Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD wrote:
"Bob (this one)" wrote:

Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD wrote:


Excerpt from http://www.heartmdphd.com/wtloss.asp

It has been my observation that the "negative" testimonials support the
2PD Approach *more* than the "positive" ones.

LOL Sure they do. What a splendid illustration of Chung's
deteriorating mental state. People offering good reasons why the 2PD
is weakly conceived and insufficiently detailed are somehow supporting
it. Sounds like something Winston Smith would like... War is peace.
Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength.

And in Chunglish, "Negative testimonials support."

And suddenly "observations" seem to have built-in conclusions. Just
like, oh, I dunno, reasoning. Which means that judgements are being
made. That Chung says he never does, while doing it. What a hoot.

Moreover, since publicly citing passages in the Holy Bible that support
the 2PD Approach (1/16/2005), the "negative" testimonials have been
crescendoing to such an unprecedented degree that the Lord has moved me
to rename the 2PD Approach as the 2PD-OMER Approach. OMER stands for
Original Method of Eating Reduction while also reminding us of the
"omer" described in Exodus 16:16. The recommended method of pronouncing
this is "the two pedomer approach."

hiss sputter hiss hiss

Sorry the 2PD-OMER Approach bothers you.

Actually, it looks like the bother is all Chung's. Poor guy's running
around hissing and sputtering in the sheer frustration of having his
insistent wackiness spotlighted. Changing what people have actually
posted. Deleting the parts that crush his fraudulent assertions. Says
he writes honestly. Bwah...

LOL The two pedometer approach, I'd say. One for the feet walking
and one for the feet in the mouth.

Poor, poor Chung...

Bob