Wednesday, October 17, 2007


A simple mammogram saved my life.

As I wrote in my blog last week, I was diagnosed with breast cancer in July of 2001 and underwent 3 operations, the last being in December of 2001. During the last operation, I had a bilateral mastectomy and reconstruction done on both breasts.

The Breast Cancer site is having trouble getting enough people to click on their site daily to meet their quota of donating at least one free mammogram a day to an underprivileged woman. It takes less than a minute to go to their site and click on "donating a mammogram" for free (pink window in the middle).

This doesn't cost you a thing. Their corporate sponsors/advertisers use the number of daily visits to donate mammogram in exchange for advertising.

Here's the web site! Please pass it along to people you know.

Follow on Buzz

Saturday, October 13, 2007

AMAZING FINDINGS IN NEW BOOK: "Rethinking Thin: The New Science of Weight Loss..."

Gina Kolata, a Science reporter with the New York Times, has a new book out entitled "Rethinking Thin: The New Science of Weight Loss — and the Myths and Realities of Dieting” (Farrar, Straus & Giroux).

The customer reviews on the book at the Amazon site are very interesting.

I'd be very interested to hear your thoughts on the following excerpt from her book, which was printed in the New York Times on May 8, 2007:

"May 8, 2007

Genes Take Charge, and Diets Fall by the Wayside

Correction Appended

It was 1959. Jules Hirsch, a research physician at
Rockefeller University, had gotten curious about weight loss in the obese. He was about to start a simple experiment that would change forever the way scientists think about fat.

Obese people, he knew, had huge fat cells, stuffed with glistening yellow fat. What happened to those cells when people lost weight, he wondered. Did they shrink or did they go away? He decided to find out.

It seemed straightforward. Dr. Hirsch found eight people who had been fat since childhood or adolescence and who agreed to live at the Rockefeller University Hospital for eight months while scientists would control their diets, make them lose weight and then examine their fat cells.

The study was rigorous and demanding. It began with an agonizing four weeks of a maintenance
diet that assessed the subjects’ metabolism and caloric needs. Then the diet began. The only food permitted was a liquid formula providing 600 calories a day, a regimen that guaranteed they would lose weight. Finally, the subjects spent another four weeks on a diet that maintained them at their new weights, 100 pounds lower than their initial weights, on average.

Dr. Hirsch answered his original question — the subjects’ fat cells had shrunk and were now normal in size. And everyone, including Dr. Hirsch, assumed that the subjects would leave the hospital permanently thinner.

That did not happen. Instead, Dr. Hirsch says, “they all regained.” He was horrified. The study subjects certainly wanted to be thin, so what went wrong? Maybe, he thought, they had some deep-seated psychological need to be fat.

So Dr. Hirsch and his colleagues, including Dr. Rudolph L. Leibel, who is now at
Columbia University, repeated the experiment and repeated it again. Every time the result was the same. The weight, so painstakingly lost, came right back. But since this was a research study, the investigators were also measuring metabolic changes, psychiatric conditions, body temperature and pulse. And that led them to a surprising conclusion: fat people who lost large amounts of weight might look like someone who was never fat, but they were very different. In fact, by every metabolic measurement, they seemed like people who were starving.
Before the diet began, the fat subjects’ metabolism was normal — the number of calories burned per square meter of body surface was no different from that of people who had never been fat. But when they lost weight, they were burning as much as 24 percent fewer calories per square meter of their surface area than the calories consumed by those who were naturally thin.

The Rockefeller subjects also had a psychiatric syndrome, called semi-starvation neurosis, which had been noticed before in people of normal weight who had been starved. They dreamed of food, they fantasized about food or about breaking their diet. They were anxious and depressed; some had thoughts of
suicide. They secreted food in their rooms. And they binged.

The Rockefeller researchers explained their observations in one of their papers: “It is entirely possible that weight reduction, instead of resulting in a normal state for obese patients, results in an abnormal state resembling that of starved nonobese individuals.”
Eventually, more than 50 people lived at the hospital and lost weight, and every one had physical and psychological signs of starvation. There were a very few who did not get fat again, but they made staying thin their life’s work, becoming Weight Watchers lecturers, for example, and, always, counting calories and maintaining themselves in a permanent state of starvation.

