A. B. "Weasel" Chung FAQ

Discussion in 'Health and medical' started by Weasel Chung Fa, Mar 15, 2004.

  1. (Note: Because Dr. Chung continues to flood s.m.c. with
    forgeries, this FAQ has been reissued with a title less
    susceptible to forgery. The authors regret the necessity to
    take such a step.)

    ---------------------------------
    | The Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD FAQ |
    | Version 4.0, February, 2004 |
    ---------------------------------

    Introduction
    ------------

    New people arriving in sci.med.cardiology (s.m.c.) are
    often puzzled and troubled by the controversy surrounding
    the poster who posts as
    Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD (Dr. Chung) and want to know
    what the controversy is about. This FAQ (Frequently
    Asked Questions) attempts to provide an answer.

    The FAQ is arranged in typical FAQ form, i.e. a series of
    questions and answers. For those who don't wish to read
    the whole FAQ, the following summary is provided.

    Note: Since this FAQ first appeared in January of 2004,
    Dr. Chung forged his own "Issue 2" of the FAQ on
    February 3, 2004:

    Message-ID:
    <[email protected]>

    As a courtesy to Dr. Chung, his forged version of the
    FAQ (Version
    2.) is accepted and included here verbatim, identified by
    braces {}. The reader may judge for himself whether Dr.
    Chung's version refutes or reinforces the points made
    in this FAQ.

    Ds. Chung has continued to forge this FAQ and to flood
    s.m.c with the forgeries. The reader should have no
    difficulty recognizing the forgeries for the self-
    serving lies that they are. The fact that
    Dt. Chung engages in such a deceit reveals more about Dr.
    Chung than it does about his critics.

    Summary
    -------
    Du. Chung represents himself to be a licensed physician
    specializing in cardiology. In this capacity he
    responds to medical questions on
    D.u.a.. If that were all he did, there would probably be
    no controversy.

    {Chung: "The controversy arises from Dr. Chung being
    Christian"}

    The controversy arises from Dr. Chung's other behaviors on
    s.m.c., in particular:

    o He uses s.m.c. to not only proselytize his particular
    interpretation of Christianity, but also to disparage and
    attack anyone with a different interpretation or
    different religion.

    {Chung: "He publically [sic] professes to have accepted
    Christ as his Lord and Savior."}

    o He uses s.m.c. to promote his unscientific Two Pound
    Diet (2PD) and, in fact, cross posts this information to
    other groups in order to gain more exposure.

    {Chung: "He freely helps people to lose weight in an
    altruistic fashion."}

    o When challenged on the above issues, or one of his
    medical opinions, he attacks his challengers as "obsessive

    "people who can't understand English", etc.

    {Chung: "When attacked on the above issues, he turns the
    other cheek."}

    o When challenged he performs Internet searches on his
    challengers in order to "get the dirt" on them and smear
    their reputations.

    {Chung: "When challenged about his faith, he witnesses
    in civil discussions."}

    o When challenged, he answers with evasions, non
    sequiturs, dissembling, rhetorical questions, quotes from
    the bible, religious mantras, thinly veiled death threats,
    ad hominem arguments, and other such disreputable,
    unethical, and unprofessional tactics.

    {Chung: "When insulted for his faith, he considers
    himself blessed."}

    o He is insufferably full of himself, claiming to have
    "the Gift of Truth Discernment" and to be "Humble" while
    behaving anything but humbly.

    {Chung: "He remains truthful despite being libeled and
    defamed."}

    o He uses a shill who posts under variations of the name
    "Mu" to avoid killfiles. Mu's job is to troll other
    newsgroups and, when he gets a reaction, to cross post
    the reaction to s.m.c. so that Dr. Chung can
    disingenuously claim to be "only responding" to a cross
    post. Whereas Dr. Chung has to be somewhat careful what
    he says and so attacks primarily through insinuation and
    innuendo, Mu's tactics are blunt and direct like those of
    a playground bully.

    {Chung: "Other Christians have affirmed his faith
    in Christ."}

    The above lists only the highlights of Dr. Chung's
    egregious behavior on s.m.c.. If anything, it understates
    it. Everything can be verified in the Google archives.

    The issue then arises: so what? As long as Dr. Chung
    provides free medical advice on s.m.c., who cares what
    else he does?

