If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#81
|
|||
|
|||
Proof of LORD Almighty GOD: The 2PD-OMER Approach.
"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. |
#82
|
|||
|
|||
Read why The 2PD-OMER approach is fundamentally flawed!
"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. |
#83
|
|||
|
|||
Proof of LORD Almighty GOD: The 2PD-OMER Approach.
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 |
#84
|
|||
|
|||
WoW
"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. |
#85
|
|||
|
|||
Wow
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. |
#86
|
|||
|
|||
Proof of LORD Almighty GOD: The 2PD-OMER Approach.
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. |
#87
|
|||
|
|||
Proof of LORD Almighty GOD: The 2PD-OMER Approach.
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. |
#88
|
|||
|
|||
Read why The 2PD-OMER approach is fundamentally flawed!
"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 |
#89
|
|||
|
|||
Read why The 2PD-OMER approach is fundamentally flawed!
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. |
#90
|
|||
|
|||
Read why The 2PD-OMER approach is fundamentally flawed!
"."@ 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. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|