Wow

"There is no prescribed course of food with the 2PD-OMER Approach.

The former (diet) is left up to the supervising doctor to prescribe."

Of course, it is a poor gimic of a calorie restriction diet. Just
ignore it, a doc will provide plans with calorie restriction anyway with
weight or volume as the guide for meal plans. The real diet from the
doc will also consider nutrition which the two pound diet does not and
stress adding exercise.

I just read about a study where exercise caused more belly fat loss then
calorie restriction alone.

One can just do a time restricted meal to also limit calories.

The two pound diet, in all its many and changing flavors over the past
few years is a scientific flop, trash science.

"Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" wrote in message
ps.com...
convicted neighbor Cary Kittrell wrote:
Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote:
satan via a sockpuppet (demon) wrote:
brother "Mu" wrote:
neighbor Cubit wrote:

Your 2 pounds of Almonds is not very inspiring.

Cubit, Usenet history is chock full of people who have tried to
disown
the Two Pound Diet (2PD) saying "Well I can eat two pounds of
insert
chocolate, cement, fat, frogs, etc and never gain weight?
Hogwash!"

Well that is because the diet says "2PD". This rather vague diet
does not
factor in the caloric content of foods, hence such questions.

The 2PD-OMER Approach is not a diet. Instead, the Approach can be
used with any diet, which are instructions about **what** to eat and
not **how much** to eat.

"diet", OED definition #3:

Prescribed course of food, restricted in kind or limited in quantity,

There is no prescribed course of food with the 2PD-OMER Approach.

The former (diet) is left up to the supervising doctor to prescribe.

A prescribed diet would include the 'type of food' and the 'amount' to
consume. Just like a prescribed drug has to be taken at an appropriate dose
to have a beneficial effect, e.g. 1 tablet of X to be taken two times a day,
or 2 tablets of Y to be taken once daily, or 1 tablets of Y to be taken as
required, or 5mg of drug Z per kg of body weight.

Your approach suggests benefit is achieved only at a fixed dose of 2 pounds
no matter what the prescribed course of food is, which would imply that the
2lbs is the benefit-determining factor of the prescribed course of food.

For example, it is likely that a diabetic would be prescribed the ADA
diabetic diet while using the 2PD-OMER Approach.

There is no point in carrying a scale, then weighing 1.5 pounds or 2 pounds
of a certain prescribed course, if one can adhere to recommended guidelines
and making appropriate lifestyle changes, which have a proven benefit.

The magic dose of "2 lbs" does not have any benefit, unless of course you
can come up with something more concrete than your anecdotal evidence.

wrote:

The two pound diet has no basis in science and ignores the equally to
calorie restriction factors of exercise and sound choice of nutrition.

I have followed it from the beginning when mr. chung was confused by
watching a movie where mountain climbers consumed two pounds of food per
day. Confused because it is dehydrated energy dense foods easier to
carry up mountains for an energy intensive activity. That same diet
would almost surely cause most people to gain weight and become obese.
As I recall from calculating a similar diet it would be about 5000
calories a day..

This obvious fact was over looked because soon thereafter given him
personally he was also confused by an account in scripture of people
eating what he took mistakenly as two pounds of food a day. He confused
a measure of weight there that was in fact a measure of dry grain
volume. It too was not far from 5000 calories if that much grain was
consumed each day.

But fear not, by this time he was convinced that by divine direction he
was correct and that two pounds of food regardless of all other factors
was a divine directive for good health. Regardless of what was eaten
and how many calories consumed it would be divinely adjusted to each
person's nutritional needs.

Then when added internal belly fat was becoming widely discussed for its
adverse metabolic activity, the two pound diet was seen as the cure for
all
metabolic related disorders, a divine cure no doubt given him personaly.
This fat "vat" was at root of all manner of disorder for which the two
pound diet was the treatment, nay the cure.


Thus one can see the trash science, the confusion, the willfull
distortions, the filtering of information, the illogical leaps made, all
firmly cemented in his mind as a divine plan in which he was to play a
central and vital role in its pronouncement to the world. Atendant with
world wide acclaim and medical praise no doubt and purchase of tourist
books for trips to sweden high on the must do list.

