Just something for many of you to think about.



M_unitions wrote:

> On Mon, 15 Sep 2003 12:39:55 -0400, "Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >What is Guy's question, Blue?
>
> Guy posted:
>
> "OK Doc, I am still waiting for you to post info in the field you
> "claim to be trained for It is relevant to diabetes. I asked
> "questions. Did I miss the answers. I am a quadruple bypass
> " "victim".
>
> Funny how, when Guy needs help, you are no longer a fraud, a quack and
> a troll.

What questions did he ask?

--
Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
Board-Certified Cardiologist
http://www.heartmdphd.com/
 
On Mon, 15 Sep 2003 14:33:20 -0400, "Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>> Funny how, when Guy needs help, you are no longer a fraud, a quack and
>> a troll.
>
>What questions did he ask?


Here it is.


"The only thing Ii have asked is for you prove you are what
"you are. It should be relatively easy. Comments on "the
"incidence of bypass surgery and if it is necessary" is very
"relevant. I have been told that considering my case I had enough
"natural bypass capacity that had developed. the surgery was
"not indicated. Comments are in order here. Vague comments
"are just a keyboard exercise. Give us something of value.
"Stick to the issue and you can change my outlook as to
"your posts.

I don't remember or could find any ????? about his quad bypass.

Oh, Guy, here is Chung. Ask away!
 
M_unitions wrote:

> On Mon, 15 Sep 2003 14:33:20 -0400, "Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >> Funny how, when Guy needs help, you are no longer a fraud, a quack and
> >> a troll.
> >
> >What questions did he ask?
>
> Here it is.
>
> "The only thing Ii have asked is for you prove you are what
> "you are. It should be relatively easy. Comments on "the
> "incidence of bypass surgery and if it is necessary" is very
> "relevant.

It the U.S., bypass surgery is commonplace. It is controversial whether all
the operations have and continue to be necessary. Dr. Rose and I have
debated this topic many times on SCM. Google should have these discussion
archived.

> I have been told that considering my case I had enough
> "natural bypass capacity that had developed. the surgery was
> "not indicated. Comments are in order here.

Some folks are blessed by God with the ability to grow good collateral
circulation unassisted.

> Vague comments
> "are just a keyboard exercise. Give us something of value.
> "Stick to the issue and you can change my outlook as to
> "your posts.
>

Have my posts been vague? It has been my impression that most folks feel I
have been too blunt or too truthful.

>
> I don't remember or could find any ????? about his quad bypass.
>
> Oh, Guy, here is Chung. Ask away!

Sure, fire away.

Am glad to be of service as God's humble servant.

Sincerely,

Andrew

--
Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
Board-Certified Cardiologist
http://www.heartmdphd.com/
 
Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD <[email protected]> wrote:
> Ted Rosenberg wrote:
>
>> cc'd by email
>> Look he IS a quack, and has serious problems
>
> Should be simple to prove if true.
>
>>
>> BUT he, or someone of the same name IS a board certified Internist (NOT
>> cardiologist)
>
> Actually, by board-certification in cardiology is on-line for the world to see on
> my web-site.

Last I looked, some weeks ago when the recent round of crossposting
started, your entry on the public website for your state medical board
had not been updated to include this certification -- although I did see
it had been added to your website, and recalled that it wasn't there
when we first became aware of you by past crossposts (incidentally,
I don't believe you would add it falsely).

IIRC, the board site said something about the information being submitted
by the listed MDs themselves, so perhaps you forgot to have it updated,
or the update did not go through.

.....just thought you should know.

--
jamie ([email protected])

"There's a seeker born every minute."
 