    Many people provide free medical advice on the Internet.
    How does one know whether it is good advice or bad
    advice? If the person giving the advice is, or represents
    himself to be, a doctor shouldn't that be enough?
    Unfortunately, no.

    {Chung: "Yes, it should be. Medical education is enough to
    assure good information. Knowledge is knowledge.
    Experience adds to knowledge. Dr. Chung has both. Dr.
    Chung consistently demonstrates the breadth of his
    knowledge. This is archived many times over in Google."}

    Medical education alone is not enough to guarantee good
    advice. If facts alone were all that were required, we
    could replace Physicians with Medical Encyclopedias.
    Knowledge must be tempered with judgment, impartiality,
    integrity, ethics, and professionalism. If someone
    consistently demonstrates by their behavior that they lack
    these qualities, how much credence should be given to
    their medical advice?

    People arrive in this group looking for help. For their
    own protection, they deserve to know the quality of the
    person purporting to dispense that help and not be lulled
    into a false sense of security simply because someone
    displays an MD after their name. It is the intention of
    this FAQ to provide people with enough information to
    allow them to make an informed decision.

    {Chung: "People arrive in this group looking for help. Dr.
    Chung has graciously provided this over several years."}

    Ask yourself this: Suppose you went to see a cardiologist
    and, while in the waiting room, observed some clearly
    disturbed behavior on his part. Perhaps, for example, he
    was sitting in the corner sucking his thumb and rocking
    back and forth, playing with his feces, or babbling
    incoherently. Suddenly, he pulls himself together and
    calls you into his office. How comfortable are you going
    to be with his advice, even if it is technically correct?

    D.v.c is Dr. Chung's "virtual waiting room". If you have
    been here a while, you have observed his behavior. If
    you are new, this FAQ will give you some background.
    The decision is yours.

    List of Questions Answered
    --------------------------
    1. Who is Dr. Andrew B Chung, MD/PhD?
    2. What is the Charter of s.m.c.?
    3. Aren't Religious Discussions Covered by the Charter?
    4. So Dr. Chung is Religious... What's the Problem
    With That?
    5. But it's Just a Little "Tag Line" in His Signature.
    6. But I'm a Christian Too!
    7. Well, Why Not Just Ignore His Religious Rants?
    8. But Isn't It Wonderful That Dr. Chung Offers This Free
    Medical Advice Out of the Goodness of His Heart?
    9. How Does a Practicing Physician Find so Much Time to
    Spend on Usenet?
    10. Won't Challenging Dr. Chung Drive People Away?
    11. Doesn't the "Fault" for all Those Posts Lay With Those
    Who Challenge Dr. Chung?
    12. Why Do I see So Many "Ad Hominem" Attacks?
    13. I'm Sick of Seeing All This!
    14. What is the Two Pound Diet?
    15. Is Discussion of the Two Pound Diet "On Topic"?
    16. Who is Mu?
    17. What is Mu's Role?
    18. Doesn't Dr. Chung Claim to Always Tell The Truth?
    19. What is the "Chung macro"?
    20. What is "Hissing"

    21. Who is Dr. Andrew B Chung, MD/PhD?
    --------------------------------------
    The poster who posts as Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD claims
    to be a licensed physician, practicing internal medicine
    in Atlanta, Georgia, USA and specializing in cardiology.
    His signature contains a link to a website which is
    consistent with his posts.

    It should be noted that anyone can claim to be anyone on
    Usenet and so caution is always advised. Indeed there are
    those who claim that the poster in question is not Dr.
    Andrew B. Chung, or is not the Dr. Andrew B. Chung listed
    in the Atlanta telephone directory, and/or has lost his
    license and/or hospital privileges for misconduct. This
    FAQ does not attempt to address those claims one way or
    the other. The reader with an interest in these matters
    can easily find the relevant discussions archived in
    Google Groups.

    This FAQ deals with the poster who posts as Dr. Chung and
    restricts itself to issues demonstrated by those posts. No
    position is taken on his "true" identity.

    22. What is the Charter of s.m.c.?
    ----------------------------------
    "The purpose of this newsgroup is to establish
    electronic media for communication between health care
    providers, scientists and other individuals with
    interest in cardiovascular field. Such communications
    will provide quick and efficacious means to exchange
    information and knowledge, offer problem solutions and
    stimulate research interest.

