Very high triglyceride numbers (what does it mean, what can be done)?

Discussion in 'Health and medical' started by Myo Cardium, Nov 17, 2003.

  1. "Paul E. Lehmann" wrote:

    > "Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > news:[email protected]
    > > "Paul E. Lehmann" wrote:
    > >
    > > > "Steve" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > > > news:[email protected]
    > > > > On Wed, 26 Nov 2003 5:50:29 -0500, Paul E. Lehmann wrote
    > > > > (in message <gA%[email protected]>):
    > > > >
    > > > > <snip>
    > > > >
    > > > > > His license is up for renewal soon. I recommend that you and others
    > > > contact
    > > > > > the regulatory board and give them information about his behavior.

    > This
    > > > > > person should not even be allowed to be a dog catcher or a piano

    > player
    > > > in a
    > > > > > whorehouse let alone a licensed physician. I am beginning to

    > understand
    > > > the
    > > > > > number of malpractice law suits. Apparently the medical profession

    > does
    > > > not
    > > > > > do a very good job of policing their own.
    > > > >
    > > > > Welcome to Chung's "et al" Club, Paul :)
    > > > >
    > > > > --
    > > > > God's Other Humble Servant
    > > > >
    > > > > Steve
    > > >
    > > > I think I am in good company. It would also be nice to know who carries
    > > > Chung's malpractice insurance - provided he has it or is able to get it.

    > I
    > > > doubt seriously if anyone would cover him but in the event there is; it
    > > > would be appropriate to drop them a note along with some archived

    > diatribes
    > > > of his and his "Two Pound Diet" nonsense.
    > > >

    > >
    > > Interesting you should bring this up. There turns out to be a lot of
    > > malpractice suits being filed against doctors by their angry obese

    > patients who
    > > are now learning that many of their health problems may have been caused

    > by
    > > their obesity. They are suing restaurants (good thing Mr. Pastorio bailed

    > out
    > > of the restaurant business) and also their doctors who have failed to

    > diagnose
    > > and treat their obesity. Your pointing out to my malpractice insurance

    > company
    > > that I am diagnosing and successfully treating obesity will get me a nice
    > > discount on my premiums on top of the already nice discount I get for not

    > ever
    > > having claims in the first place.

    >
    > Who is your insurance company, Chung?


    Email me privately and I'll think about sending you the information.

    > Do they know about your dismissal and
    > your lack of hospital privilidges?


    They know the truth.

    > You didn't lie on your applicaton, did
    > you?
    >


    I wrote and continue to write truthfully. I was rewarded with a big discount on
    my premiums for multi-million dollar malpractice coverage.

    >
    > <Paul looks so crestfallen. Too bad. Back
    > > to the peanut gallery, he goes>

    >


    So sad... too bad... don't you wish truth was on your side?

    Humbly,

    Andrew

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


  2. John Gaughan

    John Gaughan Guest

    > The above speaks to your bias and membership to the peanut gallery.

    Peanut gallery? Like you should talk. Having a fake degree, i.e. a
    medical doctorate, does not mean you are smart or even know anything.
    Every single PhD I know has nothing but bad things to say about MDs.
    They are cocky, think they are better than everyone else, etc. And your
    behavior here does nothing to contradict those observations.

    --
    John Gaughan
    http://www.johngaughan.net/
    [email protected]
     
  3. John Gaughan wrote:

    > > The above speaks to your bias and membership to the peanut gallery.

    >
    > Peanut gallery? Like you should talk.


    Aren't you the one who was complaining about folks who crosspost?

    There sure were a lot of crossposts in your header that I just trimmed.

    > Having a fake degree, i.e. a
    > medical doctorate,


    Is it your claim that my MD is a fake degree?

    > does not mean you are smart or even know anything.


    Duh.

    >
    > Every single PhD I know has nothing but bad things to say about MDs.


    Well, being that I am also a PhD with nothing but good things to say about
    MDs, you'll now have to revise your statement if you want to be truthful.

    >
    > They are cocky, think they are better than everyone else, etc.


    So what is your excuse?

    > And your
    > behavior here does nothing to contradict those observations.
    >


    Where is here?

    >
    > --
    > John Gaughan


    Thank you for your hypocritical comments.

    God's humble bond-servant,

    Andrew

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

    Steve Guest

    On Wed, 26 Nov 2003 18:20:53 -0500, Thorsten Schier wrote
    (in message <[email protected]>):

    <snip>

    > Thorsten
    >
    >
    > "Nothing in biology makes sense, except in the light of evolution"


    > (Theodosius Dobzhansky)


    So, Chung... what do you think of evolution? Are you a Creationist
    too?

