Greeting RandyF on 05/20/16 ...

523 views
Skip to first unread message

Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD

unread,
May 20, 2016, 12:07:42 PM5/20/16
to
Why this is marked as abuse? It has been marked as abuse.
Report not abuse
RandyF wrote:
>bob officer wrote:
>> No the disease is never reverse, because either the cells that produce
>> insulin are reduced in number, or the bodies ability to respond on a
>> cellular level to changes in BGL and/or insulin has been effected by
>> progress of the disease.
>
> But the responders in the paper under discussion Did *reverse* 1st
> phase pancreatic response:
> From the paper:
> *************
> "Recovery of acute insulin secretory capacity to nondiabetic
> levels [20; 21] was seen in responders and not in non-responders"
> ************

Source:
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.support.diabetes/KLXIdOuhRmM/46_0XZ8XAQAJ

> That's* huge*. And to my mind - is something more than just *control*.

Correct.

It is remission/reversal/cure :-)

I am wonderfully hungry and hope you, Randy, also have a healthy
appetite too.

So how are you ?










... because we mindfully choose to openly care with our heart,

HeartDoc Andrew <><
--
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
Emory's IMVC.org cardiologist (GA Lic#040347)
and author of the 2PD-OMER Approach:
http://JiL4ever.net/Luke2442
which is the absolutely only **healthy** cure for type-2 diabetes

Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD

unread,
May 21, 2016, 5:12:47 AM5/21/16
to

Cure*-*

unread,
May 21, 2016, 12:20:31 PM5/21/16
to
"It is remission/reversal/cure :-)"

What did the glucose challenge test results show? That is the gold
standarrd for diabetic status. If the usual 50 or more percent of beta
cells are missing at diagnosis, that test will confirm diabetic status.

No "cure" will have been demonstrated because those cells are gone and
will never be replaced to any degree that matters..
Often people who use glp-1 mimic type drugs will have all the verbs above.
The "cure" applies to them also. The glucose test mentioned have been done
with them. No surprise that diabetic status is confirmed.

Also the list of verbs needs to be qualified as to a1c testing. An
non-normal number is often used to evoke the list responses. The ada 7 as
a threshold has been used when a non-diabetic usually has a number in the
low 5 to high 4 range. That range must proceed any such claims.

Use of the glp-1 mimics ofoten result in a number in the 5 to 6 range.

The latter led research to look at post glp-1 numbers, they are greatly
elevated.

The post surgery results happen within days far short of the time weight
loss and/olr vat change would have on diabetic symptoms.

Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD

unread,
May 21, 2016, 7:03:43 PM5/21/16
to
Someone eternally cursed and tormented wrote:
> RandyF wrote:
>
>>>> CONCLUSIONS: A robust and sustainable weight loss program
>>>> achieved continuing remission of diabetes for at least 6 months
>>>> in the 40% who responded to a VLCD by achieving fasting plasma
>>>> glucose of <7 mmol/L. T2DM is a potentially reversible
>>>> condition.

Source:
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.med.cardiology/B-dJ_iWGRk8/3rFYbfd6AwAJ

>>> The study had 30 people? And had only less than half classed as
>>> responders to the treatment.
>>
>> 50% cure rate is pretty impressive.
>
> The small number of participants in this study (30) doesn't inspire
> confidence in the results.

The purpose of a larger number (N) of partipants would be to ensure
that a study is adequately powered to detect a small effect.

The "small number" excuse to reject the results of a study would be
justified if there were **no** findings with the rationale being that
the study was underpowered to detect small effects and consequently
missed them.

Such an excuse is not applicable here since the "50% cure rate" is a
very large effect.

Clearly you have no comprehension of statistics. Such cognitive
deficits are consistent with your being more cursed (Jeremiah 17:5) by
GOD.

May GOD continue to curse and torment you, who are cursed (Jeremiah
17:5), more than ever, in the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth. Amen.

Someone eternally cursed and tormented wrote:

> I forgive you.

Exposing you is not sin but rather it's keeping the LORD's commandment
(Matthew 5:16)

Many thanks, much praise, and all the glory to GOD for His compelling
you to remind us that we who are His http://WDJW.net/Redeemed have
already been http://WDJW.net/Forgiven by Him as evident by our being
new creatures in Christ (2 Corinthians 5:17) publicly saying "Jesus is
LORD" with our mouth (Romans 10:9) unto salvation (Romans 10:10) for
all to witness at Jesus' http://WDJW.net web site :-)

Laus Deo !!!

Source:
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.med.cardiology/1psFMsQWkAw/0V1sS3C-QZ8J

Someone eternally cursed and tormented wrote:

> "Finally, all of you be of one mind, having compassion for one another;
> love as brothers, be tenderhearted, be courteous." 1 Peter 3:8

Yes, this is directed towards those of us, who, unlike you who are
eternally condemned, have been http://WDJW.net/Redeemed as evident by
our publicly saying "Jesus is LORD" with our mouth (Romans 10:9) unto
salvation (Romans 10:10) for all to witness at our LORD's
http://WDJW.net/ web site and so we have compassion towards each other
instead of towards those like you who are being forever tormented by
the LORD our GOD, Who hates you just as He hates Esau (Malachi 1:2-3)
for his lying that hunger is starvation (Genesis 25:32).

> May God bless and protect and provide peace at last.

Many thanks, much praise, and all the glory to GOD for His compelling
you to unwittingly reveal that not only do you not know how to pray to
Him, you also do not have either His blessing or His protection or His
peace which is consistent with your being forever tormented by Him.

May GOD continue to openly torment you, who are eternally condemned
and accursed (Jeremiah 17:5), more than ever thereby ever comforting
those of us who are His http://WDJW.net/Redeemed in the name of Jesus
Christ of Nazareth. Amen.

Source:
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.med.cardiology/l962_mp1wzo/b9OPa1Mbmx4J

aSomeone eternally cursed and tormented wrote:

> I'm sorry ...

Those who say/write that they are sorry unwittingly reveal that they
are indeed accursed for those of us who are http://WDJW.net/Forgiven
always say/write with all due (Romans 13:8) love (1 Peter 3:8) that we
repent.

Many thanks, much praise, and all the glory to GOD for His compelling
you to unwittingly prove yet again that you are fovever accursed.

Source:
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.med.cardiology/Sz4t6AlA3Eo/RiUDbW9AwD4J

Someone eternally cursed and tormented wrote:
>
> not what goes into the mouth defiles a man, but what comes out of the
> mouth, this defiles a man. Matt. 15:11

Source:
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.med.cardiology/CZ8vV8ygnZw/xXiBrV7oVgwJ

Some additional examples:

https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.med.cardiology/VUmQFOoArtw/TrTeRjdCcgAJ

and

https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.med.cardiology/ize6zJm-cYE/BimXAx4trOcJ

Indeed, if what comes "out of the mouth" (Matthew 15:11) is either not
the phrase "wonderfully hungry" or doesn't cause (Deuteronomy 8:3)
others to be http://WDJW.net/WonderfullyHungrier now (Luke 6:21a) then
they are words that defile and prove that the source is like you who
are accursed like satan who is not hungry as evident by his eating
dust (Genesis 3:14) instead of real food.

