Ten years ago I was involved in a small startup to test out a new distribution approach for nutritional supplements. Together with an acupuncturist, we explored taking over from naturopaths, chiropractors, acupuncturists, and physicians, the process of selling supplements. Our system would automatically remind patients about when to re-order, and then we’d send out the orders, relieving the health care practitioners of duties they didn’t like to handle, and generally didn’t do well. We called the startup “The Complete Patient.”
We chose the supplement business because it’s a huge and growing marketplace, because the profit margins are attractive, and because it’s a repeat-order business (sometimes referred to among business people as “an annuity business”). The business model generally worked the way we envisioned, and after a few months, we were handling the supplements and herbs for about a dozen or 15 practitioners.
I’m not sure exactly when it happened—perhaps when we purchased liability insurance—but very early in the startup process, I became very aware of the fact that I had a huge responsibility—people were ingesting the products I was packing up and mailing them.
Even though the supplements were made by reputable companies, I worried: What if there was a screwup in one or another of the products—a toxic substance inadvertently got into some capsules, or there was a serious side effect from one or another of the supplements I was unaware of—and people became ill. What would I do as the chief executive? In my mind, the plan was to put a hold on our shipments until the problem could be traced and fixed. It would be expensive, so expensive it would likely crater our startup, but I couldn’t come up with any other scenario. I couldn’t knowingly continue selling a product that I knew could be damaging people’s health, and sleep at night.
To my mind, that was probably the biggest risk that came with operating in the food or supplement business. The profits were potentially fantastic, but you had a greater responsibility than nearly any other business I could think of to be sure your product wasn’t defective. It’s not the same as a software glitch in a batch of iPhones or producing blouses missing a button-hole, all of which inconveniences people. You can make people very sick, perhaps long term sick, or even kill them, and have to live with that outcome for the rest of your life. And I haven’t even gotten to the potential legal liability.
After about a year, my partner and I decided to shutter the business. He had a number of personal and family challenges, and just couldn’t give it the time and energy it required. In a strange way, I was relieved, because I never had to test out how I would respond to a crisis with one of the supplements I was shipping.
I went on from that business to focus more fully on writing on holistic health, and to keep the name, The Complete Patient, and use it for this blog, which I launched in 2006.
All that prelude by way of explaining to those who have questioned my motives in the FCLO blowup, why it has become such a big deal to me. You see, the crisis I anticipated with a potentially unsafe supplement finally burst into my life in an unexpected way, on August 23, when Weston A. Price Foundation vice president Kaayla Daniel released her report questioning the safety and integrity of Green Pasture fermented cod liver oil, and naturopathic physician Ron Schmid reported on his near-fatal heart problems, that he finally, and reluctantly, attributed to FCLO. (By the way, the reference in the photo above to the 1987 comedy “The Three Amigos” is meant to highlight the disparaging term now accorded Daniel, Schmid, and me on the WAPF chapter chapter leader list serve—more on that a little later.) Granted, I didn’t have the ownership responsibility, or risk, that Dave Wetzel has with Green Pasture, or the key endorsement and distribution role that Sally Fallon Morell and chapter leaders of the Weston A. Price Foundation have with the product.
But it was a crisis for me, nonetheless, I realized. As I’ve reported, I had been taking that product for a few months several years back, when I ordered a bunch at the WAPF national conference from the Green Pasture exhibit. With the Daniel report, I realized why it likely burned my throat and esophagus when I tried to swallow it—it was probably rancid.
The Kaayla Daniel report was a crisis for me in another way. How to report on this situation? I’ve always had a great relationship with the WAPF and its founder-president Sally Fallon Morell. I didn’t know Daniel at all, except to recognize her name as a bigwig in WAPF. When I inquired with Daniel that August day as to what Fallon Morell thought about the report, I didn’t get an answer back. Then I looked through the report and learned that the board had turned down her request for in-depth testing of FCLO. Uh-oh, I thought.
Then I read Ron Schmid’s account of his heart condition that he attributed to FCLO. I knew Schmid a little better than Daniel, from having spoken with him a couple times some years back about his authorship of The Untold Story of Milk, while I was writing The Raw Milk Revolution, but I didn’t know him real well.
What convinced me that these two were serious about their concerns was that each had a lot to lose by alienating WAPF and Fallon Morell. Daniel had co-authored a book with her, and presumably was in line to do more. Schmid garnered 20% of his online supplement business revenue from Green Pasture products, and so was taking a significant financial hit by dropping it from Dr Ron’s. His book on raw milk was published by Fallon Morell’s publishing company, New Trends Publishing Inc.
I just assumed that at some point Fallon Morell would come around and see the necessity to press Wetzel to take some kind of public action to credibly test and research his product—perhaps commission a group of outside scientists with marine lipid experience to do independent testing and try to figure out why users of his product were reporting rashes, heart problems, and other health issues.
But to my amazement, the situation has spun out of control. People I thought were friends have cast me as the enemy, one of “The 3 amigos.” Hey, I can take some ribbing, and I’ll probably preface future communication with Daniel and Schmid with, “Hey, Amigo”… But in the current context, that label is disparaging at best, as if Schmid, Daniel, and I are devious outsiders, in cahoots to tear down the WAPF. For what? For pressing the WAPF to do the responsible thing, to react compassionately and humanely to possible health problems in a product it has been aggressively recommending and promoting?
And what about the seeming contradiction of me supporting farmers producing and selling raw milk, and calling out Green Pasture and its FCLO for safety concerns? It’s simple. The battles over accusations concerning raw milk’s safety go back decades, and as such are often muddied by government propaganda and misrepresentation about raw milk’s dangers, in the interests of Big Dairy corporations. In writing about these situations, I’ve tried to see through the mud and figure out what’s really happening. There’s none of that going on with FCLO. There are no corporate competitors. No government involvement. The Daniel tests and the reports of health problems are clear enough to raise raise red flags.
I have to think that shock from the trauma associated with the Daniel report—and it has been hugely traumatic for many of us—has affected ordinarily sensitive and sensible people in unfortunate ways. WAPF is an organization dedicated to improving people’s health—no one associated with it wants to think they are part and parcel of a campaign to damage peope’s health. I keep thinking the trauma has caused some to lose their senses, and their sensibilities. Or perhaps they are just in denial. Or perhaps they feel such a huge amount of loyalty to Fallon Morell they feel powerless to assert their misgivings. One of these individuals, who runs a private Facebook page with many WAPF members involved, in recent days had me kicked off the site. When I inquired Thursday, she wrote me a nice note, explaining in part, “It is my decision to honor the concerns of enough community members that don’t feel safe with you having access to their communication.” I guess I question the priorities here, that people on this site worry more about my presence than they seem to worry about being part of an organization that continues to enthusiastically endorse potentially unsafe FCLO to families and children everywhere.
