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. John Gaughan wrote:

    > Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD wrote:
    > > FYI Note: Because the author of the message is a rec.food.cooking
    > > subscriber (per Google), I have added RFC for his convenience. 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.

    >
    > (6) Don't cross-post: it is considered quite rude especially when off-topic.


    Not anymore rude than your post. Actually, a good deal of the post is about
    food and cooking (by Mr. Pastorio).

    >
    > (7) Keep your flame wars to email. Nobody else cares.
    >


    Except those folks who are contributing and reading this thread which Mr.
    Pastorio started.

    >
    > Never argue with an idiot: he will drag you down to his level and then
    > beat you with experience.
    >


    If an idiot beats you at anything, it would be God's will.

    >
    > Heed that advice, Bob. Look what you got yourself into.
    >


    What Bob needs is wisdom, not advice.

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


    Thank you for your comments.

    Humbly,

    Andrew

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


  2. You're confusing me with the folks in the peanut gallery.

    Humbly,

    Andrew

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

    Tony Lew wrote:

    > Bob Pastorio <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
    > > Hey, everybody, please read what Chung writes. See if you can make any
    > > sense of his obfuscations, distortion, fanaticism, confusion,
    > > bafflements and outright lying. He starts the crosspost and he
    > > encourages you to report me to my ISP because it's crossposted. What
    > > splendid mental acuity, huh?