Many thanks, much praise, and all glory to GOD for His compelling you
to unwittingly continue to prove that you are eternally condemned and
always accursed.

Source:
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.med.cardiology/bncjgZjc2q4/Km9VWrPGh68J

Someone eternally cursed and tormented wrote:

> Markea Berry ...

Source:
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.med.cardiology/XLpEpoxeecU/mOMtz7yzcMQJ

Some additional examples:

https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.med.cardiology/3N6bKuVT9Og/_B_GuBjcXMgJ

and

https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.med.cardiology/tnSQcYqVu5s/kQ2kdFSOxmAJ

Many thanks, much praise, and all the glory to GOD for His compelling
you to unwittingly allow us to know that Markea's
http://WDJW.net/Ghost is haunting you by cutting down members of your
household one by one in answer to our prayers to the LORD our GOD, in
the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth:

http://bit.ly/13G1gKE

Laus Deo !!!

http://WDJW.net/LausDeo


Someone eternally cursed and tormented wrote:
>
> "Bariatric surgeons have in the peer-reviewed medical literature documented
> cases of type-2 diabetes being cured,"

Source:
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.med.cardiology/B-dJ_iWGRk8/1fQmfxxrAQAJ

> False, they only go as far as saying "reverse" or some similar term.

"Reverse" is a similar term to cure in that they are interchangeable
(i.e. synonymous):

To reverse type-1 diabetes would be to cure it.

To reverse Multiple Sclerosis would be to cure it.

To reverse Parkinson's disease would be to cure it.

CHECKMATE :-)

I give all the glory ( http://bit.ly/Psalm112_1 ) to GOD for His
compelling you to unwittingly CHECKMATE yourself here. The latter
self-defeat is consistent with your being more cursed (Jeremiah 17:5)
by the LORD our Mighty (Isaiah 9:6) GOD.

May GOD continue to curse you, who are eternally condemned and cursed,
more than ever, in the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth.

Amen.

HeartDoc Andrew <><
--
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
Emory's IMVC.org cardiologist (GA Lic#040347)
and author of the 2PD-OMER Approach:
http://WDJW.net/Luke2442
which is the absolutely only **healthy** cure for acquired disease

ADA*-*

unread,
May 21, 2016, 7:58:50 PM5/21/16
to

>>>>> CONCLUSIONS: A robust and sustainable weight loss program
>>>>> achieved continuing remission of diabetes for at least 6 months
>>>>> in the 40% who responded to a VLCD by achieving fasting plasma
>>>>> glucose of <7 mmol/L. T2DM is a potentially reversible
>>>>> condition.

An a1c of < 7 is not what one would find in a "cure". The only relevant
benchmark would be the 4.6 to 5 or so of the non-diabetic.

Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD

unread,
May 21, 2016, 8:25:41 PM5/21/16
to
Someone eternally condemned and tormented wrote:
> RandyF wrote:
>
>>>> CONCLUSIONS: A robust and sustainable weight loss program
>>>> achieved continuing remission of diabetes for at least 6 months
>>>> in the 40% who responded to a VLCD by achieving fasting plasma
>>>> glucose of <7 mmol/L. T2DM is a potentially reversible
>>>> condition.

Source:
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.med.cardiology/B-dJ_iWGRk8/3rFYbfd6AwAJ

> An a1c of < 7 is not what one would find in a "cure". The only relevant
> benchmark would be the 4.6 to 5 or so of the non-diabetic.

All the glory ( http://bit.ly/Psalm112_1 ) to GOD for His compelling
you to unwittingly display your ignorance about the units of measure
for HgbA1c **not** being in mmol/L. Such ignorance is consistent with
your being more cursed (Jeremiah 17:5) by GOD.

May GOD continue to curse and torment you, who are cursed (Jeremiah
17:5), more than ever, in the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth. Amen.

Someone eternally cursed and tormented wrote:
> RandyF wrote:
>
>>>> CONCLUSIONS: A robust and sustainable weight loss program
>>>> achieved continuing remission of diabetes for at least 6 months
>>>> in the 40% who responded to a VLCD by achieving fasting plasma
>>>> glucose of <7 mmol/L. T2DM is a potentially reversible
>>>> condition.

Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD

unread,
May 22, 2016, 1:03:15 AM5/22/16
to

Rod

unread,
May 22, 2016, 5:28:37 PM5/22/16
to
Not so according to the American Diabetes Association
who says that any eAG below 154(7.0) means the diabetes has gone into
remission. Mine is eAG is 134(6.3).

Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD

unread,
May 22, 2016, 8:17:10 PM5/22/16
to
Rod wrote in part:

> ... according to the American Diabetes Association
> who says that any eAG below 154(7.0) means the diabetes has gone into
> remission. Mine is eAG is 134(6.3).

Source:
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.med.cardiology/vnFABJwOeIY/cOXahgZSAgAJ

I am wonderfully hungry and hope you, Rod, also have a healthy
appetite too :-)

So how are you ?













... because we mindfully choose to openly care with our heart,

HeartDoc Andrew <><
--
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
Emory's IMVC.org cardiologist (GA Lic#040347)
and author of the 2PD-OMER Approach:
http://JiL4ever.net/Luke2442
which is the absolutely only **healthy** cure for type-2 diabetes

Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD

unread,
May 23, 2016, 4:49:11 AM5/23/16
to

ADA*--*

unread,
May 23, 2016, 11:11:38 AM5/23/16
to
"Cure" and remission are quite different. The 7 figure in the "conclusion"
is the ada's number. It is also the numbner used in recent posts about a
"cure".

The only rational benchmark for same is the numbers of a non-diabetic be
it the a1c or glucose challenge or similar test.

Rod

unread,
May 23, 2016, 11:27:47 AM5/23/16
to
On 5/23/2016 9:59 AM, ADA*--* wrote:
>>>>>>>> CONCLUSIONS: A robust and sustainable weight loss program
>>>>>>>> achieved continuing remission of diabetes for at least 6 months
>>>>>>>> in the 40% who responded to a VLCD by achieving fasting plasma
>>>>>>>> glucose of <7 mmol/L. T2DM is a potentially reversible
>>>>>>>> condition.
>>>
>>> An a1c of < 7 is not what one would find in a "cure". The only relevant
>>> benchmark would be the 4.6 to 5 or so of the non-diabetic.
>>>
>>
>> Not so according to the American Diabetes Association
>> who says that any eAG below 154(7.0) means the diabetes has gone into
>> remission. Mine is eAG is 134(6.3).
>
> "Cure" and remission are quite different.

The dictionary descriptions may be...but essential actions
are the same. Remission is a return to the original state
in a great many cases, and that is the cure to be sought.




The 7 figure in the "conclusion"
> is the ada's number. It is also the numbner used in recent posts about a
> "cure".
>
> The only rational benchmark for same is the numbers of a non-diabetic be
> it the a1c or glucose challenge or similar test.
>

Remission IS non diabetic, diabetic is an abnormal state,
where remission is a return to the original or near original
state.

ADA*-*

unread,
May 23, 2016, 12:58:21 PM5/23/16
to
An 7 does not meet that definition. Close is only valid in horseshoes.

From the normal range of 5 ore below risk from complications rise
accordingly. A 7 is the number where they skyrocket. It was chosen as the
lowest number to reflect that but far from the risk level of a
non-diabetic. Concerns for hypos for insuling using folk had the ada pick
that number as much as anything.