It’s actually worse than that. Yesterday on the list serve for WAPF chapter leaders, one chapter leader wrote a truly heart-wrenching plea for FCLO action to Sally Fallon Morell and the other chapter leaders, seeking some empathy, and understanding. The chapter leader said she was “flabbergasted that WAPF did not take the time to step away from Green Pasture until further testing could be done. NOT turn their back on them, but just temporarily suspend their hi praise and push for them.” She then explained how worried she was about her mother, who has been taking FCLO despite having a heart condition, and how she herself has had “heart palpitations, vertigo, and panic attacks when taking it myself.” She added she is “worried we will not find out until there is irreparable damage done” to her mother. She ended her long letter by asking the group to “please be gentle…I am scared to death of posting this…”
I am almost embarrassed to post Fallon Morell’s response. To the chapter leader: “You said: ‘I was flabbergasted that WAPF did not take the time to step away from Green Pastures until further testing could be done. NOT turn their back on them, but just temporarily suspend their hi praise and push for them.’
“This is exactly what the three amigos want us to do—make a public statement removing our endorsement of FCLO—Kaayla demanded that I make an apology for our endorsement. This would be a terrible thing to do to a family-owned company that produces a product that has brought so much benefit to so many, including myself and members of my family. And besides, the fclo is NOT rancid—not Dave’s tests, nor Kaayla’s, nor WAPF’s show rancidity. We are planning more tests—of all the Best category cod liver oils, but in the meantime, we keep them all in that category.
“Also, I find it amazing that people are so fixated on the label. Dave’s label complies with all the labeling requirements—Alaskan pollack IS cod and can be included in labels as cod. Moreover, Dave has not hidden this fact, but discussed Alaskan pollack on his blog. As for the butter oil, what’s wrong with the pastures in Argentina? Their grass and their sunlight is surely as good as the grass and sunlight in the U.S. The whole label discussion seems to me to be grasping at things to be critical of.”
There’s not a word of acknowledgment of the chapter leader’s concerns about her mom’s or her own health. Not a bit of empathy. Only words of scorn for “the three amigos” and defense of the “family company” GP, which by estimates I’ve heard has some millions in annual revenues and, if it is like many supplement companies, is making sizeable profits, in this case from its affiliation with WAPF.
But that’s not all. Fallon Morell ends her tirade with a stern legal warning to chapter leaders who dare to give readers of their blogs or Facebook pages info about the Daniel report or about my blog. “What we do object to is linking to Kaayla’s report or Gumpert’s blog, which are false and inflammatory. We ask you to take down these links—doing so now will save us a lot of legal expenses. Those who do not will get a warning letter and then if they don’t comply, we will have the site or page closed as a breach of your trademark agreement with us.”
I really don’t object to her advising chapter leaders to not link to my blog or the Daniel report. I’ve been thrown out of better places. But to threaten legal action against your own most loyal members to force them to remove the link? Now we’re getting pathetic, and downright autocratic.
It’s all part-and-parcel of a sick campaign that has chapter leaders around the country clicking around the Internet, wondering where they stand. They wonder in social media postings: Have they been removed from Sandrine Love’s Facebook page? Have they been removed from the WAPF chapter leader list serve? Are they in favor with the cult leader or out of favor?
And that’s the point here. I have to think that Fallon Morell and some of her staunchest supporters have simply succumbed to shock, and ongoing insistence of some that WAPF and GP act responsibly to extensively test FCLO as to why some people are having serious health reactions. That’s all I can think. I can’t imagine they would act so heartlessly and irresponsibly for money. Or to hold onto power and influence.
I encourage the board of the WAPF to end the misery of this unfortunate episode tomorrow evening when they meet to kick Kaayla Daniel off the board. Take control of this situation from someone who means well, has done much good, but is now acting irrationally to endanger the health of WAPF members and the general public that takes WAPF health and nutrition advice to heart. Those board members include Sarah Pope, Thomas Cowan, Geoffrey Morell, Cherie Calvert, Kim Schuette, Valerie Cury Joyner, along with Kaayla Daniel and Sally Fallon Morell.
So that’s it. There’s no conspiracy (among the 3 amigos, or anyone else I know), no power trip, no joy in making old friends look heartless, no desire to be a bigwig in a competing organization. Just a guy very sad to see an organization that has done so much good degenerate into a vestige of the corporate/government abuse system it likes to mock—of seeing enemies under every rock, discounting and disparaging legitimate health concerns from ordinary people, and throwing its legal weight around against families trying to make the best and healthiest food and supplement decisions.
I know a lot of people wish I would just stop writing about this, go away. Not because they dislike me, but because it’s just too unpleasant. But as we used to say in the 1960s, “You’re either part of the problem or you are part of the solution.” I hope WAPF supporters will increasingly become part of the solution.
Holy Batman! Fascinating shtuff David thanks for having the cojones to face this head on as I’m sure you are being pulled multi directions yet keeping the basics as simple as can be.
One would think that public sentiment would have an influence but it’s funny how that backfires occasionally. I’m not on any kind of pulpit and glad so, just let me have my choice no matter how different it may be from yours and I’m happy.
But ya, I’ll make one comment regarding the posturing power play mind control that has nothing to do with food choice or availability: Stop it and go back to your roots. As in carrots, parsnip, ginger etc. Oh wait, there’s dirt on them that can’t be healthy can it. Or jar it.
“It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it!” – Upton Sinclair
Bottom line: stop taking FCLO?
Excellent Q, Merle. I think that’s one of those tough personal decisions we all need to make at different times. If I hadn’t had the bad reaction I had to FCLO, and was still taking it, I’d certainly want to know more about it, and why some people are having bad reactions. It could be one of those situations where some people react badly, but there are enough good things in FCLO that it is beneficial to most people. But right now, we’re all guessing. I think what would trouble me the most if I were taking it is the resistance Wetzel has demonstrated to announcing a clean and impartial testing of the product. He seems to be wanting to keep everything controlled, as in under GP’s control. Because of such doubt, I personally would be inclined to err on the side of caution.
