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

On Sun, 25 Jan 2004 22:20:23 -0500, Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD wrote
(in message ) :

Steve wrote in message
ews.net...
On Sun, 25 Jan 2004 18:04:41 -0500, Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD wrote
(in message ):

Steve wrote in message
ews.net...
On Sat, 24 Jan 2004 15:40:53 -0500, Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD wrote
(in message ):

Alan Rowe wrote:

Artfully done.

*applauds*


Thanks :-)

desperate hissing snipped

Poor guy.

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
specify how he wanted the header trimmed, I have not trimmed it.

ROTFL!

What a jackass. Do you really think you are fooling anyone?

Oh, please trim the header to sci.med.cardiology when you respond with
your next wacko macro.

You just don't get it, do you?

God's Honest Servant,

--
Steve

Weeding the Lord's Vineyards Since 2003

Steve wrote in message ews.net...
On Fri, 23 Jan 2004 9:47:11 -0500, wrote
(in message ):

Steve writes:

BJ, thanks for your question and this opportunity to witness. I
find that when applying the Two Foot Diet, one must apply "an inch
of common sense". Although one can multiply, I would point out that
when doing so, any errors in measurement will be compounded. Also,
the variance in pea diameter is not negligible. That is why I always
recommend lining them up and measuring the result.

You may be interested in a new product I'm marketing.

hissing snipped

Poor guy.

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 this
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 and
other discussion threads.

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, Steve, 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 participate here on Usenet above the din
of hissing from the peanut gallery.


Sincerely,

Andrew

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

Steve wrote in message ews.net...
On Fri, 23 Jan 2004 16:58:10 -0500, Ignoramus14193 wrote
(in message ):

Two foot diet... hm...

How about a six inches popsicle diet?

Although some of my clients find that they do not need the whole two
feet, others like Nancy report that they require at least eight inches:

On Fri, 23 Jan 2004 15:43:28 -0500, n k bakker wrote
(in message ) :

I said it before and I'll say it again... gimme 8 inches a day and I'm
in heaven...2 feet would be rather painful.

nancyy



hissing snipped

Poor guy.

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 this
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 and
other discussion threads.

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, Steve, 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 participate here on Usenet 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 Sun, 25 Jan 2004 22:23:31 -0500, Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD wrote
(in message ) :

Steve wrote in message
ews.net...
On Sun, 25 Jan 2004 17:23:56 -0500, Sun & Mun_ wrote
(in message ):

snip

???? What is this 2' diet?

hissing snipped

Poor guy.

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.

Zzzzzzzzzzz
zzz
zz
z


Oh, please trim the header to sci.med.cardiology when you respond with
your next wacko macro. These poor people deserve a break.

You just don't get it, do you?

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 Chung
(2) Report Chung to his ISP
(3) Killfile this thread.
(4) Killfile me.
(5) Read about free speech.

This discussion(s) is related to the Two Foot Diet approach (2FD) which
I developed as a replacement for Dr. Chung's Amazing Logic Defying Two
Pound Diet to avoid having to carry a scale around.

In 2003, my wife and I watched an IMAX film about climbing the Bavarian
Alps and learned that despite their exhausting regimen, the climbers
consumed only 10 packages of wieners per week. That's less than 2 feet
of wieners per day! Since none of the climbers died from starvation, I
think it is safe to assume that 2 feet of food per day should be more
than adequate for us non-climbing folks.

So I started a little experiment with the agreeable obese friends in my
neighborhood. I gave them ordinary 6 inch rulers with instructions to
measure the length of everything substantial that passed into their
mouths. The only things exempted were water and sugar-free drinks. What
I learned was that my obese friends were consuming between 8 to 12 feet
of food per day! At the time, I was about 10 lbs. over my ideal body
weight so I decided to find out how much I was eating per day... 3
feet. I cut back to less than 2 feet and was at my proper weight in one
month.

My friends have responded similarly except they have taken longer
because of having to lose more weight. Admittedly, some of my obese
friends were especially slow to respond. They also happen to be the
ones with an unfortunate propensity for accidentally loosing their 6
inch rulers and taking weeks to buy replacements.

So here's the deal: measure all the food you eat, using it's longest
dimension, and keep the total length to less than two feet per day.
That's all there is. No scales, no counting calories or carbohydrates.
Heck, if you loose your ruler, you can even use the first joint of your
thumb to measure.

I am making this diet available as a public service and without
compensation.

If you have any questions, just see Dr. Chung's helpful FAQ and
substitute "Two Feet" for "Two Pounds" everywhere... what could be
simpler?

Though Steve invented this approach, he did not initiate this 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/hypocrite.asp

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

http://www.heartmdphd.com/wtlossfaqs.asp ... just substitute "Foot" for
"Pound" everywhere.

