FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups 
 ProfileProfile   PreferencesPreferences   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 
Forum index » Medicine forums » cardiology
Andrew B. Chung FAQ question
Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 1 of 1 [2 Posts] View previous topic :: View next topic
Author Message
Bob (this one)
medicine forum Guru


Joined: 28 Apr 2005
Posts: 1196

PostPosted: Tue May 03, 2005 6:05 pm    Post subject: Andrew B. Chung FAQ question Reply with quote

The title says January, 2004. So far as I know, it has never been
updated since then. Looks to be about time to do that. He's developed
lots of new "tricks" that aren't in this one.

It's hilarious how his FAKE FAQ mirrors the form and style of this one -
the original one. And as he decides that people are his enemies, more
and more appear in the FAKE FAQ with more and more scurrilous
"information" attached to them.

Pastorio

----------------------------------------------------------------




---------------------------------
|The Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD FAQ|
| Version 1.0, January, 2004 |
---------------------------------

Introduction
------------
New people arriving in sci.med.cardiology (s.m.c.) are often puzzled and
troubled by the controversy surrounding the poster who posts as Dr.
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD (Dr. Chung) and want to know what the
controversy is about. This FAQ (Frequently Asked Questions) attempts to
provide an answer.

The FAQ is arranged in typical FAQ form, i.e. a series of questions and
answers. For those who donít wish to read the whole FAQ, the following
summary is provided.

Summary
-------
Dr. Chung represents himself to be a licensed physician specializing in
cardiology. In this capacity he responds to medical questions on s.m.c..
If that were all he did, there would probably be no controversy.

The controversy arises from Dr. Chungís other behaviors on s.m.c., in
particular:

o He uses s.m.c. to not only proselytize his particular interpretation
of Christianity, but also to disparage and attack anyone with a
different interpretation or different religion.

o He uses s.m.c. to promote his unscientific Two Pound Diet (2PD) and,
in fact, cross posts this information to other groups in order to gain
more exposure.

o When challenged on the above issues, or one of his medical opinions,
he attacks his challengers as "obsessive anti-Christians", "libelers",
"homosexuals", "people who canít understand English", etc.

o When challenged he performs Internet searches on his challengers in
order to "get the dirt" on them and smear their reputations.

o When challenged, he answers with evasions, non sequiturs,
dissembling, rhetorical questions, quotes from the bible, religious
mantras, thinly veiled death threats, ad hominem arguments, and other
such disreputable, unethical, and unprofessional tactics.

o He is insufferably full of himself, claiming to have "the gift of
Truth Discernment" and to be "Humble" while behaving anything but humbly.

o He uses a foil who posts under variations of the name "Mu" to avoid
killfiles. Muís job is to troll other newsgroups and, when he gets a
reaction, to cross post the reaction to s.m.c. so that Dr. Chung can
disingenuously claim to be "only responding" to a cross post. Whereas
Dr. Chung has to be somewhat careful what he says and so attacks
primarily through insinuation and innuendo, Muís tactics are blunt and
direct like those of a playground bully.

The above lists only the highlights of Dr. Chungís egregious behavior on
s.m.c.. If anything, it understates it. Everything can be verified in
the Google archives.

The issue then arises: so what? As long as Dr. Chung provides free
medical advice on s.m.c., who cares what else he does?

Many people provide free medical advice on the internet. How does one
know whether it is good advice or bad advice? If the person giving the
advice is, or represents himself to be, a doctor shouldnít that be
enough? Unfortunately, no.

Medical education alone is not enough to guarantee good advice.
Knowledge must be tempered with judgment, impartiality, integrity,
ethics, and professionalism. If someone consistently demonstrates by
their behavior that they lack these qualities, how much credence should
be given to their medical advice?

People arrive in this group looking for help. For their own protection,
they deserve to know the quality of the person purporting to dispense
that help and not be lulled into a false sense of security simply
because someone displays an MD after their name. It is the intention of
this FAQ to provide people with enough information to allow them to make
an informed decision.