    >
    > You are what you eat.
    > Chung must eat 2 lbs. of nuts a day.
    >
    > >
    > > He's a cardiologist who claims to be a man of science. He demonstrates
    > > otherwise. Thought you'd all like to see how an expensive education
    > > can be wasted.
    > >
    > > Note his fanciful definition of trolling. Note how he refers to
    > > himself in the 3rd person. Note how he has "testimonials" on his web
    > > site that demolish his wonderfully silly 2PoundDiet.
    > >
    > > Chung says that if you confine your consumption to 2 pounds of food
    > > per day, you'll lose weight and somehow magically when you arrive at
    > > your ideal weight, you'll reach some sort of abracadabra equilibrium
    > > and stay at your ideal weight. And you don't really have to worry
    > > about what you eat, he says, just use common sense, whatever that
    > > means. He thinks that because he's been trolling various NG's about
    > > it, that doctors know about his hilarious diet and will counsel their
    > > patients in how to use it most effectively. Or something. He claims
    > > that he's qualified to counsel patients on matters of nutrition
    > > because he's a doctor.
    > >
    > > He usually likes to sign off with "Humbly" or "God's humble
    > > bond-servant" while parading his pure, wacko brand of Christianity.
    > > Here he moderated it to "Sincerely" perhaps so you'd think he wasn't
    > > such a spacer.
    > >
    > > Amazing display he puts on...
    > >
    > > To catch the unexpurgated Chung show, check in at sci.med.cardiology.
    > > Or visit his web site and be sure to sign up for his chat room.
    > >
    > > ------------------------
    > > Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD wrote:
    > >
    > > > Bob Pastorio <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
    > > >
    > > >>Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD wrote:
    > > >>
    > > >>>Thorsten Schier <[email protected]> wrote
    > > >>>
    > > >>>>No one knows the truth ...
    > > >>>>
    > > >>>>Thorsten
    > > >>>
    > > >>>Except those who know Jesus Christ.
    > > >>>
    > > >>>From John 14:
    > > >>>
    > > >>>6Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one
    > > >>>comes to the Father except through me..."
    > > >>>
    > > >>>http://www.heartmdphd.com/healer.asp
    > > >>
    > > >>This is a wonderful essay in self-referential exposition. A perfect
    > > >>example of begging the question. Using the subject as definition of
    > > >>the subject. "The bible is true because it's the word of god." Right.
    > > >>But first you have to prove that it's the word of god without quoting
    > > >>the book itself. Try another source. There isn't one. You either
    > > >>believe or not, and no amount of cajoling and exhorting generates
    > > >>faith. There are no proofs for faith. There are no rational
    > > >>justifications. You either believe or not.
    > > >>
    > > >>Chung makes the fatal error of equating faith with knowledge. Of
    > > >>equating belief with fact. Of equating *his* belief with absolute
    > > >>truth all the while ignoring vast portions of the bible that are
    > > >>inconvenient to his hubris. He equates the arrogance of his
    > > >>exclusionary belief with humility, defying all rational definition of
    > > >>"faith" and "humility."
    > > >>
    > > >>All fanatics believe themselves to have an exclusive grasp on truth.
    > > >>All fundamentalists believe they have an exclusive pipeline to god.
    > > >>All propagandists believe that if they shout loudly enough or repeat
    > > >>themselves enough that all will be convinced and converted.
    > > >>All egotists believe that anyone who doesn't agree with them is
    > > >>foolish and generally inferior to them.
    > > >>All True Believers believe that their faith covers everything about
    > > >>everything and that they KNOW what is proper and what isn't out to
    > > >>100% of all issues and questions.
    > > >>
    > > >>The True Believers also believe that anything they do in their
    > > >>perverse understanding of their "cause" is acceptable. That nothing is
    > > >>immoral or unethical in the cause of their religion, their faith. That
    > > >>any harm and any inconvenience caused to others is acceptable because
    > > >>it's for a noble cause. They may say anything, imply anything, slander
    > > >>and libel anyone, distort and dissemble, even outright lie to gain
    > > >>ascendancy and remain atop that moral high ground. It's the madness of
    > > >>the terrorist, the nullity of the martyr.
    > > >>
    > > >>That True Believer has one fatal flaw. His belief is so
    > > >>all-encompassing that it cannot have, must not have, any flaws. His
    > > >>belief is finally fragile because it must be absolute or all of it
    > > >>falls. So the TB cannot grant even the smallest point to anyone who
    > > >>doesn't agree with him. He cannot offer true compassion to anyone who
    > > >>doesn't agree with him 100% He cannot indicate any unsurety in his
    > > >>belief. The TB is, finally, a fraud because of the enormous distance
    > > >>and cognitive dissonance between action and words. The truly sad part
    > > >>of it is that the TB has no idea of his weakness and frailty. No idea
    > > >>of his appearance of folly and dishonesty. No idea that his relentless
    > > >>hypocrisy is his own strongest opponent and most strident critic.
    > > >>
    > > >>What a profoundly sad waste.
    > > >>
    > > >>Pastorio
    > > >
    > > >
    > > > You are such a theological expert, Mr. Pastorio.
    > > >
    > > > How did you come to hate Christ so much?
    > > >
    > > > Is it because you love food so much?
    > > >
    > > > So much so that you would sacrifice your health to it and develop
    > > > coronary disease?
    > > >
    > > > You still have my pity, my love, and my forgiveness, neighbor.
    > > >
    > > > FYI Note: Because the author of the message is a rec.food.cooking
    > > > subscriber (per Google), I have added RFC for his convenience. 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.
    > > >
    > > > 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 the
    > > > Usenet discussion(s). His participation in this discussion(s) has
    > > > been voluntary and has been conducted in the spirit of community
    > > > service. His motivation has been entirely altruistic and has arisen
    > > > from his religious beliefs as a Christian. Jesus freely gave of
    > > > Himself to better the health of folks He touched:
    > > >
    > > > http://www.heartmdphd.com/healer.asp
    > > >
    > > > From the outset, it has been clear that there are those who are
    > > > vehemently opposed to the 2 pound diet approach. They have debated
    > > > Dr. Chung on every perceived weakness of the 2 pound diet approach and
    > > > have lost the argument soundly at every point:
    > > >
    > > > http://www.heartmdphd.com/wtlossfaqs.asp
    > > >
    > > > These debates are archived on Google in their entirety within this
    > > > discussion thread(s).
    > > >
    > > > However, instead of conceding gracefully that they've lost the
    > > > argument(s), certain parties have redirected their hatred of the 2
    > > > pound diet approach toward its author. The rationale appears to be
    > > > "if you can not discredit the message then try to discredit the
    > > > messenger."
    > > >
    > > > Initially, these folks accused the messenger of "trolling." A "troll"
    > > > is someone who posts under the cloak of anonymity messages with no
    > > > redeeming discussion value and with the sole purpose of starting
    > > > "flame" wars.
    > > >
    > > > These hateful folks lost credibility with this accusation when the
    > > > following observations were made:
    > > >
    > > > (1) Dr. Chung has not been posting anonymously.
    > > > (2) The 2PD has been on-topic for the Usenet discussion groups hosting
    > > > the discussion(s).
    > > > (a) Those who are failing low-carbing can dovetail LC with the
    > > > 2PD to achieve near-ideal weight.
    > > > (b) Obese diabetics improve their blood glucose control when
    > > > their weight becomes near-ideal.
    > > > (c) For (b) see: http://tinyurl.com/levc
    > > > (3) Dr. Chung did not start the discussion(s).
    > > > (4) The 2 pound diet approach is 100% free (no profit motive).
    > > > (5) Dr. Chung's credentials are real and easily verified on-line
    > > > (including jpegs of the actual diplomas).
    > > >
    > > > Full of hatred, frustration, and desperation, certain individuals have
    > > > tried to attack Dr. Chung's credentials knowing full well that they
    > > > were attempting to libel him. One notable example is Mr. Pastorio:
    > > >
    > > > http://www.heartmdphd.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 continue the discussion(s) about the 2PD
    > > > above the din of hissing from the peanut gallery.
    > > >
    > > >
    > > > Sincerely,
    > > >
    > > > Andrew
    > > >
    > > > --
    > > > Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
    > > > Board-Certified Cardiologist
    > > > http://www.heartmdphd.com
     
