A Brilliant Cardiologist Once Wrote......



Why don't you guys get your penises out and compare them right now? It could
end a long and very tiresome arguement and also give us something to laugh
and point at.

<bunch of **** snipped>
 
Diva4 wrote:

> "Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> > Mack wrote:
> > <libelous statements 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 request that the header be trimmed, I have not trimmed it. If you are
> > upset about reading this message, a few suggestions:

>
> > "Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> >> Mack wrote:
> >> <libelous statements 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 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 Mack
> >> (2) Report Mack to his ISP ([email protected])
> >> (3) Killfile this thread.
> >> (4) Killfile me.
> >> (5) Read about free speech.

> >
> > I too am aware it is a cross posted message. Andrew, What do you not
> > understand about "ASD is not interested in this topic"? Members rarely
> > respond and refuse to take sides.


I have been getting private emails about the topic.

> This is a personal issue.


Not to me.

> If you can
> > take as much time as you do to compose all the retorts etc. you can
> > take the time to trim headers.


Wrote a little macro that runs in the background of everything else I do. It would take me longer to trim the headers.

>
> > I thought we had resolved this and you had agreed out of courtesy to
> > my polite request, to comply.


I have complied. Thank Mack et al for the continued running of the threads in question.

> I don't like having to KF the many
> > octopus arm spin offs generated by your quarrels.


I have no quarrel. All that I do is for public service.

> Because of how you
> > have approached this I no longer will discuss the diet in any detail
> > on ASD and don't even call it by name now.


Carol, the 2PD approach is not a religion. I have no incentive for it to spread. Indeed, if it stops with you in ASD
(it isn't though), I am ok with it.

> Why should I take heat for
> > your tenacious persistence about being right?


Why should folks publically following the 2PD approach be villified, anyway?

> I have lost a few good
> > buddies over this and I didn't even try the diet until quite a while
> > after it was an established topic. If this can be resolved in court,
> > do it already!
> >


Legal proceedings take time.

>
> > Deal with the legalities and name calling elsewhere PULEEZE

>
> Diva
> *****
> The Best Man for the Job is a Woman


Haven't been doing any name calling, Carol. The legalities will be dealt with in court.

God Bless,

Andrew

--
Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
Board-Certified Cardiologist
http://www.heartmdphd.com/
 
For God's sake, why doesn't everyone concerned just let it drop? No one
really cares anyway.




"Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Diva4 wrote:
>
> > "Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" <[email protected]> wrote in message

news:<[email protected]>...
> > > Mack wrote:
> > > <libelous statements 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 request that the header be trimmed, I

have not trimmed it. If you are
> > > upset about reading this message, a few suggestions:

> >
> > > "Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" <[email protected]> wrote in message

news:<[email protected]>...
> > >> Mack wrote:
> > >> <libelous statements 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 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 Mack
> > >> (2) Report Mack to his ISP ([email protected])
> > >> (3) Killfile this thread.
> > >> (4) Killfile me.
> > >> (5) Read about free speech.
> > >
> > > I too am aware it is a cross posted message. Andrew, What do you not
> > > understand about "ASD is not interested in this topic"? Members rarely
> > > respond and refuse to take sides.

>
> I have been getting private emails about the topic.
>
> > This is a personal issue.

>
> Not to me.
>
> > If you can
> > > take as much time as you do to compose all the retorts etc. you can
> > > take the time to trim headers.

>
> Wrote a little macro that runs in the background of everything else I do.

It would take me longer to trim the headers.
>
> >
> > > I thought we had resolved this and you had agreed out of courtesy to
> > > my polite request, to comply.

>
> I have complied. Thank Mack et al for the continued running of the

threads in question.
>
> > I don't like having to KF the many
> > > octopus arm spin offs generated by your quarrels.

>
> I have no quarrel. All that I do is for public service.
>
> > Because of how you
> > > have approached this I no longer will discuss the diet in any detail
> > > on ASD and don't even call it by name now.

