Atkins Died Obese, Confirmed By Mayor Bloomberg; Raises Rightful Suspicions About His "Accidental" Death

Steve wrote:

On Wed, 28 Jan 2004 11:11:31 -0500, George wrote
(in message ):

Hey Andy you forgot to include Steve in your prayers.

desperate hissing snipped

You poor guy.

Christ has reduced you to this.

http://makeashorterlink.com/?A20055A37

FYI Note: I am aware that I am responding to a cross-posted message.
Because the author of the message to which I am responding did not
request that the header be trimmed, I have not trimmed it. If you are
upset about reading this message, a few suggestions:

(1) Yell at Steve
(2) Report Steve to his ISP
(3) Killfile this thread.
(4) Killfile me.
(5) Read about free speech.

This discussion(s) is related to the 2 pound diet approach (2PD) which is
described completely at:

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

Though Dr. Chung invented this approach, he did not initiate the Usenet
discussion(s). His participation in this discussion(s) has been
voluntary and has been conducted in the spirit of community service. His
motivation has been entirely altruistic and has arisen from his religious
beliefs as a Christian. Jesus freely gave of Himself to better the
health of folks He touched:

http://www.heartmdphd.com/healer.asp

From the outset, it has been clear that there are those who are
vehemently opposed to the 2 pound diet approach. They have debated Dr.
Chung on every perceived weakness of the 2 pound diet approach and have
lost the argument soundly at every point:

http://www.heartmdphd.com/wtlossfaqs.asp

These debates are archived on Google in their entirety within this
discussion thread(s).

However, instead of conceding gracefully that they've lost the
argument(s), certain parties have redirected their hatred of the 2 pound
diet approach toward its author. The rationale appears to be "if you can
not discredit the message then try to discredit the messenger."

Initially, these folks accused the messenger of "trolling." A "troll" is
someone who posts under the cloak of anonymity messages with no redeeming
discussion value and with the sole purpose of starting "flame" wars.

These hateful folks lost credibility with this accusation when the
following observations were made:

(1) Dr. Chung has not been posting anonymously.
(2) The 2PD has been on-topic for the Usenet discussion groups hosting
the discussion(s).
(a) Those who are failing low-carbing can dovetail LC with the 2PD
to achieve near-ideal weight.
(b) Obese diabetics improve their blood glucose control when their
weight becomes near-ideal.
(c) For (b) see: http://tinyurl.com/levc
(3) Dr. Chung did not start the discussion(s).
(4) The 2 pound diet approach is 100% free (no profit motive).
(5) Dr. Chung's credentials are real and easily verified on-line
(including jpegs of the actual diplomas).

Full of hatred, frustration, and desperation, certain individuals have
tried to attack Dr. Chung's credentials knowing full well that they were
attempting to libel him. One notable example is Mr. Pastorio:

http://www.heartmdphd.com/libel.asp

When the full light was cast on Mr. Pastorio's libelous statements, the
hateful folks hiding in the darkness of anonymity only hissed louder in
support of their fallen hero.

Fortunately, those who have been following this discussion(s) either
actively or as lurkers can easily dismiss the hisses, for what they are,
using the on-line third-party resources at:

http://www.heartmdphd.com/profile.asp

where Dr. Chung's credentials can be verified many times over and
libelous claims that credentials were bought are easily and summarily
debunked.

Moreover, readers need only make the following observations concerning
the anon posters who continue to hiss (ie JC Der Koenig and Mack):

(1) They are anonymous and thus they expect to have no credibility (or
accountability).
(2) They are by their Usenet history courtesy of Google, unsavory
characters.
(3) They have not added anything to the discussion(s) except to deliver
one-sided insults.
(4) They complain about alleged cross-posts from Dr. Chung by
cross-posting.
(5) They do not complain about cross-posts from folks who attack the 2PD
or its author.

and conclude that these anon posters deserve only their kill file.

It is my hope that the above brings new readers of this thread up to
speed.

It will remain my pleasure to continue the discussion(s) about the 2PD
above the din of hissing from the peanut gallery.


Sincerely,

Andrew

--
Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
Board-Certified Cardiologist
http://www.heartmdphd.com

On Wed, 28 Jan 2004 19:09:59 -0500, "Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD"
wrote:


You poor guy.

Christ has reduced you to this.

http://makeashorterlink.com/?A20055A37

................

Andrew, Andrew, cut Steve here some slack for goodness sakes.

He was just being a little sarcastic.

Sort of like you were doing when you "sarcastically" informed the
American Medical Association that you had staff privileges at Piedmont
Hospital, Crawfor Long Hospital, and the Atlanta VA -- when in truth
you never had staff privileges at any of the three!

Tell us, oh "humble" man of Christ -- why the lie to the American
Medical Association? A truly humble man would have no need to falsely
inflate his resume!

smn

....and why would anybody believe you with your history on NGs?

