It was such a wonderful narrative that Green Pasture had going for its fermented cod liver oil over previous years. That it was produced from cod from the arctic. That solar heating activated the fermentation. That all suppliers had the so-called “Good Housekeeping” seal of approval courtesy of the Marine Stewardship Council.
But the suspicions that had been building for a couple years unraveled in significant fashion with the release by then-Weston A. Price Foundation vice president Kaayla Daniel of her explosive report, “Hook, Line, and Stinker” in late August.
Gradually, over the last month, as the old narrative has collapsed, it has been revised….or deleted completely, as Green Pasture sketches a new FCLO narrative.
One reader who has been monitoring Green Pasture closely highlighted below three of the key changes from assertions I linked to above (PPNF is Price Pottenger Nutrition Foundation and MSC is Marine Stewardship Council):
So now Green Pasture sketches a new FCLO narrative. But you have to read very carefully, because this new narrative clearly has a lot of help from lawyers. After the Daniel report included genetic evidence GP was using pollock, GP a few days ago issued a “clarification,” in which it says GP is now using only Pacific cod. But the phrasing admits it was using pollock, suggesting it was okay because the substitution wasn’t about saving money: “In the past when we have used some Alaska pollock, it has been because we were unable to obtain enough Pacific cod. Despite some unfounded rumors, we do not benefit from any cost savings based on species alone.” Yes, those damned rumor mongers are at fault, to suggest it was to save money. The implication is, We didn’t do it to save money, so therefore we weren’t doing anything wrong. Get it?
There’s more legalese, in this statement about use of Pacific cod: “As noted on the label we are using Gadus macrocephalus (Pacific cod) as this was in excellent supply in the past year.” What happens when the supply situation changes? Presumably changes in fish supplying the liver oil will be reported in the fine print on the label, so users better read closely. And to concerns about GP importing fish livers, “We currently do not import livers because we prefer to use sources closer to United States waters.” The reference to “currently” is also a lawyer’s way of leaving open the possibility of importing it sometime in the future.
Then there are new lab test reports that GP supporters have been linking to all over Facebook in recent days. I’ve asked these people to explain in plain English what they mean, because there is little approaching understandable English from the scientists. Like this, from Dr. Vicki Schlegel, “Bottom line, the FFA test for your product is not a good indicator of oxidation.” Now that’s a resounding “bottom line” endorsement.
The only interpretation with even a bit of understandable English is this, from Dr. Subramaniam Sathivel: “In conclusion, the data shows that your cod liver oil is a good quality oil and a good source of omega-3.” But then this qualifier: “Again, free fatty acids in the oil are not compounds resulting from lipid oxidation reactions. In other words, they are not aldehydes.” Huh?
When you’re hit with a public relations crisis of the sort that has hit Green Pasture and its nonprofit booster, Weston A. Price Foundation–where you are basically caught doing things you shouldn’t have done (like mislabeling your product, producing your product in ways not sanctioned by the nonprofit’s namesake, and claiming a connection with a major industry association), you basically have two options for getting through it in one piece:
- You admit you screwed up, and explain how you’ll make sure the problem(s) will never happen again;
- You underwrite an investigation by independent outsiders, and you agree to abide by the results.
Ongoing denial and stonewalling and revisionism aren’t productive options—at least if you want to keep anything resembling your previous base of support. Yet that is what has been happening with the brouhaha over fermented cod liver oil produced by GP, and heartily endorsed by WAPF. Ongoing denial and reliance on legalese and lab-ese invite suspicions that you are covering up not only the stuff you have been accused of, but much worse. The much worse is the growing suspicion of collusion between GP and WAPF. Why? Because WAPF continues to heartily endorse a product that has more credibility holes that a nice chunk of raw milk Swiss cheese.
Once you see a few holes, you start looking at everything else more closely. I wonder about Sally Fallon Morell’s claim, in her Q&A from a couple weeks back, that she and the WAPF receive “no compensation” beyond $20,610 in sponsorship fees. But what about other exchanges of $$$? Donations? Dividends? Commissions to WAPF chapter leaders for FCLO sales?
The problem is that the original denials of questionable behavior, and the subsequent web site changes at GP, invite a perception that the organization in question isn’t playing it straight. Perception becomes reality, whether deserved or not.
It takes years for a small company and small nonprofit based largely on trust to build up the kind of trust WAPF and GP had. It takes just a few weeks for it to crumble away in a change of perception.
Following national politics for forty years, it seems that how a leader responds to accusations becomes more important than the gravity of the underlying misstep. My hope is that Weston Price leadership can get in front of this issue and put it to rest. Let’s get back to the merits of Weston Price’s message. To unravel our community of 15,000 members and the accumulated body of knowledge captured in Wise Traditions would be the biggest loss of all. .
well said. ?am I the only one not seeing the 3 illustrations? it’s only showing jpg names – there’s two hidden link with the letters G G that pop up the same thing.
I see the same thing.
If you click on the G G it asks you to open a doc titled GP-errors1.tiff which just has earlier and revised text from the GP website.
Yeah, the two little boxes at the bottom can be clicked and you can see the tiffs, but it seems like all of the images are messed up a you would think they all would just show up.
The links to the “old” info at GP, the stuff that has been revised or deleted, are contained in the first paragraph of the post. The current info is on the GP site, and isn’t linked to from the post. Sorry for the confusion–I was using PDFs drawn from the actual site to highlight the quoted “before” and “after” material.
Crumbling away, indeed. I think we have a perfect right to be mad as hell that this product, which, in Dr. Price’s day, was used as a base for paint, for tanning hides, for lighting lamps, has been promoted as healthful by the foundation, which has used the chapter leaders as a sales force. Sally’s response is insulting. Her credibility is gone.
“Can’t see the forest for the trees.”
It’s worth remembering that any kind of fish oil is merely a supplement intended to insure against nutrient gaps in the diet. In the case of CLO, primarily EPA & DHA pre-formed long chain omega-3 fats lacking in terrestrial foods. Seafood is the most abundant and ideal source of these (and other) key nutrients. Besides being deeply nourishing, seafood is also among the most natural, sustainable, tasty, and traditional foods.
What I would like to see is the proof that putrified fish oil of any kind is a superior source of these vital nutrients? There are literally thousands of studies showing the safety and efficacy of fish and “regular” fish oil supplements, but where is the evidence that concentrating and ingesting this foul concoction actually confers benefit over much more traditional and palatable alternatives? Where is the evidence that “fermented” cod or pollock oil is anything more than yet another ‘snake oil’ marketing gimmick perpetrated on a highly trusting, highly vulnerable community.
To my mind this whole episode is a text book case of “confirmation bias” –the pervasive human tendency to see, hear, and believe only that which supports existing beliefs and notions.
R– you mention the safety of “regular” fish oil supplements. To my understanding most commercially available products of this kind are produced by a combination of mechanical, thermal and chemical means… all of which oxidize the fragile polyunsaturated components of the fish oil. It stands to reason that such oils would be far from ‘safe’.
I base that statement on a few things:
1. A very large number of scientific studies show standard fish oils to confer a wide range of benefits. This is not surprising since they address the common EPA & DHA deficiency that is at the root of so many chronic illnesses.
2. Large fish oil manufacturers are acutely aware that oxidation is detrimental to highly unsaturated fatty acids (EPA, DPA & DHA) so monitor it closely and have designed state of the art systems and processes that protect the.oil from it. This includes minimizing its exposure to air and adding small amounts of antioxidants such as vitamin E/mixed tocopherols . This is in stark contrast to those producing and endorsing FCLO, who have somehow managed to persuade themselves and their customers that rancid, purified fish oil is desirable.
3. The competitive nature of the fish oil industry compels large fish oil manufacturers to use good manufacturing practices. There are huge risks associated with selling a harmful product, so responsible, successful companies are obsessed with safety. Their customers include thousands of health and wellness professionals who closely scrutinize the products for compliance with rigorous safety standards. Non compliance would essentially be corporate suicide.
4. Over the many years I”ve been in and around tne fish oil industry, I’ve never heard of a single legitimate complaint over the safety of these products. On the other hand, we have published hundreds of articles detailing studies showing benefit (though to my knowledge not a single one about FCLO)
In paragraph 2 above “purified” should read “petrified”. (David it would be great if you could add an edit feature…The combination of composing on a small phone screen as many of us do and the light gray script isn’t exactly conducive to error free composition.)
Unbelievable! Auto correct strikes again. the word should be “PUTRIFIED ”
Don’t you just love autocorrect? Go through the phone settings, you might be able to shut it off. I did in my Droid Turbo
Randy, there is an edit feature. But you have to be registered. If you go in through the “Login” “Need an avatar, try Gravatar”. You can upload your photo, and you’ll have editing privileges, as I understand it.
More great reporting, David. I look at all that “legalese” WAPF and GP are putting out and scratch my head and say, “This is bull****.” Your analysis proves it.
Mislabeling, stonewalling, revisionism, denial, possible exchanges of cash – that’s the surface, what those of us with functioning brains see. Underneath, but gradually coming to the surface, are a lot of people with “unexplained” illnesses that came on while taking what I call RPLO (Rancid Pollock Liver Oil). I believe that the stuff damn near killed me. It would be hard to prove that “beyond a reasonable doubt.” But the “preponderance of the evidence” is very strong that many people were (and are being) harmed by the stuff. Just thought I’d throw in a little legalese. No BS.
Anyone with a little common sense should have been avoiding any and all Pacific Ocean “cod” products the last 4 years. Since the 2011 Fukashima reactor accident in Japan, Cesium has been found in 94% of the Cod from the Pacific. Cesium levels in the Pacific had gone up an astonishing 45 million times above pre-accident levels. The levels then declined rapidly for a while, but after that, they unexpectedly leveled off.
At Vital Choice (vitalchoice.com) we’ve invested more in testing of Pacific seafood than just about anyone. In dozens of samples submitted in the years since the accident we’ve have never found evidence of anything remotely approaching hazardous levels of cesium and strontium isotopes. While there have been countless sensational headlines and fear mongering, the truth is that Pacific seafood remains very safe.
Hazardous levels, thats the point of deception right there.
Wait, so its okay for Randy to sell fish from the Pacific, but it’s not okay if the Pacific fish products come from GPP?
I’m not sure if there’s a question there for me or not. If so, please clarify. I continue to be dismayed at the amount of misinformation masquerading as fact from well intentioned people who clearly don’t know what they’re talking about. It truly is a misinformation jungle out there.
Randy, my comment is in regard to Andy’s assertion that 94% of Pacific cod tested positive for cesium. GPP is being attacked for purchasing Pacific Cod (such as Pollock) and he asserts is contaminated with cesium. Randy, can you address this concern over Fukashima radiation contaminating our seafood? Your seafood?
I’m going to go out on a limb and say that if Randy’s customers were led to believe they were getting a certain species of fish from the Atlantic and found out they were getting a different one from the Pacific, some of them would be outraged about the difference in species, and others would be incensed because of the location.
Lets stick to the topic of this thread, Steve. We are responding to Andy’s assertion that 94% of all Pacific Cod tested positive for cesium. This thread has nothing to do with labeling.
“Lets stick to the topic of this thread, Steve. We are responding to Andy’s assertion that 94% of all Pacific Cod tested positive for cesium. This thread has nothing to do with labeling.”
First this had nothing to do with Andy’s assertion:
“Wait, so its okay for Randy to sell fish from the Pacific, but it’s not okay if the Pacific fish products come from GPP?”
This statement communicates your incredulity that everybody is attacking GPP but nobody is attacking Randy and you just don’t think it is fair. That is what I was addressing. Just as you weren’t addressing cesium in Cod, I wasn’t addressing cesium in Cod. Because frankly, if there is cesium in ANYTHING, NOBODY should be selling it, right?
Ok, I’m done. I’ll let you get back to policing topics.
Steve, you comments are absurd. Moving on….
They are getting more absurd as he goes, for sure. One argument fails, and then it’s on to the next. Reminds me of when a pitbull has it’s jaws locked down on something and won’t let go.
Hi Carrie, Yes, I’d be happy to share a summary of our test program results. We have an entire section of our website devoted to the subject that you may review here: https://www.vitalchoice.com/shop/pc/articlesView.asp?id=2231
Unfortunately, what’s missing from the contamination fear mongering is CONTEXT. Modern analytical technology can identify vanishingly small amounts of just about anything in our food, yet every major study has concluded that the health benefits of consuming seafood vastly outweigh any hypothetical risk. As an example, becquerels per kilogram is the unit used to measure cesium 134 and 137. For context, the EPA maximum safe level for drinking water is 740 Becquerels/Kg. The first time we tested our Pacific cod back in 2012 we got a barely detectable reading of 1.2 Bq/Kg. Since then we’ve tested four more times, and never exceeded the detect threshold of 1.0 becqueral per kilogram.
A few years ago the Lancet published the findings of the ALSPAC study, one of the largest ever to look at seafood consumption and its impact on mothers and their children. The authors studied more than 14,000 mother-child pairs and concluded that the benefits of consuming seafood are so significant, that “advice to limit seafood consumption actually causes the harm it is intended to prevent.” (Golding, Hibbeln).
After Fukushima, sensational headlines reported “Pacific Tuna Contaminated,” alarming millions of consumers and setting in motion enduring myths that continue to undermine human health to this day. Anyone who bothered to read past the scary headlines learned that “…researchers said the elevated radioactivity posed no risk to public health as the observed levels were more than an order of magnitude lower than the Japanese safety limit and were lower than other naturally present isotopes…”
Anyone citing these levels as a reason for avoiding Pacific cod, would’ve been very ill-informed, or doing so to exploit the marketing advantage, rather than legitimate safety concerns. …One could say there is a pattern emerging.
Thank you Randy. I appreciate your thorough response. Hopefully we can now put to rest the idea that people have unwittingly been consuming potentially radioactive cod liver oil, because this is obviously not the case.
The point in this situation is not whether Pacific seafood is safe or not.The point is that consumers who choose not to consume Pacific seafood did so unwittingly in GPP FCLO.
Julie, how and when did it become a question of where GPP sourced their livers? They have stated for years that their livers are from the arctic region. If you haven’t noticed the arctic region is adjacent to both the Atlantic and Pacific oceans. Fish don’t stop along some imaginary dividing line.
GPP has always been vague about where they sourced their livers. But people including myself assumed the best because they were so highly endorsed by the WAPF. It became more of a question because of this whole debacle including the revelation that they were tossing around the MSC name on their website when they should not have been.
Not just vague, secretive and belligerent when questioned.
Julie, GPP has competitors that would love to know where they source they raw products. To reveal the precise source would jeapordize his proprietary product, so Pete, they have every right to be “secretive.” As to “tossing around the MSC name,” there was one reference to MSC on the GPP website, which someone made sure to point out, and this was addressed immediately and without incident from the MSC. GPP simply stated that they only purchase from MSC certified fisheries and this was the justification for the lynching of GPP. How pathetic.
His “proprietary product” has no competitors. I just don’t buy all the excuses and rationalizations for all the issues that have been brought forth. I am no longer a customer.
