WHEN YOU SEE A TOTAL ECLIPSE.......

In article <[email hidden]>, Total Eclipse

Of The M_u_n said:

.............the Mu_n is not gone but only away for a while.

Peace in Christ,

Mu

http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap970827.html
Lift well, Eat less, Walk fast, Live long.

Peace at last-C----!

--
Diva
*****
The Best Man for the Job May Be A Woman

Carol you always make me laugh. LOL
Roxan
"Carol Frilegh" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

In article <[email hidden]>, Total Eclipse

Of The M_u_n said:

.............the Mu_n is not gone but only away for a while.

Peace in Christ,

Mu

http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap970827.html
Lift well, Eat less, Walk fast, Live long.

Peace at last-C----!

--
Diva
*****
The Best Man for the Job May Be A Woman

In article <[email hidden]>, roxan

Quoted message said:

Carol you always make me laugh. LOL
Roxan

When the Mu_n hits your eye like a big pizza pie it's probably from a
big bird like a Roose-ter!

--
Diva
*****
The Best Man for the Job May Be A Woman

Only if it is a 2Lb pizza...

--
.....( remove the " 6 " to e-mail reply )

"Carol Frilegh" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

In article <[email hidden]>, roxan

Quoted message said:

Carol you always make me laugh. LOL
Roxan

When the Mu_n hits your eye like a big pizza pie it's probably from a
big bird like a Roose-ter!

--
Diva
*****
The Best Man for the Job May Be A Woman

Tim Kettring said:

Only if it is a 2Lb pizza...

2Lb pizza = about 3300 calories. Some diet. NOT

In article <[email hidden]>,

Quoted message said:

Tim Kettring said:

Only if it is a 2Lb pizza...

2Lb pizza = about 3300 calories. Some diet. NOT

OT Watched "Moonstruck" again on TV two nights ago. What a wonderful
film!

--
Diva
*****
The Best Man for the Job May Be A Woman

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Only if it is a 2Lb pizza...

2Lb pizza = about 3300 calories. Some diet. NOT

A large active male could lose weight on 3300 calories.

--
Ron Ritzman
http://www.panix.com/~ritzlart
Smart people can figure out my email address

Ron Ritzman said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Only if it is a 2Lb pizza...

2Lb pizza = about 3300 calories. Some diet. NOT

A large active male could lose weight on 3300 calories.

That means that the 2Lb diet is good for loggers chopping down trees
all day. They really NEED a diet. Wasn't this dreamed up from climbing
Everest? They need a diet like this too. NOT

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

Quoted message said:

Ron Ritzman said:

Quoted message said:

>Only if it is a 2Lb pizza...

2Lb pizza = about 3300 calories. Some diet. NOT

A large active male could lose weight on 3300 calories.

That means that the 2Lb diet is good for loggers chopping down trees
all day. They really NEED a diet. Wasn't this dreamed up from climbing
Everest?

No.

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 Katchen
(2) Report Katchen 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

On Fri, 7 Nov 2003 17:22:46 -0500, Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD wrote
(in message <[email hidden]>😉:

Quoted message said:

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

Quoted message said:

Ron Ritzman said:

On Thu, 06 Nov 2003 07:07:56 -0800, [email hidden] wrote:

>> Only if it is a 2Lb pizza...
>
> 2Lb pizza = about 3300 calories. Some diet. NOT

A large active male could lose weight on 3300 calories.

That means that the 2Lb diet is good for loggers chopping down trees
all day. They really NEED a diet. Wasn't this dreamed up from climbing
Everest?

No.

Yawn... here we go again. My macro can outlast your macro.

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

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

Quoted message said:

[email hidden] wrote in message

news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Ron Ritzman said:

On Thu, 06 Nov 2003 07:07:56 -0800, [email hidden] wrote:

>>Only if it is a 2Lb pizza...
>
>2Lb pizza = about 3300 calories. Some diet. NOT

A large active male could lose weight on 3300 calories.

That means that the 2Lb diet is good for loggers chopping down trees
all day. They really NEED a diet. Wasn't this dreamed up from climbing
Everest?

No.

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 Katchen
(2) Report Katchen 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

You're an idiot and a quack. There's no way you should be giving any type of
medical advice. That's why you don't have access to a hospital, and why you
were fired in Florida. This is also why you troll usenet for unsuspecting
"patients". You bought your credentials on the internet. Shame on you.

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

Quoted message said:

[email hidden] wrote in message

news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Ron Ritzman said:

On Thu, 06 Nov 2003 07:07:56 -0800, [email hidden] wrote:

>>Only if it is a 2Lb pizza...
>
>2Lb pizza = about 3300 calories. Some diet. NOT

A large active male could lose weight on 3300 calories.

That means that the 2Lb diet is good for loggers chopping down trees
all day. They really NEED a diet. Wasn't this dreamed up from climbing
Everest?

No.

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 Katchen
(2) Report Katchen 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

You're an idiot and a quack. There's no way you should be giving any type of
medical advice. That's why you don't have access to a hospital, and why you
were fired in Florida. This is also why you troll usenet for unsuspecting
"patients". You bought your credentials on the internet. Shame on you.

