My Progress

"Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" wrote in message
...
L.B. Listmann wrote:
Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote:

The healthiest people are truly the hungriest people :-)

Then why are they dying of disease and suffering nutritional deficiencies
that weaken the immune system?

The healthiest people are winning gold medals at Olympic events (i.e.
Michael Phelps) and also winning various twinkie/hotdog eating
contests to the amazement of spectators expecting obese winners.
Their ability to eat large amounts is an indication that these hungry
(healthy) competitors are far from dying from anything.

Have personally become about 12 million times hungrier (healthier)
since using the 2PD-OMER Approach over the past 12 years:

You didn't answer the question. You side-stepped it. Then why are the
constantly "hungry" dying of disease and suffering nutritional deficiencies
that weaken the immune system?



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p8B_70Jp-kc

"A laborer's appetite works for him. His hunger drives him on." --
King Solomon

Amen.

Truth is simple :-)

Love in the truth,

Andrew
--
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
Board-certified Heart Doctor
and Author of "Be Hungry"
http://NetCabal.com

Only GOD can cure the "hunger is starvation" delusion:
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.m...81ab7d7ce78de?

L.B. Listmann wrote:
Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote:
Kaz Kylheku wrote:

http://groups.google.com/group/sci.m...e71fa96107435?

The irrational resistance (excuse-making) against using the simple
2PD-OMER Approach arises from the pervasive and deadly delusion that
"hunger is starvation" which has been discussed in a different thread
starting with the following OP:

http://groups.google.com/group/sci.m...915cc6cd0e47e?

Why do you lie constantly?

It remains my personal choice to continue to write truthfully.

I have never seen anyone on these groups claim
"hunger" is "starvation."

You clearly have the delusion that "hunger is starvation" inside your
heart as evident by the following Usenet post attributed to you:

http://groups.google.com/group/sci.m...0f41c48ff2e7a?

May GOD soften your heart, so that you would come to trust the truth,
Who is Jesus:

http://T3WiJ.com

Amen.

Love in the truth,

Andrew
--
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
Board-certified Cardiologist
and Author of "Be Hungry"
http://NetCabal.com
"Don't be left behind as were Cleopus and Simon ...
.... ----------------- be hungry ! ! !"

Only GOD can cut the "hunger is starvation" delusion from our hearts:
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.m...81ab7d7ce78de?

L.B. Listmann wrote:

wrote in message
u...
Truth:

The two pound diet,aka 2pd etc. is quack science. It has flaws of both
fact and logic. It was invented to fit a preexisting agenda and does
not flow from evidence based on research. The diet inventor has many
times been appraised of his flaws but clings to them for reasons other
then science or valid medical practice


All of this nonsense of measure by weight or volume comes from the
agenda fitting, not well established research. But sadly even the
agenda is based on misunderstood and misapplied information. Even when
corrected the author of the agenda for nothing but pride and vain face
saving can not deal with that truth.

Bottom line, ignore any reference to the two pound diet,aka 2 pd etc.
and stick with established information and sources of expert authorities
which does not include the vanity of vanity distorting reality in this
case.

God bless.

Chung got this 2PD nonsense from the bible. Apparently be believes
everyone from near infancy to old age is supposed to consume 2 lbs of
food a day. Calories don't matter according to Chung. He bases this 2
PD diet on the biblical "manna from heaven" story. There is no basis in
reality for this diet he's pushing.



no, chung got the 2 lb idea from watching Mt Everest climbers at an
I-Max theatre........ they took 2 lbs of food with them, and he said
'eureka' and started to tout 2 lbs

it was pointed out to chung that the 2lbs of food was DRIED FOOD and
they used the snow to rehydrate it, and to get their own water

then andie found religion......... and he read about the omer

and now, it's all God's vision

(me rolls her eyes here)

L.B. Listmann wrote:
Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote:
L.B. Listmann wrote:
Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote:

The healthiest people are truly the hungriest people :-)

Then why are they dying of disease and suffering nutritional deficiencies
that weaken the immune system?

Those of us who are among the hungriest (able to eat the most) are the
healthiest not dying of anything and nutritionally the most replete.

