Ode to Dr Chung

Discussion in 'Health and medical' started by Smoke, Feb 6, 2004.

  1. Smoke

    Smoke Guest

    I am the very model of a Newsgroup Personality I intersperse obscenity with tedious banality.
    Addresses I have plenty of, both genuine and ghosted to, On all the countless newsgroups that my
    drivel is cross-posted to.

    Your bandwidth I will fritter with my whining and my snivelling, And you're the one who pays the
    bill downloading all my drivelling. My enemies are numerous, and no one would be blaming you For
    cracking my head open after I've been rudely flaming you.

    I hate to lose an argument (by now I should be used to it). I wouldn't know a valid point if I was
    introduced to it. My learning is extensive but consists of mindless trivia, Designed to fan my ego,
    which is larger than Bolivia.

    The comments that I vomit forth, disguised as jest and drollery, Are really just an exercise in
    unremitting trollery. I say I'm frank and forthright, but that's merely lies and vanity, The
    gibberings of one who's at the limit of his sanity.

    If only I could get a life, as many people tell me to; If only mum could find a circus freak-show
    she could sell me to; If I go off to Zanzibar to paint the local scenery; If I lose all my fingers
    in a mishap with machinery;

    If I survive to forty, which is somewhat problematical; If what I post was more mature, or slightly
    more grammatical; If I could learn to spell a bit, and maybe even punctuate; Would I still be the
    loathsome and objectionable punk you hate?

    But while I have this tiresome urge to prance around and show my face, It simply isn't safe for
    normal people here in cyberspace. To stick me in Old Sparky and turn on the electricity Would be a
    fitting punishment for my egocentricity.

    I always have the last word; so, with utmost finality, That's all from me, the model of a Newsgroup
    Personality.
     
    Tags:


  2. Steve

    Steve Guest

    On Fri, 6 Feb 2004 1:37:06 -0500, Smoke wrote
    (in message <[email protected]>):

    > I am the very model of a Newsgroup Personality I intersperse obscenity with tedious banality.
    > Addresses I have plenty of, both genuine and ghosted to, On all the countless newsgroups that my
    > drivel is cross-posted to.
    >
    > Your bandwidth I will fritter with my whining and my snivelling, And you're the one who pays the
    > bill downloading all my drivelling. My enemies are numerous, and no one would be blaming you For
    > cracking my head open after I've been rudely flaming you.
    >
    > I hate to lose an argument (by now I should be used to it). I wouldn't know a valid point if I was
    > introduced to it. My learning is extensive but consists of mindless trivia, Designed to fan my
    > ego, which is larger than Bolivia.
    >
    > The comments that I vomit forth, disguised as jest and drollery, Are really just an exercise in
    > unremitting trollery. I say I'm frank and forthright, but that's merely lies and vanity, The
    > gibberings of one who's at the limit of his sanity.
    >
    > If only I could get a life, as many people tell me to; If only mum could find a circus freak-show
    > she could sell me to; If I go off to Zanzibar to paint the local scenery; If I lose all my fingers
    > in a mishap with machinery;
    >
    > If I survive to forty, which is somewhat problematical; If what I post was more mature, or
    > slightly more grammatical; If I could learn to spell a bit, and maybe even punctuate; Would I
    > still be the loathsome and objectionable punk you hate?
    >
    > But while I have this tiresome urge to prance around and show my face, It simply isn't safe for
    > normal people here in cyberspace. To stick me in Old Sparky and turn on the electricity Would be a
    > fitting punishment for my egocentricity.
    >
    > I always have the last word; so, with utmost finality, That's all from me, the model of a
    > Newsgroup Personality.
    >
    >

    Correct.

    --
    Steve

    Who is the humblest person in the universe? According to Chung, God :) ROTFL! "I'm Humble!
    Worship Me!"

    Weeding the Lord's Vineyards Since 2003
     
  3. Smoke

    Smoke Guest

    "Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    > Steve wrote:
    >
    > > On Fri, 6 Feb 2004 1:37:06 -0500, Smoke wrote (in message
    > > <[email protected]>):
    > >
    > > > <hiss>
    > > >
    > > >
    > >
    > > <hiss>
    >
    > You poor guy.