JC Der Koenig said:

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

Quoted message said:

[email hidden] wrote in message

news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

On Thu, 06 Nov 2003 21:23:15 -0500, Ron Ritzman
<[email hidden]> wrote:

>On Thu, 06 Nov 2003 07:07:56 -0800, [email hidden] wrote:
>
>>>Only if it is a 2Lb pizza...
>>
>>2Lb pizza = about 3300 calories. Some diet. NOT
>
>A large active male could lose weight on 3300 calories.

That means that the 2Lb diet is good for loggers chopping down trees
all day. They really NEED a diet. Wasn't this dreamed up from climbing
Everest?

No.

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 Katchen
(2) Report Katchen 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

<libelous statements snipped>

You remain in my prayers, neighbor.

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

(1) Yell at JC da Konegg
(2) Report JC da Konegg 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.

God's humble bond-servant,

Andrew

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

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

JC Der Koenig said:

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

Quoted message said:

[email hidden] wrote in message

news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

On Thu, 06 Nov 2003 21:23:15 -0500, Ron Ritzman
<[email hidden]> wrote:

>On Thu, 06 Nov 2003 07:07:56 -0800, [email hidden] wrote:
>
>>>Only if it is a 2Lb pizza...
>>
>>2Lb pizza = about 3300 calories. Some diet. NOT
>
>A large active male could lose weight on 3300 calories.

That means that the 2Lb diet is good for loggers chopping down trees
all day. They really NEED a diet. Wasn't this dreamed up from climbing
Everest?

No.

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 Katchen
(2) Report Katchen 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

<libelous statements snipped>

You continue to have my pity, neighbor.

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

(1) Yell at JC da Konegg
(2) Report JC da Konegg 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.

God's humble bond-servant,

Andrew

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

<Snip>

Quoted message said:

(1) Yell at JC da Konegg
(2) Report JC da Konegg to his ISP
(3) Killfile this thread.
(4) Killfile me.
(5) Read about free speech.

But Chung , you spelled JCs name wrong .

--
In tribute to Buggs Bunny and Elmer Fudd ,
two bastions of comedy in a world
filled with seriousness and facts .

Steve <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

On Fri, 7 Nov 2003 17:22:46 -0500, Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD wrote
(in message <[email hidden]>😉:

Quoted message said:

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

Quoted message said:

On Thu, 06 Nov 2003 21:23:15 -0500, Ron Ritzman
<[email hidden]> wrote:

> On Thu, 06 Nov 2003 07:07:56 -0800, [email hidden] wrote:
>
>>> Only if it is a 2Lb pizza...
>>
>> 2Lb pizza = about 3300 calories. Some diet. NOT
>
> A large active male could lose weight on 3300 calories.

That means that the 2Lb diet is good for loggers chopping down trees
all day. They really NEED a diet. Wasn't this dreamed up from climbing
Everest?

No.

Yawn... here we go again. My macro can outlast your macro.

<flattering imitation snipped>

Sincerely,

God's Other Humble Servant

Steve

As God's humble servant, do you believe that Christ is your Lord and
Savior?

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 Steve
(2) Report Steve 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 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.

God's humble bond-servant,

Andrew

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

On Fri, 7 Nov 2003 23:32:14 -0500, Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD wrote
(in message <[email hidden]>😉:

Quoted message said:

Steve <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

On Fri, 7 Nov 2003 17:22:46 -0500, Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD wrote
(in message <[email hidden]>😉:

Quoted message said:

[email hidden] wrote in message
news:<[email hidden]>...
> On Thu, 06 Nov 2003 21:23:15 -0500, Ron Ritzman
> <[email hidden]> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 06 Nov 2003 07:07:56 -0800, [email hidden] wrote:
>>
>>>> Only if it is a 2Lb pizza...
>>>
>>> 2Lb pizza = about 3300 calories. Some diet. NOT
>>
>> A large active male could lose weight on 3300 calories.
>
> That means that the 2Lb diet is good for loggers chopping down trees
> all day. They really NEED a diet. Wasn't this dreamed up from climbing
> Everest?

No.

Yawn... here we go again. My macro can outlast your macro.

<flattering imitation snipped>

Sincerely,

God's Other Humble Servant

Steve

As God's humble servant, do you believe that Christ is your Lord and
Savior?

Uh-oh... it's deja vu all over again! I should change my handle to
"Sisyphus".

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

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

A large active male could lose weight on 3300 calories.

That means that the 2Lb diet is good for loggers chopping down trees
all day. They really NEED a diet. Wasn't this dreamed up from climbing
Everest?

He got the idea while watching an IMAX film about Everest climbers but
the 2PD as presented is not the same diet.