>
> Carol, the 2PD approach is not a religion. I have no incentive for it to

spread. Indeed, if it stops with you in ASD
> (it isn't though), I am ok with it.
>
> > Why should I take heat for
> > > your tenacious persistence about being right?

>
> Why should folks publically following the 2PD approach be villified,

anyway?
>
> > I have lost a few good
> > > buddies over this and I didn't even try the diet until quite a while
> > > after it was an established topic. If this can be resolved in court,
> > > do it already!
> > >

>
> Legal proceedings take time.
>
> >
> > > Deal with the legalities and name calling elsewhere PULEEZE

> >
> > Diva
> > *****
> > The Best Man for the Job is a Woman

>
> Haven't been doing any name calling, Carol. The legalities will be dealt

with in court.
>
> God Bless,
>
> Andrew
>
> --
> Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
> Board-Certified Cardiologist
> http://www.heartmdphd.com/
>
>
 
On Thu, 21 Aug 2003 10:00:39 -0400, "Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>Mack wrote:
><libelous statements 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 request that the header be trimmed,


every newsgroup except sci.med.cardiology has asked you to stop
trolling and spamming their groups. complaints sent to your ISP and
[email protected] for your trolling and spamming of your website selling
prescriptions online.
 
Joe Martin wrote:

> For God's sake, why doesn't everyone concerned just let it drop? No one
> really cares anyway.


Then who's doing all the typing?

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

> Why don't you guys get your penises out and compare them right now?


SO YOU CAN PICK WHICH ONE YOU WANT TO EAT?

NO WAY UGLY *****.

--
Live To Eat ! Nooooooooo ! Eat To Live !
 
Barry Smith wrote:

> <libelous and defamatory statement snipped>


More "hissing".

How about getting back on topic instead of "hissing"?

Fwiw, your post has been reported since it seems to be contrary to your ISP's
TOS. Sorry for any inconvenience this may cause 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 Barry Smith
(2) Report Barry Smith to his ISP ([email protected])
(3) Killfile this thread.
(4) Killfile me.
(5) Read about free speech.

This discussion(s) started about 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.
(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.asp/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
 
Budd Cochran wrote:

> I just set my filter to the common denominator, his name. I filter out
> by the sender, not the address.


Care to stop "hissing" and start discussing the topic?

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

This discussion(s) started about 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.
(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.asp/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
 
Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD wrote:


> Care to stop "hissing" and start discussing the topic?


NO
--
Live To Eat ! No way ! Eat To Live !
 
On Fri, 22 Aug 2003 18:47:32 -0400, "Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>Mack wrote:
>
>> every newsgroup except sci.med.cardiology has asked you to stop
>> trolling and spamming their groups.

>
>I have been doing neither. I guess that's why I haven't seen these "requests."
>



you just confirmed yourself a liar to the readers on
sci.med.cardiology chung

if you can't tell the truth about something simple like this what lies
have you been telling them to get them to by scrips from your web
site?
 
Mack wrote:

> well chung here's another telling you about your trolling behavior.
> guess that was another one you lied about.


I've already responded to that post already, Mack.

When would you like to be back on-topic? (assuming your ISP lets 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 Mack
(2) Report Mack to his ISP ([email protected])
(3) Killfile this thread.
(4) Killfile me.
(5) Read about free speech.

This discussion(s) started about 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.
(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.asp/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
 
lol

This thread is still alive? Over 700 plus posts! lol

I see that Mack hasn't grabbed a clue about his _own_ constant and
incessant trolling of you.

Btw, nice disclaimer/sig, Andrew. Will call soon.

============================================================


On Mon, 25 Aug 2003 18:43:23 -0400, "Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>Mack wrote:
>
>> well chung here's another telling you about your trolling behavior.
>> guess that was another one you lied about.

