I am still touching it up but the next part on gallstones is good to go:

When I began researching the risks of very low calorie and low fat diets I was surprised at just how common gall stones really are, because of this I thought this should be discussed first.

It has been well documented that weight loss, in particular, rapid weight loss increases your chances of developing new gallstones. It has been shown in more then one study that new gallstones have formed in as little as only 4 weeks into a VLCD [1]. One study claims 25-35% of people who experience rapid weight loss form gallstones after their VLCD diet [2] and then another one that is higher again with 54.5% developing gallstones [3], not very good odds!

The reason this is thought to happen is because, during rapid weight loss, cholesterol concentrations in the bladder increases (keep in mind this is said to have nothing to do with dietary cholesterol). To top this off, when you eat very low fat and/or skip meals you do not stimulate your gall bladder to empty itself as often, which worsens the situation, allowing gallstones to form [4]. In fact, one study found a doubling of incidence of hospitalization for gallstones amongst women who fasted overnight for more than 14 hours compared with women who fasted for 8 or fewer hours [5].

But, this isn't just associated with VLC diets. A study was done to see if this also happens on a LCD (low calorie diet). Calories were approximately 925 calories a day spread across 4 liquid meals and one solid meal. By 17 weeks into the study, Six of the 47 patients (12.8%) displayed gallstones with 5 being asymptomatic (no symptoms). The sixth however had severe pain and required a cholecystectomy at 30 weeks from the beginning of the study. [6].

Another study showed an increase risk of symptomatic gallstones with weight cycling, weight cycling is where people intentionally lose weight through diet but then later regain some or all of it back, rinse and repeat, this is otherwise known as yo-yo dieting. They found that weight cycling of more than 10 lb of weight loss and regain led to a 31% to 68% increase in the risk for cholecystectomy [7].

To add to all this, obesity itself is a pretty big risk factor for gallstones [8] with many already having silent gallstones (unsymptomatic), in which symptoms may be triggered when doing a VLCD [9]. Other risk factors are diabetes, metabolic syndrome, some medications including oral contraceptives or postmenopausal hormone replacement therapy (estrogen) [10] as well as females having a higher risk for gall stones which is thought to be due to estrogen increasing cholesterol concentrations in the gall bladder [11]

I was just reading a book called Gallbladder and Biliary Tract Diseases by Nezam H. Afdhal in Google book search [12]. On page 370 under the heading Lowering of the rate of weight reduction, it said this:

"Several Prospective studies have examined the relationship between weight loss and gallstone formation in the placebo arm of randomized controlled trials designed to prevent gallstone formation during rapid weight loss. In the study by Yang et al, patients who lost more then 25% of their baseline bodyweight during a 16 week very low calorie rapid weight loss diet had an incidence of new gallstone formation more then twice that observed for patients with a lower rate of weight loss. In two other studies, the rate of new gallstone formation increased stepwise with the rate of weight loss. Gallstones developed in only 8% of patients who lost less then 10 lb per month. This increased to 31% in patients who lost 10 to 15 lb per month and 49% in patients who lost 15-20 lb per month. The relationship between rate of weight loss and gallstone formation appeared to be stronger in women then men. These data suggests that the risk of weight loss is limited to only 1 to 2 lb per week."


One study that I was reading suggested a minimum of 10g of fat with every meal to reduce risks [13] (Keep in mind when I mention that minimum, it is in the context of trying to prevent gallstones only, personally I do believe we need more fat then that for other nutritional reasons). I have also read another study that claims physical activity helps in the prevention of gallstones [14] and another stating that 34% of cases of symptomatic gallstone disease in men could be prevented by increasing exercise to 30 minutes of endurance-type training five times per week [15].

Now if you think "well this won't happen to me" think again. There is a low carb, low fat diet in Australia that is very popular. Over here diets like Atkins aren't very popular at all ever since the Atkins craze slowed down a few years ago. But then you have the Tony Ferguson Diet which is advertised very heavily on TV and is available through a chain of chemists, their forum is very busy. This diet is not as bad as kimkins calorie wise (unless it was abused) but it can still fall into the VLCD category simply by limiting the veggies and fruit. It consists of a meal replacement for breakfast and lunch along with a fist sized portion of lean protein for dinner plus veggies/salad and fruit for snacks. The meal replacements are protein shakes or soups full of MSG. The shakes if memory serves me correct only contain around 2g of fat so as you can imagine gallstones seems to happen a lot or at least that's what I have been told by regulars on their forum. I was poking around on their forum the other day after a member bought up an issue with gallstones happening a lot there on a thread we have going, The Tony Ferguson Diet.