Quoted message said:

They need a diet like this too. NOT

I still don't see how the 2PD is any better or worse healthwise then
any other "conventional" low calorie weight loss diet. The main
difference seems to be in the method used to control food intake. The
way I see it, if you don't like the diet then just don't do the diet.
(I'm not doing the diet BTW)

It's also not the only diet to use the "eat less of the foods you are
eating right now" approach. "The Weigh Down Diet" by Gwen Shamblin
uses a similar approach. This approach addresses one of the reasons
that diets "fail". One gets used to eating certain kinds of foods all
their lives and when they go on a diet, the first thing they try is to
change to special "diet" foods and/or so called "healthy" foods
(reduced fat foods, less calorie dense vegetables etc.) so they can
eat the same volume of food and fill up. However, they soon get sick
of eating carrots and celery and switch back to bacon and eggs. Since
they are still used to eating high food volumes, any weight they lose
comes back, ergo, another "failed" diet. By eating the same things you
were eating before but slowly reducing the volume of food you are
eating, you both lose weight and get used to lower food volumes.

However, this is not to say that one shouldn't modify their diets and
change the kinds of foods one eats. If you want to switch your diet
for health, religious or political reasons (such as becoming a
vegetarian) and are willing to stick to it for the rest of your life,
then it's best that that decision be made without any expectation of
weight loss or at least the willingness of staying with such foods
when the weight is gone. Almost the same goes for low carb dieting.
Too many people do diets like Atkins as "crash diets" with no
intention of following a long term low carb lifestyle. They'l stay in
ketosis for a few weeks or months, lose some pounds and go back to
pasta and twinkies. We know what happens next. (note, I'm kinda guilty
of this as I lost 70 pounds on a ketogenic diet and went back to
carbs. The weight hasn't came back partially due to the exercise I do)
If you want to follow a low carb "lifestyle", you should thing long
and hard about whether or not you want to follow it for the rest of
your life, even after the pounds are gone.

However, I suspect that the diet itself is not what has its critics so
[censored], it's the way it was presented or should I say "shoved down
people's throats" and I agree that this could have been done
differently, a lot differently.

--
Ron Ritzman
http://www.panix.com/~ritzlart
Smart people can figure out my email address

Ron Ritzman said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

A large active male could lose weight on 3300 calories.

That means that the 2Lb diet is good for loggers chopping down trees
all day. They really NEED a diet. Wasn't this dreamed up from climbing
Everest?

He got the idea while watching an IMAX film about Everest climbers but
the 2PD as presented is not the same diet.

Quoted message said:

They need a diet like this too. NOT

I still don't see how the 2PD is any better or worse healthwise then
any other "conventional" low calorie weight loss diet. The main
difference seems to be in the method used to control food intake. The
way I see it, if you don't like the diet then just don't do the diet.
(I'm not doing the diet BTW)

It's also not the only diet to use the "eat less of the foods you are
eating right now" approach. "The Weigh Down Diet" by Gwen Shamblin
uses a similar approach. This approach addresses one of the reasons
that diets "fail". One gets used to eating certain kinds of foods all
their lives and when they go on a diet, the first thing they try is to
change to special "diet" foods and/or so called "healthy" foods
(reduced fat foods, less calorie dense vegetables etc.) so they can
eat the same volume of food and fill up. However, they soon get sick
of eating carrots and celery and switch back to bacon and eggs. Since
they are still used to eating high food volumes, any weight they lose
comes back, ergo, another "failed" diet. By eating the same things you
were eating before but slowly reducing the volume of food you are
eating, you both lose weight and get used to lower food volumes.

You just described the 2PD approach.

Quoted message said:

However, this is not to say that one shouldn't modify their diets and
change the kinds of foods one eats. If you want to switch your diet
for health, religious or political reasons (such as becoming a
vegetarian) and are willing to stick to it for the rest of your life,
then it's best that that decision be made without any expectation of
weight loss or at least the willingness of staying with such foods
when the weight is gone. Almost the same goes for low carb dieting.
Too many people do diets like Atkins as "crash diets" with no
intention of following a long term low carb lifestyle. They'l stay in
ketosis for a few weeks or months, lose some pounds and go back to
pasta and twinkies. We know what happens next. (note, I'm kinda guilty
of this as I lost 70 pounds on a ketogenic diet and went back to
carbs. The weight hasn't came back partially due to the exercise I do)
If you want to follow a low carb "lifestyle", you should thing long
and hard about whether or not you want to follow it for the rest of
your life, even after the pounds are gone.

Sounds like you also "know" that the 2PD approach can easily be a lifelong
WOE.

Quoted message said:

However, I suspect that the diet itself is not what has its critics so
[censored], it's the way it was presented

Not according to the content of the "criticisms."

See:

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

Quoted message said:

or should I say "shoved down
people's throats"

By their doctors? Don't think so.

Certainly, you can't mean folks are forced to read Usenet posts by 2PD
proponents?

Quoted message said:

and I agree that this could have been done
differently, a lot differently.

You mean the Dr. Atkins or Dr. Phil approach by publishing a book with
recipes?

Don't think so.

Quoted message said:

--
Ron Ritzman
http://www.panix.com/~ritzlart
Smart people can figure out my email address

Thanks for your comments, Ron.

Humbly,

Andrew

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