| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" |
| Date: |
13 Apr 2007 03:41:50 PM |
| Object: |
Proof of LORD Almighty GOD: The 2PD-OMER Approach. |
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.
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
.
|
|
| User: "Olrik" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof of LORD Almighty GOD: The 2PD-OMER Approach. |
14 Apr 2007 12:28:08 AM |
|
|
On Apr 14, 12:57 am, Mu <nocowinthi...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, 13 Apr 2007 22:46:20 +0000 (UTC), Cary Kittrell wrote:
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
I'm not certain that the word diet isn't more in tune with control and
direction of specific foodstuffs and their eating. The 2PD is about
volume but I have to admit what Chung has evolved this to, I have not
kept up.
All I know is that when I found out, to my surprise, the volume of food
I was eating, reduced it, I lost weight.
It's called the "duh" factor. Look into it, shill.
Olrik
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof of LORD Almighty GOD: The 2PD-OMER Approach. |
13 Apr 2007 06:40:20 PM |
|
|
convicted neighbor Cary Kittrell wrote:
Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote:
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.
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
.
|
|
|
| User: "Epinephrine" |
|
| Title: Read why The 2PD-OMER approach is fundamentally flawed! |
13 Apr 2007 07:54:40 PM |
|
|
"Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" <love1@thetruth.com> wrote in message
news:1176507620.641274.83470@o5g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
convicted neighbor Cary Kittrell wrote:
Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote:
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.
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.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Smiler" |
|
| Title: Re: Read why The 2PD-OMER approach is fundamentally flawed! |
13 Apr 2007 08:56:26 PM |
|
|
"Epinephrine" <me@x-privut.org> wrote in message
news:46202529$1_1@x-privat.org...
"Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" <love1@thetruth.com> wrote in message
news:1176507620.641274.83470@o5g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
convicted neighbor Cary Kittrell wrote:
Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote:
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.
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.
He can't.
Smiler,
The godless one
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Read why The 2PD-OMER approach is fundamentally flawed! |
13 Apr 2007 09:07:15 PM |
|
|
Epinephrine wrote:
"Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" <love1@thetruth.com> wrote in message
news:1176507620.641274.83470@o5g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
convicted neighbor Cary Kittrell wrote:
Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote:
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.
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.
There is no anecdotal evidence, only andy's crowing.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Epinephrine" |
|
| Title: Re: Read why The 2PD-OMER approach is fundamentally flawed! |
13 Apr 2007 09:29:13 PM |
|
|
<"."@> wrote in message news:46203726$1_1@x-privat.org...
Epinephrine wrote:
"Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" <love1@thetruth.com> wrote in message
news:1176507620.641274.83470@o5g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
convicted neighbor Cary Kittrell wrote:
Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote:
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.
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.
There is no anecdotal evidence, only andy's crowing.
I was kindly referring to his "crowing" as anecdotal evidence.
i.e Chung's anecdotes = Chung's anecdotal evidence.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mu" |
|
| Title: Re: Read why The 2PD-OMER approach is fundamentally flawed! |
14 Apr 2007 12:08:26 AM |
|
|
On Sat, 14 Apr 2007 01:54:40 +0100, Epinephrine wrote:
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,
Incorrect. Speaking as one who did, interrupting one who never has but
speakd pontifically, it is a real eye opener.
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.
Really? such a broad and generic statement, which guidelines, which
proven lifestyle, oh, don't forget the citations, you wanted them for
the 2PD, it's your turn now, BigStuff.
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.
lol
See how that double-edged sword you just cut yourself wide open works?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Epinephrine" |
|
| Title: Re: Read why The 2PD-OMER approach is fundamentally flawed! |
14 Apr 2007 08:08:53 AM |
|
|
"Mu" <nocowinthismu@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:ps46j93v7hog.fqjesi5h59yo$.dlg@40tude.net...
On Sat, 14 Apr 2007 01:54:40 +0100, Epinephrine wrote:
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,
Incorrect. Speaking as one who did, interrupting one who never has but
speakd pontifically, it is a real eye opener.
Unfortunately anecdotal evidence will not convince me.
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.
