I think a story on the "Kimkins Survivors" who have had side effects or were banned and threatened would be one heck of a draw. I'd buy it!
And I'd respect them for setting a wrong right, especially after they sent a stern letter to Martin of Slamboard to stop using the WW June issue graphic. Well, Kimkins dot com still uses that graphic at their site to lure in customers. How come WW is okay with that? Not okay for a whistleblower to use it, but okay for a fibbing diet tyrant to use it?
We need to send them a message that says, basically, "Step up Woman's World. Step up. Ethical journalism demands you print a follow-up with the SAME MODEL (ie Christin) and her story of medical woes and recrimination and regrets. And her insider knowledge of the iffy goings on. Include Jeanessa and her initiation of a class action lawsuit. Include the bannings. The tirades. The advice to use laxatives. The advice that said it was okay not to eat as long as one had excess fat on one's body(which encouraged the eating disordered to STARVE)."
I did not proof my email to WW (shame on me) or phrase as tactfully as I should have in places. You go and do better than I did, okay, when you write. Proofread and be diplomatic but firm.
Here are parts of what I sent:
Back in June, your glowing article on the Kimkins Diet led thousands to join up at $60 a pop. Now, more and more information has come out that the plan is 1. dangerous to those who follow it as detailed and 2. based on a fraudulent claim by "Kimmer" (Heidi Diaz/Kim Drake) that she lost 198 pounds in 11 months and has maintained that weight loss for several years, including at the time of your article.
I'm a regular reader of WW. I saw that cover article. I cut out that article. I almost signed on to the Kimkins site and plan. I'm glad I did not.
Now, sites all over the net--including my blog--have been posting information as the storm gathers. Former Kimkins members and administrators INCLUDING THE COVER MODEL FOR YOUR ISSUE and another "success story" within the article have repudiated the diet, laid out evidence that shows Heidi Diaz/"Kimmer" is a fraud, and have confessed their side effects from the diet (some of which was suppressed for the WW article).
Becky and Christin and Deny all have blogged in detail about the issue. It's time Woman's World did their part, for all of those who read that story and trusted that you'd checked this diet out properly.
Please. Don't drop this ball. ~snip~ A story about the "survivors" and the fraud would get those thousands of Kimkinites buying the magazine, and the anti-Kimkins brigade buying the magazine, and it would get the world out as a public service. Please.
For more information, these sites:
Christin's blog (your cover model for the Kimkins story): http://the-journey-on.blogspot.com/
Becky's blog (especially see The Perfect Storm entries) http://winningweight.blogspot.com/
Deni's blog (one of your success stories in that article) http://openbench.blogspot.com/
Kimkins Survivors (various ex-members reveal their experiences) http://kimkinssurvivors.wordpress.com/
Ducky's blog (keeping the revelations in one spot)-- http://kimkinsexposed.wordpress.com
About.com's "Inside Kimkins" (they investigated and put a warning) http://lowcarbdiets.about.com/od/populardietplans/a/kimkinsdiet_2.htm
Kimkins Dangers: http://kimkinsdangers.blogspot.com/
The Truth Starts Here (more undercover work)--http://thetruthinhiding.blogspot.com/
Or just google a blog search for "Kimkins" and find lots of stuff.
Please email Woman's World magazine. Let them know we dieters are harmed when they lure us with glowing articles on diets that are dangerous in terms of caloric levels or nutrient deficiences. And when they've indeed promoted bad diets--like Kimkins--they need to retract and warn readers with follow-up articles placed just as prominently as the first.
Write them: DearWW@aol.com