>
>I've already responded to that post already, Mack.
>
>When would you like to be back on-topic? (assuming your ISP lets 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 Mack
>(2) Report Mack to his ISP ([email protected])
>(3) Killfile this thread.
>(4) Killfile me.
>(5) Read about free speech.
>
>This discussion(s) started about 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.
>(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.asp/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
 
On Mon, 25 Aug 2003 18:37:56 -0400, "Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>Mack wrote:
>
>> <libelous statements snipped>

>
>Do you care to go back on topic?


your troll posts are only on topic in sci.med.cardiology where I am
replying to them.
 
On Mon, 25 Aug 2003 18:41:43 -0400, "Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>Mack wrote:
>
>> interesting, here's another one of those posts asking you to stop
>> trolling that you lied about not seeing chung.

>
>Not a lie. I do not subscribe to your ASD newsgroup so I am not going to see posts there.



that's another lie. I've seen you reply to posts that were only
posted to asd on several occasions.
 
On Mon, 25 Aug 2003 18:43:23 -0400, "Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>Mack wrote:
>
>> well chung here's another telling you about your trolling behavior.
>> guess that was another one you lied about.

>
>I've already responded to that post already, Mack.
>



they were separate posts from separate people.

my ISP has already added you to their loon filter meaning your
complaints to my ISP fall on deaf ears because of your established
trolling of the other newsgroups and you claiming to know anything
about diabetes when you have no qualifications what so ever to post on
the subject. and your cardiology qualifications are in question to
begin with since you were fired after only 88 days of employment at
that florida cardiac facility for lack of quality care.
 
On Tue, 26 Aug 2003 03:59:15 GMT, Mack <[email protected]> wrote:

>they were separate posts from separate people.
>
>my ISP has already added you to their loon filter meaning your
>complaints to my ISP fall on deaf ears because of your established
>trolling of the other newsgroups and you claiming to know anything
>about diabetes when you have no qualifications what so ever to post on
>the subject.


And your qualifications are.......?

> and your cardiology qualifications Chung are in question to
>begin with....


lol

and YOUR qualifications are...........?
 
On Tue, 26 Aug 2003 03:59:14 GMT, Mack <[email protected]> wrote:

>your troll posts are only on topic in sci.med.cardiology where I am
>replying to them.


And your posting this to sci.med.cardiology for what reason (regarding
cardiological concerns)?
 
On Tue, 26 Aug 2003 03:59:15 GMT, Mack <[email protected]> wrote:

>that's another lie. I've seen you reply to posts that were only
>posted to asd on several occasions.


And you are on topic for cardiology when talking about a diabetic
NEWSGROUP?
 
Doc? what's so damn sad is you're the one posting back to ASD (diabetes ng)
not Mack...and Mack has not posted on this topic in ASD since July 27th...

"Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
: Mack wrote:
:
: > well chung here's another telling you about your trolling behavior.
: > guess that was another one you lied about.
:
: I've already responded to that post already, Mack.
:
: When would you like to be back on-topic? (assuming your ISP lets 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 Mack
: (2) Report Mack to his ISP ([email protected])
: (3) Killfile this thread.
: (4) Killfile me.
: (5) Read about free speech.
:
: This discussion(s) started about 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.
: (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.asp/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
:
 
Mack wrote:

> On Mon, 25 Aug 2003 18:37:56 -0400, "Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >Mack wrote:
> >
> >> <libelous statements snipped>

> >
> >Do you care to go back on topic?

>
> your troll posts are only on topic in sci.med.cardiology where I am
> replying to them.


Not really. See below.

FYI Note: I am aware that I am responding to a cross-posted message.
Because the author of the message is from an ASD subscriber, I have
added ASD for his convenience. If you are upset about reading this
message, a few suggestions:

(1) Yell at Mack
(2) Report Mack to his ISP ([email protected])
(3) Killfile this thread.
(4) Killfile me.
(5) Read about free speech.

This discussion(s) started about 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.
(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.asp/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