Really? such a broad and generic statement, which guidelines, which
proven lifestyle, oh, don't forget the citations, you wanted them for
the 2PD, it's your turn now, BigStuff.
Sorry. Given that you have plonked me and that it would be too complicated
for you to handle, I feel there is no point in. Unless of course un plonk
me..
.
|
|
|
| User: "Art Deco" |
|
| Title: Re: Read why The 2PD-OMER approach is fundamentally flawed! |
14 Apr 2007 10:36:11 AM |
|
|
Epinephrine <me@x-privut.org> wrote:
"Mu" <nocowinthismu@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:ps46j93v7hog.fqjesi5h59yo$.dlg@40tude.net...
On Sat, 14 Apr 2007 01:54:40 +0100, Epinephrine wrote:
For example, it is likely that a diabetic would be prescribed the ADA
diabetic diet while using the 2PD-OMER Approach.
There is no point in carrying a scale,
Incorrect. Speaking as one who did, interrupting one who never has but
speakd pontifically, it is a real eye opener.
Unfortunately anecdotal evidence will not convince me.
then weighing 1.5 pounds or 2 pounds
of a certain prescribed course, if one can adhere to recommended
guidelines
and making appropriate lifestyle changes, which have a proven benefit.
Really? such a broad and generic statement, which guidelines, which
proven lifestyle, oh, don't forget the citations, you wanted them for
the 2PD, it's your turn now, BigStuff.
Sorry. Given that you have plonked me and that it would be too complicated
for you to handle, I feel there is no point in. Unless of course un plonk
me..
I'm waiting to evidence of a leaky plonker.
--
Supreme Leader of the Brainwashed Followers of Art Deco
"Still suffering from reading comprehension problems, Deco?
The section is clearly attributed to Art Deco, not to you, Deco."
-- Dr. David Tholen
"Who is "David Tholen", Daedalus? Still suffering from
attribution problems?"
-- Dr. David Tholen
.
|
|
|
| User: "Charlotte L. Blackmer" |
|
| Title: Re: Read why The 2PD-OMER approach is fundamentally flawed! |
14 Apr 2007 12:46:13 PM |
|
|
In article <140420070936110473%erfc@caballista.org>,
Art Deco <erfc@caballista.org> wrote:
Epinephrine <me@x-privut.org> wrote:
"Mu" <nocowinthismu@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:ps46j93v7hog.fqjesi5h59yo$.dlg@40tude.net...
On Sat, 14 Apr 2007 01:54:40 +0100, Epinephrine wrote:
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,
Incorrect. Speaking as one who did, interrupting one who never has but
speakd pontifically, it is a real eye opener.
Funny, when I wanted to discuss my experiment with weighing food and
offered a critique, Mu evaded.
Now he's all attention ("Well I did it and you didn't, so there, nyaaah").
Unfortunately anecdotal evidence will not convince me.
*snork*
Where are the controlled peer-reviewed studies for the 2PD-OMER?
Right now about the only thing Andy has offered is weird numerology. I
mean, I know that those verse numbers were not assigned until about 500
years ago, but does Andy?
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.
Really? such a broad and generic statement, which guidelines, which
proven lifestyle, oh, don't forget the citations, you wanted them for
the 2PD, it's your turn now, BigStuff.
Has Mu actually provided citations?? Or just anecdotes?
Sorry. Given that you have plonked me and that it would be too complicated
for you to handle, I feel there is no point in. Unless of course un plonk
me..
I'm waiting to evidence of a leaky plonker.
heh.
Charlotte
--
.
|
|
|
| User: "Pastor Kutchie, Earthquacks nemesis" |
|
| Title: Re: Read why The 2PD-OMER approach is fundamentally flawed! |
14 Apr 2007 01:09:09 PM |
|
|
On Apr 14, 6:46 pm, (Charlotte L. Blackmer)
wrote:
In article <140420070936110473%e...@caballista.org>,
Art Deco <e...@caballista.org> wrote:
Epinephrine <m...@x-privut.org> wrote:
"Mu" <nocowinthi...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:ps46j93v7hog.fqjesi5h59yo$.dlg@40tude.net...