“Did those who stayed thin simply have more willpower?” Dr. Hirsch asked. “In a funny way, they did.”

One way to interpret Dr. Hirsch and Dr. Leibel’s studies would be to propose that once a person got fat, the body would adjust, making it hopeless to lose weight and keep it off. The issue was important, because if getting fat was the problem, there might be a solution to the
obesity epidemic: convince people that any weight gain was a step toward an irreversible condition that they most definitely did not want to have.

But another group of studies showed that that hypothesis, too, was wrong.

It began with studies that were the inspiration of Dr. Ethan Sims at the
University of Vermont, who asked what would happen if thin people who had never had a weight problem deliberately got fat.

His subjects were prisoners at a nearby state prison who volunteered to gain weight. With great difficulty, they succeeded, increasing their weight by 20 percent to 25 percent. But it took them four to six months, eating as much as they could every day. Some consumed 10,000 calories a day, an amount so incredible that it would be hard to believe, were it not for the fact that there were attendants present at each meal who dutifully recorded everything the men ate.

Once the men were fat, their metabolisms increased by 50 percent. They needed more than 2,700 calories per square meter of their body surface to stay fat but needed just 1,800 calories per square meter to maintain their normal weight.

When the study ended, the prisoners had no trouble losing weight. Within months, they were back to normal and effortlessly stayed there.

The implications were clear. There is a reason that fat people cannot stay thin after they diet and that thin people cannot stay fat when they force themselves to gain weight. The body’s metabolism speeds up or slows down to keep weight within a narrow range. Gain weight and the metabolism can as much as double; lose weight and it can slow to half its original speed.
That, of course, was contrary to what every scientist had thought, and Dr. Sims knew it, as did Dr. Hirsch.

The message never really got out to the nation’s dieters, but a few research scientists were intrigued and asked the next question about body weight: Is body weight inherited, or is obesity more of an inadvertent, almost unconscious response to a society where food is cheap, abundant and tempting? An extra 100 calories a day will pile on 10 pounds in a year, public health messages often say. In five years, that is 50 pounds.

The assumption was that environment determined weight, but Dr. Albert Stunkard of the
University of Pennsylvania wondered if that was true and, if so, to what extent. It was the early 1980s, long before obesity became what one social scientist called a moral panic, but a time when those questions of nature versus nurture were very much on Dr. Stunkard’s mind.
He found the perfect tool for investigating the nature-nurture question — a Danish registry of adoptees developed to understand whether
schizophrenia was inherited. It included meticulous medical records of every Danish adoption between 1927 and 1947, including the names of the adoptees’ biological parents, and the heights and weights of the adoptees, their biological parents and their adoptive parents.

Dr. Stunkard ended up with 540 adults whose average age was 40. They had been adopted when they were very young — 55 percent had been adopted in the first month of life and 90 percent were adopted in the first year of life. His conclusions, published in The
New England Journal of Medicine in 1986, were unequivocal. The adoptees were as fat as their biological parents, and how fat they were had no relation to how fat their adoptive parents were.
The scientists summarized it in their paper: “The two major findings of this study were that there was a clear relation between the body-mass index of biologic parents and the weight class of adoptees, suggesting that genetic influences are important determinants of body fatness; and that there was no relation between the body-mass index of adoptive parents and the weight class of adoptees, suggesting that childhood family environment alone has little or no effect.”

In other words, being fat was an inherited condition.

Dr. Stunkard also pointed out the implications: “Current efforts to prevent obesity are directed toward all children (and their parents) almost indiscriminately. Yet if family environment alone has no role in obesity, efforts now directed toward persons with little genetic risk of the disorder could be refocused on the smaller number who are more vulnerable. Such persons can already be identified with some assurance: 80 percent of the offspring of two obese parents become obese, as compared with no more than 14 percent of the offspring of two parents of normal weight.”

A few years later, in 1990, Dr. Stunkard published another study in The New England Journal of Medicine, using another classic method of geneticists: investigating twins. This time, he used the Swedish Twin Registry, studying its 93 pairs of identical twins who were reared apart, 154 pairs of identical twins who were reared together, 218 pairs of fraternal twins who were reared apart, and 208 pairs of fraternal twins who were reared together.