I’m beyond frustrated with the way they’re handling it. If I ran GP, I would do every test under the sun to reassure people! I have been taking it through pregnancy and giving it to my baby (who actually liked it!). We’re both healthy and had no adverse reactions but who knows?? I have 2 almost full bottles that are just sitting in my fridge. I am sad bc I really thought I was doing something good, giving it to my daughter. I do everything in my power to keep her healthy and fed nourishing foods only to find out that FCLO was possibly harming her. Livid, is not a strong enough word.
I appreciate you helping us see through the veil of secrecy. We, the people, need advocates.
One other thought that occurred to me since your original question: consider stopping the FCLO for a couple months, and see if you notice any changes positive or negative. If negative, you can always resume.
I am right there with you Merle. I also find it shocking that there has been no discussion about the Essential Oils that Dave Wetzels uses in the various flavored FCLO. Most folks do not recommend ingestion of Essential oils…especially for children. However, many people are feeding the flavored varieties to their babies and children. I agree…livid is not a strong enough word.
David, exactly how has Dave Wetzel demonstrated resistance? That is quite a strong statement to make without including any references.
Well, Victor, people are asking for it, and he hasn’t done it. So either he is ignorant of the growing volume of the requests, or he is resisting, unless you have another explanation. Being ignorant of the fact that people want to see impartial testing seems unlikely at this point, doesn’t it?
Another explanation is that he is well aware of the requests, and GP is on it. They are in process. It takes time. Reports will be released soon. And he has already made four blog posts since this started, which include statements from experts that he had to confer with.
Why do you keep saying Dave Wetzel hasn’t tested? He has run many tests and WAPF has tested too. Even several of Kaayla’s test labs reported the oil was okay by certain measures.
He has run test results. However, almost all of the results that I have seen posted on his site are about 2 years old. There is several posted recently at this link: http://www.greenpasture.org/fermented-cod-liver-oil-butter-oil-vitamin-d-vitamin-a/response-to-questions-on-fermented-cod-liver-oil/ , but one of them is from 2009 and is just vitamin d content, and the other stuff looks like a power point presentation that has no lab info, no testing methods and no specific dates.
WAPF’s posted test results have all of that information which is weird, since it seems it is commonplace for labs to require an NDA. However, they have withheld part of the report. I don’t know all of what they withheld, but I have evidence that they withheld part of it.
I should have probably been clearer, Victor. I would have reasonably expected Dave Wetzel to say something to the effect, “We take very seriously Kaayla Daniel’s report and the allegations of possible illnesses associated with fermented cod liver oil. I am immediately commissioning an in-depth study by an independent group of 3 (or 4) scientists with extensive experience analyzing marine lipids. I have asked this group to report back to me in six weeks with its results, which I intend to make public.”
Keep in mind that the Daniel report should not have been a complete surprise. Not only had she previously expressed concerns directly to him, but there had been several blog posts, including one from me, beginning in Jan. 2013, full of complaints from users about possible bad reactions to the FCLO. Wetzel had plenty of warning, and chose to do nothing. Instead, he has made two posts since the Daniel report that I interpret as being primarily defensive–we don’t believe there is a problem here.
http://www.greenpasture.org/fermented-cod-liver-oil-butter-oil-vitamin-d-vitamin-a/response-to-questions-on-fermented-cod-liver-oil/
http://www.greenpasture.org/fermented-cod-liver-oil-butter-oil-vitamin-d-vitamin-a/my-thoughts-in-looking-back-over-last-weeks-controversy/
David, so, Dave Wetzel putting his daughter on video and explaining that FCLO is not for everyone was not enough for you?
The great irony here is that what you seek is potentially more dangerous.
I.e. tests continue showing the FCLO to be fine, and thus people are encouraged to keep on taking it. But some people should NOT take it! It is NOT for everyone. We have a crisis of personal responsibility, and you will worsening that problem by focusing on the product and trying to blame WAPF and GP. You need to motivate people to take more personal responsibility for everything that they put in their bodies. Not just FCLO.
Please think about this David. The FCLO will come out shining at the end of your crusade (for lack of a better word), and more people will be hurt. Not you or any of your readers has posted data that confirms any problem; although there were a couple of attempts that backfired.
We do have a problem here David, but it is not WAPF, GP, or the FCLO.
If there is a common issue that we can rally both sides around, perhaps it is this: There is a problem in the consumer base with ‘FCLO abuse.’ There is definitely FCLO abuse occurring in the consumer base, and that doesn’t have to mean that we are blaming the consumer. Some people are just too eager, and the product is somewhat new to them, and to all of us. FCLO is like a magic pill for some people, and those stories of success are what drive the product sales – and possibly product abuse. In some ways, the product is a victim of its own success.
This is not at all new or unique. All food products are potentially dangerous to someone, and we must stop promoting the idea that personal responsibility is not required. A glass of wine is good for you. For most people this is true. But not for all. And obviously alcohol abuse is not good for you. This advice is given by countless doctors and experts. And it is the same as the FCLO advice, and any number of other foods. Dave Wetzel has a daughter that is not compatible with FCLO, and he promotes that fact.
We need to encourage more personal responsibility, and educate consumers about weighing their own experiences with that of others, and with science too. This would be a legitimate and helpful pursuit that would be in line with everyone’s concerns. The FCLO is not the problem.
Thank you for continuing to report on this despite the troubles it has caused you. You are doing important work, regardless of the outcome of this controversy.
Quite a few years ago I was quite loyal as a member-leader in a religious cult. What happened is one of the big leaders issued a 30 page paper to all the international, national, regional, area and local leaders right before the international gathering of 20,000. The paper exposed all the sins of the board of directors, national advisors and other key leaders. In the wake of the horror during the 1000 key leader pre-meeting, The President required all those who wanted to keep their positions to sign a pledge of loyalty at that big gathering. I would say at least half of the leadership said stick it and made other career plans. The overall tone of the 20,000 festival folk that very week was very cold and confusing as to what in the heck was going on. Turns out over the next few months when news and announcements were made by the local leaders to the “flocks” and when the paper was made public to all, many other ministries were formed. And some of them were actually very good groups. I have seen it in consulting companies where one day some employees just walked across the street to a different office.