    Only in monetary terms. Kinda accurate Ode though, doncha think? Smoke
    >
    >
    > Servant to the humblest person in the universe,
    >
    > 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
     
  4. Smoke

    Smoke Guest

  5. Fire

    Fire Guest

    Hi all I'm new here. What is it with the DOC?

    fire

    "Smoke" <[email protected]> wrote in news:20ed6c89c783ad145d05804d9b1ba784 @news.teranews.com:
    >
    > See the last 2 lines....... smoke
    >
    > "Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > news:[email protected]...
    >> Smoke wrote:
    >>
    >> > <long hiss>
    >>
    >> You poor guy.
    >>
    >> You remain in my prayers.
    >>
    >>
    >> Servant to the humblest person in the universe,
    >>
    >> 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
    >>
    >>
     
  6. Smoke

    Smoke Guest

    "fire" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    >
    >
    >
    > Hi all I'm new here. What is it with the DOC?
    >
    > fire

    It's all in the Ode, well not all of it, but you get the drift. Is that Mr fire, Mrs fire or maybe
    an Aussie miss?
    >
    >
    > "Smoke" <[email protected]> wrote in news:20ed6c89c783ad145d05804d9b1ba784 @news.teranews.com:
    > >
    > > See the last 2 lines....... smoke
    > >
    > > "Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > > news:[email protected]...
    > >> Smoke wrote:
    > >>
    > >> > <long hiss>
    > >>
    > >> You poor guy.
    > >>
    > >> You remain in my prayers.
    > >>
    > >>
    > >> Servant to the humblest person in the universe,
    > >>
    > >> 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
    > >>
    > >>
    > >
     
  7. Bob

    Bob Guest

    Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD wrote:

    > fire wrote:
    >
    >> Hi all I'm new here. What is it with the DOC?
    >>
    >> fire
    >
    > http://makeashorterlink.com/?K57723657

    <LOL> welcome to SMC. The DOC has written a FAQ about himself and the URL above is it. Besides being
    filled with lies, it's utterly inaccurate. <G>

    Try this one. It's the one true Chung FAQ.

    -------------------------------
    The Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD FAQ Version 1.01, January, 2004
    -------------------------------

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

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

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

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

    o He uses SMC 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 SMC 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", "libelers",

    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. Mu's job is to
    troll other newsgroups and, when he gets a reaction, to cross post the reaction to SMC so that Dr.
    Chung can disingenuously claim to be "only responding" to a cross post. Whereas
    Ds. Chung has to be somewhat careful what he says and so attacks primarily through insinuation and
    innuendo, Mu's tactics are blunt and direct like those of a playground bully.

    The above lists only the highlights of Dr. Chung's egregious behavior on SMC. 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 SMC, who cares
    what else he does?

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

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

    18. 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.

    19. What is the Charter of SMC?
    ----------------------------------
    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)

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

    21. So Dr. Chung is Religious... What's the Problem With That?
    --------------------------------------------------------------
    There is no problem with that. Most of the people who participate in SMC 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. Chung's intolerant
    and dismissive attitude towards beliefs which differ from his. The situation is further exacerbated
    by Mu's rabble raising from the sidelines.

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

    22. But it's 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.

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

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

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

    As another example, he recently choreographed a smear campaign against

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

    Ask yourself if this the brand of Christianity you identify with.

    24. 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.

    25. But Isn't 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 SMC is
    to "witness" and win converts to his religious beliefs.

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

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

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

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

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

    11. Doesn't the "Fault" for all Those Posts Lay With Those Who Challenge Dr. Chung?
    --------------------------------------------------------------
    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". it's only rule is to restrict yourself to
    two pounds of food per day. That's it. Doesn't matter if you are a 16 year old girl or an 80 year
    old man; a 5' 2" woman or a 7' man; a weight lifter or a mattress tester. Two pounds. That's it. No
    more, less if you want. One size fits all.

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

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

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

    15. Is Discussion of the Two Pound Diet "On Topic"?
    ---------------------------------------------------
    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 SMC so that Dr. Chung can disingenuously claim to be "only responding" to a cross post.

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

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

    The bottom line is that if the Two Pound Diet is "On Topic" for anyone, it is "On Topic" for
    everyone... including its 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. Chung's "Christianity" and does not hesitate to
    employ anti-Semitism and homophobia in his attacks.

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

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

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

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

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

    Comments and/or corrections to this FAQ will be taken under advisement.
     
  8. Bob wrote:

    > Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD wrote:
    >
    > > fire wrote:
    > >
    > >> Hi all I'm new here. What is it with the DOC?
    > >>
    > >> fire
    > >
    > > http://makeashorterlink.com/?K57723657
    >
    >
    > hhhhhhhhhhhhhiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiisssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss-
    > ssssss!>

    You poor guy.

    You remain in my prayers, neighbor.

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

    Bob's pathological obsessions are related to 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:

    (6) Dr. Chung has not been posting anonymously.
    (7) 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://makeashorterlink.com/?V5D042C47
    (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. Bob
    "raging and self-confident" Pastorio:

    http://www.heartmdphd.com/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):

    (6) They are anonymous and thus they expect to have no credibility (or accountability).
    (7) They are by their Usenet history courtesy of Google, unsavory characters.
    (8) They have not added anything to the discussion(s) except to deliver one-sided insults.
    (9) They complain about alleged cross-posts from Dr. Chung by cross-posting.
    (10) 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.

    Servant to the humblest person in the universe,

    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/?W1F522557

    What is all this about?

    http://makeashorterlink.com/?K57723657
     
Loading...