The identical twins had nearly identical body mass indexes, whether they had been reared apart or together. There was more variation in the body mass indexes of the fraternal twins, who, like any siblings, share some, but not all, genes.

The researchers concluded that 70 percent of the variation in peoples’ weights may be accounted for by inheritance, a figure that means that weight is more strongly inherited than nearly any other condition, including
mental illness, breast cancer or heart disease.
The results did not mean that people are completely helpless to control their weight, Dr. Stunkard said. But, he said, it did mean that those who tend to be fat will have to constantly battle their genetic inheritance if they want to reach and maintain a significantly lower weight.

The findings also provided evidence for a phenomenon that scientists like Dr. Hirsch and Dr. Leibel were certain was true — each person has a comfortable weight range to which the body gravitates. The range might span 10 or 20 pounds: someone might be able to weigh 120 to 140 pounds without too much effort. Going much above or much below the natural weight range is difficult, however; the body resists by increasing or decreasing the appetite and changing the metabolism to push the weight back to the range it seeks.

The message is so at odds with the popular conception of weight loss — the mantra that all a person has to do is eat less and exercise more — that Dr. Jeffrey Friedman, an obesity researcher at the Rockefeller University, tried to come up with an analogy that would convey what science has found about the powerful biological controls over body weight.
He published it in the journal Science in 2003 and still cites it:

“Those who doubt the power of basic drives, however, might note that although one can hold one’s breath, this conscious act is soon overcome by the compulsion to breathe,” Dr. Friedman wrote. “The feeling of hunger is intense and, if not as potent as the drive to breathe, is probably no less powerful than the drive to drink when one is thirsty. This is the feeling the obese must resist after they have lost a significant amount of weight.”

This is an excerpt from Gina Kolata’s new book, “Rethinking Thin: The New Science of Weight Loss — and the Myths and Realities of Dieting” (Farrar, Straus & Giroux).

Correction: May 12, 2007

An article in Science Times on Tuesday about the role of genes in weight gain misstated the publication date for an article in the journal Science describing the biological controls over body weight. The article was published in 2003, not 2000.

Follow on Buzz

Kimmer/Heidi? Tippy? Kimkins? Do you hear that??

Do you hear that sound??


Do you know what it is?


Well, it's the sound of the wheels of justice as they slowly move through your deceptive lives and lies, and the sordid remains of Kimkins.

Enjoy whatever serenity you now have because the noise in the hoosegow is deafening.

Sleep well, my pretties.

Follow on Buzz

Wednesday, October 10, 2007

The Kimkins Clock is Ticking....

... tick, tock, tick, tock....

Follow on Buzz

Tuesday, October 9, 2007

My new banner and why it's there...

While checking out the latest on the Kimkins Dangers blog, I noticed a pink "Breast Cancer Victory" banner on the main page.

You will see that I have added the banner to my blog, as well.

I was diagnosed with breast cancer in July of 2001 and underwent 3 operations, the last being in December of 2001. During the last operation, I had a bilateral mastectomy and reconstruction done on both breasts. It was not a cake-walk, believe me. The "up" side of the whole ordeal is that I am as "perky" as an 18-year-old now, which, at my age, is nothing to sneeze at :^)

I consider myself so lucky that I am still on this side of the dirt.

I rarely think about my bouts with cancer (cervical and breast) until I see an ad campaign or banner. When I do, I am reminded of my friends who were not as fortunate as me and lost the fight. May they rest in peace.

Follow on Buzz


Below is a comment I received from Laura on my blog this afternoon, and it bears repeating here on the main page. Thanks, Laura!

And my thoughts, after reading Dr. Mark's response to Laura's inquiry?

Dr. Mark, "if you lie down with dogs, you'll rise with fleas."

"Laura said...

'Dr. Mark appears to be a real person.

Here's a response I just received to an email inquiry I made last night:

'Subject: It is me

Well,I must say that I never expected such a quick and strange response to my postings on kimkins web site.