WAPF should have never ever had recommended products– it is a big no no for organizations like this– it may even be illegal or at least outside their charter and IRS filings. This is what the anti-competition laws are for to avoid situations like this. All Sally and the board needed to do was to say they are dropping all product recommendations and let Kaayla’s report run its course and make some type of statement at the meeting. I think it is time for the Board (the folks you named and others) put Sally out to pasture (retire as President) and they hire an executive director with non-profit/nutrition education experience to run WAPF properly. It is just to bad that Sally has continued to make this stance, as sweet as she is and all that she has done. It looks like it is time for her to step down graciously and let someone take charge to get it over this mess. To be honest, the Board and other top leaders don’t even know what they are doing with recommending products is wrong- they don’t know any better or they are afraid to speak up. As far as the Foundation of Ancestral Wisdom, the name really stinks– if they want to be taken seriously it needs to be changed. Thanks for all your brave work David
I’m Augie’s wife, Ann. Thanks for your background information, Dave Gumpert. I appreciate it. The big question I have for Sally is: Why not do the obvious? Simply put out the info that we’re doing some testing on the GP product & cannot recommend it at this time. Duh!
I don’t see how an organization whose whole existence is based upon food and nutrition cannot recommend products. Should they not mention grass fed meats, raw milk, eggs? If they have found products that are in line with what they advocate, I cannot understand why they can’t tell their members about them. I’m sure people appreciate guidance as to what others have found that supports their well-being. Others have been helped by the use of the cod liver oil and now, apparently, some have not. Did they abuse it’s usage as Schmid clearly did? I am still not convinced that FCLO is a bad product. It seems that the product owner has released test results and statements from researchers whereas, Daniels has released “double secret” tests from mystery labs. Will this new spin-off club also avoid recommending any dietary protocols? What if I consume too much of a beneficial food and find myself sick? Should I hold this new group responsible for disseminating bad information and lead a mob to demand the expulsion of all involved in recommending what I eat in a certain way? Good luck to all who begin their new organization. Somehow, I feel there will be schisms within this group down the road, as well. It’s the nature of people, as you discovered from your religious cult experience. There will always be revolts and even more spin-offs.
Ken-Surely you realize that recommending a SUPPLEMENT in a capsule that comes from a lab is very different than recommending real food, right?
Ken, the issue is in recommending certain brands–not the types of products. It would be far better to issue general standards e.g. raw milk production (good better and best), good better and best egg production methods; meat standards etc. This then drives the “industry” to improve products in a general way. Legally, in order to develop generic standards for industry it has to be a “trade association” so WAPF would need to convert to that–from what I understand. The next step could be to recognize a product which meets a standard of production methods/quality for say a one year period– it could also offer a certification “this product is certified as to meeting WAPF standards. This seems to be a huge undertaking — in these cases there would be an application fee, a fee for inspection, certification etc. It would be like the USDA organic cert. It would be easier just to have good,better and best production standards and then let the consumers decide and recommend through word of mouth or through the local groups (word would get around). But to have a national org recommend/endorse specific brands is not good practice and it can be dangerous especially with food and supplements as David G. illustrates from experience; and of the 100 or so nonprofit orgs I have known about and even worked with this is never ever done– if the org or directors would do so at a national meeting they would be fired because it would piss everyone off and cause withdrawal of supporters On the other hand, it might be more appropriate and worth considering to put the shopping guide under New Trends (but this is a shell game too). But then this is not my problem anymore since I am no longer a national or statewide and local WAPF promoter as I had been for so many years . . . not my monkeys, not my circus– just a spectator sipping my raw milk right now watching football.
Ken, the only test results I can find on Green Pasture site is, from Deltanoid Pharmaceuticals, but the report is 4.5 years old. All of the test data that USED to be there, and was almost 2 years old, has now been removed and a notice put up that “Test Data is Currently Being Updated”. Am I missing something or are you just repeating what other people are saying?
Its a bad sign when you have to resort to censorship and legal threats to stop people from reading things you disagree with.
I find myself wondering, WHY are they going to such extreme lengths to protect ONE product from ONE manufacturer, to the point it undermines their credibility and contradicts their original mission?
Is there more conflict of interest here than we’ve been made aware of so far? Who actually owns GP?
Are we just dealing with authoritarians who cannot tolerate descent?
But why die on this hill? It makes no sense. No one would think the less of them if they came out and urged caution in light of the many bad reactions to FCLO until the science was sorted out. But instead they double down.
Great questions, Pete. I’ve wondered the same things, like many people. My guess is there is more conflict of interest here than we know about, but at this point, it’s just a guess, so I’ve refrained from speculating. But if anyone has info that might help solve the mystery, I’d love to hear about it.
I checked NE Sec of State for ownership and officers and infuriated by their wanting to charge a fee to obtain this info that used to be free. So much for transparency and freedom of information
Augie, it might be that you would need to submit the request via an official FOIA in order to force ‘free’ disclosure/compliance, but of course then you’d have the inevitable foot dragging. No instant gratification response for sure.
Hopefully Dave G or Kaayla could spend the 15 bucks and get it
Sally does not seem to be able to walk away from this. What exactly is going on with this fclo that makes her decide it’s worth splitting the WAPF community? I know she was involved in the creating the butter oil. I’ve heard David and Sally say this early on. Was she involved in creating the fclo? I don’t get it since it was never mentioned by Weston Price.
It’s shameful that *you* are being cast as the enemy, David. You, who have done so much to report on harassment of real food producers and have created a nationwide sounding board for food freedom issues! I’m very sorry you are being treated this way. Both this treatment of you and the censorship actions of the WAPF board are making me seriously consider not renewing my family’s WAPF membership.
I am sorry to all of the people caught in this and hurt. These situations are painful — I know that better than I should. We had a good bit of mislabeling in the raw milk world in California and then with Rawesome. The whistle-blowers (or whatever similar label) in those cases lost friends and were outcast. It’s not a surprise that we have another round at the national level. The reactions in this round appear basically the same — shoot the messenger, ignore the concerns. The difference is that there are more people outraged and that there may be a new national organization form as a result.
I hope that members of any of the organizations can stay focused on what’s important — eating real food — and not throw the baby out with the bathwater.
I have recently heard about this controversy. I have taken this product in capsule form: butter/liver combo with cinnamon flavor, twice a day for the last year and a half with no negative side effects to date. Right now, both sides are in contradiction, like a football game. The option is for you to pick one side to win-. A terrible thing in the natural health section of town. I believe it should have been framed in the context of a discussion within the orchestra that perhaps the tuba section is too loud- not that it is the worst thing on earth and must be gotten rid of- where one can still say the orchestra is good. Having read material on both sides, I don’t know what is accurate at this time. I believe much more digging needs to be done under both trees so we can clearly see each root. Then we will be able to choose which tree we want to climb.