Now go to their forum, the url is:
http://forumDOTtonyfergusonDOTcom/Search1-1-1.aspx

(replace the "DOT" with a ".")

Do a search on gallstones and see how common they are. But check this out, this is a comment by one of their staff members on this issue which I found on their forum:

"If you are prone to gall stones, then any form of weight loss can bring them on. There really is no reason why you can't remain on the program with gall stones. Due to the fact is has such little fat content, then it should not trigger a gall stone attack."


Now if you looked at just some of the links on gallstones I have just provided, you would see just how crappy this response is. Kimmer isn't the only one whom appears to be dishing out misleading and inaccurate advice and unlike Kimmer this person I would assume is a trained professional.

As you can see, the odds are not great, seriously it seems pretty essential that you participate in regular exercise, make sure to eat enough fat regularly to encourage gall bladder emptying and avoid rapid weight loss unless medically necessary and under medical supervision.


Other Kimkins articles by me:
Sept 22: The Low Fat side of the Kimkins Diet: Rabbit Starvation, Sudden Death and Resting Metabolism.
Aug 17: My reply to Deni
Aug 13: The low fat side of the Kimkins Diet
July 18: Is Kimkins okay because its simply low carb?
July 15: Kimkins and Kimmer
June 13: Okay Some Kimkins Stuff...

Wednesday, August 29, 2007

Formaldehyde in clothes

I just wanted to quickly share this article, I was looking at it last night, almost every clothing item of Mayas that I have checked are from China...

Heres a snippet:

New Zealand's Target program tested common items of clothing made in China but New Zealand, like Australia, has no safe levels for formaldehyde, a known cancer cause.

At just 20 parts per million, the chemical can induce rashes, headaches, dizziness, joint pain, fatigue, asthma and in the extreme case - cancer.

Remember 20 parts per million is considered high, but the test results from New Zealand were incredible.

Women's corduroys: 290 parts per million.
A spiderman T-shirt: 1,400 parts per million.
Pyjamas: 3,400.
Kids pants: 16,000 parts per million.
White stain resistant pants: 18,000 parts per million.

That's nearly 900 times a reasonable safe level.

Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry Minister, Peter McGauran, ordered authorities to find out what's going on.

"(It's) totally unacceptable. Australian authorities have been caught unprepared," he said.


Article: Formaldehyde in clothes

Thursday, August 23, 2007

Low-carbohydrate nutrition and metabolism

Hey I just found this review and wanted to share, you can read the full text here on American Journal of Clinical Nutrition

Abstract:

Low-carbohydrate nutrition and metabolism

The persistence of an epidemic of obesity and type 2 diabetes suggests that new nutritional strategies are needed if the epidemic is to be overcome. A promising nutritional approach suggested by this thematic review is carbohydrate restriction. Recent studies show that, under conditions of carbohydrate restriction, fuel sources shift from glucose and fatty acids to fatty acids and ketones, and that ad libitum–fed carbohydrate-restricted diets lead to appetite reduction, weight loss, and improvement in surrogate markers of cardiovascular disease.

Friday, August 17, 2007

My Reply to Deni

Okay first up sorry I haven't put up part 2 yet of The low fat side of the Kimkins Diet but I have been busy and the yesterday got caught up in chatting which I think is stemming from me not being focused . I don't know if its like this with everyone or I'm just a wierdo LOL but I'm either totally focused/in the mood or I'm not. Yesterday I was not, I will try to be today and finish it off, I promise :)

Anyway, I just wanted to post a reply of mine to a comment made to me by Deni on her blog. She is a moderator for the Kimkins forum and unfortunately when I try to reply, I get an error saying that only "team members" are allowed which I found disappointing, as I have not been rude or anonymous.

Anyway, this is for Deni, so you don't have to read on but I don't care if you do. It appears, one of the anti-kimkins sites picked up on her blog post, so you have probably read about her post that I am referring to in my reply to her.

-----------

Deni, everything I said was in line with the focus of your post. First off, I pointed out that there are plenty of limits in fats and proteins. But more importantly, one of your points was that it was the people on the plan who were at fault for any bad eating?

