OBESITY TOP HEALTH PROBLEM IN U.S., AGENCY HEAD SAYS

Obesity Top Health Problem in U.S., Agency Head Says

By Maggie Fox, Health and Science Correspondent
Tuesday, October 28, 2003

Washington (Reuters) - Obesity is the No. 1 health threat in the United States today, the head of the leading U.S.
federal health agency said on Tuesday.

While much of her time is spent preparing to fight anthrax, smallpox, and biological threats, and diseases like SARS and West Nile virus, Centers for Disease,
Control and Prevention Director Dr. Julie Gerberding, said Americans are much more likely to die from cancer, heart disease, and diabetes caused by smoking, eating too much and exercising too little.

"Unfortunately, poor diet and a lack of exercise have almost caught up with tobacco as being the leading cause of death in the United States," Gerberding told a meeting of the National Health Council, which groups companies and non-profit health advocacy organizations.

She cited statistics that show 65 percent of U.S. adults are either overweight or obese. In 2000, 38.8 million
American adults were classified as obese, meaning their health is seriously at risk.

"In three states, 25 percent of adults are obese -- not overweight but obese," Gerberding said. The three states are Louisiana, Mississippi and West Virginia. "It is a catastrophe in our country."

She showed a graph of the leading causes of death in the
United States. Heart disease is first, followed by cancer, stroke, lung disease and accidents.

Obesity is a leading cause of the first three and, she said, bioterrorism is nowhere to be seen among the top 10 causes of death. . . .
 [...]

Jai Maharaj http://www.mantra.com/jai
Om Shanti

Panchaang for 3 Kartik 5104, Tuesday, October 28, 2003:

Shubhanu Nama Samvatsare Dakshinaya Jeevan Ritau Tula Mase Shukl Pakshe Mangal Vasara Yuktayam
Jyeshtth-Mool Nakshatr Shobhan-Atiganda Yog Vishti-Bav Karan Chaturthi-Panchami Yam Tithau

Hindu Holocaust Museum http://www.mantra.com/holocaust

Hindu life, principles, spirituality and philosophy http://www.hindu.org
http://www.hindunet.org

The truth about Islam and Muslims http://www.flex.com/~jai/satyamevajayate

o Not for commercial use. Solely to be fairly used for the educational purposes of research and open discussion. The contents of this post may not have been authored by, and do not necessarily represent the opinion of the poster. The contents are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
o If you send private e-mail to me, it will likely not be read, considered or answered if it does not contain your full legal name, current e-mail and postal addresses, and live-voice telephone number.
o Posted for information and discussion. Views expressed by others are not necessarily those of the poster.

Visit the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine web site for excellent food recommendations:
http://www.pcrm.org

Jai Maharaj http://www.mantra.com/jai
Om Shanti

<snip>

Yep.

FYI Note: I am aware that I am responding to a cross-posted message.
Because the author of the message to which I am responding did not request that the header be trimmed, I have not trimmed it. If you are upset about reading this message, a few suggestions:

(1) Yell at Jai (2) Report Jai to his ISP (3) Killfile this thread.
(4) Killfile me.
(5) Read about free speech.

This discussion(s) is related to the 2 pound diet approach (2PD) which is described completely at:
http://www.heartmdphd.com/wtloss.asp

Though Dr. Chung invented this approach, he did not initiate this
Usenet discussion(s). His participation in this discussion(s) has been voluntary and has been conducted in the spirit of community service. His motivation has been entirely altruistic and has arisen from his religious beliefs as a Christian. Jesus freely gave of
Himself to better the health of folks He touched:
http://www.heartmdphd.com/healer.asp

From the outset, it has been clear that there are those who are vehemently opposed to the 2 pound diet approach. They have debated
Dr. Chung on every perceived weakness of the 2 pound diet approach and have lost the argument soundly at every point:
http://www.heartmdphd.com/wtlossfaqs.asp

These debates are archived on Google in their entirety within this and other discussion threads.

However, instead of conceding gracefully that they've lost the argument(s), certain parties have redirected their hatred of the 2 pound diet approach toward its author. The rationale appears to be
"if you can not discredit the message then try to discredit the messenger."

Initially, these folks accused the messenger of "trolling." A "troll" is someone who posts under the cloak of anonymity messages with no redeeming discussion value and with the sole purpose of starting
"flame" wars.

These hateful folks lost credibility with this accusation when the following observations were made:

(1) Dr. Chung has not been posting anonymously.
(2) The 2PD has been on-topic for the Usenet discussion groups hosting the discussion(s).
(a) Those who are failing low-carbing can dovetail LC with the
2PD to achieve near-ideal weight.
(b) Obese diabetics improve their blood glucose control when their weight becomes near-ideal.
(c) For (b) see: http://tinyurl.com/levc (3) Dr. Chung did not start the discussion(s).
(4) The 2 pound diet approach is 100% free (no profit motive).
(5) Dr. Chung's credentials are real and easily verified on-line (including jpegs of the actual diplomas).

Full of hatred, frustration, and desperation, certain individuals have tried to attack Dr. Chung's credentials knowing full well that they were attempting to libel him. One notable example is Mr. Pastorio:
http://www.heartmdphd.com/libel.asp

When the full light was cast on Mr. Pastorio's libelous statements, the hateful folks hiding in the darkness of anonymity only hissed louder in support of their fallen hero.

Fortunately, those who have been following this discussion(s) either actively or as lurkers can easily dismiss the hisses, for what they are, using the on-line third-party resources at:
http://www.heartmdphd.com/profile.asp

where Dr. Chung's credentials can be verified many times over and libelous claims that credentials were bought are easily and summarily debunked.

Moreover, readers need only make the following observations concerning the anon posters who continue to hiss (ie JC Der Koenig and Mack):

(1) They are anonymous and thus they expect to have no credibility (or accountability).
(2) They are by their Usenet history courtesy of Google, unsavory characters.
(3) They have not added anything to the discussion(s) except to deliver one-sided insults.
(4) They complain about alleged cross-posts from Dr. Chung by cross-posting.
(5) They do not complain about cross-posts from folks who attack the
2PD or its author.

and conclude that these anon posters deserve only their kill file.

It is my hope that the above brings new readers of this thread up to speed.

It will remain my pleasure to participate here on Usenet above the din of hissing from the peanut gallery.