Wrong...on so many levels Nick..where do I start...
1. POST AN ORTHODOX LINK SO WE CAN KNOW WHERE YOU'RE GETTING THIS. PLEASE!!!!
2. "...but co-exists with the physical bread so that the bread is both a bread and the body of Jesus." Consubstantiation the way you explain it is the Lutheran heresy condemned by the Orthodox. No Orthodox would support it.
3. Transubstantiation was defined because an heretical monk in the middle ages DENIED is was physical. You have is bass-ackwards.
4. The ONLY real and somewhat reasonable objection the Orthodox have re the doctrine is that it attempts to explain that which is unexplainable. There are no differences to what we believe it truly is.
You need to stop this pretense...you're trying so hard to not sound Catholic you end up trashing your own faith.
Do your own research.You were proven false . Accept it.You said you searched on the net and couldnt find it. Improve your skills.I am not your research assistant. For being a spokesman for Orthodoxy I thought you would know how to find this info