Ted, I don’t think anyone is saying to get rid of fermented cod liver oil. What some of us have wanted is for serious outside testing of the FCLO, and investigation into why some people have had health problems. Until that happens, we’ve wanted the Weston A. Price Foundation to withdraw its enthusiastic endorsement and promotion of FCLO.
To add to Dave’s ‘wish list’ I want nothing less than full disclosure of raw materials sources. Sally’s speech to chapter leaders defended Alaskan Pollock as cod, which goes one step further confirming my suspicion that the livers are radioactive. This, to me, is a core food safety issue and essential disclosure is both a moral and ethical imperative. No transparency on this issue is a dealbreaker for me.
The radiation fears are a non issue, as anyone can have a Geiger Counter in their home for $20 that can test everything. If anyone really has fears about radiation, then you should have a Geiger Counter in your home.
It is telling to me that, again, some people are trying to fan the flames of fear with comments about radiation and Fukushima. It is easy enough to prove or disprove. Fear mongering and insinuation aplenty, and nobody bothers to promote a solution that is helpful to everyone. Go get a geiger counter. Borrow or buy it, and test everything in your home.
I live in Tokyo, and many people have opted for these devices in Japan. But do not kid yourself – the FCLO is the least of your concerns when it comes to radiation. I have never seen or heard of it registering anything.
I don’t care if it registers low on your Geiger Counter, Victor. Green Pastures was not upfront about using pollock from the pacific. Therefore, the customer would not have thought to even get a Geiger Counter, because they thought they were purchasing a product from the Atlantic. Stop saying that mislabeling and dishonesty are non issues. I think for most, it is exactly the issue. People want to know where their food comes from and then they can make their own choices. Instead, they feel mislead and don’t feel that they can trust GP or WAPF anymore. Know your audience. Most of the people I know who (previously) purchased from GP are moms with kids and they are livid because they have been feeding this product to their infants and children(on strong recommendation by WAPF and GP). Dosage, ingredients, and where it comes from does matter to them! Dave W is STILL not being upfront about the ingredients in his products and where it comes from. How dare you suggest that a mom should not be concerned about that!
You think radiation only comes from Fukushima? The point is exactly that moms, and everyone else do have a right to know. So you should be happy to hear about cheap geiger counters.
Dave Wetzel was never trying to deceive anyone, and you know that. The pollock was used in maybe 10% of the product for a limited time, but you are all jumping to conclusions. Why are you all making assumptions that it was all pollock all the time? Because Dr. Daniel did one test on one liver?! And why assume that there was some intentional deception? It’s ridiculous.
I have now posted two constructive suggestions that could help the community, but everyone here is simply interested in bashing something. Stop repeating rhetoric and look at the facts. Or move on to positive things, like talking about geiger counters or how to help people determine if FCLO is a fit for them or not.
You already know more about FCLO than you do about any other CLO product on the market. All the companies have ‘secret’ proprietary methods of processing, and all of them try to obscure corporate knowledge to some extent to protect business concerns. Dave Wetzel offers more than most, if not all.
Why do you think that pollock was used in 10% of the products and only for a limited time? Is that on GPPs page? I thought I’d read everything that they put out and I’ve not seen any admission from them that they have used Pollock. Their labeling page is blank. The only admission of Pollock use is from a scientist who says they are using Pollock and that scientifically it is ok to call Pollock “Cod” but he recommends putting the scientific name on the label. Do you find some other place where they talk about Pollock, how much they use, and how often?
Seriously Victor…how much are they paying you? My questions are pretty basic for Dave:
Is it Cod or Pollock?
Is it from the Atlantic or Pacific?
Where do you get your essential oils? How much is used?
Seems pretty basic, right? Apparently now, because it has been weeks, and Dave is still searching for his words. These are not “proprietary secrets” and Dave’s refusal to answer these questions does seem to indicate intentional deception. It seemed odd before and now it is especially creepy that he continues to ignore his customer’s basic questions, now that the accusations are finally out in the open.
Oy vey!
I was so shocked when all of this “blew up.” My husband had open heart surgery 2 years ago and he and I have been taking FCLO since then, at least, and to think that I might have been unintentionally harming him is more than upsetting. We took come other CLO until I found out that they were adding synthetic vitamins to it. That’s why I switched to the FCLO. Well, now we are using Sonne’s and hoping it is what it says it is… “old fashioned cod liver oil.” Thank you, Dave for taking the time to help us through this maze. Staying tuned….
“With the Daniel report, I realized why it likely burned my throat and esophagus when I tried to swallow it—it was probably rancid.”
possibly, there’s another less sinister reason?
http://www.oliveoiltimes.com/olive-oil-health-news/olive-oil-cough/11628
http://www.curezone.org/forums/am.asp?i=1336739
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/olive-oil-compound-makes-throat-itch-prevent-alzheimers/
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/06/dining/06curi.html
i realize that all these links concern the throat burn of olive oil but i have to ask why, since that has turned out to be a good thing, the throat burn of FCLO is assumed to cause disability and death
Carolyn, I’m not sure anyone has assumed the burning associated with FCLO causes disability and death. There have been studies suggesting that rancid oils taken over a long period of time can be dangerous to the heart. Part of the problem with the burning of FCLO for some users is we don’t know exactly what the cause is. I assumed, based on Daniel’s finding that FCLO she had tested showed to be rancid, that it was the rancidity.
There are enough anecdotal accounts of people experiencing the burning problem, and enough people reporting symptoms of heart issues that these reports should be examined and studied more seriously, in my judgment.
By the way, I take olive oil “straight” on occasion, and while I’ve experienced that slight burning in the back of the throat described in the articles you link to, it is nothing like the severe burning I experienced in my esophagus as the FCLO was going down. I was actually concerned at first that the burning indicated a problem in my esophagus. I just assumed the FCLO was a pure product, so such severe discomfort had to be my problem. That’s why, as I indicate in the posting, I was relieved to learn that it likely had to do with the product being rancid.
i’ve had it go down totally smooth and have also had some coughing, sometimes in the same bottle and sometimes a day apart- so its not like the oil when the bottle is first opened is “fresh” (no cough) and at the bottom of the bottle is rancid (cough). how can we explain no throat burn on a monday, throat burn on a tuesday and no throat burn again on a wednesday? all from the same bottle? isn’t the oil rancid or not rancid?
i think i mentioned in another post that i once had such severe throat burn from a dose of FCLO that it triggered a full blown asthma attack- ONCE. but so has using my fireplace, exposure to strong perfumes, walking up the 5 flights of stairs to my apt (occasionally), walking home 28 blocks from work (sometimes), cold weather, being near a smoker, and the reintroduction of pistachio nuts when coming down off an elimination diet (within an hour).
i am more inclined to think that i probably should avoid pistachio nuts than i am to blame it all on FCLO.
and that was my question, really. why would throat burn be a certain sign of rancidity in FCLO while it is now taken as a sign of anti-inflammatory, alzheimers prevention properties at work in olive oil?