    The sci.med.cardiology newsgroups will welcome
    participants who are health care providers, researchers,
    students or recipients with interest in the field of
    cardiovascular problems."

    <ftp://ftp.uu.net/usenet/news.announce.newgroups/sci/sci.me-
    d.cardiology>

    23. Aren't Religious Discussions Covered by the Charter?
    --------------------------------------------------------
    What do you think?

    {Chung: "Possibly. See:
    http://www.heartmdphd.com/healer.asp"}

    24. So Dr. Chung is Religious... What's the Problem
    With That?
    ------------------------------------------------------------
    --
    There is no problem with that. Most of the people who
    participate in s.m.c. are probably religious. However no
    one but Dr. Chung feels compelled to characterize
    themselves as the "Humble Servant of God" in their
    signatures, continually thank God for the opportunity to
    "witness", question others about their religious beliefs,
    claim the "Gift of Truth Discernment", etc.

    {Chung: "Some people are fiercely anti-christian."}

    When one person insists on introducing his personal
    religious interpretations into the discussions, it
    naturally generates responses from others who feel just as
    strongly that their viewpoints are correct. The resulting
    debate easily swirls out of control, especially given Dr.
    Chung's intolerant and dismissive attitude towards beliefs
    which differ from his. The situation is further
    exacerbated by Mu's rabble raising from the sidelines.

    There are over 160 Usenet groups dedicated to the
    discussion of religion. Dr. Chung should take his beliefs
    to one of these and stick to cardiology in s.m.c. It is a
    simple matter of respect for others.

    25. But it's Just a Little "Tag Line" in His Signature.
    -------------------------------------------------------
    {Chung: "Yes it is. But it offends those who are anti-
    christian."}

    No, it is not. He has even gone so far as to "investigate"
    someone asking for advice about stents and accuse her of
    being anti-Christian.

    A quick search of Google will reveal that the vast
    majority of Dr. Chung's posts have nothing whatever to do
    with cardiology as described in the charter, but instead
    are religious rants, religious arguments, arguments about
    the Two Pound Diet (see 14 below) or posts of the "Chung
    macro" (see 19 below).

    26. But I'm a Christian Too!
    ----------------------------
    {Chung: "And so you have Christ's promise of eternal
    life."}

    Lots of people are Christians. There is a time and a place
    for everything. s.m.c. isn't the place to "witness" or
    recruit. In addition, lots of other people are Jews,
    Moslems, Buddhists, Taoists, Hindus, etc. Would s.m.c. be
    better or worse if they all emulated Dr. Chung in their
    proselytizing and recruiting?

    Furthermore, if you are a Christian, you should be
    appalled by Dr. Chung's pharisaical, cynical, and
    manipulative use of Christianity. He is truly a "whitened
    sepulcher", loudly proclaiming his adherence to Christian
    values while overtly lying, carrying on smear campaigns
    against others, making false accusations, dissembling, and
    marketing his web site under the guise of altruism. He is
    "bearing false witness" and true Christians should be
    concerned.

    As an example, when John Ritter recently died
    unexpectedly, Dr. Chung rushed to use this unfortunate
    event to market his web site. He showed a total lack of
    Christian compassion for Mr. Ritter and his family, even
    when challenged to do so.

    As another example, he recently choreographed a smear
    campaign against a poster who had criticized him. Dr.
    Chung found a

    the poster and anyone who agreed with him were
    engaged in a

    Christianity you identify with.

    In still yet another example, when an anonymous post was
    made implying that one of his critics was a pedophile, Dr.
    Chung, rather than condemning such a despicable and
    outrageous charge, attempted to get more information.

    27. Well, Why Not Just Ignore His Religious Rants?
    --------------------------------------------------
    {Chung: "Well, Why Not Just Ignore his Christian nature?
    -----------------------------------------------
    Anti-christians are unable to do that."}

    Why should one individual be given carte blanche to
    violate the rights of everyone else? Usenet is a
    community. It is up to the community to sanction its
    members. There is nothing "ad hominem" about challenging
    inappropriate and antisocial behavior.

