(snip footers)

                 ---------------------------------
               | The Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD FAQ |
               |   Version 4.0, February, 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 don't wish to read the whole FAQ, the
 following summary is provided.

 Note: Since this FAQ first appeared in January of 2004, Dr. Chung
 forged his own "Issue 2" of the FAQ on February 3, 2004:

 Message-ID: <12042dd2fa45f132e7b81c7f37127...@news.teranews.com>

 As a courtesy to Dr. Chung, his forged version of the FAQ (Version
 2.0) is accepted and included here verbatim, identified by braces
 {}.  The reader may judge for himself whether Dr. Chung's version
 refutes or reinforces the points made in this FAQ.

 Dr. Chung has continued to forge this FAQ and to flood s.m.c with
 the forgeries. The reader should have no difficulty recognizing the
 forgeries for the self-serving lies that they are.  The fact that
 Dr. Chung engages in such a deceit reveals more about Dr. Chung than
 it does about his critics.

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.

 {Chung: "The controversy arises from Dr. Chung being Christian"}

 The controversy arises from Dr. Chung's 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.

   {Chung: "He publically [sic] professes to have accepted
   Christ as his Lord and Savior."}

 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.

   {Chung: "He freely helps people to lose weight in an
   altruistic fashion."}

 o When challenged on the above issues, or one of his medical
   opinions, he attacks his challengers as "obsessive
   anti-Christians", "libelers", "homosexuals", "pedophiles",
   "people who can't understand English", etc.

   {Chung: "When attacked on the above issues, he turns the
   other cheek."}

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

   {Chung: "When challenged about his faith, he witnesses in
   civil discussions."}

 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.

   {Chung: "When insulted for his faith, he considers himself
   blessed."}

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

   {Chung: "He remains truthful despite being libeled and
   defamed."}

 o He uses a shill who posts under variations of the name "Mu" to
   avoid killfiles.  Mu's 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, Mu's tactics are blunt and
   direct like those of a playground bully.

   {Chung: "Other Christians have affirmed his faith in Christ."}

 The above lists only the highlights of Dr. Chung's 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
 shouldn't that be enough? Unfortunately, no.

 {Chung: "Yes, it should be.  Medical education is enough to assure
 good information. Knowledge is knowledge.  Experience adds to
 knowledge. Dr. Chung has both.  Dr. Chung consistently demonstrates
 the breadth of his knowledge. This is archived many times over in
 Google."}

 Medical education alone is not enough to guarantee good advice.  If
 facts alone were all that were required, we could replace Physicians
 with Medical Encyclopedias.  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.

 {Chung: "People arrive in this group looking for help.  Dr. Chung
 has graciously provided this over several years."}

 Ask yourself this: Suppose you went to see a cardiologist
 and, while in the waiting room, observed some clearly disturbed
 behavior on his part. Perhaps, for example, he was sitting in the
 corner sucking his thumb and rocking back and forth, playing with
 his feces, or babbling incoherently.  Suddenly, he pulls himself
 together and calls you into his office.  How comfortable are you
 going to be with his advice, even if it is technically correct?

 s.m.c is Dr. Chung's "virtual waiting room".  If you have been here
 a while, you have observed his behavior.  If you are new, this FAQ
 will give you some background.  The decision is yours.

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?
 18. Doesn't Dr. Chung Claim to Always Tell The Truth?
 19. What is the "Chung macro"?
 20. What is "Hissing"

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 cardiovascular field. Such
 communications will provide quick and efficacious means to exchange
 information and knowledge, offer problem solutions and stimulate
 research interest.

 The sci.med.cardiology newsgroups will welcome participants who are
 health care providers, 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. Aren't Religious Discussions Covered by the Charter?
--------------------------------------------------------
 What do you think?

 {Chung: "Possibly.  See: http://www.heartmdphd.com/healer.asp"}

4. So Dr. Chung is Religious... What's 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.

 {Chung: "Some people are fiercely anti-christian."}

 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. Chung's intolerant and dismissive
 attitude towards beliefs which differ from his.  The situation is
 further exacerbated by Mu's 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 it's Just a Little "Tag Line" in His Signature.
-------------------------------------------------------
 {Chung: "Yes it is.  But it offends those who are anti-christian."}

 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.