The tests did not show the FCLO to be rancid David. If the product were truly rancid you would have conclusive results that every analyst would agree with. You do not have such results. You persist with this claim, but you never show why. What test results convinced you?
Are you saying then that something about the oil extraction process is creating high levels of oleocanthal? Do you have any proof for that or are you just throwing it out there as a hypothesis? It’s not a bad one, but would be pretty easy to test for – but again, that requires a willingness to test.
There are more than just 3 Amigos and I am so thankful for you and all the others who write unbiased, heartfelt, professional reviews and updates. I am so very saddened to see Sally caught up in this the way she is-not really knowing what it is that has her so hardened. There is just too much there not to question this product. All of their rebuttals are clearly questioned/answered in Kaayla’s report. The product glares at me in my fridge everyday and I am literally afraid of it and wonder if it was the cause of my daughters problems or mine. Why can’t Sally ‘leave it in the fridge’ until proper unbiased testing is done? It is irresponsible on a massive scale. If I continued to give it to my daughter and it proved detrimental to her health wouldn’t I be responsible? Wouldn’t I be shamed? Why does Sally not see the implications? Why is she threatening her supporters? I believe that is very telling, and very sad. Anyone on the fence, after those threats could surely see there is more to this. God bless you DG!
What angst this causes. The precautionary principle tossed out the window for what? Usually money – and just because the WPF had been founded on more altruistic principles than i see here, doesn’t mean that the current leadership is not (some) concerned more with money and reputation than other people and truth.
It has made me stop referring people to the WPF – that’s for sure. On Natural News i’d had over 200 followers and i refuse to lead them to a place of doubts. To protect their image, they are in no uncertain terms, screwing it up, perhaps irrevocably.
Once something is written on the internet, it’s there to stay. No one, including an organization like WAPF, can forbid people from saying whatever they’re going to say, good or bad, about this or any other issue. No way at all. WAPF cannot possibly know who’s posting what or where at all times. Not possible. Besides, telling people not to do something or say something, especially something people feel strongly about, is not the way to handle this situation – that will only make things worse and make WAPF look even more guilty of doing something underhanded.
AND name calling coming from supposedly intelligent/credible people, even in jest, isn’t humorous – not when it concerns a serious issue like this where people like Dr. Daniel and Ron Schmid are putting themselves on the line to bring information to the attention of both the WAPF BOD and then the general population. (Hey, at least they didn’t call you the three stooges, so I guess it could have been worse . . . ) I’m deeply disappointed in WAPF, as that organization has shown poor judgment and poor leadership from the beginning of this topic, even before the general public was aware.
Forbidding people from expressing their personal opinions, and then threatening them with loss of their chapter leader title is, well, ludicrous. No one will want to be a chapter leader and more or less carry the flag for an organization who handles things in this less than desirable manner, will they? Those who feel they might have something to gain may stay on and support WAPF; but you’ll find those leaders with NO motive at all leaving in droves, not because of FCLO itself, but because of the manner in which this whole thing was mishandled. And so they should. This issue needs to be front and center until it’s settled and it won’t be settled by name-calling and hidden agendas and favoritism towards certain sponsors. Monetary involvement should never override a deep committment to doing their best for their membership. If it does, there’s a problem.
JMO.
Yea, OK, it was rancid fish oil from China that was mixed with vegetable oil, devoid of nutrition and filled with toxins. Yea, ok, that is the product that cures rats of rickets in rat assays, helps heal cavities and eczema, etc., etc., etc.
Yea, sure.
You are asking us to ignore the countless people around the world reporting the spectacular effectiveness of FCLO for nearly ten years. You are also asking us to disregard the science.
Yea. OK.
Your comment has absolutely nothing to do with the current article. Your comment really has nothing to do with any article that David has ever written around this controversy, as he has never contended “it was rancid fish oil from China that was mixed with vegetable oil, devoid of nutrition and filled with toxins. Yea, ok, that is the product that cures rats of rickets in rat assays, helps heal cavities and eczema, etc., ” nor has he asked us “to ignore the countless people around the world reporting the spectacular effectiveness of FCLO for nearly ten years” or to disregard the science. Being off topic and using fallacious arguments like this makes it seem like you are not interested in an open and honest discussion but instead are using every artifice that you know to silence anybody that you can overwhelm, embarrass, or bully. One can only wonder why and what your stake in all of this is. While you are claiming that everybody wants to ignore the countless people that have been helped (and NOBODY, not ONE person that I have seen has contended that FCLO can’t, won’t, or hasn’t helped people), you seem to be wanting to ignore and silence anybody that claims that they have been hurt by FLCO, as if somehow that is a universal impossibility. Can you respond to that, please?
Hi Steve. You can disregard Victor. He has claimed openly on another website in his Disqus comments about David Gumpert that, “I would have stopped reading his blog long ago, but it is now part of a little social IT experiment that I am conducting.” The post is dated 3 days ago in response to Craig Elding. So, engage Victor if you care to, but I don’t plan to.
Well, no wonder I have been thinking he is a troll. Best not to feed them.
Theresa (and anyone else that cares), the details of my experiment were this:
We have a common saying in IT that you should ‘never feed the trolls.’ However, I sometimes do this intentionally in an attempt to find astroturfers. On David Gumpert’s articles I intentionally posted two factual errors that were easy to disprove. I have goaded everyone to challenge me, and many did with rhetoric, emotionally charged at times, but none found my errors.
This gives me some insight on the bloggers.
My two intentional errors were mentioning that Dr. Price warned against eating unprepared grains (which he did not), and claiming that Rosita had to be either heavily processing their CLO, or mislabeling their product. It does not have to be.