  3. Bob Pastorio

    Bob Pastorio Guest

    Steve wrote:

    > On Wed, 26 Nov 2003 4:23:08 -0500, Bob Pastorio wrote
    > (in message <[email protected]>):
    >
    > <snip>
    >
    >>"Humpty Dumpty language, noun. An idiosyncratic or eccentric use of
    >>language in which the meaning of particular words is determined by the
    >>speaker." <http://www.wordspy.com/words/HumptyDumptylanguage.asp>
    >>
    >>Pastorio

    >
    > Perhaps he should change his signature to:
    >
    >>>Humptily,
    >>>
    >>>Andrew

    >
    > :)
    >
    > Up late again? You need to get some sleep :)


    Nah. I'm doing the 2HourSleepDiet.

    Pastorio
     
  4. "Paul E. Lehmann" wrote:

    > "Bob Pastorio" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > news:[email protected]
    > <colorful display of pathological obsessive compulsive behavior snipped>
    >
    > His license is up for renewal soon.


    If you consider 12/31/2005 soon.

    > I recommend that you and others contact
    > the regulatory board and give them information about his behavior.


    That would help me get your names and addresses :)

    > This
    > person should not even be allowed to be a dog catcher or a piano player in a
    > whorehouse let alone a licensed physician.


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

    > I am beginning to understand the
    > number of malpractice law suits.


    Lots of folks in the peanut gallery.

    > Apparently the medical profession does not
    > do a very good job of policing their own.


    Some would say the solution would be to not treat those in the peanut gallery.

    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 Paul
    (2) Report Paul to his ISP
    (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 the Usenet
    discussion(s). His participation in this discussion(s) has been voluntary and
    has been conducted in the spirit of community service. His motivation has been
    entirely altruistic and has arisen from his religious beliefs as a Christian.
    Jesus freely gave of Himself to better the health of folks He touched:

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

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

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

    These debates are archived on Google in their entirety within this discussion
    thread(s).

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

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

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

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

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

    http://www.heartmdphd.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 continue the discussion(s) about the 2PD above the
    din of hissing from the peanut gallery.


    Sincerely,

    Andrew

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

    Bob Pastorio Guest

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

    > "Paul E. Lehmann" wrote:
    >
    >>His license is up for renewal soon.

    >
    > If you consider 12/31/2005 soon.
    >
    >> I recommend that you and others contact
    >>the regulatory board and give them information about his behavior.

    >
    > That would help me get your names and addresses :)


    Would it be a logical assumption that you want these names to do harm
    of some sort? Is there a threat implicit in this comment of yours? Why
    would you need these names and addresses? What will you do with them?
    How will you try to hurt the people who criticize you? What harm do
    you plan on inflicting on the people who see your lunacy for what it is?

    Why else would you need these names?

    Pastorio
     
  6. levelwave

    levelwave Guest

    Bob Pastorio wrote:

    > Would it be a logical assumption that you want these names to do harm of
    > some sort? Is there a threat implicit in this comment of yours? Why
    > would you need these names and addresses? What will you do with them?
    > How will you try to hurt the people who criticize you? What harm do you
    > plan on inflicting on the people who see your lunacy for what it is?



    How do you keep getting yourself into these predicaments?

    ~john!



    --
    Say hello to the rug's topography...It holds quite a lot of interest
    with your face down on it...
     
