General fitness, health and nutrition · Public discussion

Re: Wow

Started by Mu · · Last activity · 97 posts · 712 views

Thread navigation

Jump through the discussion

Go to the original post, the replies on this page, or the latest preserved contribution.

Thread details

What we know about this thread

Original section
General fitness, health and nutrition
Published
12 April 2007
Last activity
18 April 2007
Original author
Mu
Posts
97
Discussion status
Public discussion
Total views
712
Views / 30 days
0

The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Showing posts 21–40 of 97
Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Text size
  1. "Mu" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:
    Hollywood said:

    Mu as poster vs. performance artist? I think of him more as a drive-by
    shooter. Little commitment, large aggression, big ego, sense of
    invincibility. Could Mu be a Blood or Crip?

    I am amazed at how much you criticize Mu and how little you actually
    know of Mu.

    Wait, no I'm not.

    Quoted message said:

    In all honesty, I don't think Mu = Chung.

    Put butter on that /waffle/, thanks.

    Quoted message said:

    I think they two individuals
    deeply in love with each other and some infantile conception of a
    higher power.

    Let's get this accurate, for once, for one time in your posts about Mu.
    Once.

    There is no "higher power", I believe definitively and completely in God
    who made His Presence known as Jesus Christ.

    then,you believe in nothing.

  2. Mu said:

    On 13 Apr 2007 07:42:02 -0700, Hollywood wrote:

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    In all honesty, I don't think Mu = Chung.

    Put butter on that /waffle/, thanks.

    I don't get how a loose comment in your direction when I consistently
    suggest that you and chung are lovers, is a real waffle. Let's suggest
    it's not because you are low regard so I don't pay attention to what I
    say to you.

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    I think they two individuals
    deeply in love with each other and some infantile conception of a
    higher power.

    Let's get this accurate, for once, for one time in your posts about Mu.
    Once.

    There is no "higher power", I believe definitively and completely in God
    who made His Presence known as Jesus Christ.

    You believe in the Lord God, who is both powerful and above everyone.
    That would be a higher power. And I contend that Chung's conception is
    infantile. Your's is less forward, but no less infantile.

    Quoted message said:

    Note the lack of butter.

    Butter is good for you. It's the carbs that are killing you, not the
    sat fat.

  3. "Mu" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:
    Cubit said:

    Your 2 pounds of Almonds is not very inspiring.

    Cubit, Usenet history is chock full of people who have tried to disown
    the Two Pound Diet (2PD) saying "Well I can eat two pounds of <insert
    chocolate, cement, fat, frogs, etc> and never gain weight? Hogwash!"

    Well that is because the diet says "2PD". This rather vague diet does not
    factor in the caloric content of foods, hence such questions.

    Quoted message said:

    The truth is that you or anyone else can cut their consumption gradually
    to 2PD and the weight will come off and stay off.

    Wouldn't a 1PD diet or a 1.5PD diet work better than the 2PD diet? Just
    wondering...

  4. satan via a sockpuppet (demon) said:
    brother 'Mu said:
    neighbor Cubit said:

    Your 2 pounds of Almonds is not very inspiring.

    Cubit, Usenet history is chock full of people who have tried to disown
    the Two Pound Diet (2PD) saying "Well I can eat two pounds of <insert
    chocolate, cement, fat, frogs, etc> and never gain weight? Hogwash!"

    Well that is because the diet says "2PD". This rather vague diet does not
    factor in the caloric content of foods, hence such questions.

    The 2PD-OMER Approach is not a diet. Instead, the Approach can be
    used with any diet, which are instructions about **what** to eat and
    not **how much** to eat.

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    The truth is that you or anyone else can cut their consumption gradually
    to 2PD and the weight will come off and stay off.

    Wouldn't a 1PD diet or a 1.5PD diet work better than the 2PD diet? Just
    wondering...

    The 2 pounds (16 oz + 16 oz as described by Exodus 16:16) is by GOD's
    design to be the optimal amount. Any amount more or less would not be
    optimal and we would be less hungry.

    "HE humbled you making you hungry... to teach you that man does not
    live on bread alone but on every word that comes from the mouth of the
    LORD." -- Moses (Deuteronomy 8:3)

    "Blessed are you who hunger now for you will be satisfied." -- LORD
    Jesus Christ (Luke 6:21)

    Amen.