I do not believe there is any professional astroturfing on Gumpert’s blog; although I could be wrong of course. However, both Dr. Daniel’s report and Mr. Gumpert’s blog posts look very much to me like ‘seeding.’ But that is just my opinion.
All of this is to help me understand the FCLO issue better. I want to know why, even when I can get the ire of people, I still cannot get them to copy and paste the facts. Twist and mutilate, yes, but showing me facts to support their claims, no. FCLO is not for everyone, but there is no test data to confirm anything wrong with it. If you have some, please show me.
Steve, if I took out FCLO and substituted raw milk, the exact same situation has been going on for years.
With pleasure Steve. I am responding because Mr. Gumpert and many of his readers are attacking WAPF, GP, and the FCLO without any evidence to support the claims. I keep asking for the evidence in the hope that you will notice that there is none. But more than that, I do very much care about the people that have been hurt, whether by FCLO or something else, and this is part of what I just posted to Mr. Gumpert:
The great irony here is that what you seek is potentially more dangerous.
I.e. tests continue showing the FCLO to be fine, and thus people are encouraged to keep on taking it. But some people should NOT take it! It is NOT for everyone. We have a crisis of personal responsibility, and you will worsening that problem by focusing on the product and trying to blame WAPF and GP…
Read the rest in my reply to David, or see my blog. We are on the same team. It is simply that I feel you have all been duped by Dr. Daniel and are mistaking her rhetoric for fact. As I keep saying, her data does not support her claims.
Victor, You have just proved you are not worthy of intelligent discourse. What an absolute bone head.
Thank you D P for demonstrating what trolling is. If you wish to prove me a ‘bone head’ simply provide some evidence to refute my posts. In fact, I have deliberately posted two factual errors on this blog, and both remain undiscovered. Those posts are part of the experiment Theresa noted.
Thanks for another update, David. It is sad when so many of the WAPF supporters that I have seen comment have spoken about the disrespect that is being shown to WAPF, Sally, Dave Wetzel and GPP, yet the very same crowd is comfortable bandying around terms like “the three amigos” in a disparaging context. It’s quite sad that somebody like Sandrine would ban you without notification and when questioned would cite a safety concern – for their comments. Apparently there is no safety concern for people’s health, just that the information that they post in a public forum might get repeated in a public forum. Burning people’s throats? What exactly causes that? I can’t think of a pure oil that would do that. Nor fat soluble vitamins. Nor minerals. Not fresh or properly prepared meats. So what is it? No other fermented product burns throats. How do they explain that? Maybe I’ll talk to David Wetzel about that. He has been trying to contact me since I posted here the other day saying that GPP hadn’t gotten back to me. I’ve just been so busy getting ready to go to the Mother Earth News Fair and participating that I haven’t had a chance to talk to him. The booth is slow right now, so I’m writing a few words between people coming by. 🙂
One thing that bothers me about this is that it does seem to be bothering some people pretty dramatically and when they cease taking it, they feel better, and certain conditions clear up. Let’s just take the rancidity question off of the table. Just because it is not rancid does not mean that the product is perfectly fine and that there might not be some kind of issue. Wouldn’t it be good to get as much demographic information from people that are bothered by it as possible so as to see if some pattern might be discerned. There are people with auto immune conditions, or with genetic abnormalities that react to his or that, or cannot absorb this or that, or are predisposed to certain conditions. There could be environmental considerations. Who knows what contraindications could be found. It just seems callous to dismiss any and all concerns. I don’t think these people are callous. I just think they believe something that many would find unbelievable – something like, “This product is not just the best, it is perfect”. When you reach perfection, you stop looking for better.
It burned my throat so badly I cried. The pain was extraordinary. It hurt for hours. A week later I tried it again and got the same results. I still have no idea what would cause that level of pain. It was a very confusing experience because fclo was supposed to be an amazing healing substance. I was left feeling crazy, but the pain was undeniable. So I got rid of the bottle. All I know for sure is that something that hurts that bad can’t be good.
I just wanted to say THANK YOU! for reporting on this – I don’t know where else I could find the information. I also really appreciate how this issue has actually been able to be discussed in the comments section, especially in light of how discussion is being shut down every where else. I’ve learned a lot from both sides from reading here.
So, I guess that would make Sally El Guapo by her own reckoning? I love Those Darn Amigos. Just remember David that the Three Amigos are the heroes in the end. You do resemble the beloved silver haired Steve Martin a bit. There’s always a silver lining. Our family will be screening the movie The Three Amigos this evening while we contemplate the ramifications of all this. We’ll probably sip on some raw milk from our local dairy too. Thanks for doing what you do and maintaining your integrity.
One other thing. Is it possible to push back the date of the new organization meeting a month or 3? It might make for better attendance and organization for the event, plus more time to properly market it.
I must say I stopped respecting WAPF about two years ago, after seeing several bitter clashes over some rather insignificant issues. People took sides, became heated over it, called each other out, and ostracized any who did not adopt the official WAPF party line, which never DID make any sense as a hard line stance (let’s face it, some people really CANNOT breast feed, but there are many good choices for alternatives, and lacto-fermenting can be successfully done MANY ways, etc.). After being ostracized myself by many for taking a stance on fermenting alcoholic drinks for children (they think it is good, I think it is not), I have determined that the organization does not offer enough benefit to justify that kind of treatment of anyone. Truth does not matter, once they have taken a stance. They will defend it to the death, no matter how wrong they are.
I am also deeply sorry that this is the case. Because the organization’s potential to do good has become tainted by their dogged insistence in defending the indefensible.
Since the FDA states that it is NOT acceptable to label Pollock as Cod, Morrell’s defense of it, saying that there is “nothing wrong” with it, is rather puzzling. But it really isn’t an issue for the FDA, but for the FTC, which forbids mislabeling, or selling a lower value product labeled as a higher value product. Since the manufacturer has admitted to the fraud, a lawsuit by customers would be won without question. It IS fraud, they DID do it, have SAID they did it, and they are not apologetic about doing it!
Unlike you, I DO think the motive is monetary. People do not callously disregard the health of others for profit when the motive is promoting good health. They do it when the motive is profit alone.
It is also fairly clear that the whole rancidity issue is due to the fact that extraction of cod liver oil happens in stages, whereby good oil is obtained at the beginning of the extraction process, and poor oil at the end. It is logical that the company is very careful about the quality of oil they ship to some individuals, and not so careful about what they ship to the average customer. Rancid, yes. Fermented, no.