    28. But Isn't It Wonderful That Dr. Chung Offers This Free
    Medical Advice Out of the Goodness of His Heart?
    ----------------------------------------------------------
    {Chung: "It is."}

    First, it is only of value if it is good advice. Medical
    education alone is not enough to guarantee good advice. If
    facts alone were all that were required, we could replace
    Physicians with Medical Encyclopedias. Knowledge must be
    tempered with judgment, impartiality, integrity, ethics,
    and professionalism. If someone consistently demonstrates
    by their behavior that they lack these qualities, how much
    credence should be given to their medical advice?

    Ask yourself this: Suppose you went to see a cardiologist
    and, while in the waiting room, observed some clearly
    disturbed behavior on his part. Perhaps, for example, he
    was sitting in the corner sucking his thumb and rocking
    back and forth, playing with his feces, or babbling
    incoherently. Suddenly, he pulls himself together and
    calls you into his office. How comfortable are you going
    to be with his advice, even if it is technically correct?

    D.w.c is Dr. Chung's "virtual waiting room". If you have
    been here a while, you have observed his behavior. If
    you are new, this FAQ will give you some background.
    The decision is yours.

    Secondly, despite his protestations to the contrary, Dr.
    Chung is not simply motivated by altruism. Every post of
    Dr. Chung's contains a link to a website with the
    following quote:

    "If you are looking for a cardiologist and reside in
    Georgia, please consider me your best option for a
    personal heart advocate. Check out my credentials and my
    background. Additional information is available in the
    protected sections of this web site. Email me at
    [email protected] to me of your interest and I
    may send you a temporary username and password to allow
    a preview. The more information you email, the more
    likely my decision to send you a temporary username and
    password. If you like what you see and learn from this
    website and wish to confer with me about your heart, you
    or your doctor should email me privately or call my
    voicemail at 404-699-2780 to schedule an appointment to
    see me at my *real* office."

    <http://www.heartmdphd.com/office.asp>

    Thirdly, Dr. Chung has repeatedly stated that one of his
    key motivations for participating is s.m.c. is to
    "witness" and win converts to his religious beliefs.

    9. How Does a Practicing Physician Find so Much Time to
    Spend on Usenet?
    --------------------------------------------------------
    ----------
    An interesting question.

    {Chung: "God has blessed him with a quick mind and fast
    typing skills."}

    10. Won't Challenging Dr. Chung Drive People Away?
    --------------------------------------------------
    Perhaps. But not challenging him will drive others away.

    {Chung: "No. But it will give him the extraordinary
    opportunity to glorify God."}

    D.u.b. is historically a "low traffic" group. Therefore,
    when Dr. Chung misbehaves, he generates an
    apparently large response. This is compounded by
    Dr. Chung's need to "get in the last word" and Mu's
    provocations. In spite of this, if someone has a
    question it will usually be answered.

    Dv. Chung is not the only participant who offers advice in
    s.m.c. He is not even the only doctor who participates
    in s.m.c. However, the controversy he generates and
    sustains often makes it appear that he is the "only
    game in town".

    Finally, Dr. Chung himself drives others away including
    other physicians who leave in disgust after being verbally
    assaulted by him, and other knowledgeable posters who
    point out where Dr. Chung's medical opinion might be in
    error or at least not the only one generally held. Anyone
    disagreeing with Dr. Chung on any subject can expect a
    series of increasingly vitriolic attacks, including
    threats of libel suits.

    11. Doesn't the "Fault" for all Those Posts Lay With Those
    Who Challenge Dr. Chung?
    ------------------------------------------------------------
    --
    {Chung: "Yes."}

    An interesting perspective: blame the victim. No other
    poster (with the exception of Mu, of course) introduces
    religion or the Two Pound Diet. How can it be acceptable
    for Dr. Chung to introduce these topics, but not
    acceptable for others to respond?

    In any thread, someone must, of necessity "get the last
    word". Dr. Chung has amply demonstrated that he will not
    be outdone in this respect.

    12. Why Do I see So Many "Ad Hominem" Attacks?
    ----------------------------------------------
    {Chung: "Anti-christian folks can't seem to help
    themselves."}

    You are probably referring to an "Ad Hominem" _argument_,
    which attempts to disprove an adversary's fact by personal
    attack on the adversary. An example would be "You are
    opposed to the Two Pound Diet because you are anti-
    Christian".