Rhetorical nit picking about remission/reverse etc. does not a "cure" make.

Btw, there are people who achieve the 5 or so a1c range with a very low
carb diet and exercise. It would seem to me they have the only vlaid claim
for "cure" going by the a1c numbers. But still, a glucose challenge would
show he symptoms have been reversed, including a1c numbers, but the
diabetes exists still when accounting for beta cell loss.


Consider the state of beta cells as the ultimate state of diabetes:

Time for a New Classification System for Diabetes

http://care.diabetesjournals.org/content/39/2/179

Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD

unread,
May 23, 2016, 1:17:53 PM5/23/16
to
Someone eternally condemned and tormented opined:

>>>>>>>>>> CONCLUSIONS: A robust and sustainable weight loss program
>>>>>>>>>> achieved continuing remission of diabetes for at least 6 months
>>>>>>>>>> in the 40% who responded to a VLCD by achieving fasting plasma
>>>>>>>>>> glucose of <7 mmol/L. T2DM is a potentially reversible
>>>>>>>>>> condition.

Suggested background reading:
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.support.diabetes/V2oqBfGR9MY/3PJB0o0HAgAJ

>>>>> An a1c of < 7 is not what one would find in a "cure". The only relevant
>>>>> benchmark would be the 4.6 to 5 or so of the non-diabetic.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Not so according to the American Diabetes Association
>>>> who says that any eAG below 154(7.0) means the diabetes has gone into
>>>> remission. Mine is eAG is 134(6.3).
>>>
>>> "Cure" and remission are quite different.
>>
>> The dictionary descriptions may be...but essential actions
>> are the same. Remission is a return to the original state
>> in a great many cases, and that is the cure to be sought.
>>
>>> The 7 figure in the "conclusion"
>>> is the ada's number. It is also the numbner used in recent posts about a
>>> "cure".
>>>
>>> The only rational benchmark for same is the numbers of a non-diabetic be
>>> it the a1c or glucose challenge or similar test.
>>
>> Remission IS non diabetic, diabetic is an abnormal state,
>> where remission is a return to the original or near original
>> state.
>
> An 7 does not meet that definition.

Actually an eAG (estimated average glucose) < 7 mmol/L does in fact
"meet that definition."

The estimate average glucose **includes** postprandial glucose and is
calculated from the HgbA1c.

Source:
http://www.ngsp.org/A1ceAG.asp

I give all the glory ( http://bit.ly/Psalm112_1 ) to GOD for His
compelling you to continue to unwittingly demonstrate your inability
to comprehend the diagnosis of type-2 diabetes. The latter cognitive
deficit is a consequence of being more cursed (Jeremiah 17:5) by the
LORD our Mighty (Isaiah 9:6) GOD.

May GOD continue to curse (Jeremiah 17:5) you, who are eternally
condemned and tormented more than ever, in the name of Jesus Christ of
Nazareth. Amen.

ra...@val.com

unread,
May 23, 2016, 1:33:48 PM5/23/16
to
On 23 May 2016 16:46:19 GMT, ADA*-* wrote:
>Consider the state of beta cells as the ultimate state of diabetes:
And beta cell function was improved - Big Time.

First Phase Insulin Response was doubled!

Randy

ADA*-*

unread,
May 23, 2016, 1:49:38 PM5/23/16
to

>>Consider the state of beta cells as the ultimate state of diabetes:
>And beta cell function was improved - Big Time.
>
>First Phase Insulin Response was doubled!

As it is commonly almost absent in a type 2, twice of not much is not
much,no? There are tests for 1st phase, how did it compare to the
non-diabetic; the only benchmark for "cure" that is logical?

ADA*-*

unread,
May 23, 2016, 2:07:55 PM5/23/16
to

>>>>>>>>>>> CONCLUSIONS: A robust and sustainable weight loss program
>>>>>>>>>>> achieved continuing remission of diabetes for at least 6 months
>>>>>>>>>>> in the 40% who responded to a VLCD by achieving fasting plasma
>>>>>>>>>>> glucose of <7 mmol/L. T2DM is a potentially reversible
>>>>>>>>>>> condition.
>
>>>>>> An a1c of < 7 is not what one would find in a "cure". The only relevant
>>>>>> benchmark would be the 4.6 to 5 or so of the non-diabetic.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Not so according to the American Diabetes Association
>>>>> who says that any eAG below 154(7.0) means the diabetes has gone into
>>>>> remission. Mine is eAG is 134(6.3).
>>>>
>>>> "Cure" and remission are quite different.
>>>
>>> The dictionary descriptions may be...but essential actions
>>> are the same. Remission is a return to the original state
>>> in a great many cases, and that is the cure to be sought.
>>>
>>>> The 7 figure in the "conclusion"
>>>> is the ada's number. It is also the numbner used in recent posts about a
>>>> "cure".
>>>>
>>>> The only rational benchmark for same is the numbers of a non-diabetic be
>>>> it the a1c or glucose challenge or similar test.
>>>
>>> Remission IS non diabetic, diabetic is an abnormal state,
>>> where remission is a return to the original or near original
>>> state.
>>
>> An 7 does not meet that definition.
>
>Actually an eAG (estimated average glucose) < 7 mmol/L does in fact
>"meet that definition."
>
>The estimate average glucose **includes** postprandial glucose and is
>calculated from the HgbA1c.

Correct, but irrelevant to this discussion. And even more irrelevant with
the coming of continuous meters/methods so one has directed numbers not
derived ones.

If one has a 7 average which is in the 155 or so region, that means post
meal peaks exceed that to form an average 7 with the lows.

Those peaks are the source of the damage that causes complications. The
extended time the diabetic is in that peak post meal period, the more
damage results.

No "cure" seen in that bit.

Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD

unread,
May 23, 2016, 2:11:37 PM5/23/16
to
Someone eternally condemned and tormented wrote:

Suggested background reading:
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.med.cardiology/vnFABJwOeIY/TnwwdeySAgAJ

>>> Consider the state of beta cells as the ultimate state of diabetes:
>>
>> And beta cell function was improved - Big Time.
>>
>> First Phase Insulin Response was doubled!
>
> As it is commonly almost absent in a type 2

No.

Instead, "it is commonly almost absent" in a type 1.

In a type 2, "first phase insulin response" invariably still rises
above the basal insulin steady state level.

I give all the glory ( http://bit.ly/Psalm112_1 ) to GOD for His
compelling you to continue to unwittingly demonstrate that you are
unable to comprehend the diagnosis of type-2 diabetes. The latter
cognitive deficit is a consequence of being more cursed (Jeremiah
17:5) by the LORD our Mighty (Isaiah 9:6) GOD.

May GOD continue to curse you, who are eternally condemned and
tormented, more than ever, in the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth.
Amen.

Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD

unread,
May 23, 2016, 2:24:45 PM5/23/16
to
Someone eternally condemned and accursed wrote in part:

> If one has a 7 average which is in the 155 or so region, that means post
> meal peaks exceed that to form an average 7 with the lows.
>
> Those peaks are the source of the damage that causes complications.

Those peaks exceeding threshold to cause the "damage" that causes
type-2 diabetes happens in all who are http://bit.ly/TerriblyHungry
who are "wolfing down food to overeat to be full."