    --
    God's Other Humble Stock and Bond Servant

    Steve
     
  5. Steve <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
    > On Wed, 26 Nov 2003 18:20:53 -0500, Thorsten Schier wrote
    > (in message <[email protected]>):
    >
    > <snip>
    >
    > > Thorsten
    > >
    > >
    > > "Nothing in biology makes sense, except in the light of evolution"

    >
    > > (Theodosius Dobzhansky)

    >
    > So, Chung... what do you think of evolution? Are you a Creationist
    > too?


    God made all that we study in science. Evolution is possible because
    of time, mutations in genes, and natural selection. God made time,
    genes, mutations, and the environment. Thus, God has made evolution
    possible. Indeed, the method by which He made us may have been
    evolution or a souped-up version. It's hard to explain how free will
    in humans came into being via evolution alone. The principles of
    natural selection would dictate that the exercise of free will
    overcoming innate instincts of self-preservation would lead to
    extinction. Yet here we are. Yet another piece if scientific
    evidence for God.

    Humbly,

    Andrew

    --
    Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
    Board-Certified Cardiologist
    http://www.heartmdphd.com
     
  6. Bob Pastorio <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
    > levelwave wrote:
    >
    > > Bob Pastorio wrote:
    > >
    > >> Would it be a logical assumption that you want these names to do harm
    > >> of some sort?


    Simply to turn over to interested authorities and/or attorneys.

    > >> Is there a threat implicit in this comment of yours?


    Your supporters are a threat to themselves. They are simply following
    your lead. You are a threat to yourself, neighbor.

    See:

    http://www.heartmdphd.com/libel.asp

    > >> Why
    > >> would you need these names and addresses?


    I don't.

    See above.

    > >> What will you do with them?


    See above.

    > >> How will you try to hurt the people who criticize you?


    I would try to help them as I have tried to help you, neighbor.

    > >> What harm do
    > >> you plan on inflicting on the people who see your lunacy for what it is?


    Projecting again, I see. Where's the wisdom?

    > >
    > > How do you keep getting yourself into these predicaments?

    >
    > What is the predicament you think you see?


    Levelwave is probably referring to:

    http://www.heartmdphd.com/libel.asp

    Funny that everyone sees it but you.

    FYI Note: I am aware that I am responding to a cross-posted message.
    Because the author of the message to which I am responding did not
    request that the header be trimmed, I have not trimmed it. If you are
    upset about reading this message, a few suggestions:

    (1) Yell at Bob
    (2) Report Bob to his ISP for violating their TOS with his off-topic
    cross-posting, libel and defamation. Simply inform them that there
    are teams of ravenous attorneys salivating at the prospect of
    dismantling ISPs at a tidy profit for participating as Bob's
    accessories.
    (3) Killfile this thread.
    (4) Killfile me.
    (5) Read about free speech.

    This discussion(s) is 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 this
    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 and
    other discussion threads.

    However, instead of conceding gracefully that they've lost the
    argument(s), certain parties have redirected their hatred of the 2
    pound diet approach toward its author. The rationale appears to be
    "if you can not discredit the message then try to discredit the
    messenger."

    Initially, these folks accused the messenger of "trolling." A "troll"
    is someone who posts under the cloak of anonymity messages with no
    redeeming discussion value and with the sole purpose of starting
    "flame" wars.

    These hateful folks lost credibility with this accusation when the
    following observations were made:

    (1) Dr. Chung has not been posting anonymously.
    (2) The 2PD has been on-topic for the Usenet discussion groups hosting
    the discussion(s).
    (a) Those who are failing low-carbing can dovetail LC with the
    2PD to achieve near-ideal weight.
    (b) Obese diabetics improve their blood glucose control when
    their weight becomes near-ideal.
    (c) For (b) see: http://tinyurl.com/levc
    (3) Dr. Chung did not start the discussion(s).
    (4) The 2 pound diet approach is 100% free (no profit motive).
    (5) Dr. Chung's credentials are real and easily verified on-line
    (including jpegs of the actual diplomas).

    Full of hatred, frustration, and desperation, certain individuals have
    tried to attack Dr. Chung's credentials knowing full well that they
    were attempting to libel him. One notable example is Mr. Pastorio:

    http://www.heartmdphd.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):

    (1) They are anonymous and thus they expect to have no credibility (or
    accountability).
    (2) They are by their Usenet history courtesy of Google, unsavory
    characters.
    (3) They have not added anything to the discussion(s) except to
    deliver one-sided insults.
    (4) They complain about alleged cross-posts from Dr. Chung by
    cross-posting.
    (5) They do not complain about cross-posts from folks who attack the
    2PD or its author.

    and conclude that these anon posters deserve only their kill file.