List of Questions Answered
--------------------------
1. Who is Dr. Andrew B Chung, MD/PhD?
2. What is the Charter of s.m.c.?
3. Aren't Religious Discussions Covered by the Charter?
4. So Dr. Chung is Religious... What's the Problem With That?
5. But it's Just a Little "Tag Line" in His Signature.
6. But I'm a Christian Too!
7. Well, Why Not Just Ignore His Religious Rants?
8. But Isn't It Wonderful That Dr. Chung Offers This Free
Medical Advice Out of the Goodness of His Heart?
9. How Does a Practicing Physician Find so Much Time to Spend on
Usenet?
10. Won't Challenging Dr. Chung Drive People Away?
11. Doesn't the "Fault" for all Those Posts Lay With Those Who
Challenge Dr. Chung?
12. Why Do I see So Many "Ad Hominem" Attacks?
13. I'm Sick of Seeing All This!
14. What is the Two Pound Diet?
15. Is Discussion of the Two Pound Diet "On Topic"?
16. Who is Mu?
17. What is Mu's Role?


1. Who is Dr. Andrew B Chung, MD/PhD?
--------------------------------------
The poster who posts as Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD claims to be a
licensed physician, practicing internal medicine in Atlanta, Georgia,
USA and specializing in cardiology. His signature contains a link to a
website which is consistent with his posts.

It should be noted that anyone can claim to be anyone on Usenet and so
caution is always advised. Indeed there are those who claim that the
poster in question is not Dr. Andrew B. Chung, or is not the Dr. Andrew
B. Chung listed in the Atlanta telephone directory, and/or has lost his
license and/or hospital privileges for misconduct. This FAQ does not
attempt to address those claims one way or the other. The reader with an
interest in these matters can easily find the relevant discussions
archived in Google Groups.

This FAQ deals with the poster who posts as Dr. Chung and restricts
itself to issues demonstrated by those posts. No position is taken on
his "true" identity.

2. What is the Charter of s.m.c.?
----------------------------------
The purpose of this newsgroup is to establish electronic media for
communication between health care providers, scientists and other
individuals with interest in the cardiovascular field. Such
communications will provide quick and efficacious means to exchange
information and knowledge, and offer problems to solutions.

The sci.med.cardiology newsgroup will welcome participants who are
health care providers, trainees, researchers, students or recipients
with interest in the field of cardiovascular problems."

(ftp://ftp.uu.net/usenet/news.announce.newgroups/sci/sci.med.cardiology)

3. Arenít Religious Discussions Covered by the Charter?
--------------------------------------------------------
What do you think?

4. So Dr. Chung is Religious... Whatís the Problem With That?
--------------------------------------------------------------
There is no problem with that. Most of the people who participate in
s.m.c. are probably religious. However no one but Dr. Chung feels
compelled to characterize themselves as the "Humble Servant of God" in
their signatures, continually thank God for the opportunity to
"witness", question others about their religious beliefs, claim the
"Gift of Truth Discernment", etc.

When one person insists on introducing his personal religious
interpretations into the discussions, it naturally generates responses
from others who feel just as strongly that their viewpoints are correct.
The resulting debate easily swirls out of control, especially given Dr.
Chungís intolerant and dismissive attitude towards beliefs which differ
from his. The situation is further exacerbated by Muís rabble raising
from the sidelines.

There are over 160 Usenet groups dedicated to the discussion of
religion. Dr. Chung should take his beliefs to one of these and stick to
cardiology in s.m.c. It is a simple matter of respect for others.

5. But itís Just a Little "Tag Line" in His Signature.
-------------------------------------------------------
No, it is not. He has even gone so far as to "investigate" someone
asking for advice about stents and accuse her of being anti-Christian.

6. But IĻm a Christian Too!
----------------------------
Lots of people are Christians. There is a time and a place for
everything. s.m.c. isnít the place to "witness" or recruit. In addition,
lots of other people are Jews, Moslems, Buddhists, Taoists, Hindus, etc.
Would s.m.c. be better or worse if they all emulated Dr. Chung in their
proselytizing and recruiting?

Furthermore, if you are a Christian, you should be appalled by Dr.
Chungís pharisaical, cynical, and manipulative use of Christianity. He
is truly a "whitened sepulcher", loudly proclaiming his adherence to
Christian values while overtly lying, carrying on smear campaigns
against others, making false accusations, dissembling, and marketing his
web site under the guise of altruism. He is "bearing false witness" and
true Christians should be concerned.

As an example, when John Ritter recently died unexpectedly, Dr. Chung
rushed to use this unfortunate event to market his web site. He showed a
total lack of Christian compassion for Mr. Ritter and his family, even
when challenged to do so.

As another example, he recently choreographed a smear campaign against a
poster who had criticized him. Dr. Chung found a homosexual author with
the same first name and then insinuated that the poster and anyone who
agreed with him were engaged in a homosexual relationship. Ask yourself
if this the brand of Christianity you identify with.