Addressing the cause does result in cure/remission/reversal:

http://WDJW.net/StopFoodOverdoseNow

I give all the glory ( http://bit.ly/Psalm112_1 ) to GOD for His
compelling you to continue to unwittingly demonstrate that you are
unable to comprehend cure for type-2 diabetes. The latter cognitive
deficit is a consequence of being more cursed (Jeremiah 17:5) by the
LORD our Mighty (Isaiah 9:6) GOD.

May GOD continue to curse (Jeremiah 17:5) you, who are eternally
condemned and tormented, more than ever, in the name of Jesus Christ
of Nazareth. Amen.

Francher

unread,
May 23, 2016, 3:14:15 PM5/23/16
to
My wife and I our two of those people who have achieved very low A1Cs.
My last was 4.9. We are both on a very low carb diet. However, after 15
years on this diet for my wife, and 8 for me, there has been no "cure"
whatever. If either of us eat something we should not, the meter will
tell us the bad news very quickly. We measure any unusual food for us by
checking BG every 10 minutes for 2 hours. This finds the peak for us. I
recently had a few bites of a birthday cake at a friends home. (my bad)
When I came home I was unpleasantly surprised (should not have been) to
see a spike go up to 160! Yikes. 140 is the spot where cellular damage
begins.

Again, from our experience, a VERY low carb diet is no cure for
diabetes. It is only a way of managing the disease. We consider this
management method better than using drugs. I have no T2 complications.
She had many serious complications, one very serious before she dropped
the carbs. These complications all resolved themselves except her
vision. Her full 20/20 vision was restored recently with two surgeries.
We both believe the T2 caused the cataracts. They had been so bad that
she could not even see stars at night.

Francher

BTW, my wife's complications condition was so bad that she dropped all
carbs for several months. Her improvement was so dramatic that she had
to be coaxed into eating some green vegetables now and then. She had
begun to see carbohydrate intake as equaling death for her and eating
carb free as life. There is some truth in this, but a vegetable intake
is important. The complication she was suffering with the most was heart
failure. A doctor friend of ours said she would be dead in 6 months if
she did not eat some carbs. I believe that statement was hyperbola but
had an ounce of truth.

Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD

unread,
May 23, 2016, 3:28:51 PM5/23/16
to
Francher wrote:

> My wife and I our two of those people who have achieved very low A1Cs.
> My last was 4.9.

Actually, 4.9 is **not** "very low" for someone who really no longer
has type-2 diabetes.

> We are both on a very low carb diet.

No one has been proposing that a "very low carb diet" brings about
remission/reversal/cure of type-2 diabetes.

Instead, what is being proposed really is actually
http://WDJW.net/NotDiet

RandyF wrote in part:

> "After the eight-week diet the volunteers returned to normal eating
> but had advice on healthy foods and portion size. Ten of the group
> were retested and seven had stayed free of diabetes."
> ************
> They didn't need drugs and were eating a typical higher carb diet.
>
> Here's the abstract
> http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27002059
> <snip>
> © 2016 by the American Diabetes Association. Readers may use this
> article as long as the work is properly cited, the use is educational
> and not for profit, and the work is not altered.

Suggested discussion reading:
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.med.cardiology/B-dJ_iWGRk8/y7Wt5hwlAQAJ
GysdeJongh wrote:
>
> Diabet Med. 2012 Oct 17. doi: 10.1111/dme.12039.
> The 2012 Banting Lecture Reversing the twin cycles of Type 2 diabetes.
>
> It has become widely accepted that type 2 diabetes is inevitably life-long,
> with irreversible and progressive beta cell damage. However, the restoration
> of normal glucose metabolism within days after bariatric surgery in the
> majority of people with type 2 diabetes disproves this concept. There is now
> no doubt that this reversal of diabetes depends upon the sudden and profound
> decrease in food intake, and does not relate to any direct surgical effect.
> The Counterpoint study demonstrated that normal glucose levels and normal
> beta cell function could be restored by a very low calorie diet alone. Novel
> magnetic resonance methods were applied to measure intra-organ fat. The
> results showed two different time courses: a) resolution of hepatic insulin
> sensitivity within days along with a rapid fall in liver fat and
> normalisation of fasting glucose levels; and b) return of normal beta cell
> insulin secretion over weeks in step with a fall in pancreas fat. Now that
> it has been possible to observe the pathophysiological events during
> reversal of type 2 diabetes, the reverse time course of events which
> determine the onset of the condition can be identified. The twin cycle
> hypothesis postulates that chronic calorie excess leads to accumulation of
> liver fat with eventual spill over into the pancreas. These self-reinforcing
> cycles between liver and pancreas eventually cause metabolic inhibition of
> insulin secretion after meals and onset of hyperglycaemia. It is now clear
> that Type 2 diabetes is a reversible condition of intra-organ fat excess to
> which some people are more susceptible than others.
> PMID: 23075228

Yes, stopping the causative overeating without harmful
undernourishment by holding to the right amount, which is 32 oz of
daily food, is the absolutely only **healthy** way to remove the
"intra-organ fat excess" ( http://WDJW.net/VAT ) that happens with
overeating:

https://groups.google.com/group/sci.med.cardiology/msg/48e684b2a336961e?

Yes, right amount ( http://WDJW.net/2PD-OMER Approach ) control as
Chris Malcolm, MU, **and** Rod Eastman (along with countless others
globally --> http://bit.ly/2015GHHS ) are doing is much more
sophisticated and smarter:

https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.support.diet.low-carb/ehvWZrH5Q9U/z0oHiET3Lo0J

and

https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.med.cardiology/1r72AsO3NuQ/VkYiWMDlLFIJ
**and**

https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.med.cardiology/OwIa247V2QA/taPvYBATA9oJ

https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.med.cardiology/2KcDOWlEcZM/7pDF83wuXwUJ

Don't be an Ayoob or you will most certainly die a
http://bit.ly/TerriblyStupid (Mark 9:42) death:

http://bit.ly/BiblicalEsau

Be hungrier, which really is wonderfully healthier especially for
diabetics and other heart disease patients:

http://WDJW.net/HeartDocAndrewToutsHunger (Luke 6:21a) with all glory
to GOD, Who causes us to hunger (Deuteronomy 8:3) when He blesses us
right now (Luke 6:21a) thereby removing the http://WDJW.net/VAT from
around the heart

... because we mindfully choose to openly care with our heart,

HeartDoc Andrew <><
--
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
Emory's IMVC.org cardiologist (GA Lic#040347)
and author of the 2PD-OMER Approach:
http://WDJW.net/Luke2442

ADA*-*

unread,
May 23, 2016, 4:06:43 PM5/23/16
to
>
>>>> Consider the state of beta cells as the ultimate state of diabetes:
>>>
>>> And beta cell function was improved - Big Time.
>>>
>>> First Phase Insulin Response was doubled!
>>
>> As it is commonly almost absent in a type 2
>
>No.
>
>Instead, "it is commonly almost absent" in a type 1.

Well da.>

>In a type 2, "first phase insulin response" invariably still rises
>above the basal insulin steady state level.

Sometimes, but starting near nothing, means even a small amount is "rises",
no?