  7. Matti Narkia wrote:

    > 25 Nov 2003 20:40:37 -0800 in article
    > <[email protected]> [email protected]
    > (Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD) wrote:
    >
    > >Matti Narkia <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
    > >> Tue, 25 Nov 2003 11:04:18 -0500 in article
    > >> <[email protected]> "Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD"
    > >> <[email protected]> wrote:
    > >>
    > >> >Matti Narkia wrote:
    > >> >
    > >> >> <snip>
    > >> >> >> I'm sorry, but I couldn't find there any statement by Mr. Pastorio, where
    > >> >> >> he would claim that there is no God.
    > >> >> >>
    > >> >> >
    > >> >> >"But first you have to prove that it's the word of god without quoting
    > >> >> >the book itself. Try another source. There isn't one."
    > >> >> >
    > >> >> Here Mr. Pastorio just says that there is no alternative source proving
    > >> >> that the bible is the word of God. He is _not_ saying that there is no
    > >> >> God.
    > >> >
    > >> >Let Mr. Pastorio publically state there is a God and perhaps you'll convince somebody.
    > >> >
    > >> Why should he do that?

    > >
    > >To help you be convincing.
    > >

    > I don't need to be convincing.


    Asked and answered.

    > Anyone reading your "libel" page can see
    > that you are wrong in this issue.
    >


    Perhaps if they have difficulty understanding english.

    >
    > >> The issue is that you claimed that Mr. Pastorio had
    > >> written here that there is no God.

    > >
    > >I wrote that Mr. Pastorio would have you believe there is no God.
    > >

    > The material on your "libel" page shows no evidence of that,


    It does show that Mr. Pastorio would have you believe that I am one who pretends to be a doctor (ie no
    medical license... fraud/quack).

    > neither have
    > I seen evidence of it in his messages in this group.
    >


    Perhaps english being a 5th language for you would be an explanation for your lack of reading comprehension.

    >
    > Another matter is that I don't understand why you are so obsessed about
    > this kind of issue?


    Caring about truth is hardly an obession. Would you characterize your search for truth an obsession?

    > Suppose someone would have people believe there is no
    > God. So what?


    I care about the truth.

    > These are matters of faith and the existence of God has not
    > been proved.


    It will be proven to you after you die.

    > It's all in faith.


    Do you believe that a person can have faith in the wrong things (ie things that are untrue)?

    > There are different faiths, different
    > religions with different Gods.


    Only one of these can be true.

    > There are agnostics, there are atheists.


    There are many paths. Only one is true.

    >
    > These are all legal and accepted positions in the countries with the
    > freedom of religion. What is your problem?
    >


    I care about the truth.

    > >
    > >> When questioned, you have failed to
    > >> prove your claim.

    > >
    > >I directed you directly the source of Mr. Pastorio's writings where
    > >the above can be deduced.
    > >

    > It cannot.
    >


    Not for one without reading comprehension.

    >
    > >> There is no such statement by Mr. Pastorio.

    > >
    > >See above.
    > >

    > Ditto.
    >


    See above.

    >
    > >> Either you
    > >> have misunderstood his writing or you have not been truthful.

    > >
    > >I understand his writings *and* I remain truthful.
    > >

    > One or both of those is not true.
    >


    Perhaps you are not looking for the truth as you claim.

    >
    > >> Whether Mr. Pastorio actually believes in God (recently he has said that
    > >> he does)or not is utterly irrelevant in this issue which concerned only
    > >> what he allegedly had written according to you.

    > >
    > >Allegedly? That's the wonderful thing about archived Usenet. There
    > >is no more alleged. Do you want the link to where folks get the
    > >distinct impression that Mr. Pastorio would have people believe there
    > >is no God?
    > >

    > Yes, please.
    >


    Are you certain?

    > >> >>

    > >English is not your first language is it?
    > >

    > So what, if it isn't? I'm not doing too badly if you didn't notice it
    > before


    Actually, I have noticed. Just haven't verbalized it till now.

    > (I'm not sure whether you actually noticed it even now or are you
    > just following your customary debating tactics).


    The former would be the truth.

    > In chronological order
    > English is the fifth language I learned. I'm a Finn living in Finland, and
    > my mother tongue is Finnish. Does that create a problem for you?
    >


    No. It does shed some light on your apparent english reading comprehension problems.