7. Well, Why Not Just Ignore His Religious Rants?
--------------------------------------------------
Why should one individual be given carte blanche to violate the rights
of everyone else? Usenet is a community. It is up to the community to
sanction its members. There is nothing "ad hominem" about challenging
inappropriate and antisocial behavior.

8. But Isnít It Wonderful That Dr. Chung Offers This Free Medical Advice
Out of the Goodness of His Heart?
----------------------------------------------------------
First, it is only of value if it is good advice. Medical education alone
is not enough to guarantee good advice. Knowledge must be tempered with
judgment, impartiality, integrity, ethics, and professionalism. If
someone consistently demonstrates by their behavior that they lack these
qualities, how much credence should be given to their medical advice?

Secondly, despite his protestations to the contrary, Dr. Chung is not
simply motivated by altruism. Every post of Dr. Chung's contains a link
to a website with the following quote:

"If you are looking for a cardiologist and reside in Georgia, please
consider me your best option for a personal heart advocate. Check out
my credentials and my background. Additional information is available
in the protected sections of this web site. Email me at
cardiolog...@heartmdphd.com to me of your interest and I may send you a
temporary username and password to allow a preview. The more
information you email, the more likely my decision to send you a
temporary username and password. If you like what you see and learn
from this website and wish to confer with me about your heart, you or
your doctor should email me privately or call my voicemail at
404-699-2780 to schedule an appointment to see me at my *real* office."
(http://www.heartmdphd.com/office.asp)

Thirdly, Dr. Chung has repeatedly stated that one of his key motivations
for participating is s.m.c. is to "witness" and win converts to his
religious beliefs.

9. How Does a Practicing Physician Find so Much Time to Spend on Usenet?
------------------------------------------------------------------
An interesting question.

10. Wonít Challenging Dr. Chung Drive People Away?
--------------------------------------------------
Perhaps. But not challenging him will drive others away.

s.m.c. is historically a "low traffic" group. Therefore, when Dr. Chung
misbehaves, he generates an apparently large response. This is
compounded by Dr. Chungís need to "get in the last word" and Muís
provocations. In spite of this, if someone has a question it will
usually be answered.

Dr. Chung is not the only participant who offers advice in s.m.c. He is
not even the only doctor who participates in s.m.c. However, the
controversy he generates and sustains often makes it appear that he is
the "only game in town".

Finally, Dr. Chung himself drives others away including other physicians
who leave in disgust after being verbally assaulted by him, and other
knowledgeable posters who point out where Dr. Chungís medical opinion
might be in error or at least not the only one generally held. Anyone
disagreeing with Dr. Chung on any subject can expect a series of
increasingly vitriolic attacks, including threats of libel suits.

11. Doesn't the "Fault" for all Those Posts Lay With Those Who Challenge
Dr. Chung?
--------------------------------------------------------------
An interesting perspective: blame the victim. No other poster (with the
exception of Mu, of course) introduces religion or the Two Pound Diet.
How can it be acceptable for Dr. Chung to introduce these topics, but
not acceptable for others to respond?

In any thread, someone must, of necessity "get the last word". Dr. Chung
has amply demonstrated that he will not be outdone in this respect.

12. Why Do I see So Many "Ad Hominem" Attacks?
----------------------------------------------
You are probably referring to an "Ad Hominem" _argument_, which attempts
to disprove an adversary's fact by personal attack on the adversary. An
example would be "You are opposed to the Two Pound Diet because you are
anti-Christian".

When someone misbehaves, for example lies or distorts what someone else
is saying, it is not an "ad hominem attack" to call them on it. It is a
legitimate social sanction.

There are also, unfortunately too often, simple personal attacks and
insults on both sides. While we can all wish it weren't so, it is simply
human nature when an argument becomes heated or the other person is
obviously not arguing in good faith. If you are distressed by this, see
the next question.

13. I'm Sick of Seeing All This!
--------------------------------
There is no reason why you have to see it. Just as you can change the TV
channel if you don't like a show, you can killfile a poster or thread
you don't want to see. See the manual that came with your Usenet reader
for directions on how to do it.

Before you do this, however, you may wish to consider if a truer picture
of the world is not gained by seeing all that goes on - both the good
and the bad.

