The Kimkin's Diet (a derivative of the Atkin's Diet) is featured in this month's Woman's World magazine. However, I am still skeptical considering every photo she has ever posted of herself looks like a different woman. I realize people look different when they have lost a lost of weight, but I am talking about photos of her AFTER she lost weight. Even her eyes are a different color. Also she pays "affiliates" to post success stories on other diet websites. If you really read up on the diet it is really mainly about calorie restriction. She says people can lose weight and stay healthy on as little as 500 calories a day (that part is not in the WW article) and exercise and drinking water are not neccessary. While I don't doubt people can lose weight that way, I don't think it's healthy.

I agree with Fluffybear here. I have strong reservations about low carb and low fat together being healthy or a long term solution for weight loss. I would much rather listen to Drs Atkins and/or the Eades and all the current research about carb restricted diets. This just seems like the same old low calorie routine that cannot be sustained for life. Nyah Levi

I am not only skeptical of Kimkins being a low fat, low calorie diet, but I am also skeptical of their marketing techniques. People on such websites are usual PAID to give their testimonials and Kimkins even offers an affiliate's program whereby people are paid a 25% commission for every person they send to the Kimkins website who joins. Now in my opinion that would be enough to make some unscrupulous people fudge on the facts or even lie about their own weight loss in order to earn money. From what I understand, this is not uncommon with commercial weight loss programs and with membership fees at $60, Kimkins is certainly a commercial enterprise.

The diet itself is nothing new. A low fat, low carb low calorie plan has been around for ages. There was Stillman's in the 1960s and earlier. There have been many others.

Just googling "rabbit starvation" tells youwhat you need to know about low carb, low fat, low cal "diets".

I figured it had to be a scam

not to mention she started out here... just like any one of us tweaking at the diet.

Strange - her old pictures (those that used to be up on her website) are gone....not only that, but even Jimmy Moore's blog (who included that old photo in posts about her) seems to have lost it too....the "way back" machine (website archives) has no pages stored to go back and see what they cached either.....and even Jimmy Moore's blog posts that were reprinted elsewhere (Low-Carb Newsline, CarbWire) - are all missing that older photo (of her slimmed down).

WHY?

i dont know about the pictures and the cost of her program (I paid $30.00 for a lifetime membership many months ago...), but I do think she has hit the proverbial calories count nail right on the head. They do, and if you don't address that issue, particularly as you approach your ideal weight, you will be forever stalled...
the only question is, given all the other benefits of low carbing, do you care? if you do, it's time for to watch those portions. Kimkins provides a method and support structure for that purpose.

A lot of people change eyecolor.

Unless she's had EXTENSIVE plastic surgery. Only those who saw her ORIGINAL weight loss photo compared to the one that was in the Woman's World article know what I am talking about. Make-up couldn't even account for such a change. Does the person in the red dress REALLY look like the same person as the photo before it OR the large one that was in Woman's World? ALL of these photos have been posted at one time or another by Kim (Kimmer) and said to be HER after photos.

Yes, actually. She may have had some 'work" done, and the camera angle is very different, but it does look like the same person to me.

The only thing I can see that is common to all photos is that

A-She is female (I think)

B- She has long dark hair

C- She is light skinned


PS--If she did use a plastic surgeon, she should fire him, cause he made her nose BIGGER.

I was taken back by the differences even before the WW article. It would be so foolish to use such drastically different people as representations of the same woman, so I am assuming that she has had work done and has at least 2 pairs of coloured contacts. I really hope it isn't fraudulent representation as that would be yet another thing people will use against lowcarb. I give her the benefit of the doubt, but I admit that my bullpoopie detector went off the first time I saw two of her after pictures side by side. The "disguised" before pictures, while not unusual for heavy people, just adds fuel to it.

So I hope she's being honest, and if she's had work done, I want her doctor's number. That picture from her site looks like a 25 year old woman. I bet he or she could do an awesome job if I ever decide to get boob reduction/body lift.

I'd definitely like to see more before pics, but when I had lost 133 pounds people walked past me without knowing me. I look so vastly different from heavy to thin that I need new ID whenever I drop weight.

Then there' photoshop... ah what delights the art director at Women's World might have cooked up.

Well, yeah. The WW pic is horribly airbrushed, I am surprised you can make out any of her facial features.