These debates are archived on Google in their entirety within this and
other discussion threads.

However, instead of conceding gracefully that they've lost the
argument(s), certain parties have redirected their hatred of the 2 foot
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) Steve has not been posting anonymously.

(2) The 2FD 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 2FD
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/moreChungbull****

(3) Steve did not start the discussion(s).

(4) The 2 foot diet approach is 100% free (no profit motive).

Full of hatred, frustration, and desperation, certain individuals have
tried to attack Steve's credentials knowing full well that they were
attempting to libel him. One notable example is Dr. Chung who is
jealous that Steve has improved on his diet.

When the full light was cast on Dr. Chung's libelous statements, the
hateful folks hiding in the darkness of anonymity, most notably Mu,
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/sign_up_to_be_a_patient.asp

Moreover, readers need only make the following observations concerning
the anon posters who continue to hiss, most notably Mu:

(1) They are anonymous and thus 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 Steve by cross-
posting.

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

and conclude that these anon posters deserve only their kill file.
Unfortunately, they keep Mu_Tating so that it is impossible to killfile
them.

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

It will remain my pleasure to participate here on Usenet above the din
of hissing from the peanut gallery.

Sincerely,

God's Honest Servant

Steve

Steve wrote in message ews.net...
On Fri, 23 Jan 2004 16:26:42 -0500, Dawn Taylor wrote
(in message ):

Steve;

I'm having trouble getting an accurate measure on hard-boiled eggs,
being as they're ovoids. Do I line them up side-by-side, or
end-to-end?


hissing snipped

Poor guy.

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 this
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 and
other discussion threads.

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, Steve, 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 participate here on Usenet above the din
of hissing from the peanut gallery.


Sincerely,

Andrew

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

Steve wrote in message ews.net...
On Fri, 23 Jan 2004 15:43:28 -0500, n k bakker wrote
(in message ) :

I said it before and I'll say it again... gimme 8 inches a day and I'm
in heaven...2 feet would be rather painful.

nancyy

hissing snipped

Poor guy.

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 this
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 and
other discussion threads.

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, Steve, 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 participate here on Usenet above the din
of hissing from the peanut gallery.


Sincerely,

Andrew

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

Steve wrote in message ews.net...
On Sat, 24 Jan 2004 11:35:01 -0500, Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD wrote
(in message ):

Tony Lew wrote:

Steve wrote in message
ews.net...
On Fri, 23 Jan 2004 15:43:28 -0500, n k bakker wrote
(in message ) :

I said it before and I'll say it again... gimme 8 inches a day and I'm
in heaven...2 feet would be rather painful.

nancyy

Thank you again for witnessing for the efficacy of the 2FD Nancy. May
I use your endorsement on my Testi-moan-ial page?


The Greatest Humble One of All,

libelous statements snipped

desperate hissing snipped

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
specify how he wanted the header 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 this
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 and
other discussion threads.

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, Steve, 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 participate here on Usenet 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 Sun, 25 Jan 2004 23:03:41 -0500, Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD wrote
(in message ) :

Steve wrote in message
ews.net...
On Fri, 23 Jan 2004 16:26:42 -0500, Dawn Taylor wrote
(in message ):

Steve;

I'm having trouble getting an accurate measure on hard-boiled eggs,
being as they're ovoids. Do I line them up side-by-side, or
end-to-end?


hissing snipped

Poor guy.

blah, blah, blah, blah

You know what is really funny Chung? All you are doing by running
around and attaching your macro to every message you can find is to
make normal people angry at _you_. And writing into the permanent
record your own juvenile obsession. But you can't help yourself... you
are like Pavlov's dogs. "Must post macro... must post macro... must
post macro".

Have at it, little buddy. Put both feet in your mouth... Pastor Chung's
Two Foot Diet :-)

--
Steve

Weeding the Lord's Vineyards Since 2003

Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD wrote on 25 Jan 2004
19:59:18 -0800:

Poor guy.

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:

[ .... ]

Andrew, you've posted (more or less) this same post around a dozen times.
This is known technically as canned meat. It's something over a hundred
lines long, costs time to download, costs space on servers, and so on.
You've made your point. Would you please post something new, sparkling
and inspiring next time round. Please?

Sincerely,

Andrew

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

Alan Mackenzie wrote:

Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD wrote on 25 Jan 2004
19:59:18 -0800:

Poor guy.

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:

[ .... ]

Andrew, you've posted (more or less) this same post around a dozen times.

It is not the same post each time.


This is known technically as canned meat.

Hardly.

It's something over a hundred
lines long, costs time to download, costs space on servers, and so on.

Some of my posts are even longer.


You've made your point.

Good.

Would you please post something new, sparkling
and inspiring next time round. Please?


Be glad to.

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 Mackenzie
(2) Report Alan Mackenzie 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