No competitors? There are dozens of companies selling cod liver oil and they all need a source of cod livers.
@ Carrie Hahn: No competitors for the fermented oil.
Yes, I was referring to FCLO, his “proprietary product”.
Carrie is correct in that even though other CLO providers might not do FCLO, they still need Cod livers. But beyond that . . . ? Somehow GPP has managed to be more transparent about sourcing in the last 10 days than ever before, (location, importation, species, etc.) and all without revealing the precise source or vendor. It’s a brave new world.
As usual, just like Amanda or Vic, you’ll say anything to defend the narrative, no matter how ridiculous.
They sell CLO, ergo, they already have a source of livers. There is no need to be secretive about sourcing, this isn’t a black market, the sources and industries are known.
The only reason for secrecy, is if you don’t want consumers to know from where you are getting your livers. Because you know they would be mad/upset/feel defrauded if they did.
Okay Pete. Whatever you say.
Give me a break, Pete. I will not “say anything to defend the narrative.” I don’t agree with everything that Dave Wetzel says. I’ve already pointed out more than once here that I don’t believe the FCLO stays good forever, as I’ve had my own bottle go bad on me once before. Dave Wetzel doesn’t seem to believe that’s possible, but I think he’s wrong about that. What I don’t believe is the accusations of “fraud” and “corruption” being made against GP and WAPF …especially WAPF. Just because the BOD didn’t agree with doing things on Kaayla’s terms does not mean that they are some how in collusion with GP to deceive their members. THAT is ridiculous.
Secretive about processes? Sure. Secretive about the species that is in your clo? Or which ocean it comes from? Absolutely not.
Not in a know your farmer, know your food post Fukushima world. We were sold a story on an authentic elixer of the vikings and instead we got Fukushima Fish.
Pete, you must have missed Randy Hartnell’s excellent comment yesterday in which he shared his thoughts on Fukushima. It’s a non-issue. Please quite bringing it up. And the Vikings? There are historical references about how they processed their liver oils which is some of the basis behind GPP method. It has nothing to do with geography; its a reference to a traditional process.
Where is the documentation of these “historical references” about how the vikings processed their liver oils and what kinds of oils they used internally? I’m having a hard time finding original sourcing. It seems GPP bloggers say that the dark oil was the way it was always done and they took this for their health and the Rosita bloggers say that the light oil was the preferred oil for health and the dark for lamp oil and such. Do you have any original sources?
Rosita ah yes – anyone care to tell me what is going on with Rosita? I don’t see GP products being pulled in Norway…
http://www.nutraingredients.com/Regulation-Policy/Norway-warns-on-polluted-fish-oil-supplements
@ Doesitmatter: I didn’t see anywhere in the article where GP products were actually tested. No references to check, either. IOW, a meta-study that doesn’t mean a thing.
But hey, if you’re a fan of GP, go for it.
Fukushima fish is not a non-issue. You simply wish it was a non-issue.
Randy addressed with respect to post Fukushima safety limits which are several orders of magnitiude higher than previous.
Many people were upset to learn GPP used Pacific fish because they wished avoid Fukushima contamination.
Even if it IS a non issue on the safety aspect, consumers still have a right to know what is in their food and the opportunity to avoid Fukushima fish if they so desire!
Indeed fish do not stop at imaginary borders. But it is also true that fish sourced in the Aleutians are not actually sourced from the Arctic Ocean, or from within the Arctic circle – which would be “the Arctic region”.
Carrie: While the North Atlantic extends well to the north of the Arctic Circle, adjacent to Canada, Greenland, Iceland and Norway, the North Pacific does not. North of the North Pacific lies the Aleutians, then the Bering Sea, the Bering Strait, the Beaufort Sea and the East Siberian Sea, and finally, in the polar regions, the Arctic Ocean. The Arctic Circle passes through the southern end of the Bering Strait As to the what fishing occurs in any of these areas, I confess ignorance. Randy would know. I suspect the Arctic region would be a pretty brutal place for a commercial fisherman to make a living.
Thanks, Randy. In your presentation in Indianapolis, you discussed two studies of the effects of methylmercury from the consumption of fish, one from the Seychelles, and the other possibly from the Faroe Islands, though I don’t recall for certain. Would you be so gracious as to provide links to those studies? I’ve been curious as hell about them ever since. Thanks.
Sure Gary. I referenced three studies in my talk:
The Faroe Islands study (Grandjean et al.) found a link to subtle neurological effects, but the seafood consumed was pilot whale, a long-lived, highly contaminated marine mammal that is not representative of the seafood most people consume.
The two large, long term studies that showed net benefit associated with relatively high levels of seafood consumption in pregnant women and children (the most vulnerable populations), were the Seychelles Child Development Study (SCID) (Myers, et al), and the Avon Longitudenal Study of Parents and Children (ALSPAC) (Golding, Hibbeln, et al.)
Links:
Faroe Islands:
http://www.cprm.gov.br/pgagem/Manuscripts/grandjeanp.pdf
SCID: https://www.urmc.rochester.edu/pediatrics/research/seychelles-child-development-study/about-seychelles-child-development-study.aspx#findings
ALSPAC: http://www.bristol.ac.uk/news/2006/888.html
Hope this helps.
Randy
Bless you, Randy. It is the pilot whale study that has received recent press, but I knew there was much more to the story. We’ve become a lunatic society-give your infant 67.5 mcg of ethylmercury injected into muscle, but don’t eat fish! I’m thankful we never took our daughter to a pediatrician.
While they continue to be cited, neither the Faroe Islands study, nor the Iraq and Minimata, Japan industrial contamination events are the least bit relevant to the trace levels found commercially available seafood. The Iraq and Minimata tragedies exposed victims to massive Hg doses that exceeded even the most contaminated ‘normal’ seafood by orders of magnitude. The other key factor is selenium, which is a natural antidote to methyl mercury toxicity, and abundant in most seafood species. Pilot whale, and the contaminated foods ingested in the other two accidents were not. These are inconvenient truths to be avoided by those intent on discouraging seafood consumption.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1971_Iraq_poison_grain_disaster
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minamata_disease
Randy: Absolutely right. The Bristol paper makes a very good case that limiting seafood intake during pregnancy may harm the developing fetus rather than protecting it. Since our brain is something like 40% DHA, the rapidly-growing fetal brain places enormous demands on the mother’s stores of DHA. If she doesn’t replenish those stores by eating seafood, the fetal brain may be negatively affected. The mercury-in-seafood paranoia is another of the truly stupid things our public health authorities have trumpeted, and, of course, the media has spread this foolishness far and wide. Since seafood in general is rich in selenium, and selenium appears to nullify mercury toxicity, there is simply no reason for anyone to limit seafood intake. On the other hand, our public health experts still inject tiny infants with mercury-containing vaccines which have no selenium at all, just things like aluminum nano particles, antifreeze, polysorbate 80, human DNA fragments, retroviruses, and many other toxins. Dumb as a box of rocks they are, or, for the cynically-minded, utterly and completely bought, like Congress and our state legislators.
Thank you for putting that data up Randy. But I would have a lot more confidence if you referenced the levels with respect to the historic pre-Fukushima safety limits, since the first thing the government did after Fukushima is jack those levels through the roof to make sure nothing would ever fail.
Pete, I’ve never investigated pre-Fukushima safety limits, but am not surprised by the pervasive conspiracy theories around this issue. Can you point me to credible documentation that supports this charge?
It’s a bit reminiscent of the WAPF leadership and GP suddenly and dramatically dropping FCLO dose recommendations as soon as this story broke.
“WAPF leadership and GP suddenly and dramatically dropping FCLO dose recommendations as soon as this story broke”
Wait… what?
For years, WAPF had a popular article by Krispin Sullivan called “Cod Liver Oil: The Number One Superfood” that said:
” If using high-vitamin cod liver oil, the limit would be 2 tablespoons. Two tablespoons of regular cod liver oil provide 15,000 IU vitamin A, 2600 IU vitamin D and 6 grams of mixed omega-3 fatty acids, safe for pregnancy and good for mom and baby.”
The article suddenly disappeared from WAPF about a week after this began. It was so popular though a google search brings it up in many other places.
http://web.archive.org/web/20140410172402/http://www.westonaprice.org/cod-liver-oil/clo-number-one-superfood
Written by Krispin Sullivan, CN
Sunday, 30 June 2002 02:54
You mean a more than decade old article based on recommendations of brands, some of which no longer exist, based on older science and understanding of a number of nutritional issues (including our understanding of vitamin D and other components of oils and fats and vitamins) and whose recommendations were supplanted/replaced by later articles and conference talks?
I wonder if anyone else around here has some old things they wrote or said that we should dredge up to tar and feather em with!
How has our understanding of vitamin D changed?
Yeah, um… that article was written well over a decade ago in 2002, AND it’s not even about FCLO (which didn’t even exist yet at the time that article was written).
Furthermore, WAPF’s FCLO dosage recommendations have been dramatically lower than 2 tablespoons per day for many years now… certainly not “as soon as this the story broke.”
Randy, I’m afraid you’ve been dramatically misinformed on this one.
Also… Sally Fallon was not aware that people were still reading this old article and confusing it to be about FCLO… so they took it down off the website to avoid further confusion. I would have done the same in her place. It’s the responsible thing to do.
Excellent points Amanda. Thanks.
Some of us read that article when it was first published. And since WAPF has never come out with an advisory that their dosage recommendations had changed, which would have been the responsible thing to do, especially if FCLO required lower dosing, we had no reason to think the recommendations in that article were now outmoded.
Yes, Randy. Amanda is right. They didn’t immediately and dramatically drop the dosage recommendations. They had been lower for a while. WAPF’s recommendation is still more than double GPPs recommendation though.
What WAPF did do was act like they had never recommended anything higher to try to make Dr. Ron Schmid look like an irresponsible abuser, and then removed any and every piece of evidence that might contradict this narrative when people pointed them out, with no explanation, just now you see it, now you don’t. They also kinda never got around to explaining how a product they claim is 100% safe food, that they recommend giving to babies, could cause harm with overuse. How is that possible?
They still have up the video and the transcript where they are recommending 1/2 tsp FCLO for 36oz of formula. An 8 pound baby can easily drink that much in 2 days, if not more. That’s more than half of GPPs recommended adult dosage and 1/4 of WAPF’s recommended adult dosage PER DAY being taken in by a tiny newborn. If adult dosage is based on 150 lb individual, then the amount in the formula is at least 5 times WAPF’s daily recommended adult amount and 13 times GPPs daily recommended adult amount. If Dr. Ron, a healthy and hearty adult, was damaged due to a 6x overdose, what is happening to this children with a 5x overdose – many of whom are health challenged already??? The truth is that the dosage amount is in line with their previous recommendations of 2TBS which they are pretending never happened.
This video and transcript will probably be taken down now, and it should be. However, anybody expecting an explanation from WAPF about it will probably be disappointed. It will just go away, like so many other things.
I don’t have documentation of them raising the radiological safety limits, I just remember it happening at the time it happened. I havn’t had cause to research it in detail.
But I have no reason to doubt it as it was in keeping with their approach on that subject as well as other food contaminates (e.g. roundup) that they don’t want to worry about.
Poisonous substances in food above the safety limit? Raise the limit. Commerce must go on!
I agree on this point.
Dr. Daniel’s report page 22:
FREE FATTY ACIDS
Virtually all fats and oils in the plant and animal kingdoms start out in the triglyc- eride form, in which three free fatty acids are attached to a glycerol backbone. As the oils start to go rancid, the fatty acids begin to break free in a process called “lipid hydrolysis.” The percentage of TAGs (triacylglycerols, the term for the most prevalent form of triglycerides) then decreases and the percentages of DAGS (diacylglycerols) and MAGs (monoacylglycerols) increase.40,41
Oils from fresh livers will be light colored with a high triglyceride level and low free fatty acid content while oil obtained from livers which have begun to decom- pose will be darker in color with a lower triglyceride and higher free fatty acid content. Light-colored oils were traditionally considered “medicinal”; darker oils were for animal feeding and the darkest were used for paint, varnish and other industrial applications.42,43
!Many stressors can increase the Free Fatty Acid content of oils, including the manufacturing process; duration and conditions of storage; and the nature of the fatty acids themselves. The last will vary from species to species — for example, pollock will differ from cod — and within a species according to the fish’s age, climate, season, environment, and other factors.44,45
According to independent marine oils expert Anthony P. Bimbo, the allowable lim- it of Free Fatty Acids (FFAs) for crude fish oil is in the range of 1 to 7%, but typi- cally at 2 to 5%.46 The percentage of Free Fatty Acids in FCLO is much higher, as would be expected of a dark-colored oil. Lab #2 reported Free Fatty Acids at 16.2% and Lab #7 found an extremely high level of free fatty acids at 40.10%. Green Pasture’s own test data as posted on its website also came in high at 19.2% and 25.3%.
————–
Keeping that in mind as you read these reports:
http://www.greenpasture.org/fermented-cod-liver-oil-butter-oil-vitamin-d-vitamin-a/scientific-analysis-of-oxidation-test-reports-by-dr-vicki-schlegel/
http://www.greenpasture.org/fermented-cod-liver-oil-butter-oil-vitamin-d-vitamin-a/scientific-analysis-of-oxidation-test-reports-by-dr-subramaniam-sathivel/
————
Here is the analysis from two independent researchers, who have analyzed 7 very recent lab tests:
Dr. Schlegel reports about the fact that the use of free fatty acid tests as a marker for rancidity on Fermented Cod Liver Oil will not produce accurate results. She also reports that FCLO is on the low/normal range for oxidation.
http://www.greenpasture.org/fermented-cod-liver-oil-butter-oil-vitamin-d-vitamin-a/scientific-analysis-of-oxidation-test-reports-by-dr-vicki-schlegel/
“Dr. Schlegel has approved of the following summation of her findings:
After having reviewed our test results, Dr. Schlegel concluded that our Fermented Cod Liver Oil is in the low/normal range for oxidization. In addition, the free fatty acid test can not be used on our product with meaningful results. Free fatty acid tests measure the reaction when a base is added to the product and Fermented Cod Liver Oil has too many factors that could be reacting to the base. The only place that you can use a free fatty acid test accurately is with a purified oil such as corn oil and others that have been heavily processed.”
Dr. Sathivel:
http://www.greenpasture.org/fermented-cod-liver-oil-butter-oil-vitamin-d-vitamin-a/scientific-analysis-of-oxidation-test-reports-by-dr-subramaniam-sathivel/
“The independent analytical labs analyzed a total of seven Fermented Cod liver Oil samples and provided data for fatty acids profiles and thiobarbituric acid (TBA) values. The secondary lipid oxidation products (aldehydes) are evaluated by the measurement of malondialdehyde (MDA) reacting with thiobarbituric acid (TBA). The TBA value of your fish oils was an average of 0.32 mg MDA /kg oil, which is well below the acceptable level. Consumers may accept edible oil with TBA as high as 7-8 mg MDA/kg oil (Huss 2011).”
