Dr. Chung FAQ, Issue 1

Discussion in 'Health and medical' started by A. B. Chung Faq, Feb 2, 2004.

  1. From: "A. B. Chung FAQ" <[email protected]>
    Newsgroups: sci.med.cardiology

    ---------------------------------
    | The Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD FAQ |
    | Version 1.0, January, 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 don¹t
    wish to read the whole FAQ, the following summary is provided.

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

    The controversy arises from Dr. Chung¹s 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.

    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.

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

    etc.

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

    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.

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

    o He uses a foil who posts under variations of the name "Mu" to avoid killfiles. Mu¹s 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, Mu¹s
    tactics are blunt and direct like those of a playground bully.

    The above lists only the highlights of Dr. Chung¹s 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 shouldn¹t
    that be enough? Unfortunately, no.

    Medical education alone is not enough to guarantee good advice. 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.

    List of Questions Answered
    --------------------------
    1. Who is Dr. Andrew B Chung, MD/PhD?
    2. What is the Charter of s.m.c.?
    3. Aren¹t Religious Discussions Covered by the Charter?
    4. So Dr. Chung is Religious... What¹s the Problem With That?
    5. But it¹s Just a Little "Tag Line" in His Signature.
    6. But I¹m a Christian Too!
    7. Well, Why Not Just Ignore His Religious Rants?
    8. But Isn¹t 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. Won¹t 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 Mu¹s Role?

    18. 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.

    2. 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 the cardiovascular field. Such
    communications will provide quick and efficacious means to exchange information and knowledge, and
    offer problems to solutions.

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

    (ftp://ftp.uu.net/usenet/news.announce.newgroups/sci/sci.med.cardiology)

    3. Aren¹t Religious Discussions Covered by the Charter?
    --------------------------------------------------------
    What do you think?

    4. So Dr. Chung is Religious... What¹s the Problem With That?
    --------------------------------------------------------------
    There is no problem with that. Most of the people who participate in
    D.r.b. 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.

    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. Chung¹s intolerant
    and dismissive attitude towards beliefs which differ from his. The situation is further exacerbated
    by Mu¹s 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.

    5. But it¹s Just a Little "Tag Line" in His Signature.
    -------------------------------------------------------
    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.

    6. But I¹m a Christian Too!
    ----------------------------
    Lots of people are Christians. There is a time and a place for everything. s.m.c. isn¹t 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. Chung¹s 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

    with the same first name and then insinuated that the poster and anyone

    yourself if this the brand of Christianity you identify with.

    7. Well, Why Not Just Ignore His Religious Rants?
    --------------------------------------------------
    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.

    8. But Isn¹t It Wonderful That Dr. Chung Offers This Free
    Medical Advice Out of the Goodness of His Heart?
    ----------------------------------------------------------
    First, it is only of value if it is good advice. Medical education alone is not enough to guarantee
    good advice. 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?

    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.

    10. Won¹t Challenging Dr. Chung Drive People Away?
    --------------------------------------------------
    Perhaps. But not challenging him will drive others away.

    D.r.c. is historically a "low traffic" group. Therefore, when Dr. Chung misbehaves, he generates
    an apparently large response. This is compounded by Dr. Chung¹s need to "get in the last
    word" and Mu¹s provocations. In spite of this, if someone has a question it will usually
    be answered.

    Ds. 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. Chung¹s
    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?
    --------------------------------------------------------------
    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".
    Dt. Chung has amply demonstrated that he will not be outdone in this respect.

    12. Why Do I see So Many "Ad Hominem" Attacks?
    ----------------------------------------------
    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!
    --------------------------------
    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?
    -------------------------------
    The Two pound Diet is a diet which Dr. Chung "invented". It¹s only rule is to restrict yourself to
    two pounds of food per day. That¹s it. Doesn¹t matter if you are a 16 year old girl or an 80 year
    old man; a 5¹ 2" woman or a 7¹ man; a weight lifter or a mattress tester. Two pounds. That¹s 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... doesn¹t matter. Mix
    and match. Just keep it under two pounds.

    Du. Chung¹s 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"?
    ---------------------------------------------------
    Dv. 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 againŠ and, because of Mu¹s cross-posting, all their anger spills back into s.m.c.

    Another reason for ongoing 2PD discussions is Dr. Chung¹s 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?
    --------------
    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. Chung¹s "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 Mu¹s Role?
    ----------------------
    Mu¹s 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, Mu¹s role is to tirelessly wear down unsuspecting Dr. Chung critics, deflecting the blows
    that would otherwise be aimed at Dr. Chung. He is Dr. Chung¹s 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.

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


  2. The desperation grows :)

    Humbly,

    Andrew

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

    --
    Who is the humblest person in the universe?

    http://makeashorterlink.com/?L21532147

    "A. B. Chung FAQ" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
    > From: "A. B. Chung FAQ" <[email protected]>
    > Newsgroups: sci.med.cardiology
    >
    >
    > ---------------------------------
    > | The Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD FAQ |
    > | Version 1.0, January, 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 don¹t wish to read the whole FAQ, the following
    > summary is provided.
    >
    > Summary
    > -------
    > Dr. Chung represents himself to be a licensed physician specializing in
    > cardiology. In this capacity he responds to medical questions on
    > s.m.c.. If that were all he did, there would probably be no
    > controversy.
    >
    > The controversy arises from Dr. Chung¹s 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.
    >
    > 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.
    >
    > o When challenged on the above issues, or one of his medical opinions,
    > he attacks his challengers as "obsessive anti-Christians",