    >
    > >> >> There is no _proof_ that the bible is
    > >> >> the word of God.
    > >> >
    > >> >You'll have it when you die.
    > >> >
    > >> >> It's the matter of _belief_.
    > >> >
    > >> >It's called knowledge through faith.
    > >> >
    > >> There is no such thing, there is only your faith.

    > >
    > >This is not about me.
    > >

    > It is as much about you as about anyone else with a faith.


    Truth is not about me.

    Humbly,

    Andrew

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

    > Bob Pastorio wrote:
    >
    > > Would it be a logical assumption that you want these names to do harm of
    > > some sort? Is there a threat implicit in this comment of yours? Why
    > > would you need these names and addresses? What will you do with them?
    > > How will you try to hurt the people who criticize you? What harm do you
    > > plan on inflicting on the people who see your lunacy for what it is?

    >
    > How do you keep getting yourself into these predicaments?
    >
    > ~john!
    >
    >


    That's why his obsession is likely pathological. He can't help it.

    Humbly,

    Andrew

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

    gekko Guest

    Nine out of ten dentists agree that "Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD"
    <[email protected]> wrote in
    news:[email protected]


    > Initially, these folks accused the messenger of "trolling." A
    > "troll" is someone who posts under the cloak of anonymity



    No.

    --
    gekko

    I used to be indecisive . . . now I'm not so sure.
     
  10. Matti Narkia

    Matti Narkia Guest

    Wed, 26 Nov 2003 10:36:39 -0500 in article
    <[email protected]> "Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD"
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    >Matti Narkia wrote:
    >
    >> 25 Nov 2003 20:40:37 -0800 in article
    >> <[email protected]> [email protected]
    >> (Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD) wrote:
    >>
    >> >Matti Narkia <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
    >> >> Tue, 25 Nov 2003 11:04:18 -0500 in article

    >>
    >> >> The issue is that you claimed that Mr. Pastorio had
    >> >> written here that there is no God.
    >> >
    >> >I wrote that Mr. Pastorio would have you believe there is no God.
    >> >

    >> The material on your "libel" page shows no evidence of that,

    >
    >It does show that Mr. Pastorio would have you believe that I am one who pretends to be a doctor (ie no
    >medical license... fraud/quack).
    >

    No it doesn't, as shown earlier and agreed upon by every participant
    except you.

    >> neither have
    >> I seen evidence of it in his messages in this group.

    >
    >Perhaps english being a 5th language for you would be an explanation for your lack of reading comprehension.
    >

    So now you are claiming that I have a lack of reading comprehension?
    Remember, this will be recorded in the archives. You cannot prove that
    your claim is correct, but I can prove that it is false: during the course
    of my formal education I have passed several times English comprehension
    tests and I can do it again in any objective neutral test. Think about
    what that means and its consequences. It means that your claim is not only
    childish behavior, it also fulfills the definition of a libel. So now you
    have managed to make a graceful conversion from a self-proclaimed
    "libel-victim" to a libeler.
    >>
    >> Another matter is that I don't understand why you are so obsessed about
    >> this kind of issue?

    >
    >Caring about truth is hardly an obession. Would you characterize your search for truth an obsession?
    >

    You don't seem to you care much about truth in your desperate attempts to
    get the last word in every debate. Don't flatter yourself.

    >> Suppose someone would have people believe there is no
    >> God. So what?

    >
    >I care about the truth.
    >

    See above.

    >> These are matters of faith and the existence of God has not
    >> been proved.

    >
    >It will be proven to you after you die.
    >

    Perhaps, perhaps not. You wouldn't know it.

    >> It's all in faith.

    >
    >Do you believe that a person can have faith in the wrong things (ie things that are untrue)?
    >

    Absolutely. And _that_ is _not_ a matter of belief. History gives plenty
    of examples of people who have believed in strange things, which have not
    been true. How many times for instance the end of the world has been
    predicted by some weird cults to happen at a certain date, which has then
    passed peacefully?

    >> There are different faiths, different
    >> religions with different Gods.

    >
    >Only one of these can be true.
    >

    Let me guess, by a strange coincidence it happens to be yours ;-)?
    That's a view of a fundamentalist and fanatic.

    Have you ever heard of ecumenicalism? If not, find out about it. That's a
    start. Your current religious "thinking" is rather immature and even
    dangerous. Later you could try to find out about other religions. Try
    buddhism (although strictly interpreted buddhism is not actually a
    religion, but a path to internal development end enlightenment, IMHO), for
    example. To guide you in your way into deeper understanding of religious
    experiences I suggest you start by reading the book

    _The Varieties of Religious Experience_ by William James

    >> There are agnostics, there are atheists.