    It is my hope that the above brings new readers of this thread up to
    speed.

    It will remain my pleasure to participate here on Usenet above the din
    of hissing from the peanut gallery.


    Sincerely,

    Andrew

    --
    Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
    Board-Certified Cardiologist
    http://www.heartmdphd.com
     
  7. Steve <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
    > On Wed, 26 Nov 2003 13:06:11 -0500, Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD wrote
    > (in message <[email protected]>):
    >
    > <overconfident blathering snipped>


    overconfidence?

    It's called truth, Steve. Try it sometime.

    > > Back to the peanut gallery, he goes

    >
    > You know, Chung, I'm old enough to have actually _been_ in the original
    > "Peanut Gallery"...


    Glad that you feel right at home there.

    > and you know what we watched? A clown and a wooden
    > headed puppet.


    Must seem like old times for you cheering for a fallen Pastorio :)

    http://www.heartmdphd.com/libel.asp


    Humbly,

    Andrew

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

    John Gaughan Guest

    Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD wrote:
    > Your supporters are a threat to themselves. They are simply
    > following your lead. You are a threat to yourself, neighbor.


    Supporters? You give Bob more credit than he deserves. Nobody supports
    him. We just think you are a moron. Actually, I guess we do support him
    in the sense that we have a common enemy.

    > http://www.heartmdphd.com/libel.asp


    Words are only libel when they are untrue: "A false publication, as in
    writing, print, signs, or pictures, that damages a person's reputation."
    (dictionary.com). Calling you a moron is not libel since it is not "a
    false publication."

    > This discussion(s) is related to the 2 pound diet approach (2PD)
    > which is described completely at:


    Why do you attach these two pages of meaningless drivel to every message
    you post? I don't give a crap about your diet. You just want to spam
    advertisements for your diet.

    --
    John Gaughan
    http://www.johngaughan.net/
    [email protected]
     
  9. Marsha

    Marsha Guest

    > Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD

    A very minor point I'm sure, but did you know that it is not proper to
    address yourself in this manner? It should be either Dr. Andrew B.
    Chung OR Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD. If this offends, sorry. I'm a
    stickler for titles and such.

    Marsha/Ohio
     
  10. levelwave

    levelwave Guest

    Pulled from Mr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD's Website:

    In 1998, my wife and I watched an IMAX film about climbing Mt. Everest
    and learned that despite their exhausting regimen, the climbers consumed
    only 10 lbs of food per week. That's less than 2 lbs. of food per day!
    Since none of the climbers died from starvation, I think it is safe to
    assume that 2 lbs. per day should be more than adequate for us
    non-climbing folks.

    ----------------------------------------------------------


    Not only is Mr. Chung an imbecile he is a liar... The key to obesity is
    no more found in an IMAX film as is the secret to time travel made
    possible through the Flux Capacitor... The magnitude of this scam is
    matched only by the sheer extent of his ego... but even so - the size of
    his ego can in no way makeup for the anatomical fact that he, as an
    Asian, has a small penis... much *much* less than 2 lbs...

    One more thing Mr. Chung... No one here cares about your pretentious
    disclaimer or your *fabricated* signature...


    ~john!
     
  11. John Gaughan wrote:

    > Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD wrote:
    > > Your supporters are a threat to themselves. They are simply
    > > following your lead. You are a threat to yourself, neighbor.

    >
    > Supporters? You give Bob more credit than he deserves. Nobody supports
    > him. We just think you are a moron.


    Further proof that folks like you still have the gift of free will from God.

    > Actually, I guess we do support him
    > in the sense that we have a common enemy.
    >


    Let me guess: God.

    >
    > > http://www.heartmdphd.com/libel.asp

    >
    > Words are only libel when they are untrue: "A false publication, as in
    > writing, print, signs, or pictures, that damages a person's reputation."
    > (dictionary.com).


    Yep.

    > Calling you a moron is not libel since it is not "a
    > false publication."
    >


    Is english your *fifth* language after music?

    >
    > > This discussion(s) is related to the 2 pound diet approach (2PD)
    > > which is described completely at:

    >
    > Why do you attach these two pages of meaningless drivel to every message
    > you post?


    Why does the truth bother you?

    > I don't give a crap about your diet.


    No one is forcing you to read it.

    > You just want to spam
    > advertisements for your diet.
    >


    Go ahead and report yourself then.

    >
    > --
    > John Gaughan


    Thank you for the opportunity to glorify God.