I only know of Kimkins what I have read from the site itself, as of four days ago. It seems as though it is a carb restrictive plan that is meant to be temporary and allows for unlimited protien....therefore not restricting calories. Seems like a decent plan to me, especially for the morbidly obese. People 50 lbs or more overweight are in a serious, life threatening condition that should be treated with urgency.

Is is what I give my patients, no. I do metabolic typing that is much more specific and personal.

My role, as I see it, in the Kimkins site is not to defend the site or the diet. It is to help people along the path with questions they may have about side effects and implementing "life" into their new program.

Again, I am not aware of the programs past, only the present things I "see" while online. I am in the profession to help as many people as possible and have always been known for that. I have seen Kimkins forum as another means of accomplishing this goal.

I assure you, as with everything else in my career, I will look into the diet more extensively. I will look into the integrity of the organization. I will try to descern if "mistakes" have been made and they are moving forward........Basically, if their heart is in the right place (not talking about anatomically here).

I appreciate your concerns. Please realize that I too, care for my patients, and the weight loss community with all my being. I just want to help people get the answers and results they deserve.

Mark T. Brinson DOM, AP, CNMT Doctor of Oriental Medicine Physical Medicine Specialist'"

Follow on Buzz


Well, it's been a busy but very successful weekend for the LCF sleuths, and a very BAD weekend for Kimkins, Kimmer/Heidi Diaz, and our favourite little misguided, megalomaniac, Tippy Toes (bless her heart).

In a nutshell:

(a) many more fake "Before" and "After" pics were uncovered on Russian/European bridal sites by LCF members;

(b) the Kimkins site was carpet-bombed with posts linking to Kimmer's fake red-dress "after" pics found on the Russian Brides website. Multiple anti-Kimkins posters hit the site at the same time in an effort to alert Kimkins members of the fraudulent pics, registering approx. 500 posts before being banned.

(c) "Dr. Mark" makes his debut on Kimkins last night, doling out questionable medical advice to Kimkins members.

The updated fake "Before" and "After" pics can be found on Honeybee's blog here:

This trainwreck is moving so fast it's hard to keep up with all the goings-on.

Truth IS stranger than fiction.

Follow on Buzz

Saturday, October 6, 2007


I was reading the ALC thread this morning and Cutie provided a link to Anti-Kimkins ( and his/her take on the bannings and thread deletions/sanitations at LCF.

This post is eye-opening. Please read is spot-on.

I, too, was banned at LCF for an innocuous post, so I know where Anti-Kimkins is coming from.

I agree wholeheartedly that LCF is responsible for not only promoting the Kimkins diet but for prolonging not only its survival but the continuation of the fraud being perpetuated by Heidi Dias (aka Kimmer). Their bannings, thread sanitations, and thread deletions are just as despicable as the ban-happy Admins at

The Moderators and Administrators at LCF should bow their heads in shame.

Please boycott Netrition (who sponsors the LCF forums).

Bravo to Anti-Kimkins! Here is the post:

"Thursday, October 4, 2007

No love for LowCarbFriends!

Now that all of the fake success stories have been discovered and confirmed by scores of people across the internet, I see everyone at LowCarbFriends (which I refuse to link) is all abuzz with the information. But I can't help but grumble over the fact that all of this could have been stopped over a year ago when myself and others tried to discuss Kimkins' fake Success Stories photos - and LCF admins promptly shut us up by deleting our threads!!! I remember one thread I put up asking innocently, "do these pictures just not look right to anyone else?" and it was gone within minutes. After that, everything I put up was SANITIZED by the admins, meaning, they EDITED my posts and took out anything I said that referred to Kimmer. And of course, their idiotic policy is to not allow you to discuss their actions on the board, so if you questioned it, they'd delete that too. That's when I closed my account there and vowed never to return. It's so ironic that NOW they decide its okay to slam Kimkins.

Think about all of the people that could have been saved from Kimmer, had LCF not gone through so much trouble to protect her. I hold them just as responsible for this fiasco as Kimmer. And this was BEFORE the WW cover, so had they allowed people to even question the legitimacy of her diet and her website, thousands of people could have been warned and who knows, maybe she would have even gotten the cover and we wouldn't be here now. But they protected her and HID all evidence against her. They didn't care that she was a fraud, had no medical background, and no proof of her claims, they just didn't want anyone to speak ill of her. Why is that??? What was the connection between Tom and Heidi? What agreement did she default on that caused him to go up against her?