    >
    >There are many paths. Only one is true.
    >

    That's a fanatic, fundamentalist, dangerous view, which has lead to
    numerous wars and to enormous amount of violence and suffering.
    >>
    >> These are all legal and accepted positions in the countries with the
    >> freedom of religion. What is your problem?

    >
    >I care about the truth.
    >

    You haven't proved that. Your behavior in this group shows otherwise.
    >> >
    >> >> When questioned, you have failed to
    >> >> prove your claim.
    >> >
    >> >I directed you directly the source of Mr. Pastorio's writings where
    >> >the above can be deduced.
    >> >

    >> It cannot.

    >
    >Not for one without reading comprehension.
    >

    I haven't seen those kind of people in this newsgroup. Have you?
    >>

    [snip]
    >> >
    >> >Allegedly? That's the wonderful thing about archived Usenet. There
    >> >is no more alleged. Do you want the link to where folks get the
    >> >distinct impression that Mr. Pastorio would have people believe there
    >> >is no God?
    >> >

    >> Yes, please.

    >
    >Are you certain?
    >

    I already asked for it. I take it that you don't have any then?
    >> >> >>

    [snip]
    >> In chronological order
    >> English is the fifth language I learned. I'm a Finn living in Finland, and
    >> my mother tongue is Finnish. Does that create a problem for you?

    >
    >No. It does shed some light on your apparent english reading comprehension problems.
    >

    As I explained you earlier, you cannot prove your claim, but I can prove
    it false. This makes you a libeler. How do you feel about that?
     
  11. "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.
    >
     
  12. Steve

    Steve Guest

    On Wed, 26 Nov 2003 10:36:39 -0500, Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD wrote
    (in message <[email protected]>):

    > Perhaps english being a 5th language for you would be an explanation for
    > your lack of reading comprehension.


    Funny how his "reading comprehension" didn't seem to be an issue a week
    or so ago when you were posting your self-important list of "those who
    have contributed to this quality of discussion in newsgroup". Wonder
    what caused the precipitous drop?

    Then again, being included on an "honor roll" that includes Mu is a
    scant honor indeed :)

    Is it just my impression or has the level of your ad hominem attacks
    increased lately? Getting a little frazzled?

    --
    God's Other Humble Servant

    Steve
     
  13. Bob Pastorio

    Bob Pastorio Guest

    levelwave wrote:

    > Bob Pastorio wrote:
    >
    >> Would it be a logical assumption that you want these names to do harm
    >> of some sort? Is there a threat implicit in this comment of yours? Why
    >> would you need these names and addresses? What will you do with them?
    >> How will you try to hurt the people who criticize you? What harm do
    >> you plan on inflicting on the people who see your lunacy for what it is?

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


    What is the predicament you think you see?

    Pastorio
     
  14. Matti Narkia

    Matti Narkia Guest

    Wed, 26 Nov 2003 12:14:33 -0500 in article
    <[email protected]> "Paul E. Lehmann"
    <[email protected]> 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.
    >>

    Perhaps it would also be appropriate to drop a note to the maintainer of
    the quackwatch web site ( http://www.quackwatch.com )?
     
  15. Matti Narkia wrote:

    > Wed, 26 Nov 2003 10:36:39 -0500 in article
    > <[email protected]> "Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD"
    > <[email protected]> wrote:
    >
    > >Matti Narkia wrote:
    > >
    > >> 25 Nov 2003 20:40:37 -0800 in article
    > >> <[email protected]> [email protected]
    > >> (Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD) wrote:
    > >>
    > >> >Matti Narkia <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
    > >> >> Tue, 25 Nov 2003 11:04:18 -0500 in article
    > >>
    > >> >> The issue is that you claimed that Mr. Pastorio had
    > >> >> written here that there is no God.
    > >> >
    > >> >I wrote that Mr. Pastorio would have you believe there is no God.
    > >> >
    > >> The material on your "libel" page shows no evidence of that,

    > >
    > >It does show that Mr. Pastorio would have you believe that I am one who pretends to be a doctor (ie no
    > >medical license... fraud/quack).
    > >

    > No it doesn't, as shown earlier and agreed upon by every participant
    > except you.
    >


    A stampeding herd will run off the edge of the cliff to their deaths. This could number in the hundreds.
    Wouldn't make them right.