Your oil sample had an average of 17.3% free fatty acids, which is relatively high. Please note that your production technique of cod liver oil is very different than the traditional methods. In general, unrefined fish oil or unrefined edible oil has a high amount of free fatty acids. Sodium hydroxide is a base used to neutralize free fatty acids in edible oil. There are other techniques such as adsorption and distillation that can be used to remove free fatty acids. As I mentioned in another paper, free fatty acids have a tendency to oxidize; however, your oil has a very low level of TBA. It may be due to the presence of antioxidants in the oil. Your vitamin analysis showed that the fermented cod oil had a significant amount of vitamin A, which is known as an excellent antioxidant. It absorbs free radicals that result from lipid oxidation. Lipid oxidation is a chain reaction and we can delay or minimize lipid oxidation by removing free radicals. Your company uses amber bottles, which prevents or minimize light penetration into the bottle. UV light is one of the factors that promote lipid oxidation. In general, all oil has a tendency to oxidize regardless of free fatty acid content when they are exposed to light a long period of time or subjected to heat.”
Dr. Sathivel concurs with Dr. Schlegel about the fact that the free fatty acid test results are not an accurate measure of oxidation in this product: “Again, free fatty acids in the oil are not compounds resulting from lipid oxidation reactions. In other words, they are not aldehydes”
Learn about aldehydes: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rancidification
This is what you call “legalese”…? Sounds like more sensationalism to me, but I guess the truth alone isn’t nearly outrageous enough to appease your readership. smh
I’ve spent some time this weekend going over their test results, their scientist interpretations of the test results, and Masterjohn’s analysis of the test results. What I initially thought they were all saying isn’t what they were saying. None of them said the product wasn’t rancid, although that is what GPP and WAPF keep telling everybody. Perhaps I can elaborate when at my computer. Typing on the phone is slow.
“Dr. Schlegel has approved of the following summation of her findings: After having reviewed our test results, Dr. Schlegel concluded that our Fermented Cod Liver Oil is in the low/normal range for oxidization.”
The truth is there is no oil can be characterized as “not oxidized.” The question is, is the oxidation level is within an acceptable limit?
Oxidation is only one form of rancidity.
There are three forms of “rancidity”
1 Hydrolytic rancidity, which comes from the hydrolysis. Hydrolysis will release free fatty acid, and produce off-odor or different flavor.
2 Oxidation. This is the main concern for oil rancidity. It happens all the time, and it is the main source of the off-odor. It is related to hydrolysis and microbiological activities.
3 Microbial rancidity. This is due to the growth of microbes.
All three types of “rancidity” describe the odor, flavor, and taste, and nothing about the food safety.
Yes, the definitions that you have pulled are accurate as far as they go. Are you making a point?
All three types of “rancidity” describe the odor, flavor, and taste, and nothing about the food safety.
Guess you need to dig a little deeper then. If this whole issue was about taste, don’t you think that GPP and WAPF would be acting differently?
Exactly. Which is why none of these test results are ever going to tell us anything useful about the product. What needs to be done is precisely what Sally Fallon has suggested: to submit ALL of the CLO products to the same testing and then the results can be compared and contrasted between one another.
What is obvious is that most people who have taken FCLO have seen benefits without incidence as a result of consuming the product. Therefore it is reasonable to conclude that those who report negative reactions are just sensitive or “allergic” to something caused by the fermentation process… or they might just be intolerant to any type of CLO.
Another thing that I’ve been wondering about is how the product might be affected by way of shipping and handling, since there are so many customers who purchase their FCLO through a variety of different resellers. This allowing ample opportunity for the product to be left sitting out in the hot sun on shipping trucks for who knows how many hours before it reaches the end user. Are they being packaged with ice packs and insulation? I know that mine always are since I’ve always ordered my GP products from Miller’s Organic Farm, but I suspect that most vendors probably just ship it off in a box with packing foam. Perhaps even GP itself ships their product this way? I don’t know, but that’s probably a mistake. All I can say is that I’ve never experienced any noticeable difference from one batch to the next.
“Which is why none of these test results are ever going to tell us anything useful about the product. What needs to be done is precisely what Sally Fallon has suggested: to submit ALL of the CLO products to the same testing and then the results can be compared and contrasted between one another.”
I don’t disagree with this. Unfortunately, it took Kaayla’s report and the resulting fallout to get this to happen. Very unfortunate. Would have been so much better if the board had voted to do this back in December. How much different would this all have looked?
“Therefore it is reasonable to conclude that those who report negative reactions are just sensitive or “allergic” to something caused by the fermentation process… or they might just be intolerant to any type of CLO.”
Possibly some are intolerant of any type of CLO. Most of those I have seen and specifically reported good tolerance of other CLOs. I agree with the sensitivity. I think somebody at some point labeled them “canaries” a reference to their use in underground mines. I think that the “canaries” show that although some SEEM to tolerate the product well, they could be getting hurt, but just aren’t as sensitive to whatever is causing intolerance in the canaries.
“Another thing that I’ve been wondering about is how the product might be affected by way of shipping and handling”
This is an extremely salient point. In the shipments that I’ve gotten from GPP, there have never been any ice packs or insulation. I believe the reason for this is that Wetzel has contended that it is IMPOSSIBLE for his product to go bad. It has become an institutional belief. Masterjohn referenced this in his response to Kaayla’s report, and expressed his skepticism. Haven’t we learned in our real food movement, that if a product can’t go bad, or won’t go bad, you don’t want to put it in your mouth?
Here is the definition from a Food Science text book : The term rancidity refers to the off odors and flavors resulting from lipolysis (hydrolytic rancidity) or lipid oxidation (oxidative rancidity).
The reason rancid oil will cause a problem is the highly oxidized oil, such as vegetable oil used in fast food restaurants, will generate a very high concentration of oxidation products, such as aldehydes, ketones, organic acids, and hydrocarbons.The accumulation of aldehydes will cause danger to humans.
That is why Sally Fallon Morell sent FCLO to the UK overnight for testing of the aldehydes. The test proved there is no aldehydes found in FCLO. And also the other testing results from Midwest lab, and Eurofins Lab that were just published showed the oxidation level in FCLO was low or normal.
On the other hand, think about blue cheese, fish sauce. They are smelly, and could be referred to “rancid”. But people enjoy them.
The FCLO bottles that were recently tested were just kept at room temperature, for up to 12 months. Room temperature can get quite hot in the course of summer. The products didn’t need to be carefully handled, and still test as safe to consume.
Well, I know for sure that it can go bad if left unrefrigerated for long enough once the bottle has been opened and product used. I’ve had it happen to one of my old bottles. Can the same happen to unopened product? I imagine so under extreme enough conditions, which can certainly arise inside of a shipping truck.
I don’t agree that we would never have gotten here without Kaayla’s report. Kaayla herself admits that Sally was willing to investigate further into her concerns but wanted to wait until they could have it tested by a third party that could be fair to Dave. I don’t think that was supposed to mean “someone who will only give favorable results”, but rather someone who understands the issue of fermentation from our point of view, rather than from the mainstream point of view that fermented = “rotten.” Apparently Kaayla didn’t want to wait for that, and instead she preferred to make it look as if nobody was interested in getting to the bottom of the issue but herself. She wanted her “save the day” moment, and she sure got it alright… or shall I say: she took it and ran
So where do I ‘report’ my likely GP fclo/hvbo related illness?
I hope you’re serious, because I’m going to give a serious answer. I would like to say you could report it to WAPF or to GPP, but I honestly don’t know if they have ears to hear or if it will just be more of, “well, we’ve always said ‘It’s not for everyone.'”
FDA has a way to report adverse reactions to drugs, foods, and nutritional supplements. I’m loathe to suggest you go that route though.
Kaayla Daniel is collecting reports of FCLO related illnesses. I’m not sure for what purpose.
Were it me, I think I would report it to GPP, then report it to WAPF and depending on their responses, I would probably also send a report of it to Dr. Ron along with a note that you’ve already contacted GPP & WAPF and that you don’t know where else to turn. I’d give him permission to share it with whomever or use it in whatever way he thinks will make the most use out of it to protect other people.
@nicole — http://www.fda.gov/Safety/ReportaProblem/default.htm
just follow the links — choose emergency or non-emergency, then food, then click on the link and look down the list for your state. this is reporting by phone.
http://www.fda.gov/Safety/MedWatch/HowToReport/default.htm
to report a serious problem with a dietary supplement, look under voluntary reporting for consumers and health care professionals, select “online dietary supplement problem reporting.
Yes, that’s right. Report it to the enemy… a thoroughly corrupt alphabet agency made up of revolving-door pharma/monsanto employees and lobbyists who can’t wait to have more ammo with which to police the nutritional supplement industry right out of existence, leaving their pharmaceuticals as the only treatment options available. Brilliant idea.
Indeed. This is not the best option. When people are frustrated at not having their concerns taken seriously, they have a tendency to escalate until they are heard or until things get out of hand. The best course of action is of course to make them feel heard and validate their concerns early on.
Funny story – one time I had a call escalated to me from an absolutely irate customer. She was totally out of her mind because she felt like she was on an island. Apparently we had charged her, she had not received her order, our customer service lady could not find her order, etc. She was using terms like fraud, illegal, stealing, blah, blah. First I assured her that I would make it all right whatever it took and that calmed her down enough to have a conversation. I looked for her order, this way and that way while she ranted and grumbled. Finally I asked her if it was possible that she ordered from this another company that carried our products. She flatly said, “Oh.” She hung up without another word.
Amanda, IMO the FDA is not as black and white as you portray. Of course there is political influence (isn’t that also the emerging problem at the WAPF?), but there are also good people there doing their best against the odds to protect millions of unsophisticated consumers from all the charlatans and snake oil salesman who run their business according to the credo, “never let the truth get in the way of a good story.”
I disagree that the FDA does it’s best to “protect millions of unsophisticated consumers from *all* the charlatans and snake oil salesman who run their business according to the credo.” The key word there that I disagree with is *all* …they only go after the little guys while the pharma and GMO giants get rubber stamped approval. Maybe there are individuals within the FDA who *think* that they are doing right by the public, but obviously the agency as a whole has other plans and those few individuals have to go along to get along. That’s how gov’t institutions work, and unfortunately they have the power to control our options… WAPF, on the other hand, does not.
Amanda, you clearly have your mind made up on this, and I’m well aware that one of the toughest things in the world to do is to change an obdurate mind. Nevertheless, FWIW I personally know good people who work there and who are doing what they can to make the world a safer place. To tar them with your gross generalization is unfair, unwarranted and leaves me hoping you someday find room in your heart for a little more compassion.
There can be little doubt that there are many good, conscientious, honorable people working for Federal agencies. The problem is at the management level, where political and economic pressures set the agenda, and a corrupt one it indeed is. Anyone who has worked in an organization for a long time also knows that the quality of those on the management level can range from excellent to abysmal. More truth than fiction in Dilbert.
Agreed… Scott Adams is almost Shakespearean in his ability to capture and convey humanity’s weaknesses through his art.
By the way, Randy, what I do with the 4oz. salmon pieces is: line a skillet with 1/4″ slices of whatever citrus is available in the garden, add white wine diluted 50%, an eight minute poach, and a reduction sauce from the liquid with capers and butter. Mighty good, and not as much work as it sounds.
With all due respect, Randy, my view of the FDA has nothing to do with your friends in the agency. I am sure that there are also good people in the mafia, but I won’t be phoning the Don for help when I’m having a dispute with my neighbor all the same. So yes, my mind is made up on this, and it will remain so until the FDA stops terrorizing honest farmers/food producers out of business and policing my nutritional choices according to what they think is best for me.
“I am sure that there are also good people in the mafia…”
Okay… Whatever you say.
Randy, I know you’re probably thinking that I went too far with that comparison, but consider the fact that pharma is in the business of quietly killing people with their drugs… and they wouldn’t be able to pull it off without the FDA endorsing their “treatments” with the FDA seal of approval. So IMO, the FDA (like other alphabet agencies) really isn’t all that different from any other mobster organization. They just have a different weapon of choice: pills, syringes, and GMO’s instead of guns and knives. At least with the mafia you know what kind of people you’re dealing with and what they are capable of. I mean, at least they don’t represent themselves as some benevolent agency protecting public health. Know what I mean?
Nicole, why don’t you call Green Pasture Products at 402-858-4818?
Steve, good points. It sounds like the WAPF board has agreed to test all the clo brands they endorse. It’s too bad Dr. Daniel didn’t submit her findings in a more professional and less emotional and caustic manner. Community could have been preserved.
I agree, Anne. However, nobody, especially the VP of the organization, should have to gather and spend $10,000 in testing, and put in hundreds of hours of time to thoroughly assemble a report, in order to get the rest of the board to pay attention and do something. Don’t you think? So yes, we can blame Dr. Daniel for the disturbance in the community. Or we could blame GPP, Sally, and or the board. I think different people are going to lay the blame at different places, and unfortunately, there is enough to go around.
I don’t think Dr. Daniel had to work hard to find someone to pay for testing, but I would love to see the complete list of donors for that testing. And the hundreds of hours she put into researching her sensational story helped to collect email addresses for her to solicit her practice and to drive people to her Facebook page. As has been stated previously, the WAPF did not accept her request to test the oil because she wanted full control of the testing and the board was not comfortable with the undocumented health complaints that she was asserting, just as she had done for BioKult. Finally the board DID have the oil tested and those test results have been made public.
I have read every comment on this blog for almost 4 weeks. I have read everything I could get my hands on about this. I have followed every link, read most of the comments on every blog. I have read Sarah Pope’s public account of the board meeting and why the board voted not to do further testing. I have read Sally’s public account of it, and the reason that the board did not approve testing. I have read Kaayla’s public account of the board meeting and the reason she gave that the board voted against testing. This is the first time that I have heard that “WAPF did not accept her request to test the oil because she wanted full control of the testing and the board was not comfortable with the undocumented health complaints that she was asserting, just as she had done for BioKult.” Is this the report going around behind the scenes?
Daniel states in her report that, ” I furthermore shared reports from clinicians who were finding severe Vitamin D deficiencies among some members who were regularly taking FCLO.” You are saying that the board took this as unfounded health complaints. However, Sally seemed to consider them real and substantial enough to address them in her Q&A.
I guess that just leaves the control of the testing issue. I mean, why would you want a PhD in nutrition who has won your Integrity in Science award to be in control of the testing you were doing on a product???
“Finally the board DID have the oil tested and those test results have been made public.” The way you word this doesn’t seem to jive at all with other information that has been made public. Sally says that she initiated the testing on her own. The date the sample was received in the UK is November, before the December board meeting. Additionally, WAPF did not post the entire report.