You really have to wonder WHY. Were they sharing profits? Hoping to share profits? Did Kimmer turn them down for advertising revenue and it pissed off Tom so he decided to turn against her? Something definitely happened and we'll probably never know the truth, but LCF is just as guilty and dirty in this as Heidi is. And we all know it.

Luckily, ALC is an awesome balanced message board without Gestapo admin censoring our every word, so people who wanted integrity and freedom went there - and found it was refreshing and FAIR. I so appreciate the management and administration THERE and that's where I encourage people to go, as well as any of the other LC boards in my sidebar. Anywhere by LCF, because when this is over, they'll still be censoring your speech, and who needs that?

Posted by Tricks of Light at 6:41 PM

Labels: , , , , , ,

Once Upon A Dieter said...

I hope this incident is eye-opening for the LCF moderators/admins. I think too strict moderating kills the value of a board, frankly. And this is one case of PROOF.Funny, but I bet a lot of people thought the pics looked odd. I know I remember when I first saw Bambi's pic and I thought, "Hang on. That's not the same women." The bfore and afters looked NOTHING ALIKE. And the blind woman sure balanced great in that squat. It was just weird.Some of the other before/afters just didn't seem to match. But you know, I hadn't paid and wasn't a memeber and didn't know about the shenanigans, so I didn't even think about it beyond the moment of seeing the pics.Well, there ya go. One's instinct can be a good guide.

The Princess..."



Follow on Buzz


Buzzybee, a member of LCF, found the Lady in the Red Dress tonight on a Russian Brides website! Congrats to buzzybee!!! I'm SO happy you found her. Having been searching those websites for countless days and nights, like so many others (esp. the LCF members), I swear if I see one more picture of a Russian bride, I'm going to scream.

Anyone following the story of Heidi Diaz (aka Kimmer) and Kimkins knows that the Lady in the Red Dress was on the Kimkins website as Heidi's/Kimmer's "after" picture. Well, imagine!!!It turns out she is actually Lesya of Tver, Russia.

Here is buzzybee's post on LCF:

Okay I know I have not posted before but I have been following from the
beginning and had some time to spare.

LOOKY what I found in less than 10 minutes!!!LOL!!!

Ladies and Gentlemen I present "Lesya"

Russian Brides seeking foreign men- Russian dating brides

Hopefully this hasn't been posted heart stopped when that picture came up on my screen!!LOL!!

There are TWO pictures of her!!!

And here's a copy of the page on Lesya from the Russian Brides website:


ID 16077
Age 27,
birthday 05/26/1980
Height 5'4 '' (163cm)
Weight 115 Lbs (52 kg)
Hair color Brunette
Eye color Hazel
Smoke Non-Smoker
Drink Non-Drinker
Occupation Sales
Education University
Marital status Single
English spoken basic
Religion Christian
Children None
Plans children Yes
Residence Tver, Russia

Photos: 1
Interests / Hobbies:
I like reading very much and I like traveling. I like to discover new places and people.I enjoy spending my time with close people.

My personality:
I'm energetic and active. I consider myself to be rather romantic. I am attentive to the things and people I am surrounded by.

What partnerI'm looking for:
I wish my husband to be communicative, open, attentive and loving. I want to have that special man in my life with whom I will feel comfortable wherever we go.

Personal horoscope for Lesya from Tver, Russia
Lesya was born under the sign of Gemini The Gemini female is fun to be around. She is the symbol of a modern, intelligent woman. She possesses first-rate mental capabilities and has a light touch. Women born under the sign of Gemini enjoy social interaction and are most often the life of the party. They are easy to approach and are very outgoing and friendly. They are almost always looked upon favorably by others and though the Aries woman always views the world in a unique way, she does not try to push her opinions on others. As a partner, the Gemini woman is always exciting and makes and ideal career wife. Lesya demonstrates her affection for others and is impulsive. She is fun loving and generous in displays of her love. She is considerate of others and always takes their feelings into consideration. She is always there to lend a helping hand. The Gemini woman tends to work hard to achieve her goals. Lesya is lovable, provocative, charming and witty. They symbol of the twins express this woman’s desire to become complete by finding her other half – namely her soul mate. Use * to e-mail Lesya from Tver, Russia..."