14. What is the Two Pound Diet?
-------------------------------
The Two pound Diet is a diet which Dr. Chung "invented". Itís only rule
is to restrict yourself to two pounds of food per day. Thatís it.
Doesnít matter if you are a 16 year old girl or an 80 year old man; a 5Ļ
2" woman or a 7Ļ man; a weight lifter or a mattress tester. Two pounds.
Thatís it. No more, less if you want. One size fits all.

Oh, and the food? Whatever you want: two pounds of lettuce, two pounds
of ice cream, two pounds of celery, two pounds of bacon, two pounds of
chocolate, two pounds of peanuts... doesnít matter. Mix and match. Just
keep it under two pounds.

Dr. Chungís claim is that this magical weight of food, this universal
gustatory constant will cause everyone to arrive at and maintain their
ideal weight. His scientific basis for this claim: none. The proof he
offers: none. Studies supporting this claim: none. Nutritional
explanation: none. Metabolic explanation: none.

And this from a doctor who expects people to take him seriously on other
issues.

15. Is Discussion of the Two Pound Diet "On Topic"?
---------------------------------------------------
Dr. Chung says it is because being overweight is a risk factor for heart
problems and therefore discussion of the Two Pound Diet is On Topic.
However criticism of the Two Pound Diet is Off Topic as is discussion of
any other diet.

As with religion, Dr. Chung takes every opportunity to introduce the Two
Pound Diet (2PD) into any other thread. In addition Mu trolls other
newsgroups, particularly the diet groups looking for opportunities to
introduce the 2PD in these groups and then cross post the resulting
discussion back to s.m.c so that Dr. Chung can disingenuously claim to
be "only responding" to a cross post.

Since Dr. Chung and Mu have been laughed off of these other groups and
have been asked repeatedly not to bring up the 2PD in them, participants
of these groups are understandably angered when it happens yet againä
and, because of Muís cross-posting, all their anger spills back into s.m.c.

Another reason for ongoing 2PD discussions is Dr. Chungís habit of
researching anyone who criticizes the 2PD and then cross-posting his
responses back to other groups which the critic has been found to
frequent. He disingenuously claims that he does this as a "convenience"
to the critic, but his true reasons are transparent. Once again, the
cross-post generates a firestorm in s.m.c.

The bottom line is that if the Two Pound Diet is "On Topic" for anyone,
it is "On Topic" for everyone... including it's critics. If it is "Off
Topic", it should not be continually re-introduced by Dr. Chung.

16. Who is Mu?
--------------
Mu is a longtime Usenet Troll who has even merited his own FAQ. He
postures as some kind of personal physical trainer, but who really
knows? He has allied himself with Dr. Chung and serves as the "Bad Cop"
in the Chung - Mu "Good Cop - Bad Cop" routine. He specializes in the
short, nasty one-liner and, because unlike Dr. Chung, he has no
reputation to protect, he can afford to be much more direct and offensive.

Mu parrots an even meaner-spirited version of Dr. Chungís "Christianity"
and does not hesitate to employ anti-Semitism and homophobia in his attacks.

Naturally, most people would have long ago killfiled Mu, so he changes
his handle on an almost daily basis.

17. What is Muís Role?
----------------------
Muís role is to troll other newsgroups and, when he gets a reaction, to
cross post the reaction to s.m.c. so that Dr. Chung can disingenuously
claim to be "only responding" to a cross post.

Mu is also responsible for pitching softballs to Dr. Chung so he can hit
them out of the park, and for re-introducing religion and the Two Pound
Diet should the discussion flag.

Finally, Muís role is to tirelessly wear down unsuspecting Dr. Chung
critics, deflecting the blows that would otherwise be aimed at Dr.
Chung. He is Dr. Chungís Internet equivalent of the "rope-a-dope".
Insults roll off him like water off a duck as do attempts to reason with
him or even have a civil discussion.

Most people have learned to ignore him and his comment is usually the
last one in any thread sub-tree where it appears.

Comments and/or corrections to this FAQ will be taken under advisement.
Back to top
GaryG
medicine forum Guru


Joined: 24 Apr 2005
Posts: 525

PostPosted: Tue May 03, 2005 7:39 pm    Post subject: Re: Andrew B. Chung FAQ question Reply with quote

"Bob (this one)" <Bob@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:117fme89quv0ie3@corp.supernews.com...
Quote:
The title says January, 2004. So far as I know, it has never been
updated since then. Looks to be about time to do that. He's developed
lots of new "tricks" that aren't in this one.

Good point. It seems that lately Chung is less inclined to respond with
"Ouch. You may have the other cheek." than he is to infer that the poster
is mentally ill, or has defective genes.