Steve, yes, maybe I do have the “behind the scenes” report. Of course I have known many of the people involved in this debate, personally, for over ten years. As to vitamin D testing, you might find the following quote from Dr. Louisa Mitchell interesting….at the 2009 Wise Traditions Conference Dr. Louisa Williams stated that “Vitamin D testing only tells you what is circulating in the blood NOT what is actually getting into the tissues where it makes a difference. I think the whole vitamin D testing frenzy is just that; another way for someone to make a buck off the consumers.” You can find this discussion, along with about a dozen others on the topic of blood tests for vitamin D, on the GPP blog. Could it be that people who have been taking FCLO have seen reduced blood vitamin D levels, myself included, because the D is actually going into the tissue where it belongs? Isolating the results of one test while not looking at the bigger picture does not work; Kaayla Daniel told me this on many occasions when interpreting my hair mineral analysis test results. Interestingly, in the two years that I was her client, I don’t think she ever tested my blood for vitamin D…I’ll have to check my records.
You’ll have to talk to Sally about vitamin D and not me. I didn’t say I thought it was important. I said that Sally thought the reports “were real and substantial enough to address them in her Q&A” in response to your claim that the board rejected Kaayla’s request to test the oil in part because of their discomfort over “undocumented health complaints”. Seems like tests would be “documents” and health care practitioners would at least provide verbal reports or written affidavits if requested, if they weren’t able to share specific patient information.
It just seems like in the end, they voted not to test, because David Wetzel is more important to WAPF than Kaayla Daniel. Everything else is smokescreen. It’s one reason that even the board members can’t get their stories to match.
Steve, yes “seems like tests would be documents and health care practitioners would at least provide verbal report or written affidavits…” but to date only Dr, Schmidt and Dr Daniel have provided testimony and Daniel does not give names or even clinical reports from these individuals. To say that “David Wetzel is more important to WAPF than Kaayla Daniel” is an a wild assumption on your part and not based on any fact or evidence. Just your opinion. And what board members aren’t matching up their stories? I’d like to see what they have said that is contradictory.
Wait, so the board requested more information and Dr. Daniel wouldn’t make it available? Or Dr. Daniel has not made it public to the likes of you and me?
The delightful thing about the word “seems” is it is not absolute. It is not a statement of fact. It is indeed my opinion. And I would venture that it is the opinion of many others. What about you? Do you disagree? Do you think that David Wetzel is less important than Kaayla Daniel is to WAPF? Who is more important to you?
Oh, forgot to address your last question. Sarah Pope said that they voted not to do more testing because they had Grootveld’s report. Sally Fallon said that they voted not to do more testing because they had GPP’s test results, and she thought that vitamin testing was more important. You said that they voted not to do more testing because Daniel wanted to control the testing, and because of a discomfort over undocumented health complaints. (As if they couldn’t have voted to do testing and had Masterjohn or some other person control the testing who could be “fair to Dave”.) Will the real reason please stand up?
Since the BOD is made up of many different people, each of whom had to vote ‘yes’ or ‘no’ based on their own reasons, why does there have to be only one “real reason”…? Maybe the answer is “all of the above.”
You speak as if the directors of this board might possibly at some time vote against Sally.
Uh… one of them did vote against Sally. What is your point?
Guess they removed any possibility of that happening again . . . .
That’s not why she was voted off the board and you know it.
You said that one of them voted against Sally, as if that was a continuing possibility. I didn’t say it was WHY she was voted off. I just mentioned that I guessed they removed the possibility of that aberrant behavior being repeated in the future. Which then leads back to the original point – multiple reasons have been given as justification for the board voting for no testing – and they don’t seem to agree. The truth might actually be in there. Or it might not. It could be that FCLO is a sacred tenet of WAPFism, and as such is untouchable.
The reason is all of the above. Sarah and Sally are saying the same thing – GPP lab results and the tests Sally ran have been evaluated by Grootveld (and others soon to be released). Sally has only gone a bit further to focus on nutrient content because there were no safety issues with the oil. My comments are based on numerous discussions with several board members. Maybe you should ask Dr Daniel for a copy of her written proposal to WAPF to test and evaluate FCLO. A researcher asking an organization to spend thousands of dollars would certainly submit a written request detailing their research plans.
I think you made my point Carrie, which is that despite and because of numerous reports, we don’t know what happened. Why don’t we know what happened? Because they don’t want us to know exactly what happened. They have told stories, here and there, to try to justify their actions, but the stories don’t agree. Sarah Pope said they had Grootveld’s report that and that’s why they voted not to do testing. But they didn’t post all of Grootveld’s report. Why??? Sally didn’t mention that they had Grootveld’s report, just that they had the GPP reports which she admits Grootveld said are “not good tests for rancidity”. Uhm, ok. So if she had Grootveld’s report, why not mention it – especially when she had spent good WAPF money overnighting a sample to an expert who did an expensive test? She did not say that they were going to do vitamin testing on FCLO. Why would they do vitamin testing on FCLO? They already had GPPs reports and if they saw no reason to question the “not good tests for rancidity” why would there be any reason to question the vitamin tests? That might be a story that she is telling now (or it could be how you read what she wrote in her Q&A), but if that was the case, she and all of the rest would have said, “But we did vote to do further testing on FCLO. We voted to do vitamin testing.” But, they didn’t. I’ve had two people assure me that board meeting minutes are available upon request – two people who should know (the recording secretary, and the administrator of the chapter leader page. They were convinced, probably because they were always available upon request in the past. I asked for them. And suddenly a new policy arises that board meeting minutes are no longer available upon request. So, what is in those board meeting minutes? What does the rest of that Grootveld report state? Why don’t they want us to know?
Carrie, I applaud your loyalty. Honestly, if I ever get into a tough situation, I hope that there is somebody that will be as loyal to me as you have been to Dave and Sally. But something isn’t right. As had been stated before, GPP and WAPF are not acting like innocent parties. They are acting guilty. There has been an active cover-up operation and They are acting like they got caught with a hand in the cookie jar. They may not be guilty of fraud or be criminal masterminds, but they act like they are hiding something. We’ve already seen how certain things about the product and the situation that you believed turned out to be untrue, like that vitamin E was produced in the fermentation process. What else might be different than you think?
Here are just a few questions that you need to consider:
Why is it that fish are good sources of D3 (an animal synthesized vitamin), contain little to no D2 (a plant synthesized vitamin), but FCLO contains high amounts of D2, and little to no D3?
Why does FCLO contain higher than normal amounts of Vitamin E (a plant synthesized vitamin)?
Why does FCLO contain trans fats?
How long has Dave Wetzel known about this unsafe component of his product and not disclosed it?
Why did WAPF not post the Grootveld report in its entirety?
Steve, I applaud your loyalty. Honestly, if I ever get into a tough situation, I hope that there is somebody that will be as loyal to me as you have been to Kaayla Daniel.
Your definition of loyalty must be far different than mine. I think you will have a hard time finding me employing every artifice and taking every opportunity to defend every action, method and conclusion of Kaayla Daniel. I don’t know her. I have not been in contact with her. I have not been gathering information from her that I could use in her defense on this site.
I’ll ask you the same questions Amanda:
Why is it that fish are good sources of D3 (an animal synthesized vitamin), contain little to no D2 (a plant synthesized vitamin), but FCLO contains high amounts of D2, and little to no D3?
Why does FCLO contain higher than normal amounts of Vitamin E (a plant synthesized vitamin)?
Why does FCLO contain trans fats?
How long has Dave Wetzel known about this unsafe component of his product and not disclosed it?
Why did WAPF not post the Grootveld report in its entirety?
Steve,
Can you elaborate on the Vit E part. I understand the implications of that vis a vi the trasnfats vegie oil thing. But Dr. Daniel’s report mentioned it had expected levels of Vit E.
What tests are showing higher than normal amounts?
Is the Vit D2 vs. D3 thing in the Daniels report?
Vitamin E was reported high by GPP. It was mentioned in one of the scientist evaluations as a possible reason for there being little oxidation which is unusual considering the high amount of PUFAs.
Kaayla’s report said, “. . . I was skeptical of data showing improbably high levels of Vitamin D2 in
the product.” It was mentioned by Sally though. She says that because they found high levels of D2 in FCLO they decided to reconsider their view that D2 was ineffective and possibly toxic.
Section IV of her reports deals with the fat soluble vitamins in detail.
Do you happen to have links to the GPP reports or Sally’s statement?
If the vitamin e was high in GPPs tests, why not in Daniels?
This is important as vitamin e is a potent antioxident. But if present in high levels it is likely from vegetable oil adulteration, one more bolster to that theory.
To answer part of my own question, Sally’s statement can be found in her Q&A:
http://www.westonaprice.org/uncategorized/questions-and-answers-about-fermented-cod-liver-oil-fclo/
under the header, “Why does Green Pasture claim that there is vitamin D2 in fermented cod liver oil? Everybody knows that there is only D3 in cod liver oil.”
Found a blog post that has some test data in it. Doesn’t mention E at all. If it is important to you, you might want to archive it.
http://www.greenpasture.org/utility/showArticle/?ObjectID=8161&find=test&happ=siteAdministrator
GPP has been working on a new website for over a year; way before FCLO-gate started. Some links are missing right now and I know at least one blog post on E and B in the oil is missing. My understanding is that the site is supposed to be ready before the WT conference.
There were all sorts of testing data on the site about 3 weeks ago. About 10 days ago, I couldn’t find any. It seems unlikely that has anything to do with building a new website.
http://www.greenpasture.org/public/Products/TestData/index.cfm
http://www.greenpasture.org/utility/showArticle/?ObjectID=9385&find=test&happ=siteAdministrator
I couldn’t find any GPP testing reports when I looked the other day. I think they have been removed. Sally’s statement is in her Q&A.
Re: the vitamin E and everything else, here is a potential possibility from the Daniel report:
“Shortly after the 2009 conference, I alerted Fallon-Morell to the absurdity of these
data from UBE Laboratories and later discussed them with Chris Masterjohn
PhD, who said at the time that they would “only make sense in a parallel universe.”
More recently, he said he might be able to accept the figures if he only
knew more about Danny Pang’s methods. But Pang’s not saying much about the
unique and secret methods employed at UBE to Masterjohn or apparently anyone
else.21
Fallon Morell now acknowledges “we’re not so sure about these figures,” but she
would like to validate them.22 Until then, the high Vitamin A and D fermented cod
liver oil data from UBE remain up on both the Weston A. Price Foundation and
Green Pasture websites. ”
The GPP vitamin data came from UBE labs. I don’t remember where I saw it now but Sally said that they don’t have the UBE FCLO test results posted because Pang won’t reveal his methods. You can see above that Kaayla references the same thing, and I have confirmation from a third party as well. So the possibility is that this UBE Analytical Lab specializes in providing high vitamin content reports for companies that need them or want them.
I probably should have been more clear in what I was saying above. I was not claiming that FCLO was high in D2 or E. I should have been more careful to say that GPP was CLAIMING it was high in those substances, and then asked what possible explanations could there be for that. The likelihood is that the level of E in FCLO is about right, and that there is no D2 in FCLO, only D3 (the better form). But the D3 is low, which isn’t terrible, unless you are using FCLO as your sole source of D supplementation based upon manufacturer and marketing service (WAPF) claims.
I wouldn’t even know where to begin with your latest rant Steve. Nothing but logical fallacies and supposition. I am wondering though; are you Steve Tallent, CEO of Beeyoutiful? It’s interesting to me that Beeyoutiful.com carries both GPP FCLO and Rosita EVCLO?
Start by pointing out one logical fallacy. Just one. And please explain WHY it is a logical fallacy and what kind of logical fallacy it is.
Yes, that is me. I have confirmed that before in comments on this site. I have also stated publicly in these comments on multiple occasions that I carry GPP products and Rosita as well and sell far more of the GPP products than the Rosita products. I have thousands of dollars of GPP inventory that is past the 30 day refund window. It is in my best monetary interest that there be absolutely no problem with FCLO or that I just go along with the narrative and believe everything that I’m told and that my customers keep buying it. But I can’t.
I don’t know Kaayla Daniel, never heard her speak, don’t think I’ve ever met her. The same is true of Dr. Ron, and David Gumpert. I’ve met Sally and I’ve met David Wetzel. I have nothing against either. I think that they are both good people and people of integrity. That just makes what is happening right now all the more troubling, because they are not acting like I would have expected them to act given what I believed about them. Just search “transparency” on the WAPF site and you will see all of the efforts that Sally and WAPF have made to bring greater transparency and accountability to our foods. It is laudable. But we’re not seeing that here. I still don’t understand it and can only speculate.
If you’re looking for my angle, if you’re trying to identify my nefarious purpose, well, just let me know if you need any more information to figure it out.
Steve, I would like to say that, in my opinion, some of the best information and assessment of this situation has come from you. Thanks.
Dr. Daniel didn’t damage the community, WAPFs reaction did.
As to ‘professional and less emotional and caustic manner’, whats good for the goose is good for the gander…
https://archive.is/WfrsA
“Kaayla T. Daniel, PhD, CCN (Vice President) is The Naughty Nutritionist™ because of her ability to outrageously and humorously debunk nutritional myths.”
In 2005, Dr. Daniel received the Weston A. Price Foundation’s Integrity in Science Award.
“a natural born entertainer” and a “naughty nutritionist” because of her quirky and naughty sense of humor
@ Pete: Yes, yes, yes to the first line of your post above.
Also, I’ve been curious as to why Dr. Daniel is ridiculed for being the naughty nutritionist (which some people are totally misunderstanding and simply won’t admit they’re wrong), but it’s ok for Sally Fallon to be caustic (in their printed Journals, she has her “Caustic Commentary”)?
People making those accusations, attn: pot, kettle, black.
It must be in the fine print that apologies will be forthcoming on February 30th.
;o)
“What is obvious is that most people who have taken FCLO have seen benefits without incidence as a result of consuming the product.”
Do we know in fact that this is true? Has anyone taken a survey/poll? I have no idea, but for myself and my family, we took it off and on over the years and noticed no noticeable reactions either way, but that doesn’t mean there will not be an eventual, impossible-to-prove legacy.
I have worked with GPP for more than 10 years and have heard testimony from hundreds of happy customers. Burping and repeating, burning or scratchy sensation on the back of the throat, are the only complaints I’ve heard. For most people these issues are resolved over time as people work to improve their diet and health; myself included.
Yes very true. As one’s health improves so do the symptoms you have described. Many with congested gallbladders are challenged by the pure fclo. My husband complained of a scratchy sensation in the back of his throat at times and I would immediately take a dose (1/2 to 1 teaspoon) from the same bottle and notice absolutely no scratchiness. So obviously it was his body reacting and not a problem with the oil.
Char – My assessment that you quoted is based on the comments that I’ve read online from those who’ve taken FCLO. I have seen relatively few bad reports compared to the countless reviews praising the product for having improved or eliminated certain health issues.
It seems that the complaints have a way of festering in people’s memories, creating the illusion that they are more prevalent and more serious than they really are. I have not taken a poll or survey, but your question did inspire me to analyze the main source of FCLO complaints that many like to refer back to as evidence of a Green Pastures induced health crises of sorts.