    Marana tha

    Prayerfully in Jesus' ever-lasting love,

    Andrew <><
    --
    Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
    http://EmoryCardiology.com

    May HIS immortal brethren pray for our dying mortal friends and
    neighbors:
    http://HeartMDPhD.com/Convicts

    In memory of our dearly departed Bob(this one) Pastorio:
    http://HeartMDPhD.com/Convicts/Bob

    As for knowing who are the very elect, these you will know by the
    unconditional love they have for everyone including their enemies
    (Matthew 5:44-45, 1 Corinthians 13:3, James 2:14-17).
    http://HeartMDPhD.com/Love

    The Official SMC FAQ List:
    http://HeartMDPhD.com/TheTruth/FAQ

  5. "Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:
    satan via a sockpuppet (demon) said:
    brother 'Mu said:

    neighbor Cubit wrote:

    > Your 2 pounds of Almonds is not very inspiring.

    Cubit, Usenet history is chock full of people who have tried to disown
    the Two Pound Diet (2PD) saying "Well I can eat two pounds of <insert
    chocolate, cement, fat, frogs, etc> and never gain weight? Hogwash!"

    Well that is because the diet says "2PD". This rather vague diet does
    not
    factor in the caloric content of foods, hence such questions.

    The 2PD-OMER Approach is not a diet. Instead, the Approach can be
    used with any diet, which are instructions about **what** to eat and
    not **how much** to eat.

    Appropriate calorific restriction with cardiovascular exercise would be a
    more meaningful approach. More importantly there a lot of evidence to also
    suggest that calorific restriction is the way to live longer. Perhaps
    tailoring your approach further could add to its credibility.

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    The truth is that you or anyone else can cut their consumption
    gradually
    to 2PD and the weight will come off and stay off.

    Wouldn't a 1PD diet or a 1.5PD diet work better than the 2PD diet? Just
    wondering...

    The 2 pounds (16 oz + 16 oz as described by Exodus 16:16) is by GOD's
    design to be the optimal amount.

    Quoted message said:

    Any amount more or less would not be
    optimal and we would be less hungry.

    "Less hungry" is very subjective. Perhaps this amount (2PD) is optimal for
    *you* and keeps you less hungry? There is no evidence to suggest that this
    amount is optimal for an athelete, a bedridden patient, or an infant.

    Your assumption that 2PD is optimal for everyone is therefore flawed as it
    does not take into account an individual's specific metabolism and
    requirements. It appears to be construed to only serve religious agenda.

  6. "Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:
    satan via a sockpuppet (demon) said:
    brother 'Mu said:

    neighbor Cubit wrote:

    > Your 2 pounds of Almonds is not very inspiring.

    Cubit, Usenet history is chock full of people who have tried to disown
    the Two Pound Diet (2PD) saying "Well I can eat two pounds of <insert
    chocolate, cement, fat, frogs, etc> and never gain weight? Hogwash!"

    Well that is because the diet says "2PD". This rather vague diet does
    not
    factor in the caloric content of foods, hence such questions.

    The 2PD-OMER Approach is not a diet. Instead, the Approach can be
    used with any diet, which are instructions about **what** to eat and
    not **how much** to eat.

    Appropriate calorific restriction with cardiovascular exercise would be a
    more meaningful approach. More importantly there a lot of evidence to also
    suggest that calorific restriction is the way to live longer. Perhaps
    tailoring your approach further could add to its credibility.

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    The truth is that you or anyone else can cut their consumption
    gradually
    to 2PD and the weight will come off and stay off.

    Wouldn't a 1PD diet or a 1.5PD diet work better than the 2PD diet? Just
    wondering...

    The 2 pounds (16 oz + 16 oz as described by Exodus 16:16) is by GOD's
    design to be the optimal amount.

    Quoted message said:

    Any amount more or less would not be
    optimal and we would be less hungry.

    "Less hungry" is very subjective. Perhaps this amount (2PD) is optimal for
    *you* and keeps you less hungry? There is no evidence to suggest that this
    amount is optimal for an athelete, a bedridden patient, or an infant.