    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 John
    (2) Report John to his ISP for violating their TOS with his off-topic
    posting.
    (3) Killfile this thread.
    (4) Killfile me.
    (5) Read about free speech.

    This discussion(s) is 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 this 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 and other
    discussion threads.

    However, instead of conceding gracefully that they've lost the argument(s),
    certain parties have redirected their hatred of the 2 pound diet approach
    toward its author. The rationale appears to be "if you can not discredit
    the message then try to discredit the messenger."

    Initially, these folks accused the messenger of "trolling." A "troll" is
    someone who posts under the cloak of anonymity messages with no redeeming
    discussion value and with the sole purpose of starting "flame" wars.

    These hateful folks lost credibility with this accusation when the following
    observations were made:

    (1) Dr. Chung has not been posting anonymously.
    (2) The 2PD has been on-topic for the Usenet discussion groups hosting the
    discussion(s).
    (a) Those who are failing low-carbing can dovetail LC with the 2PD to
    achieve near-ideal weight.
    (b) Obese diabetics improve their blood glucose control when their
    weight becomes near-ideal.
    (c) For (b) see: http://tinyurl.com/levc
    (3) Dr. Chung did not start the discussion(s).
    (4) The 2 pound diet approach is 100% free (no profit motive).
    (5) Dr. Chung's credentials are real and easily verified on-line (including
    jpegs of the actual diplomas).

    Full of hatred, frustration, and desperation, certain individuals have tried
    to attack Dr. Chung's credentials knowing full well that they were
    attempting to libel him. One notable example is Mr. Pastorio:

    http://www.heartmdphd.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):

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

    (5) They do not complain about cross-posts from folks who attack the 2PD or
    its author.

    and conclude that these anon posters deserve only their kill file.

    It is my hope that the above brings new readers of this thread up to speed.

    It will remain my pleasure to participate here on Usenet above the din of
    hissing from the peanut gallery.


    Sincerely,

    Andrew

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

    > > Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD

    >
    > A very minor point I'm sure, but did you know that it is not proper to
    > address yourself in this manner?


    It is my name, therefore my choice, fyi. This topic has come up before.
    See Google.


    > It should be either Dr. Andrew B.
    > Chung OR Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD.


    I like being innovative and think outside the box.

    See:

    http://www.heartmdphd.com/wtloss.asp.

    Btw, it does say Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD on my professional licenses.


    > If this offends, sorry.


    No offense taken.

    > I'm a
    > stickler for titles and such.
    >


    Hope you are not offended by my not following title etiquette.

    >
    > Marsha/Ohio


    Thank you for your comments.

    Humbly,

    Andrew

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

    > Pulled from Mr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD's Website:
    >
    > In 1998, my wife and I watched an IMAX film about climbing Mt. Everest
    > and learned that despite their exhausting regimen, the climbers consumed
    > only 10 lbs of food per week. That's less than 2 lbs. of food per day!
    > Since none of the climbers died from starvation, I think it is safe to
    > assume that 2 lbs. per day should be more than adequate for us
    > non-climbing folks.
    >
    > ----------------------------------------------------------
    >
    > Not only is Mr. Chung an imbecile he is a liar... The key to obesity is
    > no more found in an IMAX film as is the secret to time travel made
    > possible through the Flux Capacitor... The magnitude of this scam is
    > matched only by the sheer extent of his ego... but even so - the size of
    > his ego can in no way makeup for the anatomical fact that he, as an
    > Asian, has a small penis... much *much* less than 2 lbs...
    >


    You must be hailing from Mr. Pastorio's creative writing group.

    >
    > One more thing Mr. Chung... No one here cares about your pretentious
    > disclaimer or your *fabricated* signature...
    >


    Sounds like you have a hard time distinguishing reality from fiction.

    >
    > ~john!


    Thank you for the entertainment and comic relief.

    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 John
    (2) Report John to his ISP for violating their TOS with his posting of
    off-topic fictional tripe.
    (3) Killfile this thread.
    (4) Killfile me.
    (5) Read about free speech.

    This discussion(s) is 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 this 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 and other
    discussion threads.

    However, instead of conceding gracefully that they've lost the argument(s),
    certain parties have redirected their hatred of the 2 pound diet approach
    toward its author. The rationale appears to be "if you can not discredit
    the message then try to discredit the messenger."

    Initially, these folks accused the messenger of "trolling." A "troll" is
    someone who posts under the cloak of anonymity messages with no redeeming
    discussion value and with the sole purpose of starting "flame" wars.