An excellent summary. Note that Chung is also confused by the fact
that muscle mass is denser than body fat. He also fails to understand
conservation of energy; during a three-week European grand tour bicycle
race (like the Tour de France), riders will lose weight over the course
of the event despite eating many thousands of calories per day. The
energy expended by these elite athletes is that great. If they were
"hungry", as he ignorantly asserts, they would simply not be able to
complete a stage of the race. In fact, some riders do not and are
forced to withdraw because of what is called "bonking" (running out of
energy).

--
Supreme Leader of the Brainwashed Followers of Art Deco

"Still suffering from reading comprehension problems, Deco?
The section is clearly attributed to Art Deco, not to you, Deco."
-- Dr. David Tholen

"Who is "David Tholen", Daedalus? Still suffering from
attribution problems?"
-- Dr. David Tholen

"Cary Kittrell" wrote in message
...

"Epinephrine" writes:


"Cary Kittrell" wrote in message
...

"Epinephrine" writes:


"Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" wrote in message
ups.com...

The 2 pounds (16 oz + 16 oz as described by Exodus 16:16) is by
GOD's
design to be the optimal amount.

Any amount more or less would not be
optimal and we would be less hungry.

"Less hungry" is very subjective. Perhaps this amount (2PD) is
optimal
for
*you* and keeps you less hungry? There is no evidence to suggest that
this
amount is optimal for an athelete, a bedridden patient, or an infant.

Your assumption that 2PD is optimal for everyone is therefore flawed
as
it
does not take into account an individual's specific metabolism and
requirements. It appears to be construed to only serve religious
agenda.


Ah, but you see, Dr. Chung has informed us that:

The 2PD-OMER Approach is not a diet. It has been
studied in more than 625,550 people worldwide

Surely if such a significant number of people participated, it would be
worth reporting in any medical journal or christian magazine, but it is
my
understanding that Chung has not done so. Why, I wonder!


As this approach clearly does not have any scientific basis whatsoever,
would it be taken seriously by the scientific world? Surely anectdotal
evidence alone wouldn't count - perhaps he would care to share the
results
and methods used in this extensive intercontinental study?


Oh, let's just say that it has been suggested that nearly all of the
"participants" in Dr. Chung's study were the children of Israel,
wandering hither and yon (generally more yonly than hitherly)
all those years.

Quite unlikely as I doubt the participants had any scales at the time.

If so, one can only wonder where Dr. Chung obtained all the
requisite information on the state of their health. All of their
healths.

I don't think health status of an individual matters when it comes to the 2
pound approach.

It is my understanding that as long as a supervising doctor has prescribed a
certain food, the magic dose of "2 pounds" would do the miracle.

On Apr 13, 10:44 am, "Hollywood" wrote:
On Apr 12, 11:06 pm, "Father Haskell" wrote:



On Apr 12, 3:31 am, "Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD"
wrote:

brother Mu wrote:
On Wed, 11 Apr 2007 17:14:40 -0800, Cubit wrote:

Your 2 pounds of Almonds is not very inspiring.

Cubit, Usenet history is chock full of people who have tried to disown
the Two Pound Diet (2PD) saying "Well I can eat two pounds of insert
chocolate, cement, fat, frogs, etc and never gain weight? Hogwash!"

The truth is that you or anyone else can cut their consumption gradually
to 2PD and the weight will come off and stay off.

You will get tired of almonds, candy, or whatever. Fat content will
moderate itself.

2PD of asbestos insulation waste.

2 Lbs daily, canned whoop ass?

2PD Canned Squirrel Gut with Ptomaine.

On Apr 13, 4:41 pm, "Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD"
wrote:
satan via a sockpuppet (demon) wrote:

brother "Mu" wrote:
neighbor Cubit wrote:

Your 2 pounds of Almonds is not very inspiring.

Cubit, Usenet history is chock full of people who have tried to disown
the Two Pound Diet (2PD) saying "Well I can eat two pounds of insert
chocolate, cement, fat, frogs, etc and never gain weight? Hogwash!"