 A quick search of Google  will reveal that the vast
 majority of Dr. Chung's posts have nothing whatever to do with
 cardiology as described in the charter, but instead are religious
 rants, religious arguments, arguments about the Two Pound Diet
 (see 14 below) or posts of the "Chung macro" (see 19 below).

6. But I'm a Christian Too!
----------------------------
 {Chung: "And so you have Christ's promise of eternal life."}

 Lots of people are Christians.  There is a time and a place for
 everything. s.m.c. isn't 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.
 Chung's 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.

 In still yet another example, when an anonymous post was made
 implying that one of his critics was a pedophile, Dr. Chung, rather
 than condemning such a despicable and outrageous charge, attempted
 to get more information.

7. Well, Why Not Just Ignore His Religious Rants?
--------------------------------------------------
 {Chung: "Well, Why Not Just Ignore his Christian nature?
          -----------------------------------------------
          Anti-christians are unable to do that."}

 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 Isn't It Wonderful That Dr. Chung Offers This Free
   Medical Advice Out of the Goodness of His Heart?
----------------------------------------------------------
 {Chung: "It is."}

 First, it is only of value if it is good advice. Medical education
 alone is not enough to guarantee good advice.  If facts alone were
 all that were required, we could replace Physicians with Medical
 Encyclopedias.  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?

 Ask yourself this: Suppose you went to see a cardiologist
 and, while in the waiting room, observed some clearly disturbed
 behavior on his part. Perhaps, for example, he was sitting in the
 corner sucking his thumb and rocking back and forth, playing with
 his feces, or babbling incoherently.  Suddenly, he pulls himself
 together and calls you into his office.  How comfortable are you
 going to be with his advice, even if it is technically correct?

 s.m.c is Dr. Chung's "virtual waiting room".  If you have been here
 a while, you have observed his behavior.  If you are new, this FAQ
 will give you some background.  The decision is yours.

 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.

 {Chung: "God has blessed him with a quick mind and fast typing
 skills."}

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

 {Chung: "No.  But it will give him the extraordinary opportunity to
 glorify God."}

 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. Chung's need to "get in the last word" and Mu's
 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. Chung's
 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?
--------------------------------------------------------------
 {Chung: "Yes."}

 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?
----------------------------------------------
 {Chung: "Anti-christian folks can't seem to help themselves."}

 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!
--------------------------------
 {Chung: "Would suggest you killfile the anti-christians.  You won't
 see any as [sic] hominems from Dr. Chung."}

 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?
-------------------------------
 {Chung: "See: http://www.heartmdphd.com/wtloss.asp"}

 The Two pound Diet is a diet which Dr. Chung "invented".  It's only
 rule is to restrict yourself to two pounds of food per day.  That's
 it. Doesn't matter if you are a 16 year old girl or an 80 year old
 man; a 5' 2" woman or a 7' man; a weight lifter or a mattress
 tester.  Two pounds.  That's 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... doesn't matter.  Mix
 and match. Just keep it under two pounds.

 Dr. Chung's 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"?
---------------------------------------------------
 {Chung: "Yes.  It cures [sic] Metabolic Syndrome (MetS) which
 predicts cardiovascular morbidity and mortality."}

 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 again; and, because of Mu's cross-posting, all their
 anger spills back into s.m.c.

 Another reason for ongoing 2PD discussions is Dr. Chung's 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?
--------------
 {Chung: "A Christian."}

 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. Chung's
 "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 Mu's Role?
----------------------
 {Chung: "God only knows."}

 Mu's 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, Mu's role is to tirelessly wear down unsuspecting Dr. Chung
 critics, deflecting the blows that would otherwise be aimed at Dr.
 Chung.  He is Dr. Chung's 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.

18. Doesn't Dr. Chung Claim to Always Tell The Truth?
-----------------------------------------------------
 Yes, he does... repeatedly.  However this claim cannot be
 reconciled with his behavior on s.m.c.