Follow on Buzz

Friday, October 5, 2007


Well, I thought I'd do an update on what's been happening in the last 36 hours but realized I'd be at it all day. So much has happened.

As it is, I've been spending WAY too much time pouring over the anti-Kimkins threads on LCF and ALC, and searching "Russian brides" sites, hoping to find that elusive photo of the lady in the red dress.

My eyes are rolling in their sockets from scanning through the all the photos of the Russian/Romanian/European women. And I swear I've seen at least 5 or 6 Adam's apples in the photos.

To be honest, many of the women's pictures make me very sad. You can see the desperation in their eyes.

My thoughts on "the Kimmer" flying the coop? It's a big, fat ruse.

Gotta run...some Russian brides are waiting for me. And Heidi/Kimmer, don't think for a moment we won't find that picture. You're toast. Bless your heart.

For up-to-the-minute updates, please check Kimkins Exposed. Ducky has collected all the Fake Success Story photos (the photos were stolen by Kimkins/Heidi/the Kimmer from the Russian brides sites!) which were found by the members of LCF. As well, check out Kimkins Dangers where photos of the lady in red have been enlarged and examined.

Here's the link to Kimkins Exposed:


Kimkins Dangers:

Follow on Buzz

Thursday, October 4, 2007

AND MORE Fake Kimkins "After" Pictures from Kimkins Exposed!

I know, I's hard to believe, isn't it? Imagine!! Kimmer/Heidi Diaz faking "after" pictures on

Well, to see for yourself, check out Kimkins Exposed. It's truly unbelievable. Many thanks to all the ladies (and gents) at LCF for spending hours looking at pictures on the Russian "bride" websites to uncover the truth.

Kimmer/Heidi is one piece of work.

Here's the link to Kimkins Exposed:

Follow on Buzz

KTLA Investigative Report, Part II

Check out the second video instalment of Chip Yost's investigative report on the fraudulent Kimmer/Heidi Diaz/Kimkins debacle HERE:

Follow on Buzz

More Fake Kimkins "After" Pictures from Kimkins Exposed!

Below is a copy of a post from the Kimkins Exposed Blog. Heidi/Kimmer, you naughty, naughty girl. You are no match for the sleuths who will be bringing down your Kimpire.

From Kimkins Exposed:

"Look Familiar?

Thursday, October 4th in Heidi Diaz, Kimkins, Kimkins Diet,, Kimmer, dysfunctional, fake, kim drake, kimkins controversy,
kimkins dangers, kimkins dieting, kimkins exposed, kimkins fraud, kimkins
members 2 comments

That’s right, this is the photo used by Women’s World
Magazine, and said to be a picture of Kim Drake (aka Kimmer, Heidi Diaz).



The picture is from the site Hot Russian Brides, click here.

Her profile is user #169503 her name is Tatjana53 Hotrussianbrides Profile Page"

Link to Kimkins Exposed:

Follow on Buzz

Has the "Red Dress" Woman been Found????

Last night, Kimkins Dangers posted an excellent side-by-side comparison of pictures of the lady in the red dress. One picture is from a website featuring Russian "brides" and the second is Heidi Diaz's/Kimmer's "after picture featured on her website

As well, Kimkins Dangers reveals and discusses fake "after" pictures on the Kimkins website.

Here are the posts from the Kimkins Dangers blog:

"Examining Red Dress Photos

Apparently, not everyone agrees that the red dress photos from the Russian website are indeed the same woman used by Kimmer as her "After" picture.

We offer the following:

Example 1 - another picture of the same woman from the Russian website. Compare side by side facial close ups with the Kimmer red dress photo. Note the shape of the nose. The "wrinkle" at the edge of the lips on the left hand side. The same "pouches" under the eyes and the same eyebrows. The same oddly shaped part in the hair.