    Your assumption that 2PD is optimal for everyone is therefore flawed as it
    does not take into account an individual's specific metabolism and
    requirements. It appears to be construed to only serve religious agenda.

  7. The two pound diet has no basis in science and ignores the equally to
    calorie restriction factors of exercise and sound choice of nutrition.

    I have followed it from the beginning when mr. chung was confused by
    watching a movie where mountain climbers consumed two pounds of food per
    day. Confused because it is dehydrated energy dense foods easier to
    carry up mountains for an energy intensive activity. That same diet
    would almost surely cause most people to gain weight and become obese.
    As I recall from calculating a similar diet it would be about 5000
    calories a day..

    This obvious fact was over looked because soon thereafter given him
    personally he was also confused by an account in scripture of people
    eating what he took mistakenly as two pounds of food a day. He confused
    a measure of weight there that was in fact a measure of dry grain
    volume. It too was not far from 5000 calories if that much grain was
    consumed each day.

    But fear not, by this time he was convinced that by divine direction he
    was correct and that two pounds of food regardless of all other factors
    was a divine directive for good health. Regardless of what was eaten
    and how many calories consumed it would be divinely adjusted to each
    person's nutritional needs.

    Then when added internal belly fat was becoming widely discussed for its
    adverse metabolic activity, the two pound diet was seen as the cure for
    all
    metabolic related disorders, a divine cure no doubt given him personaly.
    This fat "vat" was at root of all manner of disorder for which the two
    pound diet was the treatment, nay the cure.

    Thus one can see the trash science, the confusion, the willfull
    distortions, the filtering of information, the illogical leaps made, all
    firmly cemented in his mind as a divine plan in which he was to play a
    central and vital role in its pronouncement to the world. Atendant with
    world wide acclaim and medical praise no doubt and purchase of tourist
    books for trips to sweden high on the must do list.

  8. On Apr 13, 9:41 pm, "Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" <[email hidden]>

    Quoted message said:
    satan via a sockpuppet (demon) said:
    brother 'Mu said:

    neighbor Cubit wrote:

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    > Your 2 pounds of Almonds is not very inspiring.

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    Cubit, Usenet history is chock full of people who have tried to disown
    the Two Pound Diet (2PD) saying "Well I can eat two pounds of <insert
    chocolate, cement, fat, frogs, etc> and never gain weight? Hogwash!"

    Quoted message said:

    Well that is because the diet says "2PD". This rather vague diet does not
    factor in the caloric content of foods, hence such questions.

    The 2PD-OMER Approach is not a diet.

    I put you straight on this already, liar.

  9. In article 'Andrew B. Chung said:
    satan via a sockpuppet (demon) said:
    brother 'Mu said:

    neighbor Cubit wrote:

    > Your 2 pounds of Almonds is not very inspiring.

    Cubit, Usenet history is chock full of people who have tried to disown
    the Two Pound Diet (2PD) saying "Well I can eat two pounds of <insert
    chocolate, cement, fat, frogs, etc> and never gain weight? Hogwash!"

    Well that is because the diet says "2PD". This rather vague diet does not
    factor in the caloric content of foods, hence such questions.

    The 2PD-OMER Approach is not a diet. Instead, the Approach can be
    used with any diet, which are instructions about **what** to eat and
    not **how much** to eat.

    "diet", OED definition #3:

    Prescribed course of food, restricted in kind or limited in quantity,

    --c ary

  10. Epinephrine said:

    "Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:
    satan via a sockpuppet (demon) said:

    brother "Mu" wrote:
    > neighbor Cubit wrote:
    >
    >> Your 2 pounds of Almonds is not very inspiring.
    >
    > Cubit, Usenet history is chock full of people who have tried to disown
    > the Two Pound Diet (2PD) saying "Well I can eat two pounds of <insert
    > chocolate, cement, fat, frogs, etc> and never gain weight? Hogwash!"

    Well that is because the diet says "2PD". This rather vague diet does
    not
    factor in the caloric content of foods, hence such questions.

    The 2PD-OMER Approach is not a diet. Instead, the Approach can be
    used with any diet, which are instructions about **what** to eat and
    not **how much** to eat.