That source is here: http://nourishedandnurtured.blogspot.ca/2013/01/why-we-stopped-taking-fermented-cod.html
What I found was…
Out of the 268 comments left in response to that blog, I counted 32 Positive FCLO Reports and 17 Negative FCLO Reports (the remaining 219 comments were either off-topic or involved opinions about FCLO from people who have no personal experience taking the product.)
Out of those 17 Negative Reports:
(2) report an allergic reaction but admit to having a prior allergy to either fermented foods in general or to seafood, another (2) report minor issues like burps or throat burn, another (1) reports “anxiety” but admits that she has “high anxiety issues” normally, another (1) reports heavy menstrual bleeding but admits that taking vitamins gives her nose bleeds, another (1) reports bloody stool but admits that it’s a loose correlation to FCLO and could be from anything (Note: this last one was actually *hoping* that it was a reaction to the FCLO and not something more serious).
That leaves a whopping 10 legit Negative Reports, most of which are related to digestive distress and many of those specifically involve the cinnamon tingle flavor. Once you break it all down like this, it really doesn’t seem quite so alarming, does it?
So, between 20% (if you count only 10) and 34% (if you count all 17) of people reporting had negative experiences. Were the 32 with positive experiences actual health improvements or just people who took it and did not notice any bad effects?
The 32 Positive Reports were from people who had beneficial experiences with the product.
Interestingly enough, several of those 32 mentioned having bad reactions (like digestive issues) with regular CLO, but not with FCLO.
Also, one of the 10 Negative Reports was a positive/negative combo (but I counted it as negative, just to be safe). The author of this particular report claimed to have experienced gastric distress and no health benefit at all from the cinnamon tingle flavor, but that she had no such issues with the plain flavor which she did see positive results from.
I don’t know if there’s really anything to this whole cinnamon tingle connection or if it’s just a coincidence due to the popularity of this flavor, but I think I’ll be switching to the plain from now on… just in case.
That’s right, blame the vendors and consumers for not keepng it cold and dark in transit, ignoring the fact it sat in open vats under direct sun for months!
‘Most people’ is pure speculation. We’ve seen a couple reports at least of folks who thought they were fine, until they stopped taking FCLO and then health problems go away.
What is reasonable, is to echo Dr. Weston Price and note that an overactivated CLO like GPs is dangerous and should not be consumed. He says this based on his scientific research, not marketing, faith or myths about ‘traditional’ cod liver oil.
First of all, Pete, I wasn’t “blaming the vendors” at all. I’m simply brininging up the fact that product, which has to move from GP-to-vendor and again from vendor-to-consumer, allows for plenty of mishandling opportunity in transit. That’s a simple fact, and one which I’ve not seen anyone mention yet. Why does everything have to be a blame game with you?
Furthermore, the FCLO does not sit in direct sunlight at all at GP’s facilities. This is clarified on GP’s blog and we’ve already discussed that here.
You’re missing the point. My point is, any affect on FCLO in transit from heat and light is less than experienced during fermentation.
Wasn’t that part of the selling point, the fermentation vats were exposed to light from the clear roofed facility? Sure maybe he keeps it dark after bottling, but not during ferment. Where is my misunderstanding here?
You’re right, I hadn’t really worked all of that out. My understanding was that the CLOs were fermented in sealed metal vats. (When we started doing fermenting we were told not to ferment in metal or to store fermented products in metal, but that’s another issue.) But we were also told that the product was exposed to sun. Not sure how it could be an anaerobic process in a sealed vat if it is also exposed to the sun, unless the sealed vats are clear or at least clear on the top?
Maybe true – I have noticed differences, one time I had a bottle of fclo/hvbo mix that had the butter congealed into tiny balls – I bought it from my homeopath that time. It was rank but I still took it because after all isn’t anything fermented rank? And how do you even send it back from Australia? In hindsight I’m trusting my raw milk farmer who tests weekly more than someone I can never meet. Know thy farmer. This is a mistake we’ve all made in this clo case I think.
I think it’s time for some *in vivo* and epidemiological studies. The information I’m getting is that persons taking substantial doses of fclo are, at least by correlation, being gravely harmed.
It seems to me that all the talk of testing entirely misses the point. It is clear from Dr. Price’s unpublished work (available at the PPNF website as a blog post based upon archival research) that he advocated using only fresh cod liver oil, and warned that using oil that was not fresh could be dangerous. He clearly never used cod liver oil from barrels on humans, only with rodents in his research. How long do Dave Wetzel’s livers stay in those vats in Nebraska? How long between bottling and delivery, and how much heat are the bottles subject to in transit? There are now several reports from people who have taken this stuff over a long period, and report cardiac problems. This should be a wake-up call to all of us, folks. If some report symptomatic damage, isn’t it possible that many more have asymptomatic damage? Who in their right mind, knowing this, would put this stuff into their body? It is beyond ironic that the WAPF is promoting (no dissent allowed) a product that Weston A. Price himself would never have encouraged.
Gary: “It seems to me that all the talk of testing entirely misses the point.” Well, I’ll agree that trying to decipher the vagaries of “food scientists ” (at best technicians) is a waste of time. Flco is unique. What would be more useful would be an investigation by a forensic toxicologist. And we need to have a way of collecting data about the damage done to *canaries* and others.
Also I report that a long time friend who is a homeopath MD and public health official pointed that taking a small amount of a toxic substance stimulates the adrenals and the immune system in a way that can fool the taker of the toxin into thinking that the effect of the toxin is good. Think about a dose of smoke. We have evolved to react and “fight or flight.” Smoke is stimulating, at first.
That’s some good thoughts right there, Bob. You make several very excellent points. Thanks for sharing.
I had a friend at one time that was taking an herb that was doing something similar to what you describe. It was making her a pregnancy condition feel better. She was telling other pregnant women suffering the same to do it as well. Unfortunately, the long term effect of taking that herb was to make the issue even worse, and despite others pointing this out to her, she refused to budge and kept giving her advice on the forum she managed. She ended up kicking off herbalists and midwives and anybody else who disagreed with her suggestion. Ugh.
Bob, what kind of smoke are you talking about? like cigarette smoke? marijuana smoke? Those are the only “stimulating” smokes that I can think of, and the obvious reason for that is the stimulants present in marijuana and tobacco products. I don’t recall ever feeling stimulated at a bon fire or while standing near a BBQ.
Careful Amanda! Steve will take your comment, turn it around and accuse you of being a pot smoker! He seems to be quite the detective you know?
In the spirit of Teaching…..after all, the last words of Dr. Weston A Price were these: You Teach, you teach, you teach. The second annual Flourish Confence was held in Napa this weekend and was a huge success. More than 150 dietitians, teachers, doctors, veterinarians, students,moms, dads,and just plain normal people attended. It was sponsored by Eco Chic. I have been a speaker at this conference since before it was branded ( 4 years ). Raw milk is a central theme and it was tremendous to see the huge support for immune recovery using raw milk, raw milk kefir and other organic and natural farm direct unprocessed foods. A veterinarian in attendance was put into educational shock. She came up to me after my one hour human genomics raw milk presentation and said….she needed to go back to school because she felt so under educated about true medicine and the immune system function. Wow….great stuff!
I find it desparaging that progress and positive news is being trumped by a conversation about cod liver oil …of all things. I challenge all of you to just try and shift gears back to a positive nutritional conversation. This negative banter is not constructive. It tends to eat your brain. It begs consumers to take sides and bash one another. Unity….positive unity is what builds a better future for our kids.
There are so many postive things happening in this world that could be discussed. Has anyone had a good teaching moment recently? Would love to hear about some teaching events….no matter how small. Has any one been teaching??
I know our opdc marketing team spent three days at the Shiftcon conference in LA, it was a huge teaching and sharing success!
Anyone else have something to share about teaching or maybe a really good farm tour or media interview?
“You teach, you teach. you teach” is over the top arrogant. He should have said, “You learn, you learn, you learn.” If he had said that, Sally and WAPF would have learned something from the members and coworkers about humility and respect.
L – Funny you should mention that, considering the scarcity of humility and respect among these angry comments. Speaking of “arrogant”… I’m having trouble imagining anything more arrogant than a group of entitled Americans demanding that their cod liver oil be harvested from nothing but the absolute best (albeit totally unsustainable) Atlantic Cod fish from the “pristine and unspoilt” remote regions of Norway. God forbid the oil of a similar, more sustainable fish be tossed into the mix. Humility indeed.
I wonder how the Norwegian natives will feel once we’ve all but depleted their precious natural resource when the supply can no longer meet that demand…
Amanda….I’ve not seen anyone demanding their oil be produced anywhere. But many of us are demanding that we get the full story on what and where it’s produced. I’m fine with sustainable fish being tossed in if I’m TOLD it’s happening and why. Exactly how is it entitled to expect truth in labeling and no slick marketing gimmicks?
Sorry but I don’t buy for a second that all of this commotion bickering endlessly back and forth over the specific cod species used, “Fukushima fish,” and the migration over to Corganic’s product is all over a mere tiff about “marking terms” …not a chance.
No. It is not a tiff over marketing terms. It is a matter of trust. Many people feel like they can’t trust GPP any more. People believed things about the product that turned out to be untrue. How did they arrive at those beliefs? By things that GPP said. So they feel misled and rightly so. Maybe these same folks will find that they can’t trust Carlson’s or NutraPro or Rosita or Corganic in the future. Who know?
Who told you that Atlantic Cod was unsustainable? Oh, that’s right. David Wetzel. http://e360.yale.edu/feature/how_norway_and_russia_made__a_cod_fishery_live_and_thrive/2806/
Steve,
David Wetzel isn’t the only one saying Atlantic cod are unsustainable. From http://animalquestions.org/fish/cod/are-cod-endangered/: “Atlantic cod is considered a threatened species on the IUCN (International Union for Conservation of Nature) Red List of Threatened Species and it has also been declared endangered by the WWF (World Wildlife Foundation). Pacific cod, on the other hand, is not considered to be endangered at this time…. cod products from Ireland and the UK were examined and have been found to have been using mislabeled products in order to deceive consumers by marketing endangered Atlantic cod as sustainably sourced Pacific cod.”
I’m confused by the article you link to. It starts out talking about a harvest of Atlantic cod, but further down in the text it says it is “skrei” cod, which is not Atlantic cod but rather Norwegian Artic cod, which has yielded a sustainable annual catch of one million tons, thanks to binational cooperation between Norway and Russia.
@Lynn_M — “skrei” is the Norwegian language and what they call the Atlantic Cod – it means ‘the wanderer’ (because it’s run is for a short time of the year in their fishing region. It is the Northeast Arctic Cod (of which the Atlantic Cod are included).
“Atlantic cod are found in temperate climes ranging from the shallows near the shore to deeper waters near the continental shelf. Their habitat stretches from Greenland to North Carolina; off the coast of Iceland; and along the coasts of Europe from the Bay of Biscay to the Barents Sea [external link] , which is their most important feeding area. The northeast Arctic or Arcto-Norwegian stock is at present the world’s largest population of Atlantic cod. This stock is sometimes referred to as skrei, a Norwegian name meaning something like “the wanderer”, distinguishing them from non-migrating coastal cod.” http://marinebio.org/species.asp?id=206
Yes, it’s the wandering Atlantic Cod that may have the qualities we are interested in as medicine. They swim in the warm Gulf Stream and North Atlantic Drift and therefore have factors in their blood and flesh that prevent the PUFAs, (EPA and EPA for instance) from oxidizing when warmed. They also have the PUFAs found in cold water fish perhaps because they “wander.”
The ‘Pollock is Cod, Pollock is Cod, (kukuk ist tot)” chorus is irrelevant There are huge differences beyond just the cash register. Atlantic Cod are large and long lived. Their livers are large and active as they detox the stuff that such bottom feeders eat. I used to occasionally eat tinned Cod liver when I lived near a Russian supermarket. Mild and delicious.
You don’t want to ever try cod (A or P) sushi as all varieties have parasites and they are NOT killed by freezing. Pacific Cod et al. do not have the antioxidant qualities to allow for even short storage or exposure to air. PCod and Pollock must be frozen immediately after catching. I have cooked several Pacific varieties and do not find them good eating. (Sablefish is good though, especially smoked.)
janieinMN, thanks for that link. I wish authors would refer to the scientific name of these fish at least once in an article, so I know for sure what species they were talking about.
Bob Thorson, thanks for sharing some details of why the livers of Atlantic cod are superior to Alaskan Pollock and Pacific cod. I get irked at people who don’t recognize that Alaskan Pollock is technically now a cod, but I readily accept that, as you point out, one cod is not the same as another cod. I agree that the issue with Alaskan Pollock goes way beyond whether it can be called cod or not.
@ Bob Thorson: Interesting, informative and thank you for posting.
Steve, Randy Hartnell of Vital Choice also says its unsustainable. He purchases ONLY Pacific cod. And who promotes Atlantic Cod?….drum roll please….Corganic!
Yes. And we know that because Corganic products are accurately labeled. This whole issue boils down to integrity of production, labeling and marketing, or the problematic lack thereof, with regard to food products in the marketplace. People like Randy Hartnell have their integrity intact, others not so much. Integrity and accountability matter considerably when we are collectively arguing for artisan food producers who are genuinely on the front lines of regulatory persecution such as Michael Schmidt. Any organization that is unable to keep their own house together is then unable to provide credible assistance beyond their own house. People like Michael Schmidt are left out in the open if WAPF leadership cannot keep their own house clean. This is why it is such a big deal that WAPF has taken an aggressively defensive stance regarding one particular vendor versus another. It belies a failure of integrity and impartiality, the very thing that WAPF, and David Gumpert, is quick to point out in governmental regulatory oversight.
How would you know that “Corganic products are accurately labeled”…? Have their products been subjected to a battery of 3rd party testing, like Green Pastures products have? Or is this just a good faith assumption that Corganic’s claims are accurate?
The only reason the labeling issue came up for Green Pasture is because of the many allegations that FCLO has been making people sick. The labeling issue didn’t come up because people are “after” GP. The labeling issue hasn’t come up for Corganic products because, insofar as I know, there haven’t been the same kinds of allegations of illness.
David – The reason *why* the labeling issue came up is irrelevant. My point is that nobody can say “and we know that because Corganic products are accurately labeled” when in fact we DON’T KNOW any such thing. The only reason that we now know particulars about GP’s claims is because Kaayla put them under a microscope. If you put every other CLO company under the same microscope, chances are you’d find a lot of “slick marketing terms” that suggest and exaggerate things about their products.
Are you suggesting that GPP used “slick marketing terms” that suggested and exaggerated things about their product? Or only that other companies probably do that?
No. I put “slick marketing terms” in quotes because that’s how somebody else here described GP’s product description. Claiming that somehow their choice of wording suggested the use of atlantic cod (I disagree, but whatever). Personally, I don’t find GP’s marketing terms to be any more “slick” than the next CLO company’s marketing terms. But, if people are going to get all nitpicky and gripe about marketing, one has to wonder why the same standards aren’t being applied to other companies… especially Corganic/Rosita with their utopia-like descriptions of how and from where they source their livers.