GG

Quote:

It's hilarious how his FAKE FAQ mirrors the form and style of this one -
the original one. And as he decides that people are his enemies, more
and more appear in the FAKE FAQ with more and more scurrilous
"information" attached to them.

Pastorio

----------------------------------------------------------------




---------------------------------
|The Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD FAQ|
| Version 1.0, January, 2004 |
---------------------------------

Introduction
------------
New people arriving in sci.med.cardiology (s.m.c.) are often puzzled and
troubled by the controversy surrounding the poster who posts as Dr.
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD (Dr. Chung) and want to know what the
controversy is about. This FAQ (Frequently Asked Questions) attempts to
provide an answer.

The FAQ is arranged in typical FAQ form, i.e. a series of questions and
answers. For those who donít wish to read the whole FAQ, the following
summary is provided.

Summary
-------
Dr. Chung represents himself to be a licensed physician specializing in
cardiology. In this capacity he responds to medical questions on s.m.c..
If that were all he did, there would probably be no controversy.

The controversy arises from Dr. Chungís other behaviors on s.m.c., in
particular:

o He uses s.m.c. to not only proselytize his particular interpretation
of Christianity, but also to disparage and attack anyone with a
different interpretation or different religion.

o He uses s.m.c. to promote his unscientific Two Pound Diet (2PD) and,
in fact, cross posts this information to other groups in order to gain
more exposure.

o When challenged on the above issues, or one of his medical opinions,
he attacks his challengers as "obsessive anti-Christians", "libelers",
"homosexuals", "people who canít understand English", etc.

o When challenged he performs Internet searches on his challengers in
order to "get the dirt" on them and smear their reputations.

o When challenged, he answers with evasions, non sequiturs,
dissembling, rhetorical questions, quotes from the bible, religious
mantras, thinly veiled death threats, ad hominem arguments, and other
such disreputable, unethical, and unprofessional tactics.

o He is insufferably full of himself, claiming to have "the gift of
Truth Discernment" and to be "Humble" while behaving anything but humbly.

o He uses a foil who posts under variations of the name "Mu" to avoid
killfiles. Muís job is to troll other newsgroups and, when he gets a
reaction, to cross post the reaction to s.m.c. so that Dr. Chung can
disingenuously claim to be "only responding" to a cross post. Whereas
Dr. Chung has to be somewhat careful what he says and so attacks
primarily through insinuation and innuendo, Muís tactics are blunt and
direct like those of a playground bully.

The above lists only the highlights of Dr. Chungís egregious behavior on
s.m.c.. If anything, it understates it. Everything can be verified in
the Google archives.

The issue then arises: so what? As long as Dr. Chung provides free
medical advice on s.m.c., who cares what else he does?

Many people provide free medical advice on the internet. How does one
know whether it is good advice or bad advice? If the person giving the
advice is, or represents himself to be, a doctor shouldnít that be
enough? Unfortunately, no.

Medical education alone is not enough to guarantee good advice.
Knowledge must be tempered with judgment, impartiality, integrity,
ethics, and professionalism. If someone consistently demonstrates by
their behavior that they lack these qualities, how much credence should
be given to their medical advice?

People arrive in this group looking for help. For their own protection,
they deserve to know the quality of the person purporting to dispense
that help and not be lulled into a false sense of security simply
because someone displays an MD after their name. It is the intention of
this FAQ to provide people with enough information to allow them to make
an informed decision.

List of Questions Answered
--------------------------
1. Who is Dr. Andrew B Chung, MD/PhD?
2. What is the Charter of s.m.c.?
3. Aren't Religious Discussions Covered by the Charter?
4. So Dr. Chung is Religious... What's the Problem With That?
5. But it's Just a Little "Tag Line" in His Signature.
6. But I'm a Christian Too!
7. Well, Why Not Just Ignore His Religious Rants?
8. But Isn't It Wonderful That Dr. Chung Offers This Free
Medical Advice Out of the Goodness of His Heart?
9. How Does a Practicing Physician Find so Much Time to Spend on
Usenet?
10. Won't Challenging Dr. Chung Drive People Away?
11. Doesn't the "Fault" for all Those Posts Lay With Those Who
Challenge Dr. Chung?
12. Why Do I see So Many "Ad Hominem" Attacks?
13. I'm Sick of Seeing All This!
14. What is the Two Pound Diet?
15. Is Discussion of the Two Pound Diet "On Topic"?
16. Who is Mu?
17. What is Mu's Role?