"Stephen Nagler" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 28 Jan 2004 19:09:59 -0500, "Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD"
wrote:


You poor guy.

Christ has reduced you to this.

http://makeashorterlink.com/?A20055A37

...............

Andrew, Andrew, cut Steve here some slack for goodness sakes.

He was just being a little sarcastic.

Sort of like you were doing when you "sarcastically" informed the
American Medical Association that you had staff privileges at Piedmont
Hospital, Crawfor Long Hospital, and the Atlanta VA -- when in truth
you never had staff privileges at any of the three!

Tell us, oh "humble" man of Christ -- why the lie to the American
Medical Association? A truly humble man would have no need to falsely
inflate his resume!

smn

Just dropped in to support the Atlanta Idiot in his new conquest Glutbutt?

"HOWARD" wrote in message
news:CtKRb.315523$ts4.275546@pd7tw3no...

"Ozgirl" wrote in message
...
Sadly a lot of
our old sayings didn't have quite the ring to them
anymore. Like give him a centimetre and he'll take a
kilometre doesn't quite do it. And judging someone by
*your own yardstick* became *by your own metrestick*.

The reason it doesn't sound right is the correct expression is
"give a man two and a half centimeteres and he'll take 1.609
kilometeres" , at least thats the way it's in Canada .

Howard

On Thu, 29 Jan 2004 01:49:21 GMT, "Ear Rings" wrote:

...and why would anybody believe you with your history on NGs?


..................

Oh, Larry.

Perhaps the fact that what I am saying is true and easily verifiable
might have something to do about it? A call to the AMA and a call to
the Medical Staff Office at any of the three hospitals would do the
trick. I mean, that's what I did! (Well, at the VA they call it the
Credentialing Office - but it's the same idea.)

It is *your* history on newgroups that folks should be concerned with.
You do recall that threat upon the life of one of the newsgroup
participants you disagreed with, don't you. You know, the threat that
resulted in an arrest in front of the wife and kids?

But let's don't get into that nastiness!

smn

On Wed, 28 Jan 2004 18:17:22 -0500, Alan Mackenzie wrote
(in message ):

Steve wrote on Wed, 28 Jan 2004 12:11:00 -0500:
On Wed, 28 Jan 2004 11:14:49 -0500, Alan Mackenzie wrote (in message
):

snip

Alan, I tried to write you an apology for any misunderstandings but I
got so confused trying to figure this out:

Steve, I've no idea what you'd want to apologize for. I think your 2'
diet is a _great_ idea. It's far better than the =A32 diet, because you
don't have the hassle of weighing things. And, given the correlation
between length and weight, 2' has got to be scientifically equivalent to
=A32 when it comes to diets.

I'll not try to out-humble you though. :-)

Alan Mackenzie (Munich, Germany)
Email: ; to decode, wherever there is a repeated letter
(like "aa"), remove half of them (leaving, say, "a").

I don't have the Gift of Truth Discernment, you know. This is harder
than the Enigma Machine.

aye-see-emm at emm-you-see dot dee-eee.

A Humble Act a Day Keeps the Evil Doctor Away,
(and you know who that is ;-))
--
Steve, Humilitas Doctorus, Fellow of the American Academy of Humility



Alan, I was being facetious. The "Evil Doctor" has some very
characteristic quirks which are great fun to spoof. However, the
spoofs probably make no sense to someone who is not familiar with his
tirades :-) You can tell they hit their mark when he replies to a post
with his 3 volume "disclaimer" macro :-) In addition, there is a
distinct difference between British "humour" and American humor :-)
Rather, eh?

What are you doing in Germany anyway? Nevermind... don't answer
that... it's "off topic" :-)



--
Steve, Humilitas Doctorus, Fellow of the American Academy of Humility

Weeding the Lord's Vineyards Since 2003

aye-see-emm at emm-you-see dot dee-eee.

emm-aye-see
kay-ee-why
see-aitch-you-in-gee !!!

On Thu, 29 Jan 2004 7:31:02 -0500, Wes Groleau wrote
(in message ):


aye-see-emm at emm-you-see dot dee-eee.

emm-aye-see
kay-ee-why
see-aitch-you-in-gee !!!

LOL! He's probably too young to get it :-)

--
Steve, Humilitas Doctorus, Fellow of the American Academy of Humility

Weeding the Lord's Vineyards Since 2003

Alan Mackenzie wrote:

Steve wrote on Wed, 28 Jan 2004 12:11:00 -0500:
On Wed, 28 Jan 2004 11:14:49 -0500, Alan Mackenzie wrote (in message
):

snip

Alan, I tried to write you an apology for any misunderstandings but I
got so confused trying to figure this out:

Steve, I've no idea what you'd want to apologize for. I think your 2'
diet is a _great_ idea. It's far better than the £2 diet, because you
don't have the hassle of weighing things.

But you do have the hassle of measuring the lengths of things.

Imagine having to measure out the length of each pasta noodle especially if
it is angel hair.