That I find totally wrong and I do not think that way of thinking is what ANY lord would want to encourage.

Let me explain...

The reason why I bought up Christin and Kimmer is because like yourself, they set a huge example to the followers of the plan. People are encouraged to emulate the weight loss journey of success stories like yours and Christin. People look up to you, they have total faith and trust in the things you say. People are doing what they are doing UNDER your influences.

The majority of people on your forum are put onto a path of doing a VLCD. VLCD's whilst well known to curb hunger, also come with a lot of risks and thus should only ever be instructed and supervised by professionals experienced in their application.

I should add just in case you don't realise a VLCD is anywhere (depending on the study) from ≤ 800 to 1000 calories per day.

Just because someone doesn't feel hungry doesn't mean that they are totally out of harms way.

The worst bit is people aren't made aware of the inherent risks nor is their any true science behind the diet, you can't just pop a multi vitamin and hope that covers everything. The attitude in regards to dietary fat is also not true, particularly in the context of a low carbohydrate diet. Sure you have body fat, but body fat provides calories only, it does not provide any other nutrition. But on top of that rapid weight loss alone comes with its own set of risks to health.

There is also a huge risk in gall bladder health from VLCD, skipping meals and rapid weight loss alone let alone together, infact I have seen in studies risks go up to 54% and stones occur in as early as 4 weeks during VLCD diets. Plus obesity, diabetes etc are all risk factors on their own as well.

Also this abstinence with beef/red meat/dairy that most people seem to follow is also potentially risky in regards to important fatty acids, proteins and minerals. Minerals that are also important for weight loss, hormonal and mental health.

You know there are people that seemed perfectly fine suddenly die from doing VLCD diets with inadequate nutrition.

I could go on...

Your plans that you guys promote have no true scientific or nutritional background, just a set of vague and misleading rules. There are no minimums to ensure adequate nutrition other then a multi-vitamin which IS NOT satisfactory. There are no real warnings of the risks either. But not only that there is the mistaken belief that simply by not feeling hungry whilst eating little reassures you that your eating enough and if you feel sick to your stomach (SNATT) then that means the diet is working.

In fact, it is all pretty much left up to the interpretation of the dieter and with all the anti-fat guidelines, promoting of rapid weight loss and ignorance there is no question where that interpretation will most likely lead.

A prime example of this is through your very own Christin whom was mentioned on the kimkins exposed blog. Here are some examples allegedly in Christin's own words that I found on this blog all the whilst her average calorie intakes over six months fell below 700 calories a day (See what I mean about Kimmers Experiment still being low calorie despite not having an "official" limit in calories!):

There is nothing “magical” or unique about what I was able to accomplish. It is not an easy journey though, and I wanted to give you a few things that have helped me a long the way and hopefully answer some of your questions as well….Under the guidelines given by Kimmer this program consists of lean proteins, no extras. So, during the time I was using KE I did just that. No EXTRAS no cheese, no extra fats, no supplements. I found that the best and quickest loss for me was attained when I stayed within the list…


Fat – The point of this program is QUICK and HEALTHY weight loss. One of the things that sets Kimkins apart from other Low Carb programs is the fact that we chose to use the leanest proteins that are available to us. We will still be consuming some fat with our proteins, but the goal is as little as possible. This can also be attained by choosing even lower fat options of allowed proteins. For example: boneless/skinless chicken breast vs whole chicken on the bone; egg whites or egg beaters vs whole eggs, lean fresh ground turkey breast vs pre-ground turkey, and of course fresh fish is always a fantastic option. These are just some options that are available to you in choosing lean proteins. If you want a number to shoot for though, my guideline for myself was under 20g of fat per day, never over 30g.


That is what your members are seeing Deni, and that IS NOT HEALTHY. I don't care what her blood test results were, that doesn't speak for everyone or make such advice good and responsible advice which it is not.

You know those improvements in cholesterol, triglycerides and blood sugars can be found on the numerous low carb diets that are out there absolutely jam packed with fats, you do not have to starve your body and risk it's health to achieve that. In fact if I can find it again I will post a study sometime that I read a while back that showed some negative effects on HDL/LDL and trigs through a VLCD diet.

You can turn around and say well shes just sharing her experience, we're not telling anyone to do it or we said you should check this with your doctor, all that is, is a legal formality, morally it does not excuse it.