Here is a good review of the topic:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11424229

In patients with impaired glucose tolerance or in the early stages of type
2 diabetes, first-phase insulin release is almost invariably lost despite
the enhancement of second-phase secretion.

Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD

unread,
May 23, 2016, 5:39:21 PM5/23/16
to
Bob Officer wrote:

>> Consider the state of beta cells as the ultimate state of diabetes:
>>
>> Time for a New Classification System for Diabetes
>>
>> http://care.diabetesjournals.org/content/39/2/179
>
> Interesting idea.
>
> It would stop the confusion brought about by possible abuse of of vague
> and misleading terminology

Actually, the terminology being addressed is the word "Diabetes" and
**not** remission/reversal/cure

Bob Officer wrote:
> RandyF wrote:
>> bob officer wrote:
>>> No the disease is never reverse, because either the cells that produce
>>> insulin are reduced in number, or the bodies ability to respond on a
>>> cellular level to changes in BGL and/or insulin has been effected by
>>> progress of the disease.
>>
>> But the responders in the paper under discussion Did *reverse* 1st
>> phase pancreatic response:
>> From the paper:
>> *************
>> "Recovery of acute insulin secretory capacity to nondiabetic
>> levels [20; 21] was seen in responders and not in non-responders"
>> ************

Source:
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.support.diabetes/KLXIdOuhRmM/jLHTMCEeAQAJ

>> That's* huge*. And to my mind - is something more than just *control*.
>
> Again the words "recovery" is not the same as "reversal".

Actually, it is synonymous/interchangeable just as six and half-dozen
are interchangeable/synonymous.

Analogously, synonymous is interchangeable with same :-)

Moreover, being wonderfully hungry is the same as having a healthy
appetite.

Reference:
http://InnovateWithAMA.com/project/detail/52

Again, I am wonderfully hungry and hope you, Bob, also have a healthy
appetite too.

So how are you ?









... because we mindfully choose to openly care with our heart,

HeartDoc Andrew <><
--
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
Emory's IMVC.org cardiologist (GA Lic#040347)
and author of the 2PD-OMER Approach:
http://JiL4ever.net/Luke2442

Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD

unread,
May 23, 2016, 6:03:52 PM5/23/16
to
Someone eternally condemned and tormented wrote:

Suggested background reading:
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.med.cardiology/vnFABJwOeIY/TnwwdeySAgAJ
>>>>> Consider the state of beta cells as the ultimate state of
diabetes:
>>>>
>>>> And beta cell function was improved - Big Time.
>>>>
>>>> First Phase Insulin Response was doubled!
>>>
>>> As it is commonly almost absent in a type 2
>>
>> No.
>>
>> Instead, "it is commonly almost absent" in a type 1.
>
> Well da.>
>
>> In a type 2, "first phase insulin response" invariably still rises
>> above the basal insulin steady state level.
>
> Sometimes

Invariably means always.

> , but starting near nothing

No, starting from basal which is "near nothing" in type-1 but not
type-2.

> , means even a small amount is "rises",
> no?

Though the "spike" (first-phase insulin release) of the post-prandial
rise in insulin levels may be gone, the response is still there as
evident by it running into an enhanced "second phase insulin release"
instead of generating a delayed "first phase insulin release."

>Here is a good review of the topic:
>
> http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11424229
>
> In patients with impaired glucose tolerance or in the early stages of type
> 2 diabetes, first-phase insulin release is almost invariably lost despite
> the enhancement of second-phase secretion.

Doubling the "first phase insulin response" as observed in cases of
remission/reversal/cure does in fact restore the "spike" (first-phase
insulin release) at the very beginning of the curve of post-prandial
insulin levels.

I gives all glory ( http://bit.ly/Psalm112_1 ) to GOD for His
compelling you to unwittingly continue to demonstrate that you are
unable to comprehend the diagnosis of type-2 diabetes. Again, the

some guy

unread,
May 23, 2016, 6:31:41 PM5/23/16
to
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD wrote:


can i eat 32 oz of pop tarts every day?

%

unread,
May 23, 2016, 6:35:38 PM5/23/16
to
some guy wrote:
> Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD wrote:
>
jesus is not god he's the son of god

Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD

unread,
May 23, 2016, 6:42:08 PM5/23/16
to
satan asked:

> can i eat 32 oz of pop tarts every day?

It is written that you are cursed (Genesis 3:14) to eat only dust.

Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD

unread,
May 23, 2016, 6:43:19 PM5/23/16
to
Persent answered:
> Bob Officer asked in part:
> <snip>

Suggested background reading:
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.med.cardiology/B-dJ_iWGRk8/y7Wt5hwlAQAJ

>
>> Where was this study published and peer reviewed?

http://care.diabetesjournals.org/content/39/5/808.long

> in my backyard

I am wonderfully hungry and hope you, Persent, also have a healthy
appetite too :-)

pyracantha

unread,
May 23, 2016, 6:46:52 PM5/23/16
to
Jesus Alou played for the Giants, he may have eaten pop tarts

32 ounces of pop tarts , the RDA , chung must concur

pyracantha

unread,
May 23, 2016, 6:48:23 PM5/23/16
to
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD wrote:

so 32 oz of pop tarts each day is ok according to you

Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD

unread,
May 23, 2016, 6:56:55 PM5/23/16
to
Someone eternally condemned and tormented wrote:
> RandyF wrote:
>
>>>> CONCLUSIONS: A robust and sustainable weight loss program
>>>> achieved continuing remission of diabetes for at least 6 months
>>>> in the 40% who responded to a VLCD by achieving fasting plasma
>>>> glucose of <7 mmol/L. T2DM is a potentially reversible
>>>> condition.

Source:
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.med.cardiology/B-dJ_iWGRk8/3rFYbfd6AwAJ

> An a1c of < 7 is not what one would find in a "cure". The only relevant
> benchmark would be the 4.6 to 5 or so of the non-diabetic.

All the glory ( http://bit.ly/Psalm112_1 ) to GOD for His compelling
you to unwittingly display your ignorance about the units of measure
for HgbA1c **not** being in mmol/L. Such ignorance is consistent with
your being more cursed (Jeremiah 17:5) by GOD.

Source:
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.med.cardiology/vnFABJwOeIY/FY-xqBsNAgAJ

May GOD continue to curse (Jeremiah 17:5) and torment you, who are
eternally condemned, more than ever, in the name of Jesus Christ of
Nazareth. Amen.


Someone eternally condemned and tormented wrote:
> RandyF wrote:
>
>>>> CONCLUSIONS: A robust and sustainable weight loss program
>>>> achieved continuing remission of diabetes for at least 6 months
>>>> in the 40% who responded to a VLCD by achieving fasting plasma
>>>> glucose of <7 mmol/L. T2DM is a potentially reversible
>>>> condition.

Source:
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.med.cardiology/B-dJ_iWGRk8/3rFYbfd6AwAJ

>>> The study had 30 people? And had only less than half classed as
>>> responders to the treatment.
>>
>> 50% cure rate is pretty impressive.
>
> The small number of participants in this study (30) doesn't inspire
> confidence in the results.

The purpose of a larger number (N) of partipants would be to ensure
that a study is adequately powered to detect a small effect.

The "small number" excuse to reject the results of a study would be
justified if there were **no** findings with the rationale being that
the study was underpowered to detect small effects and consequently
missed them.