And, given the correlation
between length and weight,

The correlation is actually zero for liquids.

2' has got to be scientifically equivalent to
£2 when it comes to diets.


It isn't.

Sorry.

FYI Note: I am aware that I am responding to a cross-posted message.
Because the author of the message to which I am responding did not request
that the header be trimmed, I have not trimmed it. If you are upset about
reading this message, a few suggestions:

(1) Yell at Alan
(2) Report Alan to his ISP
(3) Killfile this thread.
(4) Killfile me.
(5) Read about free speech.

This discussion(s) is related to the 2 pound diet approach (2PD) which is
described completely at:

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

Though Dr. Chung invented this approach, he did not initiate the Usenet
discussion(s). His participation in this discussion(s) has been voluntary
and has been conducted in the spirit of community service. His motivation
has been entirely altruistic and has arisen from his religious beliefs as a
Christian. Jesus freely gave of Himself to better the health of folks He
touched:

http://www.heartmdphd.com/healer.asp

From the outset, it has been clear that there are those who are vehemently
opposed to the 2 pound diet approach. They have debated Dr. Chung on every
perceived weakness of the 2 pound diet approach and have lost the argument
soundly at every point:

http://www.heartmdphd.com/wtlossfaqs.asp

These debates are archived on Google in their entirety within this
discussion thread(s).

However, instead of conceding gracefully that they've lost the argument(s),
certain parties have redirected their hatred of the 2 pound diet approach
toward its author. The rationale appears to be "if you can not discredit
the message then try to discredit the messenger."

Initially, these folks accused the messenger of "trolling." A "troll" is
someone who posts under the cloak of anonymity messages with no redeeming
discussion value and with the sole purpose of starting "flame" wars.

These hateful folks lost credibility with this accusation when the following
observations were made:

(1) Dr. Chung has not been posting anonymously.
(2) The 2PD has been on-topic for the Usenet discussion groups hosting the
discussion(s).
(a) Those who are failing low-carbing can dovetail LC with the 2PD to
achieve near-ideal weight.
(b) Obese diabetics improve their blood glucose control when their
weight becomes near-ideal.
(c) For (b) see: http://tinyurl.com/levc
(3) Dr. Chung did not start the discussion(s).
(4) The 2 pound diet approach is 100% free (no profit motive).
(5) Dr. Chung's credentials are real and easily verified on-line (including
jpegs of the actual diplomas).

Full of hatred, frustration, and desperation, certain individuals have tried
to attack Dr. Chung's credentials knowing full well that they were
attempting to libel him. One notable example is Mr. Pastorio:

http://www.heartmdphd.com/libel.asp

When the full light was cast on Mr. Pastorio's libelous statements, the
hateful folks hiding in the darkness of anonymity only hissed louder in
support of their fallen hero.

Fortunately, those who have been following this discussion(s) either
actively or as lurkers can easily dismiss the hisses, for what they are,
using the on-line third-party resources at:

http://www.heartmdphd.com/profile.asp

where Dr. Chung's credentials can be verified many times over and libelous
claims that credentials were bought are easily and summarily debunked.

Moreover, readers need only make the following observations concerning the
anon posters who continue to hiss (ie JC Der Koenig and Mack):

(1) They are anonymous and thus they expect to have no credibility (or
accountability).
(2) They are by their Usenet history courtesy of Google, unsavory
characters.
(3) They have not added anything to the discussion(s) except to deliver
one-sided insults.
(4) They complain about alleged cross-posts from Dr. Chung by cross-posting.

(5) They do not complain about cross-posts from folks who attack the 2PD or
its author.

and conclude that these anon posters deserve only their kill file.

It is my hope that the above brings new readers of this thread up to speed.

It will remain my pleasure to continue the discussion(s) about the 2PD above
the din of hissing from the peanut gallery.


Sincerely,

Andrew

--
Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
Board-Certified Cardiologist
http://www.heartmdphd.com


--
Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
Board-Certified Cardiologist
http://www.heartmdphd.com/

In article , Alan
wrote:

Steve wrote on Wed, 28 Jan 2004 12:11:00 -0500:
On Wed, 28 Jan 2004 11:14:49 -0500, Alan Mackenzie wrote (in message
):

snip

Alan, I tried to write you an apology for any misunderstandings but I
got so confused trying to figure this out:

Steve, I've no idea what you'd want to apologize for. I think your 2'
diet is a _great_ idea. It's far better than the £2 diet, because you
don't have the hassle of weighing things. And, given the correlation
between length and weight, 2' has got to be scientifically equivalent to
£2 when it comes to diets.

Question: Does the £2 diet fluctuate with the exchange rate for those
of us in the US? Since it takes a metric assload* of $ to make a £ these
days, it seems we Americans should actually be allowed to eat that much
more (or is it less).

* ©Lee Rodgers

--
Wayne Crannell
Atkins+ 10/27/01
Maintenance 10/1/02
250/138