We increased the size of the Kimmer red dress photo and found evidence that the photograph was altered before being used by Kimmer. When you alter a photograph with a graphic enhancing program, unless the user is very, very good, there are always visible signs left that indicate a graphic change was made to the image. In this case, the eye color of the Kimmer red dress photo was changed to brown. Note the pixelated area around the eyes on the Kimmer red dress photo (image 2) as opposed to the enlargement of a natural - unretouched photo (image 1). Also please note the shape of the nose is identical in both images.

We know that many will not agree and continue to search for another "red dress woman", but we here at Kimkins Dangers are satisfied that these are indeed the same woman.
Posted by Kimkins Dangers at
8:54 PM 5 comments
Labels: ,

Red Dress Woman Revealed

Straps on the dress are the same.

Piping around the edges of the dress are the same.

Off-center part in the hair is the same.

Gold necklace is the same.

The difference is that the first picture has been color-enhanced - the red is more "red" than the other pictures. The hair in the second picture is also color-enhanced, adding artificial reds to the shading.

Others may disagree, but we are absolutely certain they are the same woman.

Here is the photo that Kimmer/Heidi used on her website (and stated in the Jimmy Moore podcast interview) as her "after" picture, presented side by side with images from the Russian brides / dating / modeling website. (Please note the straps of the dress and the gold necklace.)

It does not surprise us at all that Heidi would use stolen images from a website that exploits women in order to perpetrate her scam.We hope that everyone still associated with the Kimkins website will sever ties immediately.
Posted by Kimkins Dangers at
8:10 PM 6 comments

More Fake Pictures at Kimkins!

Remember that picture from Kimkins? Well, guess what! She's been found! Have a look at Svetlana's portfolio from THIS modeling website!

Who knows how many other success story pictures originated from that website and others just like it!

That picture was the "After" picture of the Annette success story.

Age: 31
Height: 5' 7"
Starting Weight: 214
Final Weight:
Total Loss: 72 pounds
How Long: 4.5 months
Freed From Her
"Prison" of Obesity!Life isn't easy when you work in a maximum security prison.
That was my job. I was a prison psychological evaluator. The stories I hear are
extremely stressful to say the least and more often than not I found the stress
following me home -- as well as to every fast food place and restaurant from the
interstate to my front door. It seemed some day the only things that could make
me relax was food. How sick is that I ask you?

Posted by Kimkins Dangers

Link to Kimkins Dangers' original post:

Follow on Buzz

Wednesday, October 3, 2007

Do You Recognize This Woman?

The lady (photo above) in the red dress appeared as Kimmer's "after" picture for a very long time on the Kimkins website until this past weekend, when the site was sanitized and this picture, along with many threads, etc., were removed.

Do you recognize her? We know she's not Kimmer.

Below is a post on Ducky's blog (KimkinsExposed) relating to the "lady in red." Under the "Comments" section of the post, are these comments by PrincessDucky, which I've highlighted in red:

she’s dead

October 3rd, 2007 at 8:24 pm

Thank you for all this! Everybody. It’s all too good. When I joined, I heard a voice in the back of my head saying”this is a scam”. These photos are real. But I joined anyway. Live and learn live and learn!The news story it great.

Princess Ducky — what do you mean, “She’s dead”?

Just that, the woman in the picture is dead. Not dead like going to be dead, but dead as in dead and buried.
That’s all I can say. It might help those trying to find her identity to look for someone who is dead."

If the "lady in red," is, in fact, deceased, this makes Kimmer's use of her photo even more despicable.

If you recognize this picture, please post a comment on my blog.

Follow on Buzz

BREAKING NEWS!!! Kimmer Caught on Film by KTLA TV Investigative Reporter!!!!!

The following is a transcript of Chip Yost's "on-the-spot interview" with Heidi Diaz (Kimmer) (transcribed by poster serenity aus on LCF....thanks serenity aus!).

Now we can finally see "the Kimmer" in action! Kudos to Chip Yost for finally bringing this story to light. Great job!!


And now a KTLA exclusive for you. The founder of a popular internet diet is facing tough questions. Is she actually who she says she is?