    Appropriate calorific restriction with cardiovascular exercise would be a
    more meaningful approach. More importantly there a lot of evidence to also
    suggest that calorific restriction is the way to live longer. Perhaps
    tailoring your approach further could add to its credibility.

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    > The truth is that you or anyone else can cut their consumption
    > gradually
    > to 2PD and the weight will come off and stay off.

    Wouldn't a 1PD diet or a 1.5PD diet work better than the 2PD diet? Just
    wondering...

    The 2 pounds (16 oz + 16 oz as described by Exodus 16:16) is by GOD's
    design to be the optimal amount.

    Quoted message said:

    Any amount more or less would not be
    optimal and we would be less hungry.

    "Less hungry" is very subjective. Perhaps this amount (2PD) is optimal for
    *you* and keeps you less hungry? There is no evidence to suggest that this
    amount is optimal for an athelete, a bedridden patient, or an infant.

    Your assumption that 2PD is optimal for everyone is therefore flawed as it
    does not take into account an individual's specific metabolism and
    requirements. It appears to be construed to only serve religious agenda.

    Ah, but you see, Dr. Chung has informed us that:

    The 2PD-OMER Approach is not a diet. It has been
    studied in more than 625,550 people worldwide

    -- car

  11. convicted neighbor Cary Kittrell said:
    Andrew said:
    satan via a sockpuppet (demon) said:

    brother "Mu" wrote:
    > neighbor Cubit wrote:
    >
    >> Your 2 pounds of Almonds is not very inspiring.
    >
    > Cubit, Usenet history is chock full of people who have tried to disown
    > the Two Pound Diet (2PD) saying "Well I can eat two pounds of <insert
    > chocolate, cement, fat, frogs, etc> and never gain weight? Hogwash!"

    Well that is because the diet says "2PD". This rather vague diet does not
    factor in the caloric content of foods, hence such questions.

    The 2PD-OMER Approach is not a diet. Instead, the Approach can be
    used with any diet, which are instructions about **what** to eat and
    not **how much** to eat.

    "diet", OED definition #3:

    Prescribed course of food, restricted in kind or limited in quantity,

    There is no prescribed course of food with the 2PD-OMER Approach.

    The former (diet) is left up to the supervising doctor to prescribe.

    For example, it is likely that a diabetic would be prescribed the ADA
    diabetic diet while using the 2PD-OMER Approach.

    May GOD bless you.

    Prayerfully in Jesus' ever-lasting love,

    Andrew <><
    --
    Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
    http://EmoryCardiology.com

    May HIS immortal brethren pray for our dying mortal friends and
    neighbors:
    http://HeartMDPhD.com/Convicts

    In memory of our dearly departed Bob(this one) Pastorio:
    http://HeartMDPhD.com/Convicts/Bob

    As for knowing who are the very elect, these you will know by the
    unconditional love they have for everyone including their enemies
    (Matthew 5:44-45, 1 Corinthians 13:3, James 2:14-17).
    http://HeartMDPhD.com/Love

    The Official SMC FAQ List:
    http://HeartMDPhD.com/TheTruth/FAQ

  12. "Cary Kittrell" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:


    Epinephrine said:

    "Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    The 2 pounds (16 oz + 16 oz as described by Exodus 16:16) is by GOD's
    design to be the optimal amount.

    Quoted message said:

    Any amount more or less would not be
    optimal and we would be less hungry.

    "Less hungry" is very subjective. Perhaps this amount (2PD) is optimal
    for
    *you* and keeps you less hungry? There is no evidence to suggest that
    this
    amount is optimal for an athelete, a bedridden patient, or an infant.

    Your assumption that 2PD is optimal for everyone is therefore flawed as
    it
    does not take into account an individual's specific metabolism and
    requirements. It appears to be construed to only serve religious agenda.

    Ah, but you see, Dr. Chung has informed us that:

    The 2PD-OMER Approach is not a diet. It has been
    studied in more than 625,550 people worldwide

    Surely if such a significant number of people participated, it would be
    worth reporting in any medical journal or christian magazine, but it is my
    understanding that Chung has not done so. Why, I wonder!

    As this approach clearly does not have any scientific basis whatsoever,
    would it be taken seriously by the scientific world? Surely anectdotal
    evidence alone wouldn't count - perhaps he would care to share the results
    and methods used in this extensive intercontinental study?