"M_unitions" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
: On Mon, 15 Sep 2003 12:39:55 -0400, "Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD"
: <[email protected]> wrote:
:
: >What is Guy's question, Blue?
:
: Guy posted:
:
: "OK Doc, I am still waiting for you to post info in the field you
: "claim to be trained for It is relevant to diabetes. I asked
: "questions. Did I miss the answers. I am a quadruple bypass
: " "victim".
:
: Funny how, when Guy needs help, you are no longer a fraud, a quack and
: a troll.

i will frequently ask folks questions regardless of their ability to answer
with authority, especially when i feel they will not answer truthfully...as
in provide answers that exceed their level of knowledge on the subject the
question relates to...so simply asking someone a question does not infer the
person being asked is necessarily capable of providing a knowledgeable
response...
 
NO sock puppet - don't look at YOUR lying scam site, look up board
certifications from the source.

M_unitions wrote:

> On Mon, 15 Sep 2003 13:50:17 -0400, "Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>>Ted Rosenberg wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Any twit too stupid to use the internet properly should not pretend to
>>>have a degree in computer science.
>>>
>>>Now THERE is one faked credential!
>>>
>>>If you want to check board certification LOOK IT UP dummy.
>>
>>He has already and knows the truth. Now it is your turn. Truth hurts the
>>untruthful.
>
>
> http://www.heartmdphd.com/rip.asp
>
>
 
On Mon, 15 Sep 2003 15:39:45 -0400, "Jim Horne" <[email protected]>
wrote:

>i will frequently ask folks questions regardless of their ability to answer
>with authority, especially when i feel they will not answer truthfully...as
>in provide answers that exceed their level of knowledge on the subject the
>question relates to...so simply asking someone a question does not infer the
>person being asked is necessarily capable of providing a knowledgeable
>response...

Funny how, when Guy needs help, Chung is no longer a fraud, a quack
and a troll.
 
On Mon, 15 Sep 2003 15:29:12 -0400, "Jim Horne" <[email protected]>
wrote:

>: Btw, I Xposted this back to SCM since that is the only way Chung will
>: see your request.
>
>how are you so sure what Dr Chung reads or doesn't read?

I talk to him personally.
 
"jamie" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Ted Rosenberg wrote:
> >
> >> cc'd by email
> >> Look he IS a quack, and has serious problems
> >
> > Should be simple to prove if true.
> >
> >>
> >> BUT he, or someone of the same name IS a board certified Internist (NOT
> >> cardiologist)
> >
> > Actually, by board-certification in cardiology is on-line for the world
to see on
> > my web-site.
>
> Last I looked, some weeks ago when the recent round of crossposting
> started, your entry on the public website for your state medical board
> had not been updated to include this certification -- although I did see
> it had been added to your website, and recalled that it wasn't there
> when we first became aware of you by past crossposts (incidentally,
> I don't believe you would add it falsely).
>
> IIRC, the board site said something about the information being submitted
> by the listed MDs themselves, so perhaps you forgot to have it updated,
> or the update did not go through.
>
> ....just thought you should know.
>
> --
> jamie ([email protected])
>
> "There's a seeker born every minute."

I believe his license also expires in December. Perhaps the state should be
aware of any complaints against the good "doctor?"
 
"Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> "M. Schwartz" wrote:
>
> > [email protected] (Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD) wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> > > [email protected] (M. Schwartz) wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> > > > Blue M_un <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> > > > > On Fri, 12 Sep 2003 13:04:53 -0400, "Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD"
> > > > > <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > >Many were insulted by Jesus' teachings.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >Did Jesus apologize to these folks?
> > > > > >
> > > > > >Didn't think so.
> > > > >
> > > > > Apparently you did not read, when kicking the moneychangres butts
> > > > > around the Temple grounds, Christ said: "Excuse my roughness. May I
> > > > > help you pick up your ill gotten wealth? I don't know what got into
> > > > > Me."
> > > > >
> > > > > lol
> > > > >
> > > > > I am always amazed at the folks who read the Bible and come away with
> > > > > a Christ that is always as meek as a lamb.
> > > >
> > > > Well, you'd have to admit he certainly was no tiger. Wasn't his
> > > > philosophy to turn the other cheek?
> > > >
> > > > As for the moneychanger/Temple thing, that was an isolated case
> > > > involving what He saw as a defiant action regarding a house of
> > > > worship. But where did He show an unforgiving nature or violent action
> > > > elsewhere?
> > > >
> > > > Mel, still trying to figure out why He said My God, my God, why has
> > > > thou forsaken me.
> > >
> > > God only knows.
> > >
> > > He was in the throes of death at the time.
> >
> > Yes, but who was He talking to?
> >
> > Mel, still wondering...
>
> God the Father.

