Re: Daily Spirit-guided health tip for 11/27/07.

In article <5dec4e87-f6e6-4433-a60d-92e19f810fa3@s8g2000prg.googlegroups.com> "Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" <heartdoc12@emorycardiology.com> writes:
> brother Zed wrote:
> > Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote:
> >
> > > The physicians I personally know do not wish to be named here on
> > > Usenet because they are wary of what they have witnessed here.
> > >
> > > It remains my choice to respect their wishes.
> > >
> > > However, there was a survey conducted on Sermo that yielded results
> > > that revealed that more than half of the physician participants are
> > > now recommending the 2PD-OMER Approach to their obese patients.
> > >
> > > It is possible that this extrapolates to more than 17,000 U.S.
> > > physicians.
> >
> > As a PhD, I'm sure you understand the necessity of presenting a
> > theory
> > or approach before pier review, and that said pier review must be
> > citable. Agreed?
>
> Yes.
>
> However, the 2PD-OMER Approach is not a theory...
>
> ... instead, it is a corollary/application of the 1st Law of
> Thermodynamics.
>
> Such applications are peerless because GOD has no peer.

Funny, when Stephen Hawking posits radiative evaporation of
black holes as a collary of thermodynamics combined with
applied quantum theory, none of his peers take it as
a given because "GOD has no peer".

Instead, they look for the resulting radiative signatures.

And if it's not there, then it doesn't happen.


-- cary