  13. In article 'Andrew B. Chung said:
    convicted neighbor Cary Kittrell said:
    Andrew said:

    satan via a sockpuppet (demon) wrote:
    > brother "Mu" wrote:
    > > neighbor Cubit wrote:
    > >
    > >> Your 2 pounds of Almonds is not very inspiring.
    > >
    > > Cubit, Usenet history is chock full of people who have tried to disown
    > > the Two Pound Diet (2PD) saying "Well I can eat two pounds of <insert
    > > chocolate, cement, fat, frogs, etc> and never gain weight? Hogwash!"
    >
    > Well that is because the diet says "2PD". This rather vague diet does not
    > factor in the caloric content of foods, hence such questions.

    The 2PD-OMER Approach is not a diet. Instead, the Approach can be
    used with any diet, which are instructions about **what** to eat and
    not **how much** to eat.

    "diet", OED definition #3:

    Prescribed course of food, restricted in kind or limited in quantity,

    There is no prescribed course of food with the 2PD-OMER Approach.

    And of course everyone else understands that the act of
    prescribing in the above phrase refers either to 1) prescribing
    limits of kind, or 2) prescribing limits of amount.

    -- cary

  14. Epinephrine said:

    "Cary Kittrell" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:


    Epinephrine said:

    "Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    > The 2 pounds (16 oz + 16 oz as described by Exodus 16:16) is by GOD's
    > design to be the optimal amount.

    > Any amount more or less would not be
    > optimal and we would be less hungry.

    "Less hungry" is very subjective. Perhaps this amount (2PD) is optimal
    for
    *you* and keeps you less hungry? There is no evidence to suggest that
    this
    amount is optimal for an athelete, a bedridden patient, or an infant.

    Your assumption that 2PD is optimal for everyone is therefore flawed as
    it
    does not take into account an individual's specific metabolism and
    requirements. It appears to be construed to only serve religious agenda.

    Ah, but you see, Dr. Chung has informed us that:

    The 2PD-OMER Approach is not a diet. It has been
    studied in more than 625,550 people worldwide

    Surely if such a significant number of people participated, it would be
    worth reporting in any medical journal or christian magazine, but it is my
    understanding that Chung has not done so. Why, I wonder!

    Quoted message said:

    As this approach clearly does not have any scientific basis whatsoever,
    would it be taken seriously by the scientific world? Surely anectdotal
    evidence alone wouldn't count - perhaps he would care to share the results
    and methods used in this extensive intercontinental study?

    Oh, let's just say that it has been suggested that nearly all of the
    "participants" in Dr. Chung's study were the children of Israel,
    wandering hither and yon (generally more yonly than hitherly)
    all those years.

    If so, one can only wonder where Dr. Chung obtained all the
    requisite information on the state of their health. All of their
    healths.

    -- cary

  15. "There is no prescribed course of food with the 2PD-OMER Approach.

    The former (diet) is left up to the supervising doctor to prescribe."

    Of course, it is a poor gimic of a calorie restriction diet. Just
    ignore it, a doc will provide plans with calorie restriction anyway with
    weight or volume as the guide for meal plans. The real diet from the
    doc will also consider nutrition which the two pound diet does not and
    stress adding exercise.

    I just read about a study where exercise caused more belly fat loss then
    calorie restriction alone.

    One can just do a time restricted meal to also limit calories.

    The two pound diet, in all its many and changing flavors over the past
    few years is a scientific flop, trash science.

  16. "Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:
    convicted neighbor Cary Kittrell said:
    Andrew said:

    satan via a sockpuppet (demon) wrote:
    > brother "Mu" wrote:
    > > neighbor Cubit wrote:
    > >
    > >> Your 2 pounds of Almonds is not very inspiring.
    > >
    > > Cubit, Usenet history is chock full of people who have tried to
    > > disown
    > > the Two Pound Diet (2PD) saying "Well I can eat two pounds of
    > > <insert
    > > chocolate, cement, fat, frogs, etc> and never gain weight?
    > > Hogwash!"
    >
    > Well that is because the diet says "2PD". This rather vague diet
    > does not
    > factor in the caloric content of foods, hence such questions.

