Mack wrote:
> On Wed, 03 Sep 2003 20:21:49 -0400, "Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >Mack wrote:
> >
> >> On Wed, 03 Sep 2003 10:49:22 -0400, "Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD"
> >> <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>
> >> >Mack wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> On 1 Sep 2003 16:02:22 -0700, [email protected] (M. Schwartz) wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> <snip>
> >> >> >We all have a right to disagree with Dr. Chung or anyone else, but I
> >> >> >think at the very least Dr. Chung deserves more respect because he is
> >> >> >a professional and does help people here by contributing. I don't see
> >> >> >any other cardiologist spending time here to answer questions, do you?
> >> >> >
> >> >> >If you disagree with your cardiologist, do you say he speaks junk or
> >> >> >call him a quack? Why can't all those who disagree with Dr. Chung just
> >> >> >present their argument in an intelligent manner and without malice?
> >> >> >Why can't we disagree without name calling? Does anyone think it
> >> >> >enhances their position to call Dr. Chung names and try to discredit
> >> >> >him without proof? Not in my eyes.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >In fact, I have even more admiration for Dr. Chung because he stays
> >> >> >here amid the insults and still offers help to people.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Mel
> >> >>
> >> >> if you want to see Dr Dung left alone, then get him to stop cross
> >> >> posting and trolling the diabetic and diet/low carb newsgroups. all
> >> >> of these newsgroups have repeatedly asked him to stop his cross
> >> >> posting and trolling.
> >> >
> >> >You have a funny way of asking on their behalf by trolling and name-calling.
> >>
> >> so you do not like people doing unto you as you have done unto others?
> >>
> >
> >Don't do either. Sorry to disappoint you.
>
> you're not disappointing me, I expected another lie from you. you
> accused pastorio of using drugs and called him and others names on
> many occasions.
>
Should be easy to prove with a Google cite or two.
>
> just because you deny your guilt does not make your guilt go away.
>
It does when you can't prove it with a Google cite or two.
>
> >
> >>
> >> >
> >> >> All would completely ignore Dr Dung if he would
> >> >> simply stop harassing those newsgroups.
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >Except for folks like you... it's called an obsession.
>
> no it;s called an invitation from you and Mu to post to smc and
> discuss your posts and behavior.
>
Looks like an obsession to me:
http://www.heartmdphd.com/stalking.asp
>
> if you did not want people to join smc to discuss your trolling and
> spamming you shouldn't have made the invitations.
>
It's a free country. You may do as you please even without invitation.
>
> >>
> >> the obsession is yours, you insist on cross posting to
> >> non-sci.med.cardiology groups even when the posts you are replying to
> >> are not coming from anywhere but sci.med.cardiology as is my reply.
> >>
> >
> >Who's insisting?
>
> all, my posts on this are going to smc only, you are the one cross
> posting to non smc groups.
Just to where you hang out for your convenience.
> so you are the one insisting on cross
> posting.
No insistence. Just want to make sure you are able to see my response to your post at your home base
(ASD).
> again more dishonesty from the guy who says plagiarism is
> not theft and not covered in the ten commandments.
>
I'm not going to speak for God nor pass judgments in His stead.
>
> >
> >>
> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >> it does not take a PHD to figure that out. and yet he claims to be a
> >> >> PHD and can't figure that out.
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >I do have a PhD but I didn't need it to figure you out.
> >> >
> >> >http://www.heartmdphd.com/stalking.asp
> >>
> >> according to your own definition Dr Dung you are a stalker.
> >>
> >
> >Only if I were obsessed with you, which I'm not. Again, sorry to disappoint you. You still have my
> >pity though.
>
> if you were not obsessed with me why do you find it impossible to stop
> cross posting and in the same cross posts stating that you are doing
> so that I and others will not miss the post?
>
Am I hanging out at *your* homebase (ASD)?
>
> >
> >>
> >> >
> >> >FYI Note: Because the author of the message is from an ASD subscriber, I have added ASD for his
> >> >convenience.
>
> here's the admission of your obsession and trolling intent.
>
Just being considerate to you in my pity for you.
>
> >>
> >> that's where you are most definitely lying Dr Dung. I am subscribed
> >> to sci.med.cardiology and will continue to be for as long as I choose
> >> to be.
> >>
> >
> >Not according to Google:
> >
> >http://tinyurl.com/m5u5
>
> the link shows that I am posting in both groups and not cross posting
> to smc after a certain date. so just what is it that you imagine the
> link shows?
>
Most people will find that link showing your homebase is ASD.
>
> the rest of your advertising for your commercial website snipped.
What advertising?
<libelous statements snipped>
FYI Note: 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) is related to the hatred some folks have toward 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.
(c) For (b) see:
http://tinyurl.com/levc
(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