That appears logical. But how then could they be the same person?

Mel
 
Jim Horne wrote:

> "M_unitions" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> : On Mon, 15 Sep 2003 12:39:55 -0400, "Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD"
> : <[email protected]> wrote:
> :
> : >What is Guy's question, Blue?
> :
> : Guy posted:
> :
> : "OK Doc, I am still waiting for you to post info in the field you
> : "claim to be trained for It is relevant to diabetes. I asked
> : "questions. Did I miss the answers. I am a quadruple bypass
> : " "victim".
> :
> : Funny how, when Guy needs help, you are no longer a fraud, a quack and
> : a troll.
>
> i will frequently ask folks questions regardless of their ability to answer
> with authority, especially when i feel they will not answer truthfully...as
> in provide answers that exceed their level of knowledge on the subject the
> question relates to...so simply asking someone a question does not infer the
> person being asked is necessarily capable of providing a knowledgeable
> response...

I write truthfully. Does that mean I expect you to write truthfully? No.

You ask folks questions when you do not expect the truth. Does that necessarily
mean Guy asks questions when he expects to hear a lie? Probably not.

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

> "Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> > "M. Schwartz" wrote:
> >
> > > [email protected] (Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD) wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> > > > [email protected] (M. Schwartz) wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> > > > > [email protected] (Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD) wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> > > > > > [email protected] (M. Schwartz) wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> > > > > > > "Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> > > > > > > > "M. Schwartz" wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I had a quadruple bypass in 1998. The LVEF artery was only 35% blocked
> > > > > > > > > but they also did that one.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > LVEF artery? Which one is that?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I'm reading it from the Hospital's report sent to my family physician.
> > > > > > > It says:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > "Cardiac Catheterization Report: LAD-90% proximal - 75% mid 1/3,
> > > > > > > CX-95%, RCA-90%; LVEF-35%"
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I assumed incorrectly LVEF was an artery. How does the above translate
> > > > > > > into 4 arteries?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > It doesn't. It does translate to 4 blockages which would lead to 4
> > > > > > bypass grafts. The LVEF refers to Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction.
> > > > > > LVEF of greater than 50% would be normal. 35% indicates weaker
> > > > > > function.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > I see on another page: The LAD, DX2, OM1, and RCA vessels are
> > > > > > > mentioned without specific information regarding the percentage of
> > > > > > > blockage.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Those would be the "targets" for bypass grafts that would circumvent
> > > > > > the blockages.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Hope the above clears things up for you.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Regards,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Andrew
> > > > >
> > > > > So, they did a quadruple bypass but only three arteries were affected?
> > > > > Sorry, but I am trying to understand what was done.
> > > >
> > > > Yes.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > The LVEF of 35% was before the bypass. After the operation, my LVEF
> > > > > was 50%.
> > > > >
> > > > > Mel
> > > >
> > > > Sounds like you needed the surgery.
> > >
> > > No question about that. In fact, at the hospital, I was given a choice
> > > of going home with medication or doing the bypass. Needless to say, I
> > > chose the bypass.
> > >
> > > I was going for my usual walks and felt a certain coldness while
> > > breathing in that I attributed to the cold weather. A few days later I
> > > felt a continuous pain in my left upper chest area and the next day I
> > > called my family physician.
> > >
> > > I was told to come in and pick up a form for a blood test and chest
> > > x-ray. I insisted on being seen by the doctor but they said the doctor