On Sat, 14 Apr 2007 01:54:40 +0100, Epinephrine wrote:
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,
Incorrect. Speaking as one who did, interrupting one who never has but
speakd pontifically, it is a real eye opener.
Funny, when I wanted to discuss my experiment with weighing food and
offered a critique, Mu evaded.
Now he's all attention ("Well I did it and you didn't, so there, nyaaah").
Unfortunately anecdotal evidence will not convince me.
*snork*
Where are the controlled peer-reviewed studies for the 2PD-OMER?
In the Bible ;-)
Right now about the only thing Andy has offered is weird numerology. I
mean, I know that those verse numbers were not assigned until about 500
years ago, but does Andy?
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.
Really? such a broad and generic statement, which guidelines, which
proven lifestyle, oh, don't forget the citations, you wanted them for
the 2PD, it's your turn now, BigStuff.
Has Mu actually provided citations?? Or just anecdotes?
Mu has provided nothing but invective.
Sorry. Given that you have plonked me and that it would be too complicated
for you to handle, I feel there is no point in. Unless of course un plonk
me..
I'm waiting to evidence of a leaky plonker.
heh.
Charlotte
--
He's a plonker all right.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Cary Kittrell" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof of LORD Almighty GOD: The 2PD-OMER Approach. |
13 Apr 2007 07:42:01 PM |
|
|
In article <1176507620.641274.83470@o5g2000hsb.googlegroups.com> "Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" <love1@thetruth.com> writes:
convicted neighbor Cary Kittrell wrote:
Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote:
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
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mu" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof of LORD Almighty GOD: The 2PD-OMER Approach. |
14 Apr 2007 12:01:43 AM |
|
|
On Sat, 14 Apr 2007 00:42:01 +0000 (UTC), Cary Kittrell wrote:
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
cary, you're being argumentative for what purpose? OK, so wth, call it a
diet?
It works, call it anything you want.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Cary Kittrell" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof of LORD Almighty GOD: The 2PD-OMER Approach. |
16 Apr 2007 12:29:07 PM |
|
|
In article <6v5xh72745ja.yte1prze2qno$.dlg@40tude.net> writes:
On Sat, 14 Apr 2007 00:42:01 +0000 (UTC), Cary Kittrell wrote:
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
cary, you're being argumentative for what purpose?
Because Andrew always uses this imaginary distinction to
go into willfully disingenuous mode and thus avoid
questions or objections raised to his "diet.
OK, so wth, call it a > diet?
Find with me. Not fine with Andrew.
-- cary
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mu" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof of LORD Almighty GOD: The 2PD-OMER Approach. |
16 Apr 2007 02:52:32 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 16 Apr 2007 17:29:07 +0000 (UTC), Cary Kittrell wrote:
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
cary, you're being argumentative for what purpose?
Because Andrew always uses this imaginary distinction to
go into willfully disingenuous mode and thus avoid
questions or objections raised to his "diet.
What? Chung has answered a zillion ?? regarding the 2PD. You're picking
nits, it's nonsensical for you to do so. It makes no difference what the
thing is called if in the end, it works. Which it does.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Cary Kittrell" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof of LORD Almighty GOD: The 2PD-OMER Approach. |
16 Apr 2007 03:07:11 PM |
|
|
In article <rau9f5h6q38y$.1wpko1lyuge2p$.dlg@40tude.net> writes:
On Mon, 16 Apr 2007 17:29:07 +0000 (UTC), Cary Kittrell wrote:
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
cary, you're being argumentative for what purpose?
Because Andrew always uses this imaginary distinction to
go into willfully disingenuous mode and thus avoid
questions or objections raised to his "diet.
What? Chung has answered a zillion ?? regarding the 2PD. You're picking
nits, it's nonsensical for you to do so. It makes no difference what the
thing is called if in the end, it works. Which it does.
I agree that it makes no difference.
Andrew disagrees. Vehementely and repeatedly.
-- cary
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mu" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof of LORD Almighty GOD: The 2PD-OMER Approach. |
16 Apr 2007 04:11:07 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 16 Apr 2007 20:07:11 +0000 (UTC), Cary Kittrell wrote:
cary, you're being argumentative for what purpose?