    >
    > >> neither have
    > >> I seen evidence of it in his messages in this group.

    > >
    > >Perhaps english being a 5th language for you would be an explanation for your lack of reading comprehension.
    > >

    > So now you are claiming that I have a lack of reading comprehension?


    You seem unable to comprehend things written in plain english at http://www.heartmdphd.com/libel.asp.

    Most folks would infer a lack of english reading comprehension.

    >
    > Remember, this will be recorded in the archives.


    Thank God.

    > You cannot prove that
    > your claim is correct,


    It is *your* claim that english is a fifth language. Check the archives, Matti.

    > but I can prove that it is false:


    Go ahead and prove english is not your fifth language. Should be interesting.

    > during the course
    > of my formal education I have passed several times English comprehension
    > tests and I can do it again in any objective neutral test.


    There probably others out there whose english is their fifth language who are as gifted as you.

    > Think about
    > what that means and its consequences.


    God gave you a gift. You should be thankful instead of bitter.

    > It means that your claim is not only
    > childish behavior, it also fulfills the definition of a libel.


    My recognizing english to be your fifth language should help rather than hurt your reputation.

    > So now you
    > have managed to make a graceful conversion from a self-proclaimed
    > "libel-victim" to a libeler.


    Perhaps you should re-read the english definition of libel. You can find it at the link provided at:

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

    >
    > >>
    > >> Another matter is that I don't understand why you are so obsessed about
    > >> this kind of issue?

    > >
    > >Caring about truth is hardly an obession. Would you characterize your search for truth an obsession?
    > >

    > You don't seem to you care much about truth in your desperate attempts to
    > get the last word in every debate.


    The truth about that is archived.

    > Don't flatter yourself.
    >


    Truth is not about me.

    >
    > >> Suppose someone would have people believe there is no
    > >> God. So what?

    > >
    > >I care about the truth.
    > >

    > See above.
    >


    Please do.

    >
    > >> These are matters of faith and the existence of God has not
    > >> been proved.

    > >
    > >It will be proven to you after you die.
    > >

    > Perhaps, perhaps not. You wouldn't know it.
    >


    I do.

    >
    > >> It's all in faith.

    > >
    > >Do you believe that a person can have faith in the wrong things (ie things that are untrue)?
    > >

    > Absolutely. And _that_ is _not_ a matter of belief. History gives plenty
    > of examples of people who have believed in strange things, which have not
    > been true. How many times for instance the end of the world has been
    > predicted by some weird cults to happen at a certain date, which has then
    > passed peacefully?
    >


    Then it is not all in faith now is it?

    >
    > >> There are different faiths, different
    > >> religions with different Gods.

    > >
    > >Only one of these can be true.
    > >

    > Let me guess, by a strange coincidence it happens to be yours ;-)?


    Truth is not coincidence.

    >
    > That's a view of a fundamentalist and fanatic.


    It would be the view of anyone who is honest with himself/herself.

    >
    >
    > Have you ever heard of ecumenicalism?


    Yes.

    Here's the definition:

    http://www.hyperdictionary.com/dictionary/ecumenicalism

    > If not, find out about it. That's a
    > start. Your current religious "thinking" is rather immature and even
    > dangerous.


    Truth seems dangerous to the untruthful.

    > Later you could try to find out about other religions.


    I know about other religions.

    > Try
    > buddhism (although strictly interpreted buddhism is not actually a
    > religion, but a path to internal development end enlightenment, IMHO), for
    > example.


    My neighbor, Mozz, and I have been chatting about buddhism.

    > To guide you in your way into deeper understanding of religious
    > experiences I suggest you start by reading the book
    >
    > _The Varieties of Religious Experience_ by William James
    >


    Why not go to the source? Firsthand is always better than thirdhand.

    >
    > >> There are agnostics, there are atheists.

    > >
    > >There are many paths. Only one is true.
    > >

    > That's a fanatic, fundamentalist, dangerous view, which has lead to
    > numerous wars and to enormous amount of violence and suffering.


    Anger and obsessions lead to wars. Truth does not. Folks who have Christ in their heart, love their neighbors.

    >
    > >>
    > >> These are all legal and accepted positions in the countries with the
    > >> freedom of religion. What is your problem?