The healthiest people are winning gold medals at Olympic events (i.e.
Michael Phelps) and also winning various twinkie/hotdog eating
contests to the amazement of spectators expecting obese winners.
Their ability to eat large amounts is an indication that these hungry
(healthy) competitors are far from dying from anything.

Have personally become about 12 million times hungrier (healthier)
since using the 2PD-OMER Approach over the past 12 years:

You didn't answer the question.

See above.

Truth is simple :-)

May GOD soften your heart, L.B., so that you would come to trust the
truth, Who is Jesus:

http://T3WiJ.com

Amen.

Love in the truth,

Andrew
--
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
Board-certified Heart Doctor
and Author of "Be Hungry"
http://NetCabal.com
"Don't be left behind as were Cleopus and Simon ...
.... ----------------- be hungry ! ! !"

Only GOD can cut the "hunger is starvation" delusion from our hearts:
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.m...81ab7d7ce78de?

On 2009-05-16, L.B. Listmann wrote:

"Kaz Kylheku" wrote in message
...
On 2009-05-12, L.B. Listmann wrote:
"Kaz Kylheku" wrote in message
...

Two pounds of the stuff that constitutes the average intake appears to
be
in
the ballpark for safe, effective dieting, for both men and women.


2 lbs of *WHAT STUFF?*

Obviously, food that has an average caloric density of between 1.5 and 2
kcal/g.

This is easy to achieve. If every component of every meal has a density
in this range, then the overall density cannot be outside of that
range. (Mean value theorem from calculus).

Do not put anything on that scale that has more than 2 kcal/g.

And how would anyone know what contains 2 kcal/g?

According to www.calorieking.com:

Randomly guessing some foods that are probably under 2 kcal/g:

100g of sirloin steak: 188 kcal. 1.88 kcal/g
Cooked long-grain brown rice: 1.11 kcal/g
Canned kidney beans: 0.82 kcal/g
Apples: 0.52 kcal/g
Potato, baked in skin: 0.90 kcal/g

It's not hard to come up with foods that have more than 2 kcal/g:

Brownie: 4.66 kcal/g
Muffin (Kirkland blueberry): 3.70 kcal/g
Cheddar cheese: 4.03 kcal/g
Bacon, fried: 5.41 kcal/g

You should have some intuition about what is loaded with calories, and you can
check that intuition online.

Many foods are labelled with nutritional facts too; you can easily check
caloric density when you're shopping.

What about those of us not familiar with the metric system or are poor in math?

I'm not sure where all your objections are headed. Let's see.

1. You want to go out to eat, because if you bring lunch will spoil.
2. You don't want to weigh anything.
3. You may be poor at math, so you don't want to calculate.

So, with regard to those requirements, what is your plan for limiting the
energy intake?

One way is to eat similar portion sizes everyday, under an invariant meal
structure, without snacking. Billions of people in the world are thin this way.
They eat their staple diets, in staple quantities, according to a general
plan dictated by their surrounding culture.

Sure, this is absolutely the best way to go, and what works for me.
I've never weighed anything nor counted calories for any significant
period of time.

Problem is, some fat folk don't have the accountability for this. They may be
otherwise perfectly rational grownups who handle complex responsibilities in
their jobs and personal lives. But when it comes to eating, they have
amnesia. It goes in the mouth, and five minutes later, it is forgotten.

Anything which has calories must be weighed, including liquids.
If you think you can put a 500g soda on the scale and still be
able to eat well in the 407g you have left, go ahead.

How many people carry around g scales?

I've addressed this already; you are repeating yourself. But let me add this:
how many people carry around an extra 80 pounds of flab, or more?

cookies, etc; I would tend to weigh that separately and keep it all under
50g,
which would cap its caloric contribution at 450 kcal.

How would you know the 50g contains 450 kcals?

I wouldn't. Consequently, that isn't what I wrote.