 Dr. Chung has lied repeatedly on Usenet and those lies are
 preserved in the Google archives.  A few examples:

 o Dr. Chung consistently changes other people's words when quoting
   them in a response to a post to make it appear they said
   something different than what they actually said.

 o Dr. Chung consistently posts a macro (see below) which states
   that he is responding to a cross-post because the person he
   is responding to has not requested that he trim the
   headers, even when this request has been explicitly made.

 o More recently Dr. Chung has begun forging posts as his bogus
   "Version 2" of this FAQ illustrates.  Unfortunately for
   him the attempts are so amateurish and the language so
   self-serving and lame that there is no doubt as to the
   authorship.

 These are only examples of Dr. Chung's explicit lies.  They do not
 include lies told through dissembling, innuendo, disingenuousness,
 employment of twisted trope's, and other "word games" which he
 plays.

19. What is the "Chung macro"?
------------------------------
 The "Chung macro" is an approximately 4.5 kilobyte, mind-numbing
 diatribe which Dr. Chung attaches as a response to any post he
 doesn't like.  It includes Chung's unstinting praise of himself, an
 advertisement for the Two Pound Diet, an disingenuous protest that
 he is "only responding to a cross-post", and gratuitous slaps at
 all his critics.

 It is called a "macro" because it can be saved and attached to a
 message with a single keystroke. Usually, the content of the
 original post is either "snipped" so that only Dr. Chung's diatribe
 appears or the words of the original poster are modified to say
 something which pleases Dr. Chung.  Common decency is not
 Dr. Chung's concern here.

 When the "Chung macro" appears in a thread, it is a sure sign that
 a criticism has struck home and/or Dr. Chung has run out of
 arguments or anything intelligent to say. Instead he laboriously
 and obsessively attaches the "Chung macro" to each and every
 message in the thread. If someone responds to the "Chung macro",
 he attaches the macro to the response and so on ad infinitum and
 ad nauseam.

 This generates considerable anger in the victimized newsgroups to
 Dr. Chung's apparent glee.  Requests to stop are mocked and
 ignored.  Eventually, people become sick of it and just stop
 responding: Dr. Chung has achieved his objective of shutting down
 the now objectionable thread... which was probably initiated by Mu
 in the first place.

20. What is "Hissing"?
--------------------------
 "Hissing" is Dr. Chung's term for something he doesn't want to hear,
 particularly a criticism or a correction of one of his errors.  He
 frequently inserts it in place of other people's words when he
 quotes them but is too lazy or unimaginative to change their words
 to his liking.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comments and/or corrections to this FAQ will be taken under advisement.

Demons are irresistibly drawn to the light of the truth as creatures of
darkness flying toward the fires of heaven that will annihilate them
because they no longer have free will of their own:

http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med.cardiology/msg/48107bc81f0012a7?

http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med.cardiology/msg/b06d430125ef165c?

http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med.cardiology/msg/f746b071b1d4e13a?

http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med.cardiology/msg/bb3fdb0e9180d434?

http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med.cardiology/msg/3d546d49b43092e3?

http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med.cardiology/msg/8a1c3fe4ca66e3f2?

http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med.cardiology/msg/4f5d01eb132c4744?

http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med.cardiology/msg/34dd80999b81bff0?

http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med.cardiology/msg/cccab8bf544e08c7?

http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med.cardiology/msg/1d69e3bd116f1441?

Meanwhile, fires from heaven continue to consume the AUK netcabal.com
web site:

http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med.cardiology/msg/1348055d48784253?

... along with its demon:

http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med.cardiology/msg/2ff9b828a563194e?

In the interim, the brethren of LORD Jesus Christ continue to be
blessed:

http://MabletonGA.OurLittle.net/Guarantee

May GOD continue to heal our hearts with HIS living water curing our
diabetes, depression, anxiety or panic so that we can love our
neighbors a little more and LORD Jesus Christ a lot more, dear neighbor
Paul whom I love unconditionally.

Prayerfully in Christ's amazing love,

Andrew <><
--
Andrew B. Chung
Cardiologist, Atlanta, Georgia, USA
http://HeartMDPhD.com/HolySpirit

As for knowing who are the very elect, these you will know by the
unconditional love they have for everyone including their enemies
(Matthew 5:44-45, 1 Corinthians 13:3, James 2:14-17).
http://HeartMDPhD.com/Love