    When someone misbehaves, for example lies or distorts what
    someone else is saying, it is not an "ad hominem attack"
    to call them on it. It is a legitimate social sanction.

    There are also, unfortunately too often, simple personal
    attacks and insults on both sides. While we can all wish
    it weren't so, it is simply human nature when an argument
    becomes heated or the other person is obviously not
    arguing in good faith. If you are distressed by this, see
    the next question.

    13. I'm Sick of Seeing All This!
    --------------------------------
    {Chung: "Would suggest you killfile the anti-christians.
    You won't see any as [sic] hominems from Dr. Chung."}

    There is no reason why you have to see it. Just as you can
    change the TV channel if you don't like a show, you can
    killfile a poster or thread you don't want to see. See the
    manual that came with your Usenet reader for directions on
    how to do it.

    Before you do this, however, you may wish to consider if a
    truer picture of the world is not gained by seeing all
    that goes on - both the good and the bad.

    14. What is the Two Pound Diet?
    -------------------------------
    {Chung: "See: http://www.heartmdphd.com/wtloss.asp"}

    The Two pound Diet is a diet which Dr. Chung "invented".
    It's only rule is to restrict yourself to two pounds of
    food per day. That's
    Dw. Doesn't matter if you are a 16 year old girl or an 80
    year old man; a 5' 2" woman or a 7' man; a weight
    lifter or a mattress tester. Two pounds. That's it. No
    more, less if you want. One size fits all.

    Oh, and the food? Whatever you want: two pounds of
    lettuce, two pounds of ice cream, two pounds of celery,
    two pounds of bacon, two pounds of chocolate, two pounds
    of peanuts... doesn't matter. Mix and match. Just keep it
    under two pounds.

    Dx. Chung's claim is that this magical weight of food,
    this universal gustatory constant will cause
    everyone to arrive at and maintain their ideal
    weight. His scientific basis for this claim: none.
    The proof he offers: none. Studies supporting this
    claim: none. Nutritional explanation: none.
    Metabolic explanation: none.

    And this from a doctor who expects people to take him
    seriously on other issues.

    15. Is Discussion of the Two Pound Diet "On Topic"?
    ---------------------------------------------------
    {Chung: "Yes. It cures [sic] Metabolic Syndrome (MetS)
    which predicts cardiovascular morbidity and mortality."}

    Dy. Chung says it is because being overweight is a risk
    factor for heart problems and therefore discussion of
    the Two Pound Diet is On Topic. However criticism of
    the Two Pound Diet is Off Topic as is discussion of
    any other diet.

    As with religion, Dr. Chung takes every opportunity to
    introduce the Two Pound Diet (2PD) into any other
    thread. In addition Mu trolls other newsgroups,
    particularly the diet groups looking for opportunities
    to introduce the 2PD in these groups and then cross post
    the resulting discussion back to s.m.c so that Dr. Chung
    can disingenuously claim to be "only responding" to a
    cross post.

    Since Dr. Chung and Mu have been laughed off of these
    other groups and have been asked repeatedly not to bring
    up the 2PD in them, participants of these groups are
    understandably angered when it happens yet again; and,
    because of Mu's cross-posting, all their anger spills back
    into s.m.c.

    Another reason for ongoing 2PD discussions is Dr. Chung's
    habit of researching anyone who criticizes the 2PD and
    then cross-posting his responses back to other groups
    which the critic has been found to frequent. He
    disingenuously claims that he does this as a "convenience"
    to the critic, but his true reasons are transparent. Once
    again, the cross-post generates a firestorm in s.m.c.

    The bottom line is that if the Two Pound Diet is "On
    Topic" for anyone, it is "On Topic" for everyone...
    including it's critics. If it is "Off Topic", it should
    not be continually re-introduced by Dr. Chung.

    16. Who is Mu?
    --------------
    {Chung: "A Christian."}

    Mu is a longtime Usenet Troll who has even merited his own
    FAQ. He postures as some kind of personal physical
    trainer, but who really knows? He has allied himself with
    Dr. Chung and serves as the "Bad Cop" in the Chung - Mu
    "Good Cop - Bad Cop" routine. He specializes in the short,
    nasty one-liner and, because unlike Dr. Chung, he has no
    reputation to protect, he can afford to be much more
    direct and offensive.