That’s a fair question. I don’t think we can KNOW if their products are accurately labeled without 3rd party testing, and I have not heard of any third party testing done. I know Sally said that she had them do some testing in order to be in the best category and she said the numbers were good, so I’m assuming she saw the original test results and not some extract.
I guess my attitude has always been trust but verify as much as is possible, and when trust is broken then it is distrust and verify.
What claims is Corganic’s making that you think are questionable?
I’m not saying that I think Corganic/Rosita’s claims are questionable, but I am sure that if you put their company under a microscope you would find that their product descriptions contain “slick marketing terms” and suggestive exaggerations, just as Kaayla found with GP. In fact, Green Pastures didn’t actually DO anything to warrant a secret investigation. Kaayla just decided to put them under a microscope, scrutinize and publicize what she found, and THEN people decided to take a closer look at GP. You could do the same thing to any company, which would likely reveal some things that you don’t like. Especially if done by surprise!
Well, there are enough people upset about how GPP has been treated, and a lot of them think that Corganic/Rosita is behind it, so I guess we’ll just have to see if any of them are upset enough to put them under a microscope and see what shows up. Personally, I would be interested in seeing the results. I would be especially interested in seeing how Corganic responded, and seeing if there would be an immediate defense of the company mounted by WAPF, or if they would adopt an objective “wait and see” posture which many thought they should have done in this case.
I would imagine that Corganic’s response will largely depend on how they are approached with the findings. Luckily for them, it looks like Sally will be the one wielding the microscope this time around. I predict that her assessment of the data will be much less inflammatory than Kaayla’s report.
Theresa, how has WAPF “taken an aggressively defensive stance regarding one particular vendor versus another?” Can you show me documentation of this?
Interesting how Corganic owner was slandering fclo in an effort to promote his ratfish oil four years ago. Makes you wonder if there is a connection.
What was he saying that wasn’t true? I don’t know. I was there, but I was watching kids and helping out with our VERY busy booth.
Just read the article that I posted.
L: Dr. Price’s last words, “You teach, you teach, you teach” were spoken to his assistant, in the sense of “carry on my work.” This I learned from the PPNF journal, and, since they possess the entire archive of his work, there is no reason to suspect its veracity. Nor is there any evidence that arrogance was part of Dr. Price’s character. Two things come to mind for Sally’s behavior in this mess. First, and undoubtedly true, powerful people often have powerful egos and protect their positions of power at all costs; second, I can’t help but wonder if Sally has some sort of financial interest in seeing GPP stay afloat. This will remain a mystery, no doubt, unless the government sticks its corrupt little nose into the affair.
Thanks Gary…..I suspected this on Price’s words. That’s makes more sense.
Gary, thanks for clarifying the “You teach…” was not not a command to propagandize.
In the law they ask the question, is what you’re doing being used as a shield or used as a sword?
Spreading a health message might be used as a shield. The exhortation to teach, when in the hands of a dictator marshaling power can easily be construed as a sword.
Mark, how does that post contribute to the discussion here? People want answers about FCLO. You don’t have to read. Sorry we aren’t talking only about raw milk right now–we
CAN talk about other things here.
I agree with L. I don’t think Weston Price was that arrogant.
It’s Sally Fallon’s story about his last words. I’d like to see what Price-Pottenger says about this. I’m now doubting it’s true. If it’s true Sally must have gotten it from their archives.
There’s also a story floating around that’s sometimes mentioned occasionally at WAPF conferences that Sally was born at the same hospital the day that Weston Price there. I’ve always wondered about that one too.
Why don’t you go look up the birth records Karen? They are public record.
Stop defrauding us and we won’t have such negatives to talk about.
I think this is an important discussion. Trust in raw milk farmers and their production quality controls is a good thing. Let the discussion roll on, and improvements be made.
On the topic of good news, I was recently invited to a small farmers market in Damascus, Oregon. I brought samples of raw milk and was amazed at the discussion and engagement of the folks attending.
Two people who said they couldn’t possibly try it because of severe lactose intolerance ended up trying it. They hung out while I spoke to others, to see if anything happened. They wandered away to see other booths, but came back at the end of the day to tell me they had zero issues, and would be signing up for our new drop point there.
Another lady came up to see what we were doing. When I offered her a sample of raw milk, she seemed horrified, and told me that she would never try it because a friend of hers had a daughter who DIED drinking raw milk from a local farm. I went out on a limb, and told her that I believe I know the farm you’re talking about, and no, the child did not die. I went on to tell her the name of the farm, and that they were a classic case of everything you could do wrong with raw milk. I went into detail about the importance of producing raw milk correctly, the importance of testing, cow health, and knowing your farmer. She then said, ‘oh yeah, I guess she didn’t die’. Wow! How many people had she told that story to?? But the most amazing thing is that she drank the sample I offered, and will be signing up for her own share.
Shortly after that, we had 33 7th and 8th graders from a Montessori school associated with that little market choose our farm for their camp out and bonding experice/service project. They only do this once every two years. The kids and teachers camped for a week on our farm. They experienced milking, feeding, apple harvests, fence building, and we even harvested a hog. They got a biology lesson, participated in butchery, sausage making, as well as ice cream and butter making. Truly a huge lesson, and wonderful experience for all.
We do need to focus on the good. However, all of this is about trust, so we have to have everything in the light, too, and open for discussion.
Please excuse any typos – my poor little phone screen Is cracked…
Wow, Kira! That is just amazing. It sounds like you have a real talent for getting past mental roadblocks. We just need to have the whole nation line up and we can pay you to talk them all through it. 🙂
And it is crazy that she would be reporting that the daughter of her “friend” died when she didn’t. If it is really a friend, how do you not know whether their child lived or died.
I can’t believe that you typed that whole thing on a phone! My screen isn’t cracked and I have to wait for a computer screen before I can type anything very long.
L.
Who ever you are?
It is evident that Dr Price did one hell of a lot of listening and learning in his life….I do not consider it one bit arrogant that his last breathes would utter these words and that he would want others to please share and teach others.
I really wish that everyone that posted here would use their real name. A deeper respect and more mutual respect would perhaps be evident. Being able to comment from behind a rock seems to empower commenters to say things that they would perhaps never say. Anonymous commenting should be a violation of the bill of rights….all people should be able to face their accussors. Even in blogville.
So much has been made of the “cods liver”….lets start eating the whole damn cod and be done with this rediculous conversation.
The writers of the bill of rights are famous for their anonymous writings. The people who have an issue with anon are those who wish to ignore the content and attack the messanger, doxx him and the like.
For real – the Federalist Papers and the Anti-Federalist Papers immediately come to mind. …
Mark, you’re ridiculous. “So much has been made of the ‘cods liver'” – considering Dr. Price advocated taking it, and it’s been consumed for millennia by some cultures, maybe you should sit this one out.
And have you read the “about” section for this blog? I’ll paste it here for you and *emphasis mine:
This site’s mission is to provide *news and analysis* about *food rights* and raw milk.
Increasingly, our access to privately available *food* is under attack by government and industry forces that seek to impose their choices on us. *This blog seeks to provide up-to-date information and encourage the development of community to **maintain traditional food acquisition options.**
See there?
If the topic doesn’t interest you, you don’t have to comment. There’s plenty of people here, including David himself who writes the blog, that are interested in this topic that so annoys you.
I agree with Mark. Use your full and real name. True fears no investigation.
I think there some that fear repercussions in the WAPF community if they still want to associate and fellowship there. It only takes one over-zealous person to completely ruin your life – at least for a time.
Yes, use your real name so you can be kicked out of WAPF and your name sullied when you fail to sufficiently toe the line.
Truth by any other name would smell as sweet.
Who is “D”
I know who Amanda is and i know who Mary….but how can anyone of us have a civil conversation with a no named ghost.
Stand up proud and be counted…..or hold your piece.
Amanda….for once in my blogging life….I must agree with your sentiments. Totally agree!!
It’s a different Amanda . . . .
Fish guts….what a strange thing to argue about. Eat the whole fish and be done with it.
But Mark, if you eat the whole cow there won’t be any future milk, or liver oils if you’re talking fish. I do agree about the overflow of fish gut talk on a milk blog fascinating as it is gets annoying.
How many Amanda’s are there here at the complete patient?
Now I am totally confused.
Would people identify themselves please!!
lol I am not Amanda Rose, if that’s what you were thinking. I’ve never really felt the need to comment here prior to this ordeal, but I have been a reader of this blog off and on for quite a while.
Mark, Amanda Rose identifies herself on this blog as Amanda Rose.
Mark, as in most things in life there is an upside and downside to both online identibility and invisibility. I choose to use an alias here just trying to be funny but would be glad to share personal data to anyone that asks, as opposed to the opposite. And there’s also the somewhat remote possibility that you have someone post under your name for whatever purpose so you always have to wonder, but in the long run we learn who to trust or not based on their track record.
“much worse is the growing suspicion of collusion between GP and WAPF”
I think it has grown way beyond suspicion by now. If Sally Fallon Morrell has a business outside of Weston A. Price Foundation, where she is selling Green Pasture products for a profit, we can see how that creates a financial conflict of interest, and a reason to collude:
“My husband and I do sell its FCLO and other products in our farm store (pabowenfarmstead.com), along with other healthy products that we believe in. Gross profit from sales of Green Pasture products probably does not exceed $1,000 per year.”
http://www.westonaprice.org/uncategorized/questions-and-answers-about-fermented-cod-liver-oil-fclo/
I keep getting emails from my WAPF chapter leader linking me to Green Pasture. Isn’t the Weston A. Price Foundation supposed to be more industry/business non-biased?:
“The Foundation receives no funding from any government agency or food processing corporation. Although many of our members are farmers, the Foundation has no ties with the meat or dairy industry, nor with any organization promoting these industries. The Foundation promotes the production of food by independent farmers and artisans, and not by industry.”
http://www.westonaprice.org/about-the-foundation/wapf-funding/
This used to be a non-profit organization that I would readily direct friends and family to, for nutrition information. Now I hesitate to admit that I volunteer for WAPF.
I was a chapter leader for 10 years. Never, at any time, did I receive a commission from GPP nor have I ever heard of another chapter leader receiving a commission from them. Dividends are paid out through public companies, not private like GPP, so of course I have not received dividends either (what an absurd accusation to make David). Anyone, with a business, such as P.A. Bowen Farmstead, can apply for a wholesale account with GPP, like I did back in 2005. There is nothing new here on this blog but more regurgitation of the same garbage. If you believe the WAPF has acted unlawfully, why don’t you investigate by requesting financial records instead of making wild accusations to feed the piranhas here?
David. Pollock liver oil appears to be plentiful and is largely used in animal feed or as a biofuel. I think there would have to be a significant financial advantage in sourcing pollock livers or oil over cod livers or oil. Hard to deny in my mind, so why not take ownership of this at GP.
I looked into FCLO when you wrote about it a few months ago. My conclusion at that time was that only GP really knows what happens in Nebraska. Personally, I would not consume FCLO (even without knowing .the current concerns).
Ok, I know this is OT, but we need a bit of a change around here and since no one seemed interested in talking about raw milk, and no one seemed interested in discussing the tribulations of Michael Schmidt (both important topics but heaven forbid we should interrupt an ongoing, useless argument, I guess). This is short to read, totally interesting and there is a short 9 1/2 minute trailer which is excellent to see and will lift your spirits, I guarantee it. Can’t wait for the entire movie to be released. Getting to be more and more interest in this sort of thing all the time. Thank the Lord for guys like Joel and Daniel Salatin.
https://www.lewrockwell.com/lrc-blog/the-salatin-familys-polyface-farm-on-film/
I just read over part of this article again. This phrase from GPP troubles me: “In the past when we have used some Alaska pollock, it has been because we were unable to obtain enough Pacific cod. Despite some unfounded rumors, we do not benefit from any cost savings based on species alone.” Why the use of the phrase “based on species alone”? It kinda hints that there is a cost savings in there of some kind. It seems it would have been easier and more straightforward to say, “we don’t save money by using pollock” or “we pay the same price for pacific cod livers and pollock livers”.
Legalese, Steve. Is it everywhere, or am I paranoid? The art of saying something but never being pinned down. See also Washington, DC, or WAPF website on GP products.
I’m kinda wondering where the WAPF Q&A on the rumored “Rosita Ratfish Oil Recall” is. This rumor has been running around among WAPF supporters and even chapter leaders, and I haven’t seen a single word from WAPF reminding their chapter leaders not to say something negative about this product of one of their vendors/sponsors. Have I missed it?
The only “rumor” I have seen was that someone posted the webpage that listed the recall. If it’s a fact, it is not a rumor.
“The only “rumor” I have seen was that someone posted the webpage that listed the recall. If it’s a fact, it is not a rumor.”
Indeed. And if it is not a fact, then it is a rumor. I have seen the rumor numerous places, sometimes as “Rosita CLO recall” sometimes as “Rosita Ratfish Oil recall” and sometimes as “Rosita banned from sale in Norway”. None of those are factual. Therefore they are rumor. You KNOW they have been spread around by chapter leaders. We’ve seen it in the comments on this very site. So again, since WAPF contends that this is not special treatment for GPP, where is the immediate denouncement of this rumor on their Facebook page? The first place I SAW the rumor was in the comments section on WAPF’s initial post defending GPP. I did not see them remove the comment, address the comment, or otherwise come to the defense of the Rosita product. Did you?
It is interesting, this discussion on Vitamin D levels in his oil…
http://www.greenpasture.org/utility/showArticle/?ObjectID=8819&find=vitamin%20d%20in%20cod%20liver%20oil&happ=siteAdministrator
Goes to great lengths to justify that there is D2 in cod liver oil, others not just his. But he never says why he might be concerned to show this.
They even went to the lengths of testing “As rendered Atlantic Cod Liver Oil, Canned Atlantic Cod Livers (using the oil in can only) and i brought in some wild caught Atlantic Cod Livers and fermented them”.
This is in keeping with the understanding that we’re gettting the traditional CLO from him, i.e. from Atlantic cod. But notice, he had to buy the Atlantic cod livers specially for this activity. He never had them.
Of cource this is no great revelation now that Dr. Danials has forced him to admit the species of his livers.
“Of cource this is no great revelation now that Dr. Danials has forced him to admit the species of his livers.”
You say this as if someone had asked him about the species before, and he just refused to give them an answer.
Multiple people have reported in these comments that they have asked him about sourcing and sustainability and he was very vague, or downright rude. Did they ask species specifically? I don’t know, but sourcing would include fish type, I would think.