Well that is because the diet says "2PD". This rather vague diet does not
factor in the caloric content of foods, hence such questions.

The 2PD-OMER Approach is not a diet. Instead, the Approach can be
used with any diet, which are instructions about **what** to eat and
not **how much** to eat.

The truth is that you or anyone else can cut their consumption gradually
to 2PD and the weight will come off and stay off.

Wouldn't a 1PD diet or a 1.5PD diet work better than the 2PD diet? Just
wondering...

The 2 pounds (16 oz + 16 oz as described by Exodus 16:16) is by GOD's
design to be the optimal amount. Any amount more or less would not be
optimal and we would be less hungry.

You read it here. God prefers the Imperial system of weights and
measures.

On Apr 13, 8:47 pm, wrote:
"There is no prescribed course of food with the 2PD-OMER Approach.

The former (diet) is left up to the supervising doctor to prescribe."

Of course, it is a poor gimic of a calorie restriction diet. Just
ignore it, a doc will provide plans with calorie restriction anyway with
weight or volume as the guide for meal plans. The real diet from the
doc will also consider nutrition which the two pound diet does not and
stress adding exercise.

I just read about a study where exercise caused more belly fat loss then
calorie restriction alone.

One can just do a time restricted meal to also limit calories.

The two pound diet, in all its many and changing flavors over the past
few years is a scientific flop, trash science.

I wouldn't bother with calorie restriction except in life or death
cases of
morbid obesity. Exercise also has dramatic effects on cardiovascular
health; 4 weeks of daily, easy 8 mile bike rides (age 30, starting
from no
exercise whatsoever) brought my bp from 140 / 80 to 110 / 60, and my
resting pulse rate from 90 bpm to 55 -- the traditional "count beats
for
15 seconds and multiply by 4" method was no longer accurate. This
was on top on smoking 1 pack of Marlboro reds per day. Weight loss
was from 185 lbs to 150. I could still eat like a pig, and my weight
went
down.

"Epinephrine" wrote in message
...

"Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" wrote in message
ps.com...
convicted neighbor Cary Kittrell wrote:
Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote:
satan via a sockpuppet (demon) wrote:
brother "Mu" wrote:
neighbor Cubit wrote:

Your 2 pounds of Almonds is not very inspiring.

Cubit, Usenet history is chock full of people who have tried to
disown
the Two Pound Diet (2PD) saying "Well I can eat two pounds of
insert
chocolate, cement, fat, frogs, etc and never gain weight?
Hogwash!"

Well that is because the diet says "2PD". This rather vague diet
does not
factor in the caloric content of foods, hence such questions.

The 2PD-OMER Approach is not a diet. Instead, the Approach can be
used with any diet, which are instructions about **what** to eat and
not **how much** to eat.

"diet", OED definition #3:

Prescribed course of food, restricted in kind or limited in
quantity,

There is no prescribed course of food with the 2PD-OMER Approach.

The former (diet) is left up to the supervising doctor to prescribe.

A prescribed diet would include the 'type of food' and the 'amount' to
consume. Just like a prescribed drug has to be taken at an appropriate
dose to have a beneficial effect, e.g. 1 tablet of X to be taken two times
a day, or 2 tablets of Y to be taken once daily, or 1 tablets of Y to be
taken as required, or 5mg of drug Z per kg of body weight.

Your approach suggests benefit is achieved only at a fixed dose of 2
pounds no matter what the prescribed course of food is, which would imply
that the 2lbs is the benefit-determining factor of the prescribed course
of food.

For example, it is likely that a diabetic would be prescribed the ADA
diabetic diet while using the 2PD-OMER Approach.

There is no point in carrying a scale, then weighing 1.5 pounds or 2
pounds of a certain prescribed course, if one can adhere to recommended
guidelines and making appropriate lifestyle changes, which have a proven
benefit.

The magic dose of "2 lbs" does not have any benefit, unless of course you
can come up with something more concrete than your anecdotal evidence.


He can't.

