bob pastorio

Carmen, I listened to all this and I say it's a wonderful exposition.
But I don't buy it.

In order for this "belief" to assume any further utility, it has to be
convincing. It has to have some intelligent logic to it or it's no
different than shaking feathers at the moon and saying that that's the
way to control the gods of obesity.

Mu and Chung are two sides of the same coin. Mu thinks he can bully
people into doing his thing. Chung tries to use his authority as a
doctor to do it. Both are doomed to fail because they refuse to respect
the people they're peddling to. They don't feel they need to offer
anything beyond their word. But they've been caught out in so many
absurdities, contradictions and outright falsehoods that there's no
logical reason to invest any "faith" in them or their words.

My pragmatic experience in feeding people in settings from hospitals to
country clubs, in America and overseas, as a menu designer, chef and as
a scholar tells me that this 2PD is an utterly impractical approach.
It's the *make the person adapt to the system* idea that makes it
destined to fail if tried on any larger group than the diehards, and I
doubt them because of their demonstrably insincere history. It may well
work for a small number of people who, as Mu has said, remove the
pleasure from eating. It may work for the frail with small appetites. It
may even work for large, strapping men with demanding jobs. The reason
it works is because it engenders an essential starvation mode. Of course
people will lose weight when deprived of food.

Chung and Mu want people to buy into their belief system and only offer
their testimonials. They say that "hundreds' of others are doing well.
Chung says he's got 100% success in his practice with it. Yet, his
testimonials most surely don't reflect that. And he's said that he *did*
know what was up there, so that prankster business is out the window. It
would have shown him marginally better to have been the victim of a
prank that to have so stupidly put up clarification about how flawed his
"plan" is.

So all we have is faith with this. And there are so many intuitive
reasons to laughingly reject it. ANd there are so many nutritional
reasons to reject it. Given the unanswered questions about how to manage
the "plan" - how to actually do it on a day to day basis, there are
reasons to reject it.

And here's where it comes down to. They have both demonstrated such a
lack of integrity and intelligence in huckstering a bad idea that I feel
duty-bound to point it out. Beyond that, Mu's relentless malice and
mean-spiritedness are a coward's way of spraying the world with
negativity. I don't presume to know why he's a sociopath, it's enough to
know that he is. I don't really care why. He strikes out at people in
pain and I think he needs to get some back. It's that going around and
coning around thing. That it succeeds is obvious enough. Just look at
how he "defends" Chung today in this thread. Lots of people are poking
at him and it's fair because he's earned it.

If even a small percent of what he claims about himself is true, he
could be such a force for constructive information. Instead, he prefers
to try to hurt people. To inflict yet more pain on people who are
already hurting. I find that so morally reprehensible, that I feel
constrained to return it to him. He swaggers and struts, preening like
some prom-queen and for what? He accomplishes nothing for anyone but
himself. His moral bankruptcy is neon-bright in the full sun of ethics.
He's just as self-involved as the cartoon-character people on Seinfeld.
Everything's about Mu. Fine. That's what he chooses to do. I choose to
punch holes in his hot air bag persona. I choose to mock him because he
deserves it for his fraudulence and superciliousness. He may do as he
wishes. I may do as I wish.

As for the faith business, I don't think Chung buys it either. His sad
post yesterday (notes about which quoted below) was to "prove" something
to me by offering URLs to Pubmed papers. They proved nothing and, if
anything, made his already weak case weaker. Mu talks big about science
and patients and clients and all that blowhard stuff, but he, too, seems
incapable of reading an abstract. I expect incompetence from Mu since
he's demonstrated it so often. I'm truly shocked at Chung's apparent
inability to focus. I'd expect a doctor to be more thorough and careful.
For everybody's sake.


Sure are.

Have one of these LC truffles I just made. Semi-sweet chocolate (with
cream and rum) center, dipped into milk chocolate (with peach extract)
rolled in shredded coconut. Most pleasing <crack> biting into it. Then
the silken center coats the tongue and a new experience begins. You're
alone and the pleasure of the moment banishes the travails of the day.
Espresso...? Pastorio

*mu*

On Tue, 08 Jul 2003 15:45:04 -0400, Bob Pastorio <pastorio@rica.net> wrote:


Oh goodee, I so want to take your money. How much do you want to bet?
$10,000 works for me.

I bet Chung is not Mu, $10,000, escrow contract is written and waiting
(damn that Gregory chicken bawk bawk).

Ready to go, Cheffie?

Put up or shut up.

*mu*

I have no clue but it is nearly impossible to define anyway.

No it does not. Unless, of course, yo are looking for an excuse to continue your gluttony.


Since it is hard to eat less than 2 pounds in 3 sittings, yep, sure is.

Hell, I thot it came along with his inflated Usenet self-worth. lol


Yes, there is.


Neither do I.

Hell if I know.


Yes, overeating spurs more overeating; eating less spurs the need for
less food. More rocket science, huh?


Don't forget psychiatry!


Sure is.

Sure is.

bob pastorio

Bwa...
Bwaha... Bwahahahahahaha
<wipes tears from eyes> Right. Cook a whole roast beef and cut slices by
the ounce. Roast chickens and hack off three ounces. Cut potatoes in
half.

Half a scoop of ice cream. 3/4 cup of coffee.

Sure. That ought to cut down on waste and make prices go lower. Grasp of
restaurant operations right up there with the laws of physics.

Feet planted firmly in the clouds.

Pastorio

andrew

Go ahead and prove you are not a Chef.


The Everest climbers lived to climb. They ate to stay alive. Are you claiming different?


We only have your word for it.


Therefore, it has in the past.

Again, your word for it.

Prove it.

As a cardiologist, I would see *less* patients if everyone achieved
ideal body weight on the 2PD. Financially, there is a negative
incentive for the 2PD.

The alternative and more plausible explanation is that you are
fighting for you livelihood. Certainly this should be obvious to the
most casual reader.


That would probably be all the uneaten food sitting in the corners of
your abandoned restaurant.

A Chef that has never worked at a restaurant. Hmmmm

Couldn't pay the gas bill?


No wonder you have a chip on your shoulder. You probably blame Mu for
your financial destruction.

A lot of perserverating here. Sounds pathological.


You've probably single-handedly furthered it more than either Mu or I
ever could hope to. Folks probably have wondered whether Cooks and
Chefs have conspired to make them fat. Your ramblings probably have
convinced them that lawsuits against eating establishments are
warranted given your position against anything that may give folks
insight into how much they are overeating.

I assure you my name is not phony.


And which cartoon character do I act like, pray tell?

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

andrew

I would say it bothered you a lot.

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

andrew

Simply visit http://www.heartmdphd.com/wtloss.asp for the punchline.

<Chef Pastorio's vivid hallucinatory "trip" snipped>

Those Chefs tend to eat everything they can get their hands on. Gotta
watch out for those "pink" spotted mushrooms.

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

rosescripter

I'm sure you're a quack.

andrew

Simply a source of amu*****t, Rosie.

Beats arguing with an insurance company. Cheaper than therapy :-)


Regards,

Andrew

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

julie bove

weight loss is quantity of food


You're right of course. And dang! I have to kill file him again! I've kill
filed both him and Mu more times than I care to remember!

--
Type 2
http://users.bestweb.net/~jbove/