> > > said to have the blood test and chest x-ray and make an appointment
> > > for two weeks. I again insisted that I be seen by the doctor and they
> > > finally relented and said I could come in. I had an EKG which showed
> > > an abnormal reading and was sent to the hospital where another EKG was
> > > taken and again an abnormal reading. I was tranferred to another
> > > hospital better suited for heart problems. I had an angiogram and the
> > > blocked arteries were discovered. I was told there was no heart damage
> > > and did not have a heart attack, but, had I waited two weeks I likely
> > > would have been dead.
> > >
> > > I asked my family physician why he suggested I take a blood test and
> > > chest x-ray and see him in two weeks rather than having me come in,
> > > and his answer was he thought I was having some muscular problem.
> > > Needless to say, he was dismissed as my family physician.
> > >
> > > Mel, lucky to be alive
> >
> > Don't believe in luck. It is God's will that you remain alive.
>
> I've got to tell you a very unusual event that took place when I was
> about 11 or 12 years old:
>
> I was playing ball with my friends Barry and Sheldon. I decided to
> leave and go for a walk while they continued to play ball. I was
> walking along the street where there were lots of stores and I stopped
> by what looked like the back of a truck. I jumped up and went inside
> and saw that it was completely empty. I walked around and soon a voice
> entered my ear and I looked around but saw nothing. I continued
> walking around in this whatever it was hearing a voice and wondering
> why I was hearing a voice when no one was there. I began to question
> the voice and also that there was a voice. I asked who it was and a
> male sounding voice said I am what I am. I can't remember the whole
> conversation but I do remember I doubted the voice and asked for some
> kind of verification. The voice said Go and tell Sheldon that Barry is
> going to hit him 40 times. I remember asking if I could speak with
> this voice again and it said Yes. I asked how do I call this voice.
> The voice said Call me Mr. Best.
>
> I left the whatever it was and looked under, over, and into the sides
> which had no more than maybe two inches of space. I couldn't see
> anything or anyone. There was no one inside, around, or on top of
> whatever it was I was inside. The voice was definitely male and
> definitely not a teenager's voice. I would say a very mature voice.
>
> I went back to where Barry and Sheldon were still playing ball. I went
> over to Sheldon and told him Barry is going to hit you 40 times.
> Sheldon laughed and continued to get into position to catch the next
> ball when suddenly Barry came running over and began hitting Sheldon
> and counting 1, 2, 3, 4, and so on. Chills went up and down my spine.
>
> That evening, I went into the bathroom and called for Mr. Best but
> nothing happened.
>
> I tried going back to where I was when hearing the voice but nothing
> happened.
>
> There were other times I tried calling Mr. Best but nothing happened.
> I don't understand it. There were times I thought I must have been
> imagining the voice but then I remembered how the voice told of Barry
> hitting Sheldon. I know the voice could not have been Barry or Sheldon
> - totally impossible.
>
> But who? And why couldn't I contact that voice again?
>
> Mel

God knows.

--
Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
Board-Certified Cardiologist
http://www.heartmdphd.com/
 
On Mon, 15 Sep 2003 18:11:42 -0400, "Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>> Mu, how are you so sure what Dr Chung reads or doesn't read?
>
>He is certain that I write truthfully and I have written that I don't
>subscribe to alt.support.diabetes.

Er, I'm sure you meant he/she.

lol
 
In article <[email protected]>,
Fencer <[email protected]> wrote:
>Your opinion flys in the face of well documented, historical truths. Surely
>you are familiar with the Christian Crusades? What about the Spanish
>Inquisition? The Klu Klux Klan? Jonestown? What about Paul Hill? Jim Baker?
>How about Paul Shanley and Francis DeBaradinis? The list goes on and on.
>
>Here's Pascal's quote again (because I know how much you like it):
>"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from
>religious conviction."

Sounds more like an explanation for recent terrorist bombers.

Whether it's the IRA, or Moslem extremists, they all do evil thing
believing that God is on their side.

However, I do doubt that pedophile priests thought they were carrying
out God's will when they molested children.