On May 16, 11:08*am, "Andrew B. Chung" wrote:
Truth is simple :-)

post time = 11:08am

schedule = "11:00 to 11:30 am - Be prepared for the worst case
scenario of the Flu pandemic."
http://www.thehealthfair.com/

"Tiger Lily" wrote in message
...
L.B. Listmann wrote:

wrote in message
u...
Truth:

The two pound diet,aka 2pd etc. is quack science. It has flaws of both
fact and logic. It was invented to fit a preexisting agenda and does
not flow from evidence based on research. The diet inventor has many
times been appraised of his flaws but clings to them for reasons other
then science or valid medical practice


All of this nonsense of measure by weight or volume comes from the
agenda fitting, not well established research. But sadly even the
agenda is based on misunderstood and misapplied information. Even when
corrected the author of the agenda for nothing but pride and vain face
saving can not deal with that truth.

Bottom line, ignore any reference to the two pound diet,aka 2 pd etc.
and stick with established information and sources of expert authorities
which does not include the vanity of vanity distorting reality in this
case.

God bless.

Chung got this 2PD nonsense from the bible. Apparently be believes
everyone from near infancy to old age is supposed to consume 2 lbs of
food a day. Calories don't matter according to Chung. He bases this 2 PD
diet on the biblical "manna from heaven" story. There is no basis in
reality for this diet he's pushing.



no, chung got the 2 lb idea from watching Mt Everest climbers at an I-Max
theatre........ they took 2 lbs of food with them, and he said 'eureka'
and started to tout 2 lbs

it was pointed out to chung that the 2lbs of food was DRIED FOOD and they
used the snow to rehydrate it, and to get their own water

then andie found religion......... and he read about the omer

and now, it's all God's vision

(me rolls her eyes here)

They're all nuts...............

"Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" wrote in message
...
L.B. Listmann wrote:
Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote:

"Indeed most people using the 2PD-OMER Approach are doing this in
combination with a diet comprising of their favorite foods."

Eating 2 lbs of food consisting of 8 or 9000 calories a day ...

Bomb calorimeter measurements of 2 lbs (908 grams) of food comprising
of a variety of a person's favorites typically yields about 1800
calories and not 8000-9000 calories as you falsely claim. This has
been pointed out to you earlier by Kaz:


The favorite foods of many, if not most obese people are not low calorie
foods. Fries, sweets, burgers etc are not going to contain 1800 in a 2 pound
portion. Only lean meats and low carb veggies may make it. Those are not
usually the favorite foods of those with weight issues. If eating 2 lbs a
day caused weight loss as you claim, everyone would be carrying around
scales and no one would be obese.

L.B. Listmann wrote:
Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote:
L.B. Listmann wrote:
Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote:

"Indeed most people using the 2PD-OMER Approach are doing this in
combination with a diet comprising of their favorite foods."

Eating 2 lbs of food consisting of 8 or 9000 calories a day ...

Bomb calorimeter measurements of 2 lbs (908 grams) of food comprising
of a variety of a person's favorites typically yields about 1800
calories and not 8000-9000 calories as you falsely claim. This has
been pointed out to you earlier by Kaz:

The favorite foods of many, if not most obese people are not low calorie
foods.

Favorites change when folks hold themselves to 32 ounces per day.

Fries, sweets, burgers etc are not going to contain 1800 in a 2 pound
portion.

They don't contain 8000-9000 calories as you have falsely claimed.

Only lean meats and low carb veggies may make it.

The average caloric density of what people are eating remains about 2
cal/gm as cited by Kaz.

Those are not
usually the favorite foods of those with weight issues.

Folks with weight issues are **all** eating more than 32 ounces per
day.

Therefore, they will **all** lose weight by eating less, down to the
right amount (32 ounces) per day.

Truth is simple :-)

May GOD soften your heart, L.B., so that you would come to trust the
truth, Who is Jesus:

http://T3WiJ.com

Amen.

Love in the truth,

Andrew
--
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
Board-certified Heart Doctor
and Author of "Be Hungry"
http://NetCabal.com
"Don't be left behind as were Cleopus and Simon ...
.... ----------------- be hungry ! ! !"

Only GOD can cut the "hunger is starvation" delusion from our hearts:
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.m...81ab7d7ce78de?