1. Who is Dr. Andrew B Chung, MD/PhD?
--------------------------------------
The poster who posts as Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD claims to be a
licensed physician, practicing internal medicine in Atlanta, Georgia,
USA and specializing in cardiology. His signature contains a link to a
website which is consistent with his posts.

It should be noted that anyone can claim to be anyone on Usenet and so
caution is always advised. Indeed there are those who claim that the
poster in question is not Dr. Andrew B. Chung, or is not the Dr. Andrew
B. Chung listed in the Atlanta telephone directory, and/or has lost his
license and/or hospital privileges for misconduct. This FAQ does not
attempt to address those claims one way or the other. The reader with an
interest in these matters can easily find the relevant discussions
archived in Google Groups.

This FAQ deals with the poster who posts as Dr. Chung and restricts
itself to issues demonstrated by those posts. No position is taken on
his "true" identity.

2. What is the Charter of s.m.c.?
----------------------------------
The purpose of this newsgroup is to establish electronic media for
communication between health care providers, scientists and other
individuals with interest in the cardiovascular field. Such
communications will provide quick and efficacious means to exchange
information and knowledge, and offer problems to solutions.

The sci.med.cardiology newsgroup will welcome participants who are
health care providers, trainees, researchers, students or recipients
with interest in the field of cardiovascular problems."

(ftp://ftp.uu.net/usenet/news.announce.newgroups/sci/sci.med.cardiology)

3. Arenít Religious Discussions Covered by the Charter?
--------------------------------------------------------
What do you think?

4. So Dr. Chung is Religious... Whatís the Problem With That?
--------------------------------------------------------------
There is no problem with that. Most of the people who participate in
s.m.c. are probably religious. However no one but Dr. Chung feels
compelled to characterize themselves as the "Humble Servant of God" in
their signatures, continually thank God for the opportunity to
"witness", question others about their religious beliefs, claim the
"Gift of Truth Discernment", etc.

When one person insists on introducing his personal religious
interpretations into the discussions, it naturally generates responses
from others who feel just as strongly that their viewpoints are correct.
The resulting debate easily swirls out of control, especially given Dr.
Chungís intolerant and dismissive attitude towards beliefs which differ
from his. The situation is further exacerbated by Muís rabble raising
from the sidelines.

There are over 160 Usenet groups dedicated to the discussion of
religion. Dr. Chung should take his beliefs to one of these and stick to
cardiology in s.m.c. It is a simple matter of respect for others.

5. But itís Just a Little "Tag Line" in His Signature.
-------------------------------------------------------
No, it is not. He has even gone so far as to "investigate" someone
asking for advice about stents and accuse her of being anti-Christian.

6. But IĻm a Christian Too!
----------------------------
Lots of people are Christians. There is a time and a place for
everything. s.m.c. isnít the place to "witness" or recruit. In addition,
lots of other people are Jews, Moslems, Buddhists, Taoists, Hindus, etc.
Would s.m.c. be better or worse if they all emulated Dr. Chung in their
proselytizing and recruiting?

Furthermore, if you are a Christian, you should be appalled by Dr.
Chungís pharisaical, cynical, and manipulative use of Christianity. He
is truly a "whitened sepulcher", loudly proclaiming his adherence to
Christian values while overtly lying, carrying on smear campaigns
against others, making false accusations, dissembling, and marketing his
web site under the guise of altruism. He is "bearing false witness" and
true Christians should be concerned.

As an example, when John Ritter recently died unexpectedly, Dr. Chung
rushed to use this unfortunate event to market his web site. He showed a
total lack of Christian compassion for Mr. Ritter and his family, even
when challenged to do so.

As another example, he recently choreographed a smear campaign against a
poster who had criticized him. Dr. Chung found a homosexual author with
the same first name and then insinuated that the poster and anyone who
agreed with him were engaged in a homosexual relationship. Ask yourself
if this the brand of Christianity you identify with.

7. Well, Why Not Just Ignore His Religious Rants?
--------------------------------------------------
Why should one individual be given carte blanche to violate the rights
of everyone else? Usenet is a community. It is up to the community to
sanction its members. There is nothing "ad hominem" about challenging
inappropriate and antisocial behavior.

8. But Isnít It Wonderful That Dr. Chung Offers This Free Medical Advice
Out of the Goodness of His Heart?
----------------------------------------------------------
First, it is only of value if it is good advice. Medical education alone
is not enough to guarantee good advice. Knowledge must be tempered with
judgment, impartiality, integrity, ethics, and professionalism. If
someone consistently demonstrates by their behavior that they lack these
qualities, how much credence should be given to their medical advice?