    > >
    > >I care about the truth.
    > >

    > You haven't proved that.


    Don't need to.

    > Your behavior in this group shows otherwise.


    Not for those with good english reading comprehension.

    >
    > >> >
    > >> >> When questioned, you have failed to
    > >> >> prove your claim.
    > >> >
    > >> >I directed you directly the source of Mr. Pastorio's writings where
    > >> >the above can be deduced.
    > >> >
    > >> It cannot.

    > >
    > >Not for one without reading comprehension.
    > >

    > I haven't seen those kind of people in this newsgroup. Have you?
    >


    Didn't you write earlier that english is your *fifth* language?

    > >>

    > [snip]
    > >> >
    > >> >Allegedly? That's the wonderful thing about archived Usenet. There
    > >> >is no more alleged. Do you want the link to where folks get the
    > >> >distinct impression that Mr. Pastorio would have people believe there
    > >> >is no God?
    > >> >
    > >> Yes, please.

    > >
    > >Are you certain?
    > >

    > I already asked for it. I take it that you don't have any then?


    Here you go:

    http://tinyurl.com/wo85

    You are welcome. Let me know if you need more links.


    >
    > >> >> >>

    > [snip]
    > >> In chronological order
    > >> English is the fifth language I learned. I'm a Finn living in Finland, and
    > >> my mother tongue is Finnish. Does that create a problem for you?

    > >
    > >No. It does shed some light on your apparent english reading comprehension problems.
    > >

    > As I explained you earlier, you cannot prove your claim, but I can prove
    > it false. This makes you a libeler. How do you feel about that?


    The truth remains that you have written that english is your *fifth* language.

    Humbly,

    Andrew

    --
    Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
    Board-Certified Cardiologist
    http://www.heartmdphd.com/
     
  16. "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. <Paul looks so crestfallen. Too bad. Back
    to the peanut gallery, he goes>

    Humbly,

    Andrew

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

    Steve Guest

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

    <overconfident blathering snipped>

    > Back to the peanut gallery, he goes


    You know, Chung, I'm old enough to have actually _been_ in the original
    "Peanut Gallery"... and you know what we watched? A clown and a wooden
    headed puppet.

    Seems like old times here watching you and Mu :)

    --
    God's Other Humble Servant in the new Peanut Gallery

    Steve
     
  18. Steve

    Steve Guest

    On Wed, 26 Nov 2003 12:58:49 -0500, Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD wrote
    (in message <[email protected]>):


    >>> Perhaps english being a 5th language for you would be an explanation for
    >>> your lack of reading comprehension.
    >>>


    > It is *your* claim that english is a fifth language. Check the archives,
    > Matti.


    > Go ahead and prove english is not your fifth language. Should be
    > interesting.


    > There probably others out there whose english is their fifth language who
    > are as gifted as you.


    Heh heh... you're English could use some work itself, Chungy-boy.

    >
    > Didn't you write earlier that english is your *fifth* language?
    >


    >
    > The truth remains that you have written that english is your *fifth*
    > language.
    >
    > Humpty Dumptily,
    >
    > Andrew


    Chung, you throw this out as some kind of defect... most people would
    be _impressed_ that someone could learn five languages... how many do
    _you_ know, not counting "Chung-speak"?

    You also seem to be saying that knowing five languages is evidence of
    non-comprehension of the fifth.

    One wonders if you comprehend anything in any language. I think you
    have been on the Kool-Aid Diet too long.

    --
    God's Other Humble Servant

    Steve
     
  19. "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? Do they know about your dismissal and
    your lack of hospital privilidges? You didn't lie on your applicaton, did
    you?



    <Paul looks so crestfallen. Too bad. Back
    > to the peanut gallery, he goes>
    >
    > Humbly,
    >
    > Andrew
    >
    > --
    > Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
    > Board-Certified Cardiologist
    > http://www.heartmdphd.com/
    >
    >
     
  20. Matti Narkia wrote:

    > Wed, 26 Nov 2003 12:14:33 -0500 in article
    > <[email protected]> "Paul E. Lehmann"
    > <[email protected]> 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.
    > >>

    > Perhaps it would also be appropriate to drop a note to the maintainer of
    > the quackwatch web site ( http://www.quackwatch.com )?


    Is it your claim that I am a quack?

    Just want you to be clearly understood, that's all (being that english is your
    *fifth* language).

    Humbly,

    Andrew

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