Because Andrew always uses this imaginary distinction to
go into willfully disingenuous mode and thus avoid
questions or objections raised to his "diet.
What? Chung has answered a zillion ?? regarding the 2PD. You're picking
nits, it's nonsensical for you to do so. It makes no difference what the
thing is called if in the end, it works. Which it does.
I agree that it makes no difference.
Andrew disagrees. Vehementely and repeatedly.
-- cary
So? Let him. Pick your own pimples.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Hollywood" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof of LORD Almighty GOD: The 2PD-OMER Approach. |
17 Apr 2007 08:01:09 AM |
|
|
On Apr 16, 5:11 pm, Mu <nocowinthi...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Mon, 16 Apr 2007 20:07:11 +0000 (UTC), Cary Kittrell wrote:
cary, you're being argumentative for what purpose?
Because Andrew always uses this imaginary distinction to
go into willfully disingenuous mode and thus avoid
questions or objections raised to his "diet.
What? Chung has answered a zillion ?? regarding the 2PD. You're picking
nits, it's nonsensical for you to do so. It makes no difference what the
thing is called if in the end, it works. Which it does.
I agree that it makes no difference.
Andrew disagrees. Vehementely and repeatedly.
-- cary
So? Let him. Pick your own pimples.
Wow, real wisdom. Please forward to Chung and take own advice.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mu" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof of LORD Almighty GOD: The 2PD-OMER Approach. |
13 Apr 2007 11:58:18 PM |
|
|
On 13 Apr 2007 16:40:20 -0700, Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD wrote:
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.
I don't see how or why it there could be.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Art Deco" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof of LORD Almighty GOD: The 2PD-OMER Approach. |
14 Apr 2007 10:39:53 AM |
|
|
Mu <nocowinthismu@gmail.com> wrote:
On 13 Apr 2007 16:40:20 -0700, Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD wrote:
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.
I don't see how or why it there could be.
Kookslurper.
--
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
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Father Haskell" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof of LORD Almighty GOD: The 2PD-OMER Approach. |
13 Apr 2007 08:28:39 PM |
|
|
On Apr 13, 4:41 pm, "Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" <l...@thetruth.com>
wrote:
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.
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.
You read it here. God prefers the Imperial system of weights and
measures.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Pastor Kutchie, ordained atheist minister" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof of LORD Almighty GOD: The 2PD-OMER Approach. |
13 Apr 2007 04:42:01 PM |
|
|
On Apr 13, 9:41 pm, "Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" <l...@thetruth.com>
wrote:
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.
I put you straight on this already, liar.
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
Proof by LORD Almighty GOD: repeatedly rebuked by Jesus' brethren...satan unwittingly endorses the 2PD-OMER Approach ! ! !
Proof of GOD: Million Dollar guarantee from GOD for the 2PD-OMER Approach.
Re: 2PD-OMER Approach
Re: How the 2PD-OMER Approach works.
Amazing Proofs by LORD Almighty GOD: The miracle of crossing the Red Sea, the miracle of the USS Texas, the miracle of the 2PD-OMER Approach curing type-2 diabetes, Patsy's miracle, RFC's Pastorio dying on April Fool's day, and the futility of satan'
Proofs of LORD Almighty GOD: The miracle of the parting of the Red Sea, the miracle of the USS Texas, the miracle of the 2PD-OMER Approach curing type-2 diabetes, and Pastorio dying on April Fool's day.
Re: The 2PD-OMER Approach
OT: Endorsed version of 2PD diet by Dr Andrew B Chung
| Proof by LORD Almighty GOD: satan unable to stomach the 2PD-OMERApproach.
Proof by LORD Almighty GOD: An omer of food-ready-to-eat (i.e. manna)weighs 2 pounds...
Proof by LORD Almighty GOD: by HIS design there is the omer, which is the one optimal daily amount of food for all.
Proofs of LORD Almighty GOD: Pastorio died on April Fool's day, an omer of bread/food (not grain) is still a weight measure, and convicted diabetic neighbor Vicky keeps getting angrier.
Re: Results of one year on the OMER approach
Proof of LORD Almighty GOD: Still no witnesses for atheism.
Proof of LORD Almighty GOD: Paranoia in demons.
|
|
|