"Kaz Kylheku" wrote in message
...
On 2009-05-16, L.B. Listmann wrote:

"Kaz Kylheku" wrote in message
...
On 2009-05-12, L.B. Listmann wrote:
"Kaz Kylheku" wrote in message
...

Two pounds of the stuff that constitutes the average intake appears to
be
in
the ballpark for safe, effective dieting, for both men and women.


2 lbs of *WHAT STUFF?*

Obviously, food that has an average caloric density of between 1.5 and 2
kcal/g.

This is easy to achieve. If every component of every meal has a density
in this range, then the overall density cannot be outside of that
range. (Mean value theorem from calculus).

Do not put anything on that scale that has more than 2 kcal/g.

And how would anyone know what contains 2 kcal/g?

According to www.calorieking.com:

Randomly guessing some foods that are probably under 2 kcal/g:

100g of sirloin steak: 188 kcal. 1.88 kcal/g

I'm in America where we use pounds and ounces, teaspoons and tablespoons,
cups etc. How would the average American judge a gram of food? Is that a
tsp full or a Tbs full? Do you look for gram scales to weigh everything and
then look for a computer to see how many kcal/gs they contain? Let's say we
have a lb plate of baked chicken, potatoes and string beans? How do we know
how many calories the plate of food contains? 1.11 kcal/g means nothing to
me.

Cooked long-grain brown rice: 1.11 kcal/g
Canned kidney beans: 0.82 kcal/g
Apples: 0.52 kcal/g
Potato, baked in skin: 0.90 kcal/g

It's not hard to come up with foods that have more than 2 kcal/g:

Brownie: 4.66 kcal/g
Muffin (Kirkland blueberry): 3.70 kcal/g
Cheddar cheese: 4.03 kcal/g
Bacon, fried: 5.41 kcal/g

You should have some intuition about what is loaded with calories, and you
can
check that intuition online.

I don't have access to a PC when out during the day.


Many foods are labelled with nutritional facts too; you can easily check
caloric density when you're shopping.

What about those of us not familiar with the metric system or are poor in
math?

I'm not sure where all your objections are headed. Let's see.

1. You want to go out to eat, because if you bring lunch will spoil.

Right. There is no fridge where I work or where many people work. Leaving an
sandwich out at room temperature can well spoil it after 5 hours.

2. You don't want to weigh anything.

Most people would rather not carry around a scale all day.

3. You may be poor at math, so you don't want to calculate.

Many people are indeed poor in math. All these things have to be considered.
And if calories are going to be counted, why weight the food? Just add the
calories and find what number is the magic number and you start losing
weight.


So, with regard to those requirements, what is your plan for limiting the
energy intake?

Counting calories would be the fastest and easiest for active working people
with busy schedules. But since not everyone eats at home, that too can be
problematic.


One way is to eat similar portion sizes everyday, under an invariant meal
structure, without snacking. Billions of people in the world are thin this
way.
They eat their staple diets, in staple quantities, according to a general
plan dictated by their surrounding culture.

Sure, this is absolutely the best way to go, and what works for me.
I've never weighed anything nor counted calories for any significant
period of time.

And how much weight have you lost on this regime?


Problem is, some fat folk don't have the accountability for this. They
may be
otherwise perfectly rational grownups who handle complex responsibilities
in
their jobs and personal lives. But when it comes to eating, they have
amnesia. It goes in the mouth, and five minutes later, it is forgotten.

Anything which has calories must be weighed, including liquids.
If you think you can put a 500g soda on the scale and still be
able to eat well in the 407g you have left, go ahead.

Soda in grams? Here it's in ozs, pints, quarts and gallons.


How many people carry around g scales?

I've addressed this already; you are repeating yourself. But let me add
this:
how many people carry around an extra 80 pounds of flab, or more?

So you suggest men carry around scales.... ? In what? Handbags like women
carry?


cookies, etc; I would tend to weigh that separately and keep it all
under
50g,
which would cap its caloric contribution at 450 kcal.

How would you know the 50g contains 450 kcals?

I wouldn't. Consequently, that isn't what I wrote.