Re: Classic 2 1/4 Pound Diet Got Peary to the Pole
From: Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD (andrew_at_heartmdphd.com)
Date: 12/16/04
- Next message: lordshiva5753_at_rediffmail.com: "Re: Question about Hypertension & Diabetes?"
- Previous message: Mirek Fídler: "Re: Classic 2 1/4 Pound Diet Got Peary to the Pole"
- In reply to: Bob (this one): "Re: Classic 2 1/4 Pound Diet Got Peary to the Pole"
- Next in thread: MU: "Accountability"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 06:07:29 -0500
"Bob (this one)" wrote:
>
> Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD wrote:
>
> > "Mirek Fídler" wrote:
> >
> >>OK, this is better:)
> >>
> >>Anyway, you still owe us your height.
> >>
> >>I am sorry about being so investigative, but perhaps if we start to give
> >>fair answers to fair question, we can get somewhere.
> >>
> >>Mirek
> >>
> >>"Bob (this one)" <Bob@nospam.com> píse v diskusním príspevku
> >>news:10s0h1cg0735a24@corp.supernews.com...
> >>Mirek Fídler wrote:
> >
> >>>I guess this response is similiar to Chung's word games. You ask for
> >>>number and get several paragraphs but no number.
> >>
> >>Mirek, forgive me, but I feel no need to respond to every whim of
> >>"John." He's merely a belligerent sockpuppet for Chung.
>
> If "john" were sincerely asking for the sake of gathering information,
> I'd comply with his request, as I do when others sincerely ask
> questions. But when the "question" is part of a battle plan and a
> component of an attack, then I don't feel constrained to play by those
> rules.
>
> I'm heavily muscled and have been all my life. I have a 17-inch neck
> and have always had it that large since my early twenties and growth
> stopped, gaining or losing no more than 1/2 inch with weight
> fluctuations over the years. I have a large chest, 45 inches or so and
> heavy, muscular legs with a 26 inch thigh. Large arms. Relatively
> small waist at 34-35 inches. Large calves.
>
> Calculated today, my BMI is 27.6 This is from the site I clicked to
> calculate it:
> "BMI is a reliable indicator of total body fat, which is related to
> the risk of disease and death. The score is valid for both men and
> women but it does have some limits. The limits are:
> * It may overestimate body fat in athletes and others who have a
> muscular build."
>From the same site:
For people who are considered obese (BMI greater than or equal to 30) or
those who are overweight (BMI of 25 to 29.9) and have two or more risk
factors, the guidelines recommend weight loss. Even a small weight loss
(just 10 percent of your current weight) will help to lower your risk of
developing diseases associated with obesity. Patients who are
overweight, do not have a high waist measurement, and have less than 2
risk factors may need to prevent further weight gain rather than lose
weight.
Bottomline: For someone with known severe occlusive coronary disease, a
BMI of 27.6 is too high. Simply a few words to the wise.
> >>I weigh 176
> >>pounds this morning and I'm happy with that weight.
> >
> > He may need to be taller than 6'3" in order to be at an "ideal" body
> > weight of 176 lbs.
>
> That's a BMI of 22 or less. Too rigid a position about it. Everybody
> but Chung looks at it this way:
>
> BMI Categories:
> * Underweight = <18.5
> * Normal weight = 18.5-24.9
> * Overweight = 25-29.9
> * Obesity = BMI of 30 or greater
Bottomline: You are overweight, especially for someone with severe
occlusive coronary disease.
> And therein resides the reason why I regard BMI to be a flawed
> criterion. That's what I weighed playing football in high school.
> Running track in college. Playing baseball. And being one of the most
> consistently fast runners in all the sports. No jiggly flab.
The flab may very well be visceral (around the vital organs).
> So if this BMI calculation says I'm overweight, that's fine. Given the
> obvious flaws in the premises for the calculations, I don't use it as
> a basis for my functioning. I don't really need the numbers to tell me
> when I'm out of condition. My kinesthetic sense takes care of that.
It is the rare individual who can sense visceral adiposity. Your
having developed severe occlusive coronary disease would suggest you do
not have this sense.
> Now, what has this to do with whether the 2PD is reasonable or not?
> The question is addressed to you, Mirek. I'm not trying to be hostile
> here, just establishing the subject.
I believe this information is enlightening and will help folks discern
the truth.
> Chung has said so many things of seriously doubtful veracity that
> whether I'm fat or thin, tall or short or green or blue makes no
> difference to the subject.
I believe it sheds light on what you write.
> He says that he "guesstimates" that 90,000 people are doing it and
> that if anyone failed, he'd know about it. He says it has a 100%
> success rate.
It remains my choice to continue to write truthfully.
> So what color is your car? And does it affect the verity of the 2PD?
Truth is invariant.
> Bob
Hope the above information enlightens everyone.
Such is the work being done here for Christ's glory
(http://makeashorterlink.com/?U1E13130A).
Servant to the humblest person in the universe,
Andrew
-- Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD Board-Certified Cardiologist http://www.heartmdphd.com/ ** Who is the humblest person in the universe? http://makeashorterlink.com/?L26062048 What is all this about? http://makeashorterlink.com/?K6F72510A Is this spam? http://makeashorterlink.com/?D13B21FF9
- Next message: lordshiva5753_at_rediffmail.com: "Re: Question about Hypertension & Diabetes?"
- Previous message: Mirek Fídler: "Re: Classic 2 1/4 Pound Diet Got Peary to the Pole"
- In reply to: Bob (this one): "Re: Classic 2 1/4 Pound Diet Got Peary to the Pole"
- Next in thread: MU: "Accountability"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