    These hateful folks lost credibility with this accusation when the following
    observations were made:

    (1) Dr. Chung has not been posting anonymously.
    (2) The 2PD has been on-topic for the Usenet discussion groups hosting the
    discussion(s).
    (a) Those who are failing low-carbing can dovetail LC with the 2PD to
    achieve near-ideal weight.
    (b) Obese diabetics improve their blood glucose control when their
    weight becomes near-ideal.
    (c) For (b) see: http://tinyurl.com/levc
    (3) Dr. Chung did not start the discussion(s).
    (4) The 2 pound diet approach is 100% free (no profit motive).
    (5) Dr. Chung's credentials are real and easily verified on-line (including
    jpegs of the actual diplomas).

    Full of hatred, frustration, and desperation, certain individuals have tried
    to attack Dr. Chung's credentials knowing full well that they were
    attempting to libel him. One notable example is Mr. Pastorio:

    http://www.heartmdphd.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):

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

    (5) They do not complain about cross-posts from folks who attack the 2PD or
    its author.

    and conclude that these anon posters deserve only their kill file.

    It is my hope that the above brings new readers of this thread up to speed.

    It will remain my pleasure to participate here on Usenet above the din of
    hissing from the peanut gallery.


    Sincerely,

    Andrew

    --
    Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
    Board-Certified Cardiologist
    http://www.heartmdphd.com
     
  14. [removed rec.food.cooking, misc.writing, alt.writing from distribution
    list]

    On Fri, 28 Nov 2003 03:49:32 GMT, "Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD"
    <[email protected]> wrote:
    [snip]
    >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.
    >It will remain my pleasure to participate here on Usenet above the din of
    >hissing from the peanut gallery.


    Oh get over yourself.

    BTW, the Mt. Everest expedition wouldn't "starve to death" in a week
    no matter how little food they were eating. They could have been
    eating 1 M&M in the morning and still made it.

    Sarah Jahn
     
  15. Bob Pastorio

    Bob Pastorio Guest

    Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD wrote:
    > Bob Pastorio <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
    >
    >>levelwave wrote:
    >>
    >>>Bob Pastorio wrote:
    >>>
    >>>>Would it be a logical assumption that you want these names to do harm
    >>>>of some sort?

    >
    > Simply to turn over to interested authorities and/or attorneys.


    <Yawn> Chung has been threatening to do this for quite a while.
    Perhaps he thinks that watching lawyer shows on tv is, like, a
    consultation. Go see the web site. He does play-lawyer talk on it.
    Sounds like the lawyers for the defendants on tv you know are going to
    lose.

    >>>>Is there a threat implicit in this comment of yours?

    >
    > Your supporters are a threat to themselves. They are simply following
    > your lead. You are a threat to yourself, neighbor.


    I take it that Chung's non-answer means that he knows his toothless
    implied threats won't fly.

    There are no supporters, just a band of merry fellows who see
    dishonesty and sloppy logic and invented "facts" and aim their slings
    and arrows at it. No coordination. No plan. Just a big, wobbly,
    slow-moving target that's fun to puncture and very easy to hit.

    > See:
    >
    > http://www.heartmdphd.com/libel.asp


    >>>>Why
    >>>>would you need these names and addresses?

    >
    > I don't.
    >
    > See above.
    >
    >>>>What will you do with them?

    >
    > See above.


    So Chung really has no use for them. Clear enough.

    >>>>How will you try to hurt the people who criticize you?

    >
    > I would try to help them as I have tried to help you, neighbor.


    <LOL> Help me he certainly has. Helped me to clear my thinking about
    other's fraud and quackery. Helped me to understand how superficial
    some other people's thinking can be. Helped me to see how the first
    casualty for the ego-impaired diet huckster is truth.

    >>>>What harm do
    >>>>you plan on inflicting on the people who see your lunacy for what it is?

    >
    > Projecting again, I see. Where's the wisdom?


    Another splendid Chung non-answer. The wisdom is in pointing out the
    folly in Chung's propagandistic blather.

    >>>How do you keep getting yourself into these predicaments?

    >>
    >>What is the predicament you think you see?

    >
    > Levelwave is probably referring to:
    >
    > http://www.heartmdphd.com/libel.asp
    >
    > Funny that everyone sees it but you.


    "Everyone?" I bet you have hundreds of emails that support that.
    No,seriously...

    Chung's credentials as a lawyer fall right in there with the ones for
    nutritional counseling. It's a singular astonishment that none of his
    "friends" have explained how embarrassing that web page should be to
    him. Perhaps he has no one besides the folks here who are willing to
    tell him the truth.

    I hope Chung had a happy Thanksgiving. If you see him, tell him I said
    so. Thanks.