Chuck Demas

--
Eat Healthy | _ _ | Nothing would be done at all,
Stay Fit | @ @ | If a man waited to do it so well,
Die Anyway | v | That no one could find fault with it.
[email protected] | \___/ | http://world.std.com/~cpd
 
You mean you do the
1 yell at so-and-so
2 report so-and-so
3 etc
4 etc

bit with a word processor ? you know more than me on WPs if so . Interesting .

tim

"Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> tim kettring wrote:
>
> > Of the previous I am quite sure , but :
> >
> > I will venture to GUESS , in that case it is probably just a waste of time ?
> > ( TIME , which we all have a finite amount of until life comes to an end )
>
> Macros running in the background don't take up any of my time.
 
On Tue, 16 Sep 2003 06:36:16 +0000 (UTC), Charles Demas wrote:

>>"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as
>>when they do it from religious conviction."
>
> Sounds more like an explanation for recent terrorist bombers.

Oh, they're part of it too, no doubt about it. Interestingly enough, Islam
was once well regarded for religious tolerance. I guess Pope Urban II,
Torquemada and rest helped put a stop to that, eh?

> Whether it's the IRA, or Moslem extremists, they all do evil
> thing believing that God is on their side.

Actually, the IRA is a bit more complicated than that. They're more like
the early mafia in Italy.

> However, I do doubt that pedophile priests thought they were carrying
> out God's will when they molested children.

Hmm, good point, but I wouldn't be surprised if they justified it to
themselves that way.
 
On Tue, 16 Sep 2003 01:44:37 -0400, Bob Pastorio <[email protected]>
wrote:

>After you. The day you begin being civil, I will cheerfully follow
>suit. You might throw in being candid and honest, too.

In all candidness, how many folks did you overfeed and contribute to
their health, even their early deaths and, tell us honestly, how does
it feel to live so luxuriously off their blood money?

>Since I'm merely replying to your smarmily crossposted note, I'd like
>it if you'd trim headers back to just SCM.

I'll bet you would but, honestly and candidly, I feel it is important
for all the support groups you frequent to hear your answer.
 
On Mon, 15 Sep 2003 10:57:40 -0400, Fencer <[email protected]> wrote:

>>>Are you saying that Christians have NOT been among the worse
>>>offenders? So, what is your "opinion"?
>>
>> My opinion is that there is no way to determine whether your
>> statement is correct or not. NO way for you to do so either.
>>
>> Opinion.
>
>Your opinion flys in the face of well documented, historical truths. Surely
>you are familiar with the Christian Crusades? What about the Spanish
>Inquisition? The Klu Klux Klan? Jonestown? What about Paul Hill? Jim Baker?
>How about Paul Shanley and Francis DeBaradinis? The list goes on and on.

So does your mindless insistence on arguing your opinion.

>Here's Pascal's quote again (because I know how much you like it):
>"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from
>religious conviction."

yippee.
 
On Tue, 16 Sep 2003 06:36:16 +0000 (UTC), [email protected] (Charles
Demas) wrote:

>However, I do doubt that pedophile priests thought they were carrying
>out God's will when they molested children.

Interesting but the truth is, having known several pedophilic priests,
some actually have deluded themselves into thinking exactly that.
 
"Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
: Jim Horne wrote:
:
: >
: > i will frequently ask folks questions regardless of their ability to
answer
: > with authority, especially when i feel they will not answer
truthfully...as
: > in provide answers that exceed their level of knowledge on the subject
the
: > question relates to...so simply asking someone a question does not infer
the
: > person being asked is necessarily capable of providing a knowledgeable
: > response...
:
: I write truthfully. Does that mean I expect you to write truthfully? No.
:
: You ask folks questions when you do not expect the truth.

I also ask folks questions to determine their ability to admit they don;t
really know the answer. its a much bigger person that can admit they don't
know than to just make something up to sound as if they do know...

so when you ask your patients if they are compliant with your instructions
relative to their treatment, do you always expect them to be totally
truthful? or will you question and weigh their reply with any other observed
facts to determine if they are telling the truth?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom Back