    The 2PD-OMER Approach is not a diet. Instead, the Approach can be
    used with any diet, which are instructions about **what** to eat and
    not **how much** to eat.

    "diet", OED definition #3:

    Prescribed course of food, restricted in kind or limited in quantity,

    There is no prescribed course of food with the 2PD-OMER Approach.

    The former (diet) is left up to the supervising doctor to prescribe.

    A prescribed diet would include the 'type of food' and the 'amount' to
    consume. Just like a prescribed drug has to be taken at an appropriate dose
    to have a beneficial effect, e.g. 1 tablet of X to be taken two times a day,
    or 2 tablets of Y to be taken once daily, or 1 tablets of Y to be taken as
    required, or 5mg of drug Z per kg of body weight.

    Your approach suggests benefit is achieved only at a fixed dose of 2 pounds
    no matter what the prescribed course of food is, which would imply that the
    2lbs is the benefit-determining factor of the prescribed course of food.

    Quoted message said:

    For example, it is likely that a diabetic would be prescribed the ADA
    diabetic diet while using the 2PD-OMER Approach.

    There is no point in carrying a scale, then weighing 1.5 pounds or 2 pounds
    of a certain prescribed course, if one can adhere to recommended guidelines
    and making appropriate lifestyle changes, which have a proven benefit.

    The magic dose of "2 lbs" does not have any benefit, unless of course you
    can come up with something more concrete than your anecdotal evidence.

  17. Quoted message said:

    The two pound diet has no basis in science and ignores the equally to
    calorie restriction factors of exercise and sound choice of nutrition.

    I have followed it from the beginning when mr. chung was confused by
    watching a movie where mountain climbers consumed two pounds of food per
    day. Confused because it is dehydrated energy dense foods easier to
    carry up mountains for an energy intensive activity. That same diet
    would almost surely cause most people to gain weight and become obese.
    As I recall from calculating a similar diet it would be about 5000
    calories a day..

    This obvious fact was over looked because soon thereafter given him
    personally he was also confused by an account in scripture of people
    eating what he took mistakenly as two pounds of food a day. He confused
    a measure of weight there that was in fact a measure of dry grain
    volume. It too was not far from 5000 calories if that much grain was
    consumed each day.

    But fear not, by this time he was convinced that by divine direction he
    was correct and that two pounds of food regardless of all other factors
    was a divine directive for good health. Regardless of what was eaten
    and how many calories consumed it would be divinely adjusted to each
    person's nutritional needs.

    Then when added internal belly fat was becoming widely discussed for its
    adverse metabolic activity, the two pound diet was seen as the cure for
    all
    metabolic related disorders, a divine cure no doubt given him personaly.
    This fat "vat" was at root of all manner of disorder for which the two
    pound diet was the treatment, nay the cure.

    Thus one can see the trash science, the confusion, the willfull
    distortions, the filtering of information, the illogical leaps made, all
    firmly cemented in his mind as a divine plan in which he was to play a
    central and vital role in its pronouncement to the world. Atendant with
    world wide acclaim and medical praise no doubt and purchase of tourist
    books for trips to sweden high on the must do list.

    An excellent summary. Note that Chung is also confused by the fact
    that muscle mass is denser than body fat. He also fails to understand
    conservation of energy; during a three-week European grand tour bicycle
    race (like the Tour de France), riders will lose weight over the course
    of the event despite eating many thousands of calories per day. The
    energy expended by these elite athletes is that great. If they were
    "hungry", as he ignorantly asserts, they would simply not be able to
    complete a stage of the race. In fact, some riders do not and are
    forced to withdraw because of what is called "bonking" (running out of
    energy).