    Pastorio
     
  16. Bob Pastorio

    Bob Pastorio Guest

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

    > Steve <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
    >
    >>On Wed, 26 Nov 2003 13:06:11 -0500, Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD wrote
    >>
    >><overconfident blathering snipped>

    >
    > overconfidence?
    >
    > It's called truth, Steve. Try it sometime.
    >
    >>>Back to the peanut gallery, he goes

    >>
    >>You know, Chung, I'm old enough to have actually _been_ in the original
    >>"Peanut Gallery"...

    >
    > Glad that you feel right at home there.
    >
    >>and you know what we watched? A clown and a wooden
    >>headed puppet.

    >
    > Must seem like old times for you cheering for a fallen Pastorio :)
    >
    > http://www.heartmdphd.com/libel.asp


    I'd say this is about as weak a show as Chung has ever put on. And
    that's going some. Trailerpark-level wit and insults that ring as
    flaccid as the 2PD.

    Tragic waste.

    Pastorio
     
  17. Bob Pastorio

    Bob Pastorio Guest

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

    > John Gaughan wrote:
    >
    >>Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD wrote:
    >>
    >>>Your supporters are a threat to themselves. They are simply
    >>>following your lead. You are a threat to yourself, neighbor.

    >>
    >>Supporters? You give Bob more credit than he deserves. Nobody supports
    >>him. We just think you are a moron.

    >
    > Further proof that folks like you still have the gift of free will from God.


    Not in doubt.

    Chung replies with these non-answers (tm) when he's stumped and just
    hoping he can divert attention from his failure to have anything to
    counter with.

    >>Actually, I guess we do support him
    >>in the sense that we have a common enemy.

    >
    > Let me guess: God.


    Chung replies with these non-answers (tm) when he's stumped and just
    hoping he can divert attention from his failure to have anything to
    counter with.

    One can only hope desperately that Chung's diagnostic capacity is
    better than this. For the sake of his patients.

    >>>http://www.heartmdphd.com/libel.asp

    >>
    >>Words are only libel when they are untrue: "A false publication, as in
    >>writing, print, signs, or pictures, that damages a person's reputation."
    >>(dictionary.com).

    >
    > Yep.


    Chung replies with these non-answers (tm) when he's stumped and just
    hoping he can divert attention from his failure to have anything to
    counter with.

    >>Calling you a moron is not libel since it is not "a
    >>false publication."

    >
    > Is english your *fifth* language after music?


    Chung replies with these non-answers (tm) when he's stumped and just
    hoping he can divert attention from his failure to have anything to
    counter with.

    >>>This discussion(s) is related to the 2 pound diet approach (2PD)
    >>>which is described completely at:

    >>
    >>Why do you attach these two pages of meaningless drivel to every message
    >>you post?

    >
    > Why does the truth bother you?


    Chung replies with these non-answers (tm) when he's stumped and just
    hoping he can divert attention from his failure to have anything to
    counter with.

    Chung creates this equality: meaningless drivel=truth. Keep that in
    mind for any future Chung posts.

    >>I don't give a crap about your diet.

    >
    > No one is forcing you to read it.
    >
    >>You just want to spam
    >>advertisements for your diet.

    >
    > Go ahead and report yourself then.


    Chung replies with these non-answers (tm) when he's stumped and just
    hoping he can divert attention from his failure to have anything to
    counter with.

    > Thank you for the opportunity to glorify God.


    With friends like this, god doesn't need enemies. Chung makes Jim
    Bakker and Jimmie Swaggert look pristine. If this is how Chung
    glorifies god, it's a sad show...

    Pastorio
     
  18. Steve

    Steve Guest

    On Thu, 27 Nov 2003 22:49:32 -0500, Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD wrote
    (in message <[email protected]>):

    > <snip>
    >
    > Thank you for the oppoortunity to glorify God.


    Glorify this:


    Because this discussion concerns the Two Pound Diet (2PD), I am
    providing the following as a Public Service:

    I have developed the Two Foot Diet approach (2FD) as a replacement for
    Dr. Chung's Amazing Logic Defying Two Pound Diet to avoid having to
    carry a scale around.

    Following Dr. Chung's scientific approach, as described on his website,
    in 2003, my wife and I watched an IMAX film about climbing the Bavarian
    Alps and learned that despite their exhausting regimen, the climbers
    consumed only 10 packages of wieners per week. That's less than 2 feet
    of wieners per day! Since none of the climbers died from starvation, I
    think it is safe to assume that 2 feet of food per day should be more
    than adequate for us non-climbing folks.