Before I decided to take a stance on this I contacted many researchers that were not only doctors but experienced in researching low carbohydrate diets and treating obesity for advice. Not one could support it Deni.

Its great to share experiences and support people Deni, but at the same token we have to take responsibility for what we say, support and encourage when we put ourselves in a position where people look up to us. Even if say the advice your giving is really good, by turning a blind eye to other potentially dangerous advice you are still supporting it. By linking to the website, by telling people to join, by being an affiliate, by having your success story up there, YOU ARE STILL SUPPORTING ALL THAT GOES ON THERE.

What experience do you have in VLCD dieting, nutrition and obesity for you to know for sure that yours and others advice and the kimkins plans full stop are nutritionally sound?

You can't just expect to place all blame onto the members joining, that is simply just not fair.

I don't think ANY lord would want that.

This all said, I don't think you mean any ill will but at the same token morally you still have to be accountable just like Christin, Kimmer and anyone else. After all, these peoples health, trust and possibly even their lives are in your hands.


 



Some Kimkins articles by me:

Nov 16: Kimkins Diet Scam
Sept 22: The Low Fat side of the Kimkins Diet: Rabbit Starvation, Sudden Death and Resting Metabolism.
Sept 11: The Low Fat side of the Kimkins Diet: Gallstones.
Aug 17: My reply to Deni
Aug 13: The low fat side of the Kimkins Diet, Part 1
July 18: Is Kimkins okay simply because it is low carb?
July 15: Kimkins and Kimmer
June 13: Okay Some Kimkins Stuff...

Tuesday, August 14, 2007

Kimkins Petition

Just wanted to share, that someone has put up an online petition against Kimkins:


To: Federal Trade Commission, Better Business Bureau, California Attorney General

Believing it to be true that Kimkins.com is promoting medically unsound and potentially life-threatening diet plans in which many followers have complained of one or more of the following:

� Dizziness
� Nausea
� Muscle fatigue or weakness
� Heartbeat palpitations
� Moderate to severe hair loss
� Bone and joint pain
� Mental changes - irritability, forgetfulness, confusion
� Bowel complications/symptoms of laxative abuse

And that the founder of Kimkins, known as �Kimmer� ;

� is not certified or licensed in any way to dispense nutritional and medical advice
� claims to have lost 198 lbs. but has never provided solid evidence of such loss, having refused to be interviewed in person
� has advised the daily use of laxatives extended beyond products� warnings
� has pushed diet followers to stay as low in calories as possible, even as low as 0-300 calories a day
� has used questionable marketing techniques to generate membership revenues by:

-- displaying false �before/after� testimonials
-- using viral marketing techniques such as the willful misplanting that young celebrities have followed the plan in order to target a younger demographic, including pre-teens
-- has allowed affiliates to spam many valid forums with misleading information
-- advertising the acquisition of an e-book as included in the membership fee, which she never produced

We, the undersigned hereby request that this website, Kimkins.com and its founder, �Kimmer� be properly investigated in an expedient manner so as to prevent harm from coming to more individuals who might try these plans.

Sincerely,

The Undersigned


If you agree with these concerns, you can sign the petition here: Request For Kimkins Investigation

 

Monday, August 13, 2007

The low fat side of the Kimkins Diet, Part 1

Low Fat Side of Kimkins parts 2 and 3


Hey guys I am splitting this up in two parts as it is getting awfully long. I have been working on this for a couple of weeks now but with us being sick, Maya having food intolerance reactions and then some dramas with my website being down the last four days my time or ability to concentrate lol hasn't been too crash hot. Anyway I have not quite finished the last part but I thought I should put the kimkins bit up now and then tommorrow put up the rest as it is looking too long as I type it out. I have also just started putting together some of the research on VLCD's that I have bookmarked into a page but there is still tons to add but feel free to have a look: Research on Risks of Very Low Calorie Diets.

This post here is just some concerns of mine regarding kimkins, I have seen a lot of people try to deny the very low fat and calorie side of this diet or people try to say claim the safety of Kimkins based on their own success when they did not really do it. So I wanted to make a few points about why I don't see it that way.

The next part I will go into concerns regarding gallstones, rapid weight loss and lean protein (aka Stefannson and the "rabbit diet").