Such an excuse is not applicable here since the "50% cure rate" is a
very large effect.

Clearly you have no comprehension of statistics. Such cognitive
deficits are consistent with your being more cursed (Jeremiah 17:5) by
GOD.

Source:
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.med.cardiology/B-dJ_iWGRk8/wH7GbAo5AAAJ

May GOD continue to curse (Jeremiah 17:5) and torment you, who are
eternally condemned, more than ever, in the name of Jesus Christ of
Nazareth. Amen.


Someone eternally condemned and tormented wrote:

>> In a type 2, "first phase insulin response" invariably still rises
>> above the basal insulin steady state level.

Source:
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.support.diabetes/V2oqBfGR9MY/fgBEB3OhAgAJ
May GOD continue to curse (Jeremiah 17:5) and torment you, who are
eternally condemned, more than ever, in the name of Jesus Christ of
Nazareth.
Amen.



Someone eternally condemned and tormented wrote:

> I forgive you.

Exposing you is not sin but rather it's keeping the LORD's commandment
(Matthew 5:16)

Many thanks, much praise, and all the glory to GOD for His compelling
you to remind us that we who are His http://WDJW.net/Redeemed have
already been http://WDJW.net/Forgiven by Him as evident by our being
new creatures in Christ (2 Corinthians 5:17) publicly saying "Jesus is
LORD" with our mouth (Romans 10:9) unto salvation (Romans 10:10) for
all to witness at Jesus' http://WDJW.net web site :-)

Laus Deo !!!

Source:
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.med.cardiology/1psFMsQWkAw/0V1sS3C-QZ8J



Someone eternally condemned and tormented wrote:

> "Finally, all of you be of one mind, having compassion for one another;
> love as brothers, be tenderhearted, be courteous." 1 Peter 3:8

Yes, this is directed towards those of us, who, unlike you who are
eternally condemned, have been http://WDJW.net/Redeemed as evident by
our publicly saying "Jesus is LORD" with our mouth (Romans 10:9) unto
salvation (Romans 10:10) for all to witness at our LORD's
http://WDJW.net/ web site and so we have compassion towards each other
instead of towards those like you who are being forever tormented by
the LORD our GOD, Who hates you just as He hates Esau (Malachi 1:2-3)
for his lying that hunger is starvation (Genesis 25:32).

> May God bless and protect and provide peace at last.

Many thanks, much praise, and all the glory to GOD for His compelling
you to unwittingly reveal that not only do you not know how to pray to
Him, you also do not have either His blessing or His protection or His
peace which is consistent with your being forever tormented by Him.

May GOD continue to openly curse (Jeremiah 17:5) and torment you, who
are eternally condemned, more than ever thereby ever comforting those
of us who are His http://WDJW.net/Redeemed in the name of Jesus Christ
of Nazareth. Amen.

Source:
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.med.cardiology/l962_mp1wzo/b9OPa1Mbmx4J



Someone eternally condemned and tormented wrote:

> I'm sorry ...

Those who say/write that they are sorry unwittingly reveal that they
are indeed accursed for those of us who are http://WDJW.net/Forgiven
always say/write with all due (Romans 13:8) love (1 Peter 3:8) that we
repent.

Many thanks, much praise, and all the glory to GOD for His compelling
you to unwittingly prove yet again that you are fovever accursed.

Source:
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.med.cardiology/Sz4t6AlA3Eo/RiUDbW9AwD4J



Someone eternally condemned and tormented wrote:
>
> not what goes into the mouth defiles a man, but what comes out of the
> mouth, this defiles a man. Matt. 15:11

Source:
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.med.cardiology/CZ8vV8ygnZw/xXiBrV7oVgwJ

Some additional examples:

https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.med.cardiology/VUmQFOoArtw/TrTeRjdCcgAJ

and

https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.med.cardiology/ize6zJm-cYE/BimXAx4trOcJ

Indeed, if what comes "out of the mouth" (Matthew 15:11) is either not
the phrase "wonderfully hungry" or doesn't cause (Deuteronomy 8:3)
others to be http://WDJW.net/WonderfullyHungrier now (Luke 6:21a) then
they are words that defile and prove that the source is like you who
are accursed like satan who is not hungry as evident by his eating
dust (Genesis 3:14) instead of real food.

Many thanks, much praise, and all glory to GOD for His compelling you
to unwittingly continue to prove that you are eternally condemned and
always accursed.

Source:
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.med.cardiology/bncjgZjc2q4/Km9VWrPGh68J



Someone eternally condemned and tormented wrote:

> Markea Berry ...

Source:
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.med.cardiology/XLpEpoxeecU/mOMtz7yzcMQJ

Some additional examples:

https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.med.cardiology/3N6bKuVT9Og/_B_GuBjcXMgJ

and

https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.med.cardiology/tnSQcYqVu5s/kQ2kdFSOxmAJ

Many thanks, much praise, and all the glory to GOD for His compelling
you to unwittingly allow us to know that Markea's
http://WDJW.net/Ghost is haunting you by cutting down members of your
household one by one in answer to our prayers to the LORD our GOD, in
the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth:

http://bit.ly/13G1gKE

Laus Deo !!!

http://WDJW.net/LausDeo


Someone eternally condemned and tormented wrote:
>
> "Bariatric surgeons have in the peer-reviewed medical literature documented
> cases of type-2 diabetes being cured,"

Source:
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.med.cardiology/B-dJ_iWGRk8/1fQmfxxrAQAJ

> False, they only go as far as saying "reverse" or some similar term.

"Reverse" is a similar term to cure in that they are interchangeable
(i.e. synonymous):

To reverse type-1 diabetes would be to cure it.

To reverse Multiple Sclerosis would be to cure it.

To reverse Parkinson's disease would be to cure it.

CHECKMATE :-)

I give all the glory ( http://bit.ly/Psalm112_1 ) to GOD for His
compelling you to unwittingly CHECKMATE yourself here. The latter
self-defeat is consistent with your being more cursed (Jeremiah 17:5)
by the LORD our Mighty (Isaiah 9:6) GOD.

May GOD continue to curse (Jeremiah 17:5) you, who are eternally
condemned and tormented, more than ever, in the name of Jesus Christ
of Nazareth.

Amen.

HeartDoc Andrew <><
--
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
Emory's IMVC.org cardiologist (GA Lic#040347)
and author of the 2PD-OMER Approach:
http://WDJW.net/Luke2442

pyracantha

unread,
May 23, 2016, 7:00:17 PM5/23/16
to
can i eat 32 oz of pop tarts each day?

Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD

unread,
May 23, 2016, 7:26:06 PM5/23/16
to
Someone eternally condemned and tormented asked:

> can i eat 32 oz of pop tarts each day?

No according to Genesis 3:14

pyracantha

unread,
May 23, 2016, 7:30:34 PM5/23/16
to
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD wrote:

> pyracantha wrote:


> > can i eat 32 oz of pop tarts each day?


> No according to Genesis 3:14


i'm a human being asking you if i can eat 32 oz of pop tarts each day

%

unread,
May 23, 2016, 7:34:39 PM5/23/16
to
you can even eat 33 if you like

pyracantha

unread,
May 23, 2016, 7:39:56 PM5/23/16
to
that wouldn't be in accord with Dr. Chung's dietary recommendation of 32
oz of food per day.