I walked away from his new labeling article with the distinct impression that he had not just use Pollock, which he had to admit to because there is public proof, but other species in the Gadidae family. He says there are 7 different types of fish in the cod family. Later he says that “The spirit of cod liver oil is Gadidae fish livers that have a specific range of EPA/DHA and good source of vitamin A/D.” And of course then an entire paragraph “We consult with both industry and academia and test before we use any Gadidae fish livers to produce our oils. In fact, Merriam Webster Dictionary defines the term, “cod liver oil” as “an oil obtained from the liver of the cod and closely related fishes and used as a source of vitamins A and D”. This is similar to the definition proposed by the Joint Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations and World Health Organization’s CODEX Committee for Fats and Oils for CODEX standard for fish oil, which specifically identifies the livers to be obtained through wild caught fish from within the Gadidae fish family. See page 34 of the report. Every ocean of the world has different fish genus and species that fall within the Gadidae family.” He doesn’t speak of Gadus, the Cod genus, but spreads a wider net using Gadidae the family. I think it is a good bet he hasn’t only used Pacific Cod and Alaska Pollock. Since he seems only to source from the Bering Sea in the Pacific, that probably means Pollock, Pollachius virens.
Asking about sourcing is not the same thing as asking what species of cod he uses. Those are two different questions, and I haven’t seen anyone say that they asked him the latter. If they had, surely somebody would have brought up, in one of the many comment sections, that “I asked Dave what species of cod he uses and HE LIED.” Notice there aren’t any comments like that anywhere… or, if there is one that you know of, then perhaps you can link us to where we can all read it?
Yes I do, because he did.
This is one of the troubling aspects of this whole deal. Not just his lack of transparency, not just the deceitful marketing, but his hostile belligerence towards people who ask him reasonable questions about the product.
It forces you to ask, just what all is he hiding?
Here is but one example, from Chris Masterjohn’s piece….
ViolaAugust 29, 2015 at 3:17 PM
I was already a GP customer when I approached David Wetzel over email with some questions regarding seafood sustainability (I’m a marine ecologist, so I am particularly interested in sustainability questions). The short of it is that I wanted to know, given how common seafood mislabeling is, how GP ensures that their product is what it claims to be. How do they know it’s cod? How do they know it was sustainably harvested? Do they know their suppliers or do they just communicate through a middleman? Not only did David Wetzel refuse to answer my questions, he basically told me to f-off and never contact him again. I was dumbfounded. Based on their lack of transparency on this matter and on how rudely I was treated (even after stating I was a faithful customer) I would never again recommend their product to anyone. Oh and the last batch of FCLO I did consume did taste awfully rancid to me.
Several others have reported on Dave’s squishiness when asked questions about his CLO production.
Yes it is (interesting), to say the least — especially since “Ergocalciferol (D2) is the form present in plants or yeast following exposure to ultraviolet light.” It is not ‘natural’ in healthy fish — not to mention it’s another violation of the FDA labeling laws (to exclude the vitamin A and D from his product labels — this is required in both food and dietary supplements, just a different manner (ie % only is ok for food, while dietary supplements must list the amount in units).
GP claims his products are high sources of A & D, yet refuses to put the amounts on the label — BUT, he makes a statement on the label regarding “natural” vitamins A and D — https://web.archive.org/web/20130929030622/http://www.greenpasture.org/help.cfm?artID=7341&happ=greenpasture&noHeader=1&padding=10&services=both&noTitle=1&title=Arctic_Mint
Dr Daniels lab results showed they were low and people were reported as having low levels vitamin D — GP has article showing ‘justification for the D2’ — archived here just in case they change it https://web.archive.org/web/20151001120947/http://www.greenpasture.org/utility/showArticle/?ObjectID=8819&find=vitamin%20d%20in%20cod%20liver%20oil&happ=siteAdministrator — even the study quoted by Dr Jie on this GP page states: “vitamin D2 originates from yeast and plant sterol, ergosterol”, and the 2nd one was regarding the pharmaceutical version (grown on yeast) and it’s use.
YET — it’s been stated elsewhere that it’s D3 that is high in “HEALTHY FISH”, and cod liver oil is high in D3.
Here are some scientific / medical studies showing why it is not good to supplement D2… why it’s important to choose D3 — it has to do with our body’s receptiveness to the different forms vitamin D’s – our body does NOT treat them the same!
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23168298
http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/84/4/694.full
http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/589256_4 (which also states “Vitamin D2 is a fungus/yeast-derived product”)
about naturally occurring vitamin D2 – http://www.ars.usda.gov/SP2UserFiles/Place/80400525/Articles/AICR09_Mushroom_VitD.pdf
“Ergocalciferol (D2) is the form present in plants or yeast following exposure to ultraviolet light.” It is not ‘natural’ in healthy fish… so if it’s present, wouldn’t one think the opposite? that it’s an UNhealthy fish? (fungi/yeast exposed to UV light)… DEFINITELY something to think ‘seriously’ about!
This is interesting Pete. I have Googled CLO and D2 and the only links that are relevant are about GPP or from GPP. I have Googled fish oil and D2 and the only thing I can find is that the body makes Resolvin D2 from something in the fish oil. I have Googled the quote that he uses “Fish oil, especially cod liver oil, is the best natural source of vitamin D2” and the only 3 results are all on GPP site.
If he was using the same lab to test the Atlantic Cod, then yes, it would also yield D2 using the same methods. And it sounds like two of the samples were from farmed fish.
Also of note from this article:
“The argument of “Vitamin D3 is better than Vitamin D2,” is really meaningless. If they have different function, or if Vitamin D2 has not bio-activities, how can it be given a name as Vitamin D?” Yeesh. Really? Because vitamin B12 and vitamin B6 have the same function? Because vitamin K1 and K2 are exactly the same . . . . Makes you question anything Jie says.
The reason for the obsession with Vitamin D2 is that the only testing they can get that shows high vitamins (remember that Dr. Price recommended a high vitamin CLO and that is what they are supposed to be) also shows D2 and not so much D3. So they have to justify it. Or they have to publish much lower numbers.
Would it be possible that farmed cod could have higher D2 owing to an unnatural grain based diet? But its not clear to me how much farmed cod there really is.
Some have claimed D2 to be toxic, but I haven’t seen justification for that yet. Nearest I can tell it is simply less effective than D3 in certain age groups. But I am operating on partial information here.
If we want Vitamin D to make up for deficiencies, we probably aught to consume raw dairy, as it is rich in Vitamin D3-suflate, the exact same form our body produces, and is the only food to provide that form (per Selenoff).
It would certainly seem to make sense to get it that way from local farmers vs. importing it and going through fancy proprietary processes to create the oil. But that wouldn’t benefit the processor I guess.
Another interesting thing about google searches, any google search mentioning cod liver oil yields ads from multiple vendors of FCLO. Just one more part of an extensive marketing campaign, obviously a lot of money being made.
Farm raised? I can’t believe you would even go there to insinuate the GPP would use farm raised fish. You clearly do not know the Dave Wetzel.
Insinuate? No. I am simply searching for possible explinations. I do not know Dave. AllI know is what I can see, a man who got caught with his pants down decieving his customers and potentially making them sick and rather than own up to it has doubled down on the deception. I don’t put anything past him.
For all I know, he is pefctly innocent but was duped by his suppliers and made a mistake in assuming the fermentation would be good. But instead of being introspective he’s buying his own sales pitch and doubling down.
Tell me Carrie, do you know Dave? What is the nature of your relationship to him, you seem to have inside info at times.
Pete, yes, I know Dave Wetzel well. He is a man of integrity and faith. I met him in 2004 at the WT conference. In 2005 I started a nutrient dense food company and sold his products. In 2011 I closed my business (due to a series of moves that made it impossible for me to inventory product) and in 2012 I began working for GPP; handling their product questions. I have been out the their home office and plant twice. I am no longer on their payroll; instead I volunteer to work at his booth at the WT conference. You know nothing about him and yet you continue to make wild accusations. You are also not paying any attention to the facts that have come out since Dr. Daniel’s sensational accusations were made.
Yes, Dave Wetzel caught with his pants around his ankles sounds about right. Yet he is still too arrogant to answer basic questions and apologize to his customers. Amazing.
No, we don’t know him. Thus the importance of answering your customers questions. I never trusted him, because he refused to answer my basic questions. However, everyone seemed to blindly trust him. Those days are over!
I recently attended a seminar on fish oil safety that included a presentation by a very knowledgeable person in the field, Gry Strand Festervoll. (See Linked In for her full profile). Gry is a trained pharmacist and has held product safety positions at Galaxo Smith Kline and Eli Lilly in London, and is currently senior scientific communication manager for Pronova/BASF. Among other things she spoke about CLO oxidation, including the traditional Norwegian practice of fermenting cod liver oil. She was unaware of the current GP controversy, so spoke with relative objectivity. I approached her after her talk and asked her opinion about the quality of CLO produced in the “traditional” way. She said this oil would have most certainly been highly oxidized, but that the residual vitamins and other nutrients would have likely conferred some benefit to counterbalance the harmful effects of the oxidative compounds, especially at a time and place when so many people were malnourished. I asked her if she was aware of any credible studies that provided evidence for the actual net health benefit of ingesting such highly oxidized oil, but she was not.
So Steve, now you are casting your ignorant accusations at Jie? You have no idea what you are talking about, so you should give up this ridiculous crusade that you are on. It only reflects poorly on you, as you demonstrate a history of ignorance and mal intent that a vendor should not have:
Let’s give all the other readers here some perspective: You had actually been selling the Green Pasture FCLO on your own website, and you have many happy customers, correct? You even mentioned that you have communicated with Dave Wetzel directly. And yet…
– You never questioned trans fats, even though Green Pasture informed the community long ago. You sound surprised on this blog, which shows that you did not know your product.
– You never discussed what Cod is before; never made a blog post to inquire or educate, or raise the question, even though there is no such fish simply called ‘Cod.’
– You never questioned the labeling of ‘Cod’ or the nutritional information, or anything related to labeling issues with FCLO, ever.
– You displayed total ignorance of the fermentation process, even though the information has always been public knowledge on the Green Pasture website with many articles, photos, etc.
– You obviously never read or listened to any of the information about Vitamin D, metabolites, etc., that is discussed by Dave Wetzel and other scientists with regard to FCLO.
You never cared about any of these issues until Dr. Daniel’s report. There was nothing new in her report, as I stated many times here, and yet you persist to ignorantly perpetuate her false accusations.. I cautioned many times that you were duped, but you obviously have your own agenda.
As your claims toppled one by one, you just kept jumping to new ones, trying to attack new people. These are not the actions of someone that is interested in health. Do you have some purpose here, other than trying to spread fear, uncertainty, and doubt?
You are not a scientist Steve, so why don’t you just step back and let the scientists work it out.
Victor, Steve has become the poster child of what a troll is.
Victor,
Clearly both sides of this debate with respect to the above “issues” you referred to are at loggerheads.
The fact of the matter however, is that the WAPF made a serious error in judgment when it decided to forcefully marginalize it’s dissenting members who were questioning the healthfulness and quality of fclo, not to mention the organization’s integrity. Oppressive behavior of the above nature only serves to undermine all that we have in common and are trying to achieve. It is “the” first and foremost issue, and needs to be dealt with asap if we are going to gain any constructive ground.
I respectfully beg to differ. I think that quite the opposite is true, in that Dr. Kaayla Daniel sought to suppress the truth and defame an innocent man, and has garnered some accomplices (perhaps unwittingly) here on this blog. Any informed person or organization should feel it their duty to stop such actions.
Many of Dr. Daniel’s ‘conclusions’ are in direct contradiction to her own lab tests, and her report is filled with unfounded insinuations and accusations that distract from any real issues. She manufactured imaginary issues, and did not provide us with any useful information that we did not already know.
At no time does she, or anyone on this blog ever show evidence of mal intent by Dave Wetzel, and yet the report and this blog is filled with insinuations of such. Such dialogue serves absolutely no good purpose.
We do in fact have one single issue that this blog community could contribute to, and that is education on FCLO usage and dosage. This is not a new issue either, but an issue that is clearly at the root of much confusion. And this issue is common to all foods. Clearly there is much good that can be done, if only people would give up their agendas.
All of you on this blog should know better. You should take pause, take a step back, and notice that any ‘attack’ on the FCLO or its producer is fraudulent. It should be obvious. I stepped away a week ago thinking that surely such discussions would be over. Yet somehow they continue on this blog.
I have watched Mr. Gumpert (and others) claim that the FLCO is rancid, and yet never post any evidence. He took the time to write ten articles and dozens if not hundreds of comments, and yet he could not post any evidence to confirm rancidity. The other issues are the same. The truth has been obvious for over a month already, but people were blinded by the emotion of the report.
Wonder why Dr Daniel deleted all her Facebook posts on FCLO?
Must have been advised by legal council to start deleting information. 😉
Good think I know how to work that print screen button on my keyboard. 😉
Interesting reading the comments on GPPs blog posts.
Q:”Could you also please address the Marine Stewardship Council issue that Kaayla Daniel has raised in her latest blog post? ” posted 9/22/15 10:47PM
A:”I’m not totally familiar with the post but I did reach out the MSC and spoke to three people including one regional director yesterday. They were appreciative of the contact and I am not aware of any other discussion I will have with them.” no post time given
How coincidental the timing. WHY did you contact them? How familiar does one have to be with a post? No mention of having to take down any reference to MSC.
Q: Will Green Pasture be making a statement about the vitamin k, co-q10, and trans-fat concern?
A: we do not add any vegetable oil to the product. we don’t have vegetable oil in the home let lone the plant …. more test data to be posted soon
OK, but, uh, that didn’t answer ANY of those questions.
Q: What about trans fat content… As mentioned in the Daniels report… Do you have info on this? Wouldn’t expect any in an oil but would fermentation cause trans fat?
A: see other discussions such as Dr. Vicki Schlegel article has fatty acid test reports listed. Ask the scientist article discussion, and there will be more posted. We do not add vegetable oil. We don’t have vegetable oil in our house let alone the plant. The levels are always low and and natural, we don’t add anything.
Dr. Schlegel’s article says nothing about trans fats. “Ask the scientist” article is actually What the Scientists say, and says, “You have routinely had commercial analytical labs analyze samples of your fish oil. The data obtained did not show trans fatty acids, that is, if trans fatty acids did exist, they were present at a very low level. In general, fish oils may contain very low levels of trans fatty acids.” Now, it appears that the data does show trans fatty acids. Wonder what has changed?
Q: I have been using the Green Pasture cod liver oil and butter for some years now. Please comment regarding the data on the trans fats content. I presume the finding was an aberration and was the result of a biased attack, but I expect some unbiased, independent testing results on the issue of trans fats.
A: none
I thought it might be an aberration, something gone wrong with a single batch. It turns out it wasn’t.
Q: There is an opinion out there that fermented oil is virtually the same as rancid oil; that rancid oil has the same affect within the body as hydrogen peroxide; and thus, that fermented oil has the same effect inside the body as hydrogen peroxide. Is there documentation research to disprove this – both that it is not the same as rancid oil and that it does not have the same effect virtually as hydrogen peroxide? If so, good; I am interested in taking your product.
A: i can assure you the product is not rancid by any known definition i know, unless one does not like the taste or smell and wants to tag it with an emotional character assassination 🙂 . The peroxide level is very low and stable. It is loaded with natural occuring protective structures including; vitamins, pigments and other known/unknown structures.