    --
    Supreme Leader of the Brainwashed Followers of Art Deco

    "Still suffering from reading comprehension problems, Deco?
    The section is clearly attributed to Art Deco, not to you, Deco."
    -- Dr. David Tholen

    "Who is "David Tholen", Daedalus? Still suffering from
    attribution problems?"
    -- Dr. David Tholen

  18. "Cary Kittrell" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:


    Epinephrine said:

    "Cary Kittrell" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:


    "Epinephrine" <[email hidden]> writes:
    >
    >
    > "Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    > news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    > > The 2 pounds (16 oz + 16 oz as described by Exodus 16:16) is by
    > > GOD's
    > > design to be the optimal amount.
    >
    > > Any amount more or less would not be
    > > optimal and we would be less hungry.
    >
    > "Less hungry" is very subjective. Perhaps this amount (2PD) is
    > optimal
    > for
    > *you* and keeps you less hungry? There is no evidence to suggest that
    > this
    > amount is optimal for an athelete, a bedridden patient, or an infant.
    >
    > Your assumption that 2PD is optimal for everyone is therefore flawed
    > as
    > it
    > does not take into account an individual's specific metabolism and
    > requirements. It appears to be construed to only serve religious
    > agenda.

    Ah, but you see, Dr. Chung has informed us that:

    The 2PD-OMER Approach is not a diet. It has been
    studied in more than 625,550 people worldwide

    Surely if such a significant number of people participated, it would be
    worth reporting in any medical journal or christian magazine, but it is
    my
    understanding that Chung has not done so. Why, I wonder!

    Quoted message said:

    As this approach clearly does not have any scientific basis whatsoever,
    would it be taken seriously by the scientific world? Surely anectdotal
    evidence alone wouldn't count - perhaps he would care to share the
    results
    and methods used in this extensive intercontinental study?

    Oh, let's just say that it has been suggested that nearly all of the
    "participants" in Dr. Chung's study were the children of Israel,
    wandering hither and yon (generally more yonly than hitherly)
    all those years.

    Quite unlikely as I doubt the participants had any scales at the time.

    Quoted message said:

    If so, one can only wonder where Dr. Chung obtained all the
    requisite information on the state of their health. All of their
    healths.

    I don't think health status of an individual matters when it comes to the 2
    pound approach.

    It is my understanding that as long as a supervising doctor has prescribed a
    certain food, the magic dose of "2 pounds" would do the miracle.

  19. Hollywood said:
    Father Haskell said:

    On Apr 12, 3:31 am, "Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" <[email hidden]>
    wrote:

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    brother Mu wrote:
    > On Wed, 11 Apr 2007 17:14:40 -0800, Cubit wrote:

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    > > Your 2 pounds of Almonds is not very inspiring.

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    > Cubit, Usenet history is chock full of people who have tried to disown
    > the Two Pound Diet (2PD) saying "Well I can eat two pounds of <insert
    > chocolate, cement, fat, frogs, etc> and never gain weight? Hogwash!"

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    > The truth is that you or anyone else can cut their consumption gradually
    > to 2PD and the weight will come off and stay off.

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    > You will get tired of almonds, candy, or whatever. Fat content will
    > moderate itself.

    Quoted message said:

    2PD of asbestos insulation waste.

    2 Lbs daily, canned whoop ass?

    2PD Canned Squirrel Gut with Ptomaine.

  20. On Apr 13, 4:41 pm, "Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" <[email hidden]>

    Quoted message said:
    satan via a sockpuppet (demon) said:
    brother 'Mu said:

    neighbor Cubit wrote:

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    > Your 2 pounds of Almonds is not very inspiring.

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    Cubit, Usenet history is chock full of people who have tried to disown
    the Two Pound Diet (2PD) saying "Well I can eat two pounds of <insert
    chocolate, cement, fat, frogs, etc> and never gain weight? Hogwash!"

    Quoted message said:

    Well that is because the diet says "2PD". This rather vague diet does not
    factor in the caloric content of foods, hence such questions.

    The 2PD-OMER Approach is not a diet. Instead, the Approach can be
    used with any diet, which are instructions about **what** to eat and
    not **how much** to eat.

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    The truth is that you or anyone else can cut their consumption gradually
    to 2PD and the weight will come off and stay off.

    Quoted message said:

    Wouldn't a 1PD diet or a 1.5PD diet work better than the 2PD diet? Just
    wondering...

    The 2 pounds (16 oz + 16 oz as described by Exodus 16:16) is by GOD's
    design to be the optimal amount. Any amount more or less would not be
    optimal and we would be less hungry.

    You read it here. God prefers the Imperial system of weights and
    measures.

Active in the last 60 minutes

Active in this thread

0 users · 0 guests ·0 bots ·0 total

No signed-in users are active right now.

No known search crawlers active right now.