    So I started a little experiment with the agreeable obese friends in my
    neighborhood. I gave them ordinary 6 inch rulers with instructions to
    measure the length of everything substantial that passed into their
    mouths. The only things exempted were water and sugar-free drinks. What
    I learned was that my obese friends were consuming between 8 to 12 feet
    of food per day! At the time, I was about 10 lbs. over my ideal body
    weight so I decided to find out how much I was eating per day... 3
    feet. I cut back to less than 2 feet and was at my proper weight in one
    month.

    My friends have responded similarly except they have taken longer
    because of having to lose more weight. Admittedly, some of my obese
    friends were especially slow to respond. They also happen to be the
    ones with an unfortunate propensity for accidentally loosing their 6
    inch rulers and taking weeks to buy replacements.

    So here's the deal: measure all the food you eat, using it's longest
    dimension, and keep the total length to less than two feet per day.
    That's all there is. No scales, no counting calories or carbohydrates.
    Heck, if you loose your ruler, you can even use the first joint of your
    thumb to measure.

    I am making this diet available as a public service and without
    compensation.

    If you have any questions, just see Dr. Chung's helpful FAQ and
    substitute "Two Feet" for "Two Pounds" everywhere... what could be
    simpler?

    Sincerely,

    God's Other Humble Servant

    Steve
     
  19. Steve

    Steve Guest

    On Thu, 27 Nov 2003 21:33:24 -0500, levelwave wrote
    (in message <[email protected]>):

    > Pulled from Mr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD's Website:
    >
    > In 1998, my wife and I watched an IMAX film about climbing Mt. Everest
    > and learned that despite their exhausting regimen, the climbers consumed
    > only 10 lbs of food per week. That's less than 2 lbs. of food per day!
    > Since none of the climbers died from starvation, I think it is safe to
    > assume that 2 lbs. per day should be more than adequate for us
    > non-climbing folks.
    >
    > ----------------------------------------------------------
    >
    >
    > Not only is Mr. Chung an imbecile he is a liar... The key to obesity is
    > no more found in an IMAX film as is the secret to time travel made
    > possible through the Flux Capacitor... The magnitude of this scam is
    > matched only by the sheer extent of his ego... but even so - the size of
    > his ego can in no way makeup for the anatomical fact that he, as an
    > Asian, has a small penis... much *much* less than 2 lbs...
    >
    > One more thing Mr. Chung... No one here cares about your pretentious
    > disclaimer or your *fabricated* signature...
    >
    >
    >> john!

    >


    John, I can see why you might have a little difficulty accepting the
    Two Pound Diet... that's why I invented the Two Foot Diet!

    I have developed the Two Foot Diet approach (2FD) as a replacement for
    Dr. Chung's Amazing Logic Defying Two Pound Diet to avoid having to
    carry a scale around.

    Following Dr. Chung's scientific approach, as described on his website,
    in 2003, my wife and I watched an IMAX film about climbing the Bavarian
    Alps and learned that despite their exhausting regimen, the climbers
    consumed only 10 packages of wieners per week. That's less than 2 feet
    of wieners per day! Since none of the climbers died from starvation, I
    think it is safe to assume that 2 feet of food per day should be more
    than adequate for us non-climbing folks.

    So I started a little experiment with the agreeable obese friends in my
    neighborhood. I gave them ordinary 6 inch rulers with instructions to
    measure the length of everything substantial that passed into their
    mouths. The only things exempted were water and sugar-free drinks. What
    I learned was that my obese friends were consuming between 8 to 12 feet
    of food per day! At the time, I was about 10 lbs. over my ideal body
    weight so I decided to find out how much I was eating per day... 3
    feet. I cut back to less than 2 feet and was at my proper weight in one
    month.

    My friends have responded similarly except they have taken longer
    because of having to lose more weight. Admittedly, some of my obese
    friends were especially slow to respond. They also happen to be the
    ones with an unfortunate propensity for accidentally loosing their 6
    inch rulers and taking weeks to buy replacements.

    So here's the deal: measure all the food you eat, using it's longest
    dimension, and keep the total length to less than two feet per day.
    That's all there is. No scales, no counting calories or carbohydrates.
    Heck, if you loose your ruler, you can even use the first joint of your
    thumb to measure.

    I am making this diet available as a public service and without
    compensation.

    If you have any questions, just see Dr. Chung's helpful FAQ and
    substitute "Two Feet" for "Two Pounds" everywhere... what could be
    simpler?

    Sincerely,

    God's Other Humble Servant

    Steve
     
  20. Steve

    Steve Guest

    On Thu, 27 Nov 2003 23:00:22 -0500, Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD wrote
    (in message <[email protected]>):

    <snip>

    > Thank you for the entertainment and comic relief.