Smiler,
The godless one

Epinephrine wrote:

"Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" wrote in message
ps.com...

convicted neighbor Cary Kittrell wrote:

Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote:

satan via a sockpuppet (demon) wrote:

brother "Mu" wrote:

neighbor Cubit wrote:


Your 2 pounds of Almonds is not very inspiring.

Cubit, Usenet history is chock full of people who have tried to
disown
the Two Pound Diet (2PD) saying "Well I can eat two pounds of
insert
chocolate, cement, fat, frogs, etc and never gain weight?
Hogwash!"

Well that is because the diet says "2PD". This rather vague diet
does not
factor in the caloric content of foods, hence such questions.

The 2PD-OMER Approach is not a diet. Instead, the Approach can be
used with any diet, which are instructions about **what** to eat and
not **how much** to eat.

"diet", OED definition #3:

Prescribed course of food, restricted in kind or limited in quantity,

There is no prescribed course of food with the 2PD-OMER Approach.

The former (diet) is left up to the supervising doctor to prescribe.


A prescribed diet would include the 'type of food' and the 'amount' to
consume. Just like a prescribed drug has to be taken at an appropriate dose
to have a beneficial effect, e.g. 1 tablet of X to be taken two times a day,
or 2 tablets of Y to be taken once daily, or 1 tablets of Y to be taken as
required, or 5mg of drug Z per kg of body weight.

Your approach suggests benefit is achieved only at a fixed dose of 2 pounds
no matter what the prescribed course of food is, which would imply that the
2lbs is the benefit-determining factor of the prescribed course of food.


For example, it is likely that a diabetic would be prescribed the ADA
diabetic diet while using the 2PD-OMER Approach.


There is no point in carrying a scale, then weighing 1.5 pounds or 2 pounds
of a certain prescribed course, if one can adhere to recommended guidelines
and making appropriate lifestyle changes, which have a proven benefit.

The magic dose of "2 lbs" does not have any benefit, unless of course you
can come up with something more concrete than your anecdotal evidence.


There is no anecdotal evidence, only andy's crowing.

"."@ wrote in message ...
Epinephrine wrote:

"Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" wrote in message
ps.com...

convicted neighbor Cary Kittrell wrote:

Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote:

satan via a sockpuppet (demon) wrote:

brother "Mu" wrote:

neighbor Cubit wrote:


Your 2 pounds of Almonds is not very inspiring.

Cubit, Usenet history is chock full of people who have tried to
disown
the Two Pound Diet (2PD) saying "Well I can eat two pounds of insert
chocolate, cement, fat, frogs, etc and never gain weight? Hogwash!"

Well that is because the diet says "2PD". This rather vague diet does
not
factor in the caloric content of foods, hence such questions.

The 2PD-OMER Approach is not a diet. Instead, the Approach can be
used with any diet, which are instructions about **what** to eat and
not **how much** to eat.

"diet", OED definition #3:

Prescribed course of food, restricted in kind or limited in
quantity,

There is no prescribed course of food with the 2PD-OMER Approach.

The former (diet) is left up to the supervising doctor to prescribe.


A prescribed diet would include the 'type of food' and the 'amount' to
consume. Just like a prescribed drug has to be taken at an appropriate
dose to have a beneficial effect, e.g. 1 tablet of X to be taken two
times a day, or 2 tablets of Y to be taken once daily, or 1 tablets of Y
to be taken as required, or 5mg of drug Z per kg of body weight.

Your approach suggests benefit is achieved only at a fixed dose of 2
pounds no matter what the prescribed course of food is, which would imply
that the 2lbs is the benefit-determining factor of the prescribed course
of food.


For example, it is likely that a diabetic would be prescribed the ADA
diabetic diet while using the 2PD-OMER Approach.


There is no point in carrying a scale, then weighing 1.5 pounds or 2
pounds of a certain prescribed course, if one can adhere to recommended
guidelines and making appropriate lifestyle changes, which have a proven
benefit.

The magic dose of "2 lbs" does not have any benefit, unless of course you
can come up with something more concrete than your anecdotal evidence.


There is no anecdotal evidence, only andy's crowing.

I was kindly referring to his "crowing" as anecdotal evidence.

i.e Chung's anecdotes = Chung's anecdotal evidence.