Secondly, despite his protestations to the contrary, Dr. Chung is not
simply motivated by altruism. Every post of Dr. Chung's contains a link
to a website with the following quote:

"If you are looking for a cardiologist and reside in Georgia, please
consider me your best option for a personal heart advocate. Check out
my credentials and my background. Additional information is available
in the protected sections of this web site. Email me at
cardiolog...@heartmdphd.com to me of your interest and I may send you a
temporary username and password to allow a preview. The more
information you email, the more likely my decision to send you a
temporary username and password. If you like what you see and learn
from this website and wish to confer with me about your heart, you or
your doctor should email me privately or call my voicemail at
404-699-2780 to schedule an appointment to see me at my *real* office."
(http://www.heartmdphd.com/office.asp)

Thirdly, Dr. Chung has repeatedly stated that one of his key motivations
for participating is s.m.c. is to "witness" and win converts to his
religious beliefs.

9. How Does a Practicing Physician Find so Much Time to Spend on Usenet?
------------------------------------------------------------------
An interesting question.

10. Wonít Challenging Dr. Chung Drive People Away?
--------------------------------------------------
Perhaps. But not challenging him will drive others away.

s.m.c. is historically a "low traffic" group. Therefore, when Dr. Chung
misbehaves, he generates an apparently large response. This is
compounded by Dr. Chungís need to "get in the last word" and Muís
provocations. In spite of this, if someone has a question it will
usually be answered.

Dr. Chung is not the only participant who offers advice in s.m.c. He is
not even the only doctor who participates in s.m.c. However, the
controversy he generates and sustains often makes it appear that he is
the "only game in town".

Finally, Dr. Chung himself drives others away including other physicians
who leave in disgust after being verbally assaulted by him, and other
knowledgeable posters who point out where Dr. Chungís medical opinion
might be in error or at least not the only one generally held. Anyone
disagreeing with Dr. Chung on any subject can expect a series of
increasingly vitriolic attacks, including threats of libel suits.

11. Doesn't the "Fault" for all Those Posts Lay With Those Who Challenge
Dr. Chung?
--------------------------------------------------------------
An interesting perspective: blame the victim. No other poster (with the
exception of Mu, of course) introduces religion or the Two Pound Diet.
How can it be acceptable for Dr. Chung to introduce these topics, but
not acceptable for others to respond?

In any thread, someone must, of necessity "get the last word". Dr. Chung
has amply demonstrated that he will not be outdone in this respect.

12. Why Do I see So Many "Ad Hominem" Attacks?
----------------------------------------------
You are probably referring to an "Ad Hominem" _argument_, which attempts
to disprove an adversary's fact by personal attack on the adversary. An
example would be "You are opposed to the Two Pound Diet because you are
anti-Christian".

When someone misbehaves, for example lies or distorts what someone else
is saying, it is not an "ad hominem attack" to call them on it. It is a
legitimate social sanction.

There are also, unfortunately too often, simple personal attacks and
insults on both sides. While we can all wish it weren't so, it is simply
human nature when an argument becomes heated or the other person is
obviously not arguing in good faith. If you are distressed by this, see
the next question.

13. I'm Sick of Seeing All This!
--------------------------------
There is no reason why you have to see it. Just as you can change the TV
channel if you don't like a show, you can killfile a poster or thread
you don't want to see. See the manual that came with your Usenet reader
for directions on how to do it.

Before you do this, however, you may wish to consider if a truer picture
of the world is not gained by seeing all that goes on - both the good
and the bad.

14. What is the Two Pound Diet?
-------------------------------
The Two pound Diet is a diet which Dr. Chung "invented". Itís only rule
is to restrict yourself to two pounds of food per day. Thatís it.
Doesnít matter if you are a 16 year old girl or an 80 year old man; a 5Ļ
2" woman or a 7Ļ man; a weight lifter or a mattress tester. Two pounds.
Thatís it. No more, less if you want. One size fits all.

Oh, and the food? Whatever you want: two pounds of lettuce, two pounds
of ice cream, two pounds of celery, two pounds of bacon, two pounds of
chocolate, two pounds of peanuts... doesnít matter. Mix and match. Just
keep it under two pounds.