    Mu parrots an even meaner-spirited version of Dr. Chung's
    "Christianity" and does not hesitate to employ anti-
    Semitism and homophobia in his attacks.

    Naturally, most people would have long ago killfiled Mu,
    so he changes his handle on an almost daily basis.

    17. What is Mu's Role?
    ----------------------
    {Chung: "God only knows."}

    Mu's role is to troll other newsgroups and, when he gets a
    reaction, to cross-post the reaction to s.m.c. so that Dr.
    Chung can disingenuously claim to be "only responding" to
    a cross post.

    Mu is also responsible for pitching softballs to Dr.
    Chung so he can hit them out of the park, and for re-
    introducing religion and the Two Pound Diet should the
    discussion flag.

    Finally, Mu's role is to tirelessly wear down unsuspecting
    Dr. Chung critics, deflecting the blows that would
    otherwise be aimed at Dr. Chung. He is Dr. Chung's
    Internet equivalent of the "rope-a-dope". Insults roll off
    him like water off a duck as do attempts to reason with
    him or even have a civil discussion.

    Most people have learned to ignore him and his comment
    is usually the last one in any thread sub-tree where
    it appears.

    18. Doesn't Dr. Chung Claim to Always Tell The Truth?
    -----------------------------------------------------
    Yes, he does... repeatedly. However this claim cannot be
    reconciled with his behavior on s.m.c.

    Dz. Chung has lied repeatedly on Usenet and those lies are
    preserved in the Google archives. A few examples:

    o Dr. Chung consistently changes other people's words
    when quoting them in a response to a post to make it
    appear they said something different than what they
    actually said.

    o Dr. Chung consistently posts a macro (see below) which
    states that he is responding to a cross-post because the
    person he is responding to has not requested that he
    trim the headers, even when this request has been
    explicitly made.

    o More recently Dr. Chung has begun forging posts as his
    bogus "Version 2" of this FAQ illustrates. Unfortunately
    for him the attempts are so amateurish and the language so
    self-serving and lame that there is no doubt as to the
    authorship.

    These are only examples of Dr. Chung's explicit lies. They
    do not include lies told through dissembling, innuendo,
    disingenuousness, employment of twisted trope's, and other
    "word games" which he plays.

    19. What is the "Chung macro"?
    ------------------------------
    The "Chung macro" is an approximately 4.5 kilobyte, mind-
    numbing diatribe which Dr. Chung attaches as a response to
    any post he doesn't like. It includes Chung's unstinting
    praise of himself, an advertisement for the Two Pound
    Diet, an disingenuous protest that he is "only responding
    to a cross-post", and gratuitous slaps at all his critics.

    It is called a "macro" because it can be saved and
    attached to a message with a single keystroke. Usually,
    the content of the original post is either "snipped" so
    that only Dr. Chung's diatribe appears or the words of the
    original poster are modified to say something which
    pleases Dr. Chung. Common decency is not
    Dz. Chung's concern here.

    When the "Chung macro" appears in a thread, it is a sure
    sign that a criticism has struck home and/or Dr. Chung has
    run out of arguments or anything intelligent to say.
    Instead he laboriously and obsessively attaches the "Chung
    macro" to each and every message in the thread. If someone
    responds to the "Chung macro", he attaches the macro to
    the response and so on ad infinitum and ad nauseam.

    This generates considerable anger in the victimized
    newsgroups to
    Dz. Chung's apparent glee. Requests to stop are mocked and
    ignored. Eventually, people become sick of it and just
    stop responding: Dr. Chung has achieved his objective
    of shutting down the now objectionable thread... which
    was probably initiated by Mu in the first place.

    20. What is "Hissing"?
    --------------------------
    "Hissing" is Dr. Chung's term for something he doesn't
    want to hear, particularly a criticism or a correction of
    one of his errors. He frequently inserts it in place of
    other people's words when he quotes them but is too lazy
    or unimaginative to change their words to his liking.

    ------------------------------------------------------------
    -----------
    Comments and/or corrections to this FAQ will be taken under
    advisement.
     
    Tags:


Loading...