I thought, a good topic to post on would be the fat intake, as the more and more I read up on about kimkin's and other's fitdays the more I see how extremely "anti-fat" this diet is.

There are 2 reasons why this concerns me, first and foremost is health reasons, more on that in part 2. But second is the association of this with low carb diets, low carb was never meant to be low fat, pure and simple. As a low carb community we have fought tooth and nail to show that good stable fat's are not unhealthy, particularly in the context of a low carbohydrate diet, same thing with cholesterol. Yet on the various kimkins plans both saturated fats and cholesterol are kept extremely low. This diet isn't about low carbing in the true sense of the word, in my opinion, carbs are only reduced in order to make the VLCD (very low calorie diet) more tolerable. In other words so you can starve without hunger...

Then you have Kimmer and crew (whomever does the web and SEO stuff with her) promoting Kimkins as the "healthy" alternative to Atkins with this anti-fat, saturated fat garbage....

For those that don't know there are a bunch of dummy sites aimed at bringing in more members by touting the same anti-Atkins garbage.

The last thing I want to see is low fat being made fashionable in low carb circles and undo all the work that has and still is being done by the various doctors, researchers and other people to prove the merits of low carb, fat and cholesterol.

If you are new to low carb and are following Kimkins or any of the said to be low carb "shake" diets such as Tony Ferguson which I have posted about before then I encourage you to read at least one of the more popular low carb books such as Atkins New Diet Revolution (2002 edition is a good one), Protein Power Lifeplan, Natural Health & Weight Loss and Life Without Bread so you can understand the true meaning of low carbohydrate dieting and understand where many of us are coming from. I will make sure to add some links to some good articles on fats at the bottom of this article as well.

I have seen many retorts that go something along the lines of...

"the kimkin's plan I am on does not limit calories"

"Kimmer says you can have just enough fat that makes your menu work, so it is not low fat, just moderate fat"

"I am doing mine a bit different so it has more fat and calories"

Hey if you are doing yours a bit different and eating above your BMR then good for you but that doesn't mean Kimkins per se is okay. Considering, her plans and guidelines (let alone advice) for such plans don't really advocate that if you want the kind of results the diet is popular for, it just means your really just doing a typical low carb diet like Atkins whilst watching your calories!

I hear of many people doing the Kimkins diet more sensibly such as, higher calories and fat and cycling one week of kimkins with four to six weeks of Atkins. That's certainly a lot better then doing Kimkins the way it is meant to be done, but it doesn't validate Kimkins whatsoever. Kimkins promises you rapid weight loss, that is the krux of her plan and why it is sooo popular. BUT in order to achieve those promises that Kimmer and her crew promise you, that her success stories claim... then the majority of you will have to cut your diet down to the bare bones. Thus, I cannot see how doing the kimkins diet in a more sensible manner can vouch for her diet being a good one let alone for its safety.

Her success stories, the stories that are the "proof" of how successful her diet is... how much were they all eating?

How much was Christin eating?

What about all the other girls that newbies are pointed to, to use as a guideline for their own kimkins weight loss?

I think we all know the answer to that one...

And another thing to keep in mind, when you come across websites for kimkins success stories, they are most likely an affiliate that gets paid to promote it and thus may have a hidden agenda.

In my opinion, Kimkins is NOT a low carb diet it is a VLCD diet and thus the dangers that go along with a VLCD diet go right along with the Kimkins diet except the Kimkins diet has no real scientific structure behind it nor is it and the advice, medically supervised like all VLCD's should be.

For those that still insist that any of her plans are okay and not low fat or low calories. Apart from the fact that all plans involve lean protein, how about we look at the alleged kimkins guidelines and tips that are presented with these plans when you sign up, such as...


"Use minimal fat for cooking"

"Use low calorie salad dressings and "light" butter substitutes"

"Don't add fat when preparing foods, e.g. grill meat, discard dripping, steam and bake fish, boil and poach eggs"

"LEAN PROTEIN: Bake, boil, broil, grill, poach, roast, steam, nonstick spray"

"Cook by any low fat method listed above"

"Remove the skin before cooking"

"Trim all visible fat"

"Replace meat with fish as often as possible"

"Replace red meat with white meat - eat chicken, turkey or ostrich instead of steak or chops"

"Beef should be eaten rarely for fastest weight loss results"

"Have meatless meals regularly, replacing meat with pasta or legumes (dry beans, peas and lentils, Toppers and textured vegetable protein dishes)"

"Save fat calories by mixing 2 egg whites + 1 whole egg for scrambles or omelettes. Choose low fat cooking methods and low fat mayonnaise to cut calories. Eggbeaters are excellent"

My gosh what fat does that leave???

