In his letter, Kalman1 has raised some interesting points in response to our recent publication of yogurt augmenting total and central fat loss secondary to energy. However, the concern regarding compliance as a confounding variable appears to be unfounded. As indicated in the article, 'all subjects maintained complete diet diaries, and compliance was assessed by weekly subject interview and review of the diet diary and product return (analogous to pill counts)'. To expand upon this, subjects were judged to be compliant only if their diet diaries indicated they maintained a total calcium intake of 600 mg/day exclusive of the yogurt or gelatin desert, consumed 80–100% of the product provided (based on product return) and maintained an energy intake within 200 kcal of the daily energy prescription. Using these criteria, 13 of the 18 subjects on the yogurt diet and 10 of the 16 subjects on the control diet met all criteria for compliance. Separate analysis of the compliant subjects yielded comparable data to that found in the analysis of all subjects completing the trial, although the statistical significance achieved was stronger in the compliant group.