    > etc.
    >
    > o When challenged he performs Internet searches on his challengers in
    > order to "get the dirt" on them and smear their reputations.
    >
    > 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.
    >
    > o He is insufferably full of himself, claiming to have "the gift of
    > Truth Discernment" and to be "Humble" while behaving anything but
    > humbly.
    >
    > o He uses a foil who posts under variations of the name "Mu" to avoid
    > killfiles. Mu¹s 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, Mu¹s tactics
    > are blunt and direct like those of a playground bully.
    >
    > The above lists only the highlights of Dr. Chung¹s 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 shouldn¹t that be
    > enough? Unfortunately, no.
    >
    > Medical education alone is not enough to guarantee good advice.
    > 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.
    >
    > List of Questions Answered
    > --------------------------
    > 1. Who is Dr. Andrew B Chung, MD/PhD?
    > 2. What is the Charter of s.m.c.?
    > 3. Aren¹t Religious Discussions Covered by the Charter?
    > 4. So Dr. Chung is Religious... What¹s the Problem With That?
    > 5. But it¹s Just a Little "Tag Line" in His Signature.
    > 6. But I¹m a Christian Too!
    > 7. Well, Why Not Just Ignore His Religious Rants?
    > 8. But Isn¹t 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. Won¹t 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 Mu¹s Role?
    >
    >
    > 1. 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.
    >
    > 2. 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 the cardiovascular field. Such
    > communications will provide quick and efficacious means to exchange
    > information and knowledge, and offer problems to solutions.
    >
    > The sci.med.cardiology newsgroup will welcome participants who are
    > health care providers, trainees, researchers, students or recipients
    > with interest in the field of cardiovascular problems."
    >
    > (ftp://ftp.uu.net/usenet/news.announce.newgroups/sci/sci.med.cardiology)
    >
    >
    > 3. Aren¹t Religious Discussions Covered by the Charter?
    > --------------------------------------------------------
    > What do you think?
    >
    > 4. So Dr. Chung is Religious... What¹s 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.
    >
    > 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. Chung¹s intolerant and dismissive attitude towards beliefs
    > which differ from his. The situation is further exacerbated by Mu¹s
    > 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.
    >
    > 5. But it¹s Just a Little "Tag Line" in His Signature.
    > -------------------------------------------------------
    > 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.
    >
    > 6. But I¹m a Christian Too!
    > ----------------------------
    > Lots of people are Christians. There is a time and a place for
    > everything. s.m.c. isn¹t 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.
    > Chung¹s 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

    > with the same first name and then insinuated that the poster and anyone

    > yourself if this the brand of Christianity you identify with.
    >
    > 7. Well, Why Not Just Ignore His Religious Rants?
    > --------------------------------------------------
    > 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.
    >
    > 8. But Isn¹t It Wonderful That Dr. Chung Offers This Free
    > Medical Advice Out of the Goodness of His Heart?
    > ----------------------------------------------------------
    > First, it is only of value if it is good advice. Medical education
    > alone is not enough to guarantee good advice. 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?
    >
    > 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.
    >
    > 10. Won¹t Challenging Dr. Chung Drive People Away?
    > --------------------------------------------------
    > Perhaps. But not challenging him will drive others away.
    >
    > s.m.c. is historically a "low traffic" group. Therefore, when Dr. Chung
    > misbehaves, he generates an apparently large response. This is
    > compounded by Dr. Chung¹s need to "get in the last word" and Mu¹s
    > provocations. In spite of this, if someone has a question it will
    > usually be answered.
    >
    > Dr. 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. Chung¹s 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?
    > --------------------------------------------------------------
    > 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?
    > ----------------------------------------------
    > 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!
    > --------------------------------
    > 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?
    > -------------------------------
    > The Two pound Diet is a diet which Dr. Chung "invented". It¹s only
    > rule is to restrict yourself to two pounds of food per day. That¹s it.
    > Doesn¹t matter if you are a 16 year old girl or an 80 year old man; a
    > 5¹ 2" woman or a 7¹ man; a weight lifter or a mattress tester. Two
    > pounds. That¹s 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... doesn¹t matter. Mix and match.
    > Just keep it under two pounds.
    >
    > Dr. Chung¹s 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"?
    > ---------------------------------------------------
    > Dr. 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 Mu¹s cross-posting, all their anger spills
    > back into s.m.c.
    >
    > Another reason for ongoing 2PD discussions is Dr. Chung¹s 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?
    > --------------
    > 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. Chung¹s
    > "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 Mu¹s Role?
    > ----------------------
    > Mu¹s 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, Mu¹s role is to tirelessly wear down unsuspecting Dr. Chung
    > critics, deflecting the blows that would otherwise be aimed at Dr.
    > Chung. He is Dr. Chung¹s 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.
    >
    > Comments and/or corrections to this FAQ will be taken under advisement.
     
  3. Wholey_smoke

    Wholey_smoke Guest

  4. "wholey_smoke" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<401e[email protected]>...
    > "Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > news:[email protected]...
    > > The desperation grows :)
    >
    > ................As with your ego

    If it were truly my ego that offends you, why snip the accolades to my Lord and Savior?

    > >
    > > Humbly,
    > >
    > > Andrew
    > >
    > > --
    > > Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD Board-Certified Cardiologist http://www.heartmdphd.com/
    > >
    > > snip>

    You poor guy. Can't handle the truth can you?

    Humbly,

    Andrew

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

    --
    Who is the humblest person in the universe?

    http://makeashorterlink.com/?L21532147
     
Loading...