KIMKINS?
Moderators: Boss Man, cassiegose
-
byebyefat0
- STARTING OUT
- Posts: 19
- Joined: Tue Jun 05, 2007 10:49 am
- Location: arizona
KIMKINS?
has anyone heard or read bout that Kimkins Diet that apparently many ppl have done with great weightloss success? it's a form of Atkins but "better" it calls for lower calories, lower fat, and it's low carb..its seems to be three meals a dday with a mini meal/snack permited as well... the women who created this diet apparently lost 200lbs in 11 months? it also states that you can lose 10 lbs in a week? truth or scam?
Very suspicious.
4lb's a week, is as much as most people can lose, before any additional weight loss becomes Fat and Muscle and a.n.other physical sources. Such weekly weight loss targets dependant on starting and target weights.
If you're losing 10lb's a week, it could be muscle as well, and possibly other stuff, like bits of water, Connective Tissue or even bone weight, as cutting calories would restrict what nutrients, all these physical structures need, to be properly structured and in a good healthy state, things like the Bone Matrix for example, need Calcium replenishment as Bones deplete Calcium out of the Matrix, daily.
So if you cut calories but maintained a high level of certain things like Calcium, for bones, Vit C for immune functions, Amino acids for general health and physical functions ect etc, tio prioritse more important physical aspects, you risk restriction of certain foods, thereby losing other vits / minerals, when you're not allowing certain healthy foodstuffs to be part of the diet.
Definitely muscle will go. 4 meals a day?
Look at it like this.
3 hour meal spaces.
example plan
Meal 1. 8:00AM
Meal 2. 11:00AM
Meal 3. 2:00PM
Meal 4. 5:00PM
Nutrient deficeit would begin approximately 8:00PM. Total duration of empty stomach, 12 hours. Too long in opinion. Half a day of muscle burning.
Catabolic actions can occur during sleep, but shouldn't while you're awake, or the Metabolism might possibly get too used to muscle burning for energy, and maybe then possibly view some calories you eat as unnecessary, treat them as excess, and convert a few to Fat, because the bodies energy systems were partially sating themselves on Muscle, not Carbs, and were meeting at least basic energy requirements, from two sources not one, meaning bits of muscle competing with some Carbs for conversion to Glucose.
If you space meals out more like say 4 hours, the plan look like his.
Meal 1. 8:00AM
Meal 2. 12:00PM
Meal 3. 4:00PM
Meal 4. 8:00PM
Nutrient deficeit would begin approximately 11:00PM. Catabolic action lasting 9 hours, but unfortunately you're getting between meals 1-2, 2-3 and 3-4 one hour as well, so the plan only splits the Catabolism up into a big time period, and a few mini time periods.
Same effect and hours per day, but if the bodies Metabolism has been increased by waking activity, therefore increased Heart rate, and certainly by exercise, Metabolic burn could be increased, thus making daytime Catabolism more Catabolic, than resting Catabolism at night.
If that makes sense.
You would need at least a 5th meal there to be safe, and a 6th should needs be.
Nobody. People who create these sometimes unhealthy, pointless and best scenario, plausible but still slightly dubious diets, will often probably never admit side effects, or possibly might exaggerate results, like supplement companies do.
These people want you to think their diet is the bees knees, and that the 5-6 letters after their name, makes their name just as important if not moreso, than many other peoples names, with 5-6 letters after them.
Reality check here. I am confident enough to say here and now, whilst I give advice sometimes on diet, I am not qualified, and know limits pretty much, but if I claimed publicly, I'd just got a qualification, and now name had the letters I.R.S.Q.V.C, (recognise those two words??), after name, one or two people would believe me. I would give you 99.999% assurance of that.
If anyone asked about it, I could just say, I can't explain what the letters after name mean, as they represent complicated Latin phrases, and truthfully Latin is rubbish.
As stated before I have no diet based Qualifications.
I'm not saying people in the industry try to sound more important about food matters, just that letters after a name doesn't always mean a 100% guarantee, you're getting the greatest advice for you.
People are human same as doctors, and I don't claim advice to be the gospel according to Boss Man, I don't B.S. people like that, and nobody else on here does either.
On boards like this, it's a simple case of "take peoples advice or help as you find it, then trust or don't trust it, depending on what you think of it."
That's the same thing with anyone of any experience, knowledge and years on this Earth, from any walk of life.
Yes you might get weightloss off such a diet for sure. Eating below maintenance can do that. Think about it, if you were someone 100lb's overweight, sedentary and eating 4,000 calories a day, you could lose weight eating 3,800 calories a day. Not much, but you'd lose some weight, because you couldn't regularly maintain a weight level that high, when you trimmed calories down even by 200 a day.