    Here's some more for you to chuckle about, Chung:

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

    This discussion(s) is related to the Two Foot Diet approach (2FD) which
    I developed as a replacement for Dr. Chung's Amazing Logic Defying Two
    Pound Diet to avoid having to carry a scale around.

    In 2003, my wife and I watched an IMAX film about climbing the Bavarian
    Alps and learned that despite their exhausting regimen, the climbers
    consumed only 10 packages of wieners per week. That's less than 2 feet
    of wieners per day! Since none of the climbers died from starvation, I
    think it is safe to assume that 2 feet of food per day should be more
    than adequate for us non-climbing folks.

    So I started a little experiment with the agreeable obese friends in my
    neighborhood. I gave them ordinary 6 inch rulers with instructions to
    measure the length of everything substantial that passed into their
    mouths. The only things exempted were water and sugar-free drinks. What
    I learned was that my obese friends were consuming between 8 to 12 feet
    of food per day! At the time, I was about 10 lbs. over my ideal body
    weight so I decided to find out how much I was eating per day... 3
    feet. I cut back to less than 2 feet and was at my proper weight in one
    month.

    My friends have responded similarly except they have taken longer
    because of having to lose more weight. Admittedly, some of my obese
    friends were especially slow to respond. They also happen to be the
    ones with an unfortunate propensity for accidentally loosing their 6
    inch rulers and taking weeks to buy replacements.

    So here's the deal: measure all the food you eat, using it's longest
    dimension, and keep the total length to less than two feet per day.
    That's all there is. No scales, no counting calories or carbohydrates.
    Heck, if you loose your ruler, you can even use the first joint of your
    thumb to measure.

    I am making this diet available as a public service and without
    compensation.

    If you have any questions, just see Dr. Chung's helpful FAQ and
    substitute "Two Feet" for "Two Pounds" everywhere... what could be
    simpler?

    Though Steve invented this approach, he did not initiate this 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/hypocrite.asp

    From the outset, it has been clear that there are those who are
    vehemently opposed to the 2 foot diet approach. They have debated
    Steve on every perceived weakness of the 2 foot diet approach and have
    lost the argument soundly at every point:

    http://www.heartmdphd.com/wtlossfaqs.asp ... just substitute "Foot" for
    "Pound" everywhere.

    These debates are archived on Google in their entirety within this and
    other discussion threads.

    However, instead of conceding gracefully that they've lost the
    argument(s), certain parties have redirected their hatred of the 2 foot
    diet approach toward its author. The rationale appears to be "if you
    can not discredit the message then try to discredit the messenger."

    Initially, these folks accused the messenger of "trolling." A "troll"
    is someone who posts under the cloak of anonymity messages with no
    redeeming discussion value and with the sole purpose of starting
    "flame" wars.

    These hateful folks lost credibility with this accusation when the
    following observations were made:

    (1) Steve has not been posting anonymously.

    (2) The 2FD 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 2FD
    to achieve near-ideal weight.

    (b) Obese diabetics improve their blood glucose control when their
    weight becomes near-ideal.

    (c) For (b) see: http://tinyurl.com/moreChungbullshit

    (3) Steve did not start the discussion(s).

    (4) The 2 foot diet approach is 100% free (no profit motive).

    Full of hatred, frustration, and desperation, certain individuals have
    tried to attack Steve's credentials knowing full well that they were
    attempting to libel him. One notable example is Dr. Chung who is
    jealous that Steve has improved on his diet.

    When the full light was cast on Dr. Chung's libelous statements, the
    hateful folks hiding in the darkness of anonymity, most notably Mu,
    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/sign_up_to_be_a_patient.asp

    Moreover, readers need only make the following observations concerning
    the anon posters who continue to hiss, most notably Mu:

    (1) They are anonymous and thus expect to have no credibility (or
    accountability).

    (2) They are by their Usenet history courtesy of Google, unsavory
    characters.

    (3) They have not added anything to the discussion(s) except to deliver
    one-sided insults.

    (4) They complain about alleged cross-posts from Steve by cross-
    posting.

    (5) They do not complain about cross-posts from folks who attack the
    2FD or its author.

    and conclude that these anon posters deserve only their kill file.
    Unfortunately, they keep Mu_Tating so that it is impossible to killfile
    them.

    It is my hope that the above brings new readers of this thread up to
    speed.

    It will remain my pleasure to participate here on Usenet above the din
    of hissing from the peanut gallery.

    Sincerely,

    God's Other Humble Servant

    Steve
     
Loading...