Dr. Chungís claim is that this magical weight of food, this universal
gustatory constant will cause everyone to arrive at and maintain their
ideal weight. His scientific basis for this claim: none. The proof he
offers: none. Studies supporting this claim: none. Nutritional
explanation: none. Metabolic explanation: none.

And this from a doctor who expects people to take him seriously on other
issues.

15. Is Discussion of the Two Pound Diet "On Topic"?
---------------------------------------------------
Dr. Chung says it is because being overweight is a risk factor for heart
problems and therefore discussion of the Two Pound Diet is On Topic.
However criticism of the Two Pound Diet is Off Topic as is discussion of
any other diet.

As with religion, Dr. Chung takes every opportunity to introduce the Two
Pound Diet (2PD) into any other thread. In addition Mu trolls other
newsgroups, particularly the diet groups looking for opportunities to
introduce the 2PD in these groups and then cross post the resulting
discussion back to s.m.c so that Dr. Chung can disingenuously claim to
be "only responding" to a cross post.

Since Dr. Chung and Mu have been laughed off of these other groups and
have been asked repeatedly not to bring up the 2PD in them, participants
of these groups are understandably angered when it happens yet againä
and, because of Muís cross-posting, all their anger spills back into
s.m.c.

Another reason for ongoing 2PD discussions is Dr. Chungís habit of
researching anyone who criticizes the 2PD and then cross-posting his
responses back to other groups which the critic has been found to
frequent. He disingenuously claims that he does this as a "convenience"
to the critic, but his true reasons are transparent. Once again, the
cross-post generates a firestorm in s.m.c.

The bottom line is that if the Two Pound Diet is "On Topic" for anyone,
it is "On Topic" for everyone... including it's critics. If it is "Off
Topic", it should not be continually re-introduced by Dr. Chung.

16. Who is Mu?
--------------
Mu is a longtime Usenet Troll who has even merited his own FAQ. He
postures as some kind of personal physical trainer, but who really
knows? He has allied himself with Dr. Chung and serves as the "Bad Cop"
in the Chung - Mu "Good Cop - Bad Cop" routine. He specializes in the
short, nasty one-liner and, because unlike Dr. Chung, he has no
reputation to protect, he can afford to be much more direct and offensive.

Mu parrots an even meaner-spirited version of Dr. Chungís "Christianity"
and does not hesitate to employ anti-Semitism and homophobia in his
attacks.

Naturally, most people would have long ago killfiled Mu, so he changes
his handle on an almost daily basis.

17. What is Muís Role?
----------------------
Muís role is to troll other newsgroups and, when he gets a reaction, to
cross post the reaction to s.m.c. so that Dr. Chung can disingenuously
claim to be "only responding" to a cross post.

Mu is also responsible for pitching softballs to Dr. Chung so he can hit
them out of the park, and for re-introducing religion and the Two Pound
Diet should the discussion flag.

Finally, Muís role is to tirelessly wear down unsuspecting Dr. Chung
critics, deflecting the blows that would otherwise be aimed at Dr.
Chung. He is Dr. Chungís Internet equivalent of the "rope-a-dope".
Insults roll off him like water off a duck as do attempts to reason with
him or even have a civil discussion.

Most people have learned to ignore him and his comment is usually the
last one in any thread sub-tree where it appears.

Comments and/or corrections to this FAQ will be taken under advisement.
Back to top
Google

Back to top
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 1 of 1 [2 Posts] View previous topic :: View next topic
The time now is Sun Nov 18, 2018 9:01 pm | All times are GMT
Forum index » Medicine forums » cardiology
Jump to:  

Similar Topics
Topic Author Forum Replies Last Post
No new posts question about eye exams and what the doctor sees bruin70@mail.com vision 0 Fri Jul 21, 2006 8:20 am
No new posts Question about Pupillary Dilation Test procedure nickname vision 3 Thu Jul 20, 2006 7:46 pm
No new posts Dumb question about food stryped@hotmail.com nutrition 5 Wed Jul 19, 2006 6:07 pm
No new posts Nicotine question frenchy dentistry 3 Tue Jul 18, 2006 10:00 pm
No new posts Diuretic Question Robert11 cardiology 5 Tue Jul 18, 2006 12:21 pm

Copyright © 2004-2005 DeniX Solutions SRL
Other DeniX Solutions sites: email marketing campaigns , electronics forum, Science forum, Unix/Linux blog, Unix/Linux documentation, Unix/Linux forums


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
[ Time: 0.0560s ][ Queries: 16 (0.0090s) ][ GZIP on - Debug on ]