Maya Zuiderweg

unread,
May 23, 2016, 7:45:36 PM5/23/16
to
pyracantha schreef :
..you'll be eternally damned forever and ever.. :oÞ


Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD

unread,
May 23, 2016, 7:50:03 PM5/23/16
to
Someone eternally condemned and tormented wrote:
>
>> > can i eat 32 oz of pop tarts each day?
>
>> No according to Genesis 3:14
>
> i'm a human being asking you if i can eat 32 oz of pop tarts each day

Eternally condemned and tormented Judas Iscariot was a human being too
until satan entered into him.

Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD

unread,
May 23, 2016, 7:50:51 PM5/23/16
to
Persent answered:
> Bob Officer asked in part:
> <snip>

Suggested background reading:
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.med.cardiology/B-dJ_iWGRk8/y7Wt5hwlAQAJ

>
>> Where was this study published and peer reviewed?

http://care.diabetesjournals.org/content/39/5/808.long

> in my backyard

I am wonderfully hungry and hope you, Persent, also have a healthy
appetite too :-)

So how are you ?








... because we mindfully choose to openly care with our heart,

HeartDoc Andrew <><
--
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
Emory's IMVC.org cardiologist (GA Lic#040347)
and author of the 2PD-OMER Approach:
http://JiL4ever.net/Luke2442

pyracantha

unread,
May 23, 2016, 7:52:35 PM5/23/16
to
Maya Zuiderweg schreef:
> ..you'll be eternally damned forever and ever.. :oŞ


Dr. Chung is not in the position to remove the Holy Spirit from me.

he would be close to blaspheming the Holy Spirit himself

inasmuch as he has called me "satan" albeit, one may be

a 'satan' as in 'adversarial' and not be The Devil

but i'm not even being adversarial with Dr. Chung, anyway

i simply ask if i can eat 32 oz of pop tarts each day.

he's being defensive for no reason.

pyracantha

unread,
May 23, 2016, 7:54:49 PM5/23/16
to
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD wrote:

> pyracantha wrote:

> >> > can i eat 32 oz of pop tarts each day?

> >> No according to Genesis 3:14

> > i'm a human being asking you if i can eat 32 oz of pop tarts each day

> Eternally condemned and tormented Judas Iscariot was a human being too
> until satan entered into him.


asking if one may eat 32 oz of pop tarts each day is not evidence

that 'satan' has entered into anyone.

take care not to blaspheme the Holy Spirit Mr. Chung.

Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD

unread,
May 23, 2016, 8:00:04 PM5/23/16
to
Maya Zuiderweg wrote:
> Someone eternally condemned and tormented wrote:
>> % wrote:
>>> Someone eternally condemned and tormented wrote:
>>>> Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote:
>>>>> Someone eternally condemned and tormented asked:
>>
>>>>>> can i eat 32 oz of pop tarts every day?
>>
>>>>> It is written that you are cursed (Genesis 3:14) to eat only dust.

Source:
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.med.cardiology/vnFABJwOeIY/Nq1_7FKoAgAJ

>>>> so 32 oz of pop tarts each day is ok according to you
>>
>>> you can even eat 33 if you like
>>
>> that wouldn't be in accord with Dr. Chung's dietary recommendation of 32
>> oz of food per day.
>
>..you'll be eternally damned forever and ever.. :oŞ

Such is the condition of those cursed (Genesis 3:14) to eat dust
instead of food.

Yes, they are terribly **not** hungry.

I am instead wonderfully hungry and hope you, Maya, also have a

pyracantha

unread,
May 23, 2016, 8:02:59 PM5/23/16
to
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD wrote:

> Maya Zuiderweg wrote:

> > pyracantha wrote:

> >> % wrote:


> >>>>>> can i eat 32 oz of pop tarts every day?


> >>>>> It is written that you are cursed (Genesis 3:14) to eat only dust.


> >>>> so 32 oz of pop tarts each day is ok according to you


> >>> you can even eat 33 if you like


> >> that wouldn't be in accord with Dr. Chung's dietary
> >> recommendation of 32 oz of food per day.

> >..you'll be eternally damned forever and ever.. :oŞ

> Such is the condition of those cursed (Genesis 3:14) to eat dust
> instead of food.

> Yes, they are terribly **not** hungry.


i'm hungry, i like pop tarts they come in a wide variety

Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD

unread,
May 23, 2016, 8:12:58 PM5/23/16
to
Someone eternally condemned and tormented wrote:
> Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote:
>> Someone eternally condemned and tormented asked:
>
>> >> > can i eat 32 oz of pop tarts each day?
>
>> >> No according to Genesis 3:14
>
>> > i'm a human being asking you if i can eat 32 oz of pop tarts each day
>
>> Eternally condemned and tormented Judas Iscariot was a human being too
>> until satan entered into him.
>
>
> asking if one may eat 32 oz of pop tarts each day is not evidence
> that 'satan' has entered into anyone.

Otoh, lack of discernment is evidence that satan has entered into you.

> take care not to blaspheme the Holy Spirit Mr. Chung.

Referring to yourself as the Holy Spirit is in fact blaspheming
against Him.

I give all glory ( http://bit.ly/Psalm112_1 ) to GOD for His
compelling you to unwittingly prove that you are eternally condemned.
The latter is a consequence of being more cursed (Jeremiah 17:5) by
the LORD our Mighty (Isaiah 9:6) GOD.

May GOD continue to curse (Jeremiah 17:5) and torment you, who are
eternally condemned, more than ever, in the name of Jesus Christ of
Nazareth. Amen.

Source:
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.med.cardiology/vnFABJwOeIY/Nq1_7FKoAgAJ

pyracantha

unread,
May 23, 2016, 8:20:01 PM5/23/16
to
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD wrote:

> pyracantha wrote:

> > Andrew wrote:

> >> pyracantha wrote:

> >> >> > can i eat 32 oz of pop tarts each day?

> >> >> No according to Genesis 3:14

> >> > i'm a human being asking you if i can eat 32 oz of pop tarts each day

> >> Eternally condemned and tormented Judas Iscariot was a human being too
> >> until satan entered into him.


> > asking if one may eat 32 oz of pop tarts each day is not evidence
> > that 'satan' has entered into anyone.

> Otoh, lack of discernment is evidence that satan has entered into you.


i ask again, in your opinion, can i eat 32 oz of pop tarts each day?


> > take care not to blaspheme the Holy Spirit Mr. Chung.

> Referring to yourself as the Holy Spirit is in fact blaspheming
> against Him.


not that i have done so, but it is not, blasheming the Holy Spirit
to align oneself with the Holy Spirit

but you are near blaspheming the Holy Spirit when you call
one filled with the Holy Spirit filled with a demon.

Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD

unread,
May 23, 2016, 8:38:21 PM5/23/16
to
Someone eternally condemned and tormented perseverated:
> Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote:
>> Someone eternally condemned and tormented wrote:
>> > Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote:
>> >> Someone eternally condemned and tormented asked:
>
>> >> >> > can i eat 32 oz of pop tarts each day?
>
>> >> >> No according to Genesis 3:14
>
>> >> > i'm a human being asking you if i can eat 32 oz of pop tarts each day
>
>> >> Eternally condemned and tormented Judas Iscariot was a human being too
>> >> until satan entered into him.
>
>> > asking if one may eat 32 oz of pop tarts each day is not evidence
>> > that 'satan' has entered into anyone.
>
>> Otoh, lack of discernment is evidence that satan has entered into you.
>
> i ask again, in your opinion, can i eat 32 oz of pop tarts each day?