Not rancid by any known definition that you know, huh? Wonder why your scientists and Chris Masterjohn were so careful to tiptoe around the topic, and never say the product isn’t rancid, just that it tested low for oxidation. It is because calling hydrolized oil “rancid” is not tagging it “with an emotional character assassination”. It is calling it like it is.
Troll….with no name. I refuse to give you my energy. You are an energy vampire.
I’m sure it is quite obvious, by this point, that Carrie Hahn, Victor, and Amanda are actually the ones being paid to spew positive remarks about Green Pastures. Nobody in their right mind, would be dumb enough to trust Dave Wetzel right now. Anyone who cares about their families health, would at very least take pause and question their loyalty to this character. Dave’s arrogance, poor customer service, and refusal to be open with customers is very suspicious and always has been.
You are still a troll and I am still not paid by GPP. Anyone, in their right mind, would fight for the product that helped bring so much healing to so many.
@ Carrie Hahn: Save it, Carrie.
Save it? What exactly does that mean? You don’t believe I am not on the GPP payroll?
I am definitely not being paid by anyone to say anything at all, much less anything about GP.
Wow, you people are still trying to sling mud? Interesting. The current attack about ‘trans fats’ health risks is another desperate and misinformed attempt at defamation.
As usual, the accusers give no context for their accusations, as there is no search for meaning or truth – only a search for accusations. And again they fail.
Any concern about trans fats consumption from FCLO is made irrelevant by one simple fact: the amount of trans fats in the FCLO is insignificant when compared to the amount consumed in a standard American diet. The FCLO is in fact ‘trans fats free,’ according to FDA definitions. To understand further…
If we take Dr. Daniel’s WORST test result, we have a worst case scenario of 3.2% trans fats in FCLO. The FDA says that any food containing less than 0.5 grams per serving can declare itself trans fat free. The recommended FCLO daily serving is 5 grams (one teaspoon). The calculations:
3.2% x 5 grams = 0.16 grams, or 160mg. This is far below the 0.5 gram FDA rating.
Even if you triple the dosage/serving, you are still ‘trans fats free’ according to the FDA. Green Pasture could legally label the FCLO as Trans Fat Free.
In fact, the recommended serving for FCLO on all the labels I have seen is only 2 grams (or 2ml, which is the same thing).
Furthermore, as general guidance, it is recommended that you should consume less than 2 grams, or 2,000mg of trans fats per day. Most Americans consume far more than that – easily double or triple that amount. Consuming FCLO would contribute LESS than 0.5% of the recommended target for trans fat consumption. Again, it is insignificant. Even if I took ten times the recommended amount, the trans fats would not have any impact.
One additional note that might be interesting – about 80% of trans fats are artificial – they are man made products. The other 20%, and FCLO, are naturally occurring.
Our foods, even all natural organic foods, are loaded with a great many undesirables. It is not the undesirables themselves that are dangerous, but their quantities, and the rate of consumption.
If any of the people screaming about trans fats actually cared, they would have figured all this out themselves. Sorry to rain truth on your trolling,
“Lab #1 shows 3.22 percent trans fats, of which Dr. Gjermund Vogt, Project Man-
ager for Eurofins Food & Feeding Testing Norway AS, and a leading authority on
fish oils, says:
No authentic raw or mildly processed cod liver oil will contain trans fats.
There should also be none present if the cod liver oil is mildly refined. The
presence of trans C18:3 indicates that another oil has been added to this
oil. This other oil must obviously be in sufficient quantities to detect the
presence of these trans fats.”
– Dr. Daniel, Hook, Line and Stinker
The wording is hardly legalese. If I had just come under such an aggressive attack I would chose my words very carefully with further announcements. What they say isn’t hard to understand though – if their source fails to provide adequate cod, then they will use a different source. This is standard practice for any business, and as long as the source matches their quality, then they are doing nothing wrong.
Also, GP never said that they were endorsed by the MSC, simply that they only worked with companies that were endorsed. You can read more about this here: http://www.thehealthcloud.co.uk/fermented-cod-liver-oil-facts/
It seems that you are strongly bias against GP for whatever reason, but I really haven’t seen enough evidence to take this stance. Could it really be that there is a political agenda behind all this as many people have suggested? I would really hope not, because this community wants to be about health, not politics. However, I see no reason for this aggressive stance against GP….
My understanding is that MSC does not want their name even mentioned in reference to a product unless it has been certified by them. There is a specific chain of custody that is involved.
I see – I can’t imagine there is any legal standing for this though (as long as GP’s suppliers are certified). It is still hardly fair to accuse GP of claiming they are MSC accredited. Personally I think they are being very clear with their relationship with the MSC, they haven’t said they are certified.
Vital Choice has been an MSC licensed vendor for more than a dozen years, and over that period launched the first ever MSC certified dietary supplements (Alaska salmon oil, Antarctic krill oil, and others). The MSC certification is the “Gold Standard” among dozens of seafood eco-labels due to the rigor of its chain-of-custody tracking system.This process is costly and carries a significant administrative burden for legitimate licensees. Companies who promote an MSC affiliation without making such a commitment are essentially free-loading/stealing the benefits of certification. They want the sustainability marketing “halo” but are happy to let other more responsible companies and their customers pay for it. This is quite common and, in my opinion, says more about the company and people who do it than the product itself.
“Wherever you find people sacralizing something, you’ll find ignorance, blindness to the truth and resistance to evidence.”
–Jonathan Heidt
I owe Randy Hartnell and Vital Choice an apology. My preference (perhaps genetic?) for North Atlantic and North Sea seafood should not have led me to say that North Pacific white and gray fleshed fish were “not good eating.” I do apologize. My point was meant to be that the “wanderer” Cod, (Gadus morhua) has a very different chemistry and life pattern from other fishes no matter how their names may be similar. It was this Atlantic Cod whose oil Dr. Price worked with of course.
I understand that Alaska Pollock, Pacific Cod, etc. have benefited from new harvesting and processing techniques such as flash freezing on board. Those fish which in days gone by were called trash fish now occupy a well deserved place on the gourmet table.
Thanks Bob, apology accepted. We sell a lot of Alaskan cod to customers all over the country who would take issue with your earlier characterization. In my opinion it doesn’t matter what kind or where in the world fish is harvested, the polyunsaturated fats that make it so potentially healthy are prone to oxidation and tend to quickly turn any poorly handled fish into rancid trash in short order
All of this talk, all of this speculation. All I see is GOSSIP. I was once told that if you have an issue or a question, why not go directly to the source and find the answer for yourself? What has happened to our country as of late? No one looks at themselves but is very quick to point fingers at anyone else for any of their problems.
That being said –
While Green Pasture is under so much scrutiny by yourself and a few others and Rosita is being flagged as this “perfect company” to switch to (by yourself and a few others) -YET this is happening with Rosita in Norway – Being swept under the rug is it?
http://www.nutraingredients.com/Regulation-Policy/Norway-warns-on-polluted-fish-oil-supplements
What do you have to say about this?
No one is perfect people!
Speaking of Rosita, I decided to order a bottle of their “perfect” CLO to see what all the fuss was about. Here are some first impressions…
Flavor:
I’m a bit confused as to how some people are reporting rave reviews of the “fresh fishy taste” of Rosita CLO. Indeed it does have a fresh fishy taste, but it’s not exactly a good taste. Certainly not comparable to the taste of say, sashimi, for instance. If you’ve ever gone fishing before then you are familiar with the strong and unpleasant scent of a freshly caught fish, and Rosita CLO tastes exactly like you would expect it to taste if you were to lick the slime off the scales of a trout… truly a taste that only my cat could appreciate. I still have to chase this CLO down with milk just as I have to do with the FCLO.
Benefits:
Well, I guess I haven’t been taking Rosita’s CLO long enough to notice any difference in benefits from this product yet. However, I did get a headache about an hour or so after taking my first dose of CLO, and I rarely ever get headaches in general. I could blame it on the CLO, but it was probably just a coincidence… right?
Yes, going to the source is an excellent idea. All of this could have been avoided if Green Pastures had simply answered everyone’s darn questions.
Pretty sure they went straight to their lawyers who likely told them to keep quiet. Answering people’s questions in an honest manner obviously would have gotten them into trouble. Red flag, anyone?
Sally Fallon Morrell’s maiden name is Wetzel according to the obituary of her previous husband. Is she related to Steve Wetzel? Is this the reason for the stonewalling any investigation? http://www.forevermissed.com/john-baptist-fallon/#about
No relation. Do some research before you grasp at straws. How pathetic.
How do you know, Carrie?
Ken, I asked Dave Wetzel. They are not related in any way that they know of.
Who the heck is Steve Wetzel?
So is Sally Wetzel Fallon Morrell related to Dave Wetzel? This may explain a lot.
http://www.forevermissed.com/john-baptist-fallon/#about
It does not appear they are brother and sister, but that doesn’t mean they aren’t related otherwise. He may be a cousin or a nephew or something.
Sally’s mom sounds like quite a woman! Her father was no slouch either. Her late ex-husband (Fallon) worked for the company where Sally’s father was the COB.
Her Mom’s obit: http://articles.latimes.com/2008/jun/05/local/me-wetzel5
I just researched their relatives online and the only relation that I can find between Sally C Wetzel and David C Wetzel is that they both appear to be from California originally. If they are related to each other at all it can only be by numerous degrees of separation to the point that they would not know it unless they did extensive research into their own family trees. Not the kind of relatives that you see at family get-togethers.
Amanda, explain your research thread, please. Also, why don’t you just email Sally and Dave and ask?
Since both have Wetzel as a last name (Sally’s maiden name) they must have been asked if they are related before and would be eager to tell you 🙂
Ah… why don’t YOU ask Sally, instead of asking *me* to ask her for you? I chose to research it online, since it has been pretty well established here that you guys don’t “trust” anything that Dave or Sally says at this point. It is easy enough to look up background information on people via the internet, so there’s another task that you should be perfectly capable of doing on your own (without my help) if you feel so compelled to double-check my conclusion. 😉
Here, I’ll give you a head start.
You’re looking up background info on: Sally Caroline Wetzel, DOB 22 Jun 1948 and David Carl Wetzel DOB 11 Apr 1964
Amanda, we all have the names and birth dates. I asked for your research thread because that would be a way of fact checking your “distant Wetzel relative” conclusions. Since you and Sally are pals, obviously she’ll answer your email. Why are you afraid to ask her?
Actually, no. You didn’t have their full names, or Dave’s birth date, until I just gave them to you (you’re welcome, by the way). If you try looking up info on “Dave Wetzel” that isn’t going to get you very far. You need to look up “David Carl Wetzel” along with his birth date in order to start getting relevant search results. The rest is up to you. And no, I’m not going to backtrack through my search results to take notes for you on how I found the names of their relatives just so you can be lazy and criticize me. Do it yourself, or don’t. I don’t care either way.
And who told you that Sally and I are “pals”? Not me, that’s for sure. We are not pen pals and she doesn’t know me any better than she knows you. So, again, if there’s something you’d like to ask her then why don’t YOU ask her yourself? …or you could simply scroll up and see that somebody else here has already asked her and provided the answer above.
Thank you for disclosing you had no verifiable research thread and were guessing about the “distant relative” theory. This is why I was fact checking your assertions. I’m not sure why you thought you were giving me anything since you have no idea what information I have.
It’s this kind of ASSuming that got Sally and Dave in trouble.
LOL thank you for disclosing that you’re a troll. Next…
Sally Wetzel and David Wetzel are both from California and both interested in fermented foods. Sally’s brother has a degree in fermentation science so other family members are also interested in this. Of course people think they’re related…why is someone a troll to ask for proof they’re not?
Because Amanda is actually the troll. They like to use that word a lot about others so as to distract from their own identity. Best to ignore them.
“Of course people think they’re related…why is someone a troll to ask for proof they’re not?”
Yeah, that isn’t why “L” is a troll.
She continuously asks the same questions over and over while ignoring my answers and leaving my questions unanswered. She makes a number of assumptions about myself and then hypocritically calls me an “ASS” for doing the same to her. And after all of that she isn’t even interested in acknowledging the fact that somebody else has already posted the answer that she’s been harassing me to find for her this whole time. THAT is what makes her a troll.
Hope that helps.
Amanda people can post any answer they want. There’s a difference between saying it’s so and proving it’s so. I can say anything under the sun, but it doesn’t make it true unless I have facts to back it up.
The big question is why Sally Fallon (nee Sally Wetzel) is so partial to this fclo marketed by David Wetzel when it’s not even close to what Weston Price described as high-quality clo. If kickbacks aren’t involved could it a case of blood is thicker than water?
Karen, are you missing the point on purpose? I don’t really care what your “big question” is …that’s not the question that I was answering. You asked me what makes “L” a troll and I just told you what. Period. End of conversation.
You’ll have to take your “big question” to someone else because, as I’ve said before, I’m not getting paid for this.
Amanda……I didn’t realize there were people “getting paid” for posting comments on blogs. Why would you even bring that up? I would be shocked if there’s anyone on David’s blog getting paid for commenting.
Why would I even bring that up? Hmm, let’s see… could it be because some of us keep getting accused of being on GPP’s payroll? Could be…
Amanda, L didn’t call you an ass. She challenged your assumptions about how Sally (maiden name, Wetzel) and David Wetzel were related. Remember what we were all taught in high school?
“When you assume, you make an ass of you and me.” 10th grade. Mrs. Chiara’s social study class.
She didn’t challenge anything. She simply denied it. There’s a difference.
And let’s be real here… “L” made the assumption when she took the liberty of speaking for everyone here as she says: “Amanda, we all have the names and birth dates”
…ah, really? Who is “we all” and where might you “all” have gotten that information, since it isn’t listed in any of the bits of “evidence” that you guys have dredged up from the internet thus far?
Obviously “L” didn’t have it, and I have serious doubts that she happened to know of anyone else here who had it at that particular moment in time… much less “all” of you. And since you guys like to come and post new unearthed “clues” here as soon as you come across them, I think it’s safe to say that none of you had yet figured out the deets on Dave Wetzel’s full name and birthdate… just saying.
Amanda, I’m having trouble following your train of thought here? What exactly is your complaint about L right now? This is about the potential links between Sally Fallon Morell, nee Sally Wetzel, and David Wetzel. I think many of us are trying to figure out why Sally is so invested in this fermented cod liver oil. If this is a family business venture it starts to make sense.
Yeah, you apparently missed the part where I said “Period. End of conversation.”
I can’t help myself, but I’m just too curious….why do you keep posting if it’s “Period. End of conversation”?
And btw…when I said big picture I wasn’t directing it to you. I was directing it to those of us who are concerned about why Sally Fallon Morell Wetzel continues to defend this particular product despite people saying it’s made them sick. Is it possible David Wetzel and Sally Wetzel have a family business going? I don’t know but since neither of them will address this directly it’s open to speculation.
@ Karen: Please stop engaging her, it will only encourage her to keep posting more of her arrogant blather. She has no way of knowing what any of us do or don’t know or when we knew it. It’s all hot air.