Then you have her protein shake plan, where you can replace your meals with "homemade" protein shakes with guidelines on the limits of calories, carbs and protein but no guidelines for fat, minerals or any other nutrients!

Example, in Australia at least, you buy a tub of low carb protein powder designed for bodybuilders from a health food shop and right there on the label with the directions is a warning that it can not be used as a meal replacement... why do you think that is?

I have seen menus where people are eating 5-10g of fat a day, menus where people are only eating egg whites or just 4 bites of chicken and a coffee but not only that she tells them if they are not hungry then its okay!

I have seen people try and justify their fat intake with percentages, sure the percentage of fat isn't extremely low for some BUT if you are following her guidelines then it will most likely be because you are already eating low calories. Bring those calories up to a sensible level whilst keeping the fat to a similar level and watch that percentage plummet!

If you are following any authoritative type of "guidelines" to justify your fat percentage, just keep in mind that as well as the fact that these guidelines are in the context of a high carb diet, these types of guidelines use percentages based on say a 2000 calorie diet not a 500 calorie often seen on Kimkins. That makes a big difference in the amount of fat you eat as I will illustrate below...

To show this I made up a kimkins bootcamp menu minus the small amount of limited veggies. I used 2 large eggs, 2 oz lean ham, and 2 times 4 oz raw chicken breast. This gave me:

477 cals 20g fat 1g carb 68g protein and the percentages worked out to be 39% fat 1 % carbs and 60% protein

So then I decided to use kimmers maintenance menu that she posted on LCF which allegedly runs between 1200-1400 calories as an example for foods to add to it plus I added in a glass of milk as she claims in Jimmy's interview that she has a little milk...
Now I was hoping to go for a higher calorie menu by using her as a guide, but I had trouble getting over 1200 calories (suprise, suprise) which was supposedly her bottom end. But if you go by her interview with Jimmy it is now 1400-1700 calories (yeah right!). So the menu of 1168 calories will have to do. I did not add any sauces etc as she states in that post that she doesn't use them for maintenance. What we have now is:

2 large eggs, 2 oz lean ham, 8 oz whiting, 8 oz raw skinless chicken breast, 2 cups salad greens, 1 cup spinach, 1 cup raw cauliflower, 1 cup boiled potato, 1 x 100 calorie danone yoghurt, 1 cup no fat milk and 1 medium banana.

This came to 1168 calories, 26g fat, 86g carbs and 150g of protein. Percentages were, 21% fat, 25% carbs and 54% protein.

So here we have a 477 calorie menu with 39% fat turn into a 1168 cal menu and 21% fat even though the fat has increased slightly in the second menu by 6 grams. Could you imagine the fat percentage if it was 1500 cals with fat kept low? :eek:

This is why when eating low in calories you shouldn't be relying on a percentage to say that you are eating enough fat and why you should be adding fat back in to increase those calories. Do not make the mistake of increasing your calories with low fat products or fruit and veggies only. Of course, if you have been low fatting it and want to change that, then please add your fats in gradually to give your body a chance to make the enzymes needed.

If you are interested in working out calories based on your BMR (Basal Metabolic Rate), I have put up some information here: BMR and Calories

For those that are new to low carb I want to add here some good articles off the top of my head for you to read regarding fat and low carb:

The truth About Saturated Fats


Why low carb diets must be high fat not high protein

The Cure For Diabetes


Eat Fat to Lose Fat

What if It's All Been a Big Fat Lie?

Regina's Keys to Success Series

Okay that should do it, look out for part 2!

Other Kimkins articles by me:


Nov 16: Kimkins Diet Scam
Sept 22: The Low Fat side of the Kimkins Diet: Rabbit Starvation, Sudden Death and Resting Metabolism.
Sept 11: The Low Fat side of the Kimkins Diet: Gallstones.
Aug 17: My reply to Deni
July 18: Is Kimkins okay because its simply low carb?
July 15: Kimkins and Kimmer
June 13: Okay Some Kimkins Stuff...