Again, the answer is no according to Genesis 3:14

>> > take care not to blaspheme the Holy Spirit Mr. Chung.
>
>> Referring to yourself as the Holy Spirit is in fact blaspheming
>> against Him.
>
> not that i have done so

Actually you have.

>, but it is not, blasheming the Holy Spirit
> to align oneself with the Holy Spirit

To write that you "align oneself with the Holy Spirit" as if He were
comparable in size to yourself is to again blaspheme against Him.

I give all glory ( http://bit.ly/Psalm112_1 ) to GOD for His

pyracantha

unread,
May 23, 2016, 8:47:14 PM5/23/16
to
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD wrote:

> pyracantha wrote:

> > Andrew wrote:

> >> pyracantha wrote

> >> > Andrew wrote:

> >> >> pyracantha wrote:

> >> >> >> > can i eat 32 oz of pop tarts each day?

> >> >> >> No according to Genesis 3:14

> >> >> > i'm a human being asking you if i can eat 32 oz of pop tarts each day

> >> >> Eternally condemned and tormented Judas Iscariot was a human being too
> >> >> until satan entered into him.

> >> > asking if one may eat 32 oz of pop tarts each day is not evidence
> >> > that 'satan' has entered into anyone.

> >> Otoh, lack of discernment is evidence that satan has entered into you.

> > i ask again, in your opinion, can i eat 32 oz of pop tarts each day?

> Again, the answer is no according to Genesis 3:14


so the Chung dietary plan is not just; "32 oz of food per day"

32 oz of pop tarts are excluded even though pop tarts

come in a delicious wide variety.

"32 oz of food per day" is not a working dietary plan.

"32 oz of food per day" is just a nonsense tale

%

unread,
May 23, 2016, 8:48:48 PM5/23/16
to
who cares

Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD

unread,
May 23, 2016, 8:54:06 PM5/23/16
to
Persent answered:
> Bob Officer asked in part:
> <snip>

Suggested background reading:
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.med.cardiology/B-dJ_iWGRk8/y7Wt5hwlAQAJ

>
>> Where was this study published and peer reviewed?

http://care.diabetesjournals.org/content/39/5/808.long

> in my backyard

I am wonderfully hungry and hope you, Persent, also have a healthy
appetite too :-)

So how are you ?








... because we mindfully choose to openly care with our heart,

HeartDoc Andrew <><
--
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
Emory's IMVC.org cardiologist (GA Lic#040347)
and author of the 2PD-OMER Approach:
http://JiL4ever.net/Luke2442

Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD

unread,
May 23, 2016, 8:55:28 PM5/23/16
to
Someone eternally condemned and tormented perseverated:
> Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote:
>> Someone eternally condemned and tormented wrote:
>> > Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote:
>> >> Someone eternally condemned and tormented asked:
>
>> >> >> > can i eat 32 oz of pop tarts each day?
>
>> >> >> No according to Genesis 3:14
>
>> >> > i'm a human being asking you if i can eat 32 oz of pop tarts each day
>
>> >> Eternally condemned and tormented Judas Iscariot was a human being too
>> >> until satan entered into him.
>
>> > asking if one may eat 32 oz of pop tarts each day is not evidence
>> > that 'satan' has entered into anyone.
>
>> Otoh, lack of discernment is evidence that satan has entered into you.
>
> i ask again, in your opinion, can i eat 32 oz of pop tarts each day?

Again, the answer is no according to Genesis 3:14

pyracantha

unread,
May 23, 2016, 9:00:33 PM5/23/16
to
good for who, or maybe not so good for who inasmuch as the Chung
dietary plan seems indefensible except by demonizing anyone who
even asks simple questions about it.

pyracantha

unread,
May 23, 2016, 9:01:40 PM5/23/16
to
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD wrote:

> pyracantha wrote:

> > Andrew wrote:

> >> pyracantha wrote

> >> > Andrew wrote:

> >> >> pyracantha wrote:

> >> >> >> > can i eat 32 oz of pop tarts each day?

> >> >> >> No according to Genesis 3:14

> >> >> > i'm a human being asking you if i can eat 32 oz of pop tarts each day

> >> >> Eternally condemned and tormented Judas Iscariot was a human being too
> >> >> until satan entered into him.

> >> > asking if one may eat 32 oz of pop tarts each day is not evidence
> >> > that 'satan' has entered into anyone.

> >> Otoh, lack of discernment is evidence that satan has entered into you.

> > i ask again, in your opinion, can i eat 32 oz of pop tarts each day?

> Again, the answer is no according to Genesis 3:14


pyracantha

unread,
May 23, 2016, 9:03:48 PM5/23/16
to
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD wrote:


> So how are you ?


i'm fine, i have very healthy appetite, but as we see

Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD

unread,
May 23, 2016, 9:10:07 PM5/23/16
to
Someone eternally condemned and tormented perseverated:
> Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote:
>> Someone eternally condemned and tormented wrote:
>> > Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote:
>> >> Someone eternally condemned and tormented asked:
>
>> >> >> > can i eat 32 oz of pop tarts each day?
>
>> >> >> No according to Genesis 3:14
>
>> >> > i'm a human being asking you if i can eat 32 oz of pop tarts each day
>
>> >> Eternally condemned and tormented Judas Iscariot was a human being too
>> >> until satan entered into him.
>
>> > asking if one may eat 32 oz of pop tarts each day is not evidence
>> > that 'satan' has entered into anyone.
>
>> Otoh, lack of discernment is evidence that satan has entered into you.
>
> i ask again, in your opinion, can i eat 32 oz of pop tarts each day?

Again, the answer is no according to Genesis 3:14

pyracantha

unread,
May 23, 2016, 9:13:28 PM5/23/16
to

%

unread,
May 23, 2016, 11:08:34 PM5/23/16
to
you have a chung obsession

pyracantha

unread,
May 24, 2016, 7:58:00 AM5/24/16
to
if chun king made egg roll pop tarts then you'd be on to something

as it is, you're just dabbling in armchair psychiatry

The Office of Disease Prevention and Health Promotion will
not soon be adopting the Chung Dietary guidelines, as

"32 oz of food each day"

says zero about nutirent density and this is not
explicitly stated in the proposed Chung guideline.

"32 oz of a wide variety of delicious food"

is equally useless and vapid

one could take the Chung guideline and
eat only 32 oz of pop tarts each day.

when confronted with the failures of his guideline, he will only say;

"satan has possessed you to fault my dietary guideline"

he'll never likely suffer a malpractice suit because when a judge
bangs his gavel, Chung will scream;

"satan has possessed you judge, may you be eternally cursed"

and the bailiff will escort mr. chung to a holding cell
on a contempt of court citation pending a thorough mental examination.

it'll never get to trial, much like the Chung guideline itself.

duke

unread,
May 24, 2016, 7:58:05 AM5/24/16