This is the real skinny for you, that most diet developers / promoters won't tell you.
I guarantee, this common sense angle, ( words below), is probably 99% accurate.
Good healthy regular diet advice, weights and Cardio produce weightloss results, and when done correctly, will almost always cause weight loss in a "healthy" way. The exception to the rule coming possibly, with a few people who have genetic anomelies.
Healthy designer diets, (those that safely shed purely fat alone), are probably not proven to be any faster, than a good combination of healthy regular diet advice, weights and Cardio. Even when you do such a diet, with weights and Cardio.
Should this be so, and it's likely to be the case, due to their often more restrictive food planning, this makes them potentially less enjoyable to do, and therefore not as good as regular healthy diet advice.
Read those words in bold Atkins and prove me wrong, prove me wrong, I dare you. Then go ask someone who used your deluded diet, what it's like being a Johnny Fartpants for 2 weeks.
So adivce to you after all this, is stick with normal diet advice, not misleading, and often unhealthy B.S. diets and plans, with almost no proven acceleration / boosted efficacy of results, compared to regular advice / plans.
.
P.S. I bet people who think these designer diet plans are great, wouldn't be able to tell you with 100% assurity, all the weight loss was Fat, nothing else.
If they did they'd no doubt probably be fooling themselves, or they created the dubious diet in the first place.
4lb's a week, is as much as most people can lose, before any additional weight loss becomes Fat and Muscle and a.n.other physical sources. Such weekly weight loss targets dependant on starting and target weights.
If you're losing 10lb's a week, it could be muscle as well, and possibly other stuff, like bits of water, Connective Tissue or even bone weight, as cutting calories would restrict what nutrients, all these physical structures need, to be properly structured and in a good healthy state, things like the Bone Matrix for example, need Calcium replenishment as Bones deplete Calcium out of the Matrix, daily.
So if you cut calories but maintained a high level of certain things like Calcium, for bones, Vit C for immune functions, Amino acids for general health and physical functions ect etc, tio prioritse more important physical aspects, you risk restriction of certain foods, thereby losing other vits / minerals, when you're not allowing certain healthy foodstuffs to be part of the diet.
Definitely muscle will go. 4 meals a day?
Look at it like this.
3 hour meal spaces.
example plan
Meal 1. 8:00AM
Meal 2. 11:00AM
Meal 3. 2:00PM
Meal 4. 5:00PM
Nutrient deficeit would begin approximately 8:00PM. Total duration of empty stomach, 12 hours. Too long in opinion. Half a day of muscle burning.
Catabolic actions can occur during sleep, but shouldn't while you're awake, or the Metabolism might possibly get too used to muscle burning for energy, and maybe then possibly view some calories you eat as unnecessary, treat them as excess, and convert a few to Fat, because the bodies energy systems were partially sating themselves on Muscle, not Carbs, and were meeting at least basic energy requirements, from two sources not one, meaning bits of muscle competing with some Carbs for conversion to Glucose.
If you space meals out more like say 4 hours, the plan look like his.
Meal 1. 8:00AM
Meal 2. 12:00PM
Meal 3. 4:00PM
Meal 4. 8:00PM
Nutrient deficeit would begin approximately 11:00PM. Catabolic action lasting 9 hours, but unfortunately you're getting between meals 1-2, 2-3 and 3-4 one hour as well, so the plan only splits the Catabolism up into a big time period, and a few mini time periods.
Same effect and hours per day, but if the bodies Metabolism has been increased by waking activity, therefore increased Heart rate, and certainly by exercise, Metabolic burn could be increased, thus making daytime Catabolism more Catabolic, than resting Catabolism at night.
If that makes sense.
You would need at least a 5th meal there to be safe, and a 6th should needs be.
No surprise there. Lets face it, who's going to say something like, "hay I've got a food science degree, and I tried to make a clever diet up using High Carbs, Vegan protein sources and Fish based Fatty acids, and after 2 months I only lost 2lbs of weight, breath stank, I fart more, and I sweat a fishy musk, and get banging Headaches."byebyefat0 wrote: the women who created this diet apparently lost 200lbs in 11 months?
Nobody. People who create these sometimes unhealthy, pointless and best scenario, plausible but still slightly dubious diets, will often probably never admit side effects, or possibly might exaggerate results, like supplement companies do.
These people want you to think their diet is the bees knees, and that the 5-6 letters after their name, makes their name just as important if not moreso, than many other peoples names, with 5-6 letters after them.