Chip Yost has been investigating this intriguing case joins us now with more, Chip. Leila and Emmet, the kimkins diet has taken off on the internet. It’s based on a mixture of a couple of diets, most notably the Atkins diet. Its success can largely be traced to the amazing claims of the diet’s founder. A woman known as “the Kimmer”. But what we and others found, is that "the Kimmer’s" claims may not be all they’re cracked up to be.

Chip:“Ma’am can you look at this picture I’m showing you.” [kimmer in the car]

Why is this woman in such a hurry to get away from us? The answer starts at this website, It’s a website that says if you buy a lifetime membership for $59.95 and follow the kimkins diet, you can lose more than 2 pounds a week, with no exercise. The diet is named after the website’s founder. A woman known as "the Kimmer". This was supposedly "the Kimmer" before the diet. This is what she says she looked like 11 months later. After dramatically losing 198lbs on her diet. [images of the website and her blue flowery before shot, and red dress shot ]

Heidi (HBGal) And I was really happy for her, cause I felt like I kinda knew her. Umm, So I went over and I joined. [Heidi (HBGirl) interviewed ]Heidi [HBGirl] who lives in southern California was sold. She signed up, and thousands of others did too. [Heidi(HBGirl) walking outside] Especially after many of them saw the diet featured in a woman’s world magazine cover story. Inside the magazine, Kimmer’s story was told again. Alongside the story of another woman who lost weight on the kimkins diet. But unlike the other dieter, who posed for pictures, Kimmer wasn’t interviewed in person. In fact, it seemed no one in the dieting world had ever really seen her in person. [shots of the ww article] Even heidi [HB girl] tried to meet up with her when she found out they lived only a few miles apart.

Heidi (HBGal) “She always had an excuse, something with her kids, or she was doing something or another.” [Heidi (HB Girl) at computer]

Suspicions began floating. Is kimmer really that lady in the red dress? [red dress] A former business partner of Kimmer who also had never met her in person, decided to hire private investigator Bob Charlton of Alliance Investigative Services to find out who Kimmer really was. [images from surveillance of green van]Charlton knew Kimmer’s real name was Heidi Diaz and that she lived in Corona. But when he finally found her, he was in for a shock. He realised she wasn’t that thin woman in the red dress. Charlton’s investigation found that Heidi “Kimmer” Diaz was really this woman. [images from surveillance of Kimmer at petrol pump, and at store]

Chip: “And is Heidi Diaz as far as you know the Kimmer?”

Charlton: “Yes, from” [charlton being interviewed]Charlton’s pictures were posted on the internet. [images of slamboard] Kimkins members were in a huff, they thought they had been taken. The Better Business Bureau offered to meet with kimmer to settle the dispute. But they too were turned down

BBB “Because she claims that she’s ahh you know, a bit shy” [BBB guy being interviewed]

Finally we decided to go to Heidi Diaz or Kimmer’s apartment ourselves to see if she would clear things up [garage underneath kimmer's apartment trying to interview Heidi]

Chip: “are you actually the person that’s been claiming to be kimmer on the website.”

Heidykins “No comment”

Chip: “Ma’am have you been lying to people about who you are. Ma’am, we just want to clear some things up. Are you actually Kimmer? Have you been telling people this picture is you? Can you look through the window Ma’am. Ma’am can you look at this picture I’m showing you? [Heidi gets back in car and drive's off to avoid reporter]She didn’t answer our questions, but Heidi Diaz may soon have to answer questions before a court. Tomorrow night we’ll tell you why a class action lawsuit is about to be filed against her, and why some members claim her diet is causing them all kinds of health problems.And one other note I should mention Emmet and Leila the picture of the lady in the red dress was taken off the website over the weekend.
The second instalment of Yost's interview with Kimmer will be on KTLA tonight, so don't miss it!!

"...and the walls came tumblin' down..." ~ John Mellencamp
Link to the video:

Link to the transcript on LCF:
AND the Private Investigator's Notes of his surveillance of Kimmer:

Follow on Buzz

Tuesday, October 2, 2007

I've been out of town...

...for a few days but will be back blogging tomorrow.

Keeping checking out all the anti-Kimkins blogs for updates on the latest in the Kimkins / Kimmer / Heidi Diaz scam!

Follow on Buzz