Reality check here. I am confident enough to say here and now, whilst I give advice sometimes on diet, I am not qualified, and know limits pretty much, but if I claimed publicly, I'd just got a qualification, and now name had the letters I.R.S.Q.V.C, (recognise those two words??), after name, one or two people would believe me. I would give you 99.999% assurance of that.
If anyone asked about it, I could just say, I can't explain what the letters after name mean, as they represent complicated Latin phrases, and truthfully Latin is rubbish.
As stated before I have no diet based Qualifications.
I'm not saying people in the industry try to sound more important about food matters, just that letters after a name doesn't always mean a 100% guarantee, you're getting the greatest advice for you.
People are human same as doctors, and I don't claim advice to be the gospel according to Boss Man, I don't B.S. people like that, and nobody else on here does either.
On boards like this, it's a simple case of "take peoples advice or help as you find it, then trust or don't trust it, depending on what you think of it."
That's the same thing with anyone of any experience, knowledge and years on this Earth, from any walk of life.
Yes you might get weightloss off such a diet for sure. Eating below maintenance can do that. Think about it, if you were someone 100lb's overweight, sedentary and eating 4,000 calories a day, you could lose weight eating 3,800 calories a day. Not much, but you'd lose some weight, because you couldn't regularly maintain a weight level that high, when you trimmed calories down even by 200 a day.
This is the real skinny for you, that most diet developers / promoters won't tell you.
I guarantee, this common sense angle, ( words below), is probably 99% accurate.
Good healthy regular diet advice, weights and Cardio produce weightloss results, and when done correctly, will almost always cause weight loss in a "healthy" way. The exception to the rule coming possibly, with a few people who have genetic anomelies.
Healthy designer diets, (those that safely shed purely fat alone), are probably not proven to be any faster, than a good combination of healthy regular diet advice, weights and Cardio. Even when you do such a diet, with weights and Cardio.
Should this be so, and it's likely to be the case, due to their often more restrictive food planning, this makes them potentially less enjoyable to do, and therefore not as good as regular healthy diet advice.
Read those words in bold Atkins and prove me wrong, prove me wrong, I dare you. Then go ask someone who used your deluded diet, what it's like being a Johnny Fartpants for 2 weeks.
So adivce to you after all this, is stick with normal diet advice, not misleading, and often unhealthy B.S. diets and plans, with almost no proven acceleration / boosted efficacy of results, compared to regular advice / plans.
.P.S. I bet people who think these designer diet plans are great, wouldn't be able to tell you with 100% assurity, all the weight loss was Fat, nothing else.
If they did they'd no doubt probably be fooling themselves, or they created the dubious diet in the first place.
-
byebyefat0
- STARTING OUT
- Posts: 19
- Joined: Tue Jun 05, 2007 10:49 am
- Location: arizona
very good points here boss man!...nothing beats good diet and exercise...i guess most ppl really hope that there is such a thing as a quick for years of bad eating habits and carelessness...i know sometimes i do...it's hard to remember to see it as "u didn't gain it overnight so it won't be gone overnight either"...what i wonder is all those testimonials u think they paid these ppl to say all that stuff?
You can't be sure with testimonials. What you said might happen.
I actually on a thread some time back, read about something like this, might have been either a diet, or supplement, forget which now, but when I used "Legal" internet search techniques, many of the listed names either came up often, didnt exist, (though that doesn't prove said person is made up, they just didn't show up on a search), or the initial of a persons name appeared on a search, so no evidence it stood for the name listed on a testimonial.
E.G. if someone with a name like say Steve Marcelo, from California as examples, says a Fatburner is brilliant, there might be 4 S Montellos living in Cali, but that doesn't mean S stands for Steve.
That's an example, I'm no saying anybody called S Montello lives there.
So the testimonies might have been true, or could have been clever fakes.
I actually on a thread some time back, read about something like this, might have been either a diet, or supplement, forget which now, but when I used "Legal" internet search techniques, many of the listed names either came up often, didnt exist, (though that doesn't prove said person is made up, they just didn't show up on a search), or the initial of a persons name appeared on a search, so no evidence it stood for the name listed on a testimonial.
E.G. if someone with a name like say Steve Marcelo, from California as examples, says a Fatburner is brilliant, there might be 4 S Montellos living in Cali, but that doesn't mean S stands for Steve.
That's an example, I'm no saying anybody called S Montello lives there.
So the testimonies might have been true, or could have been clever fakes.
-
byebyefat0
- STARTING OUT
- Posts: 19
- Joined: Tue Jun 05, 2007 10:49 am
- Location: arizona