Why am I getting the feeling all of this is propaganda? Including your rant about what you think is right. Whole, raw, local organic, grass-fed, and prepared in the kitchen food is the only answer. I. My mind anyone who pushes supplements are looking to make a profit. You said so yourself but sugar coated it with blah, blah, blah. Get real and stop whining already. Eat real food. Food is medicine.
David Gumpert, when is the last time you took a big spoonful of really good cold pressed olive oil? If it’s any good at all it will have strong astringent qualities (it will burn going down). I’m surprised that someone with your research background could be so easily swayed by such an unscientific line of reasoning (“it burns so it must be rancid.”) Are we to believe the best olive oil we can buy is rancid because, if we swig it down straight — something almost no one does — it burns? I eat the FCLO by putting it into my glass of raw milk and then I savor every drink. No burning.
Also, the Ron Schmid report is ridiculous on its face. First, as many have pointed out, he admits to abusing the product by over dosing. Second, how closely did you read the 1930’s era research report he based his assumptions upon? I understood it to say that the “heart damage” was not assessed by autopsy but by EKG! How do we know this particular researcher correctly interpreted the EKG data? How do we know whether an EKG has the fidelity to show the difference between heart damage and merely heart irregularities (some of which could actually be positive developments?) Do we know the state of EKG data interpretation in 1935 versus today? Are there ANY other follow-up or confirmatory research experiments along these lines? It’s also my understanding that the animals’ condition returned to “normal” after a withdrawal period. Now that’s interesting! Reversible heart damage! It’s an interesting study no doubt, but to put someone in our community out of business based on this kind of conjecture is beyond the pale.
Next, I believe both Wetzel and WAPF have said they’d do follow up studies / replies to Daniel’s report. How do we know they wouldn’t have taken exactly the same approach had the report been submitted to them privately (as it clearly should have been.) Honestly, I couldn’t even finish the Daniel’s report — it’s tone of vilification and condemnation does not speak well for its objectivity to say the least. Chris Kresser, who is not a part of the WAPF community and whose research I respect, has given a more balanced analysis of the Daniel’s report and it raises some serious questions about her conclusions. Perhaps the board should have done the testing in the first place, hindsight is 20 / 20 as they say, but clearly Daniels did not make her case. Releasing her own report to the public without taking it first to Wetzel and back to the board was irresponsible at best and vindictive at worst.
Finally, I agree with your comments about the “three amigos.” Factionalism isn’t going to make things better. They owe you an apology on that front. I hate see this divide but my impression of what you’ve written above is that the emotional aspect of the situation is clouding your perspective. You might counter that the potential health risks warrant an entirely different response. I’d simply disagree based on the evidence presented thus far (and Morell’s response to the woman complaining of various heart issues that have suddenly sprung up, as quoted above, seems quite reasonable to me too. What’s to empathize with except baseless claims about an unproven connection to a product that many, many others have used for years with only great results?) If we took this same approach to any food producer, we could put every one of them out of business before determining anything substantive one way or another. I hope this rift will be mended eventually and I’m looking forward to seeing more conclusive research into the biological effects of FCLO.
Larry, on the olive oil, see my reply to Carolyn. I do consume olive oil “straight” and my reaction to that and the FCLO was much different.
Fine David. It is certainly true that different people have different tolerance levels for the astringency of these oils. Nonetheless, the point remains: astringency does not equal rancidity.
I think Chris Masterjohn’ comment is of value here: “As I wrote, I think negative reactions are more likely due to amine intolerance, and I’m sorry but if flavor is the issue please deliver similar scrutiny to intensely flavored cheeses the century egg, and the whole range of fermented foods. Is it hard to find someone who likes tofu but hates natto?”
“Next, I believe both Wetzel and WAPF have said they’d do follow up studies / replies to Daniel’s report. How do we know they wouldn’t have taken exactly the same approach had the report been submitted to them privately (as it clearly should have been.) Honestly, I couldn’t even finish the Daniel’s report — it’s tone of vilification and condemnation does not speak well for its objectivity to say the least. ”
Because people have been reporting health problems from taking FCLO for at least 5 years now. You might not like this public approach, but that is what it took to get them to take these problems serious.
I find it funny how people will complain about her approach or her tone and completely ignore the substance of the facts she presents.
It all comes across as, ‘your a big meanie for raising a stink so you must be wrong and I don’t have to listen to what you say’.
Okay Pete, let’s see some data regarding these “reports” for at least five years (dates please).
Clearly you’re new here, or you’d know I’m not a demagogue spouting things which can’t be backed up with facts…
What follows is the earliest report I’ve run across. I’ve not been looking either, so there may well be more and earlier than this. But suffice it to say WAPF has been ignoring this issue for a LONG time…
http://www.westonaprice.org/health-topics/cod-liver-oil-basics-and-recommendations/
Claire West says:
October 12, 2010 at 8:28 pm
For a long time I used the regular clo from Green Pastures and then I used the fermented — with no problems until about six months ago: the plain (no antioxidants) fermented smelled and tasted like sludge. I could not get it down
Note as well, Sally F. tries to paint this as an issue of FCLO just not being right for everyone, or that some people can’t tolerate it; but that there is nothing wrong with the product itself. This report clearly puts the lie to that obfuscation.
I did not ignore her “facts.” These finding are open to interpretation and as I said, some of her findings have been called into question by experts in the field. I also said that I eagerly await further testing.
Your turn Larry. What ‘experts in the field’ have called into question her findings and which findings? (links and credentials please)
Really Pete? That is your idea of a “report?” Some person on a combox saying she doesn’t like the taste! You fail. At least go to the CDC database on foodborne illnesses and find a couple of incident reports related to FCLO — something published somewhere that has at least a shred of credibility. What a joke.
Now to experts in the field of lipid chemistry who have called Daniels’ interpretation into question:
Dr. Martin Grootveld BSc, PhD, FIBMS, CBiol, FSB, FRSC
Dr. Chris Masterjohn PhD Nutritional Sciences, Lipid Science
Dr. Vicki Schlegel PhD Analytical Chemistry
AND, how about these labs that, for some strange reason, are quite willing to put their names on their reports (unlike the ones Daniels uses.):
Midwest Laboratories Inc., Sue Ann Seitz
EuroFins Scientific, Inc., David Gross
And Chris Kresser and Craig Elding, not scientists per se, but both well-studied laymen who are well respected within the natural healing communities in their own countries. All of the above have reports online. I’m not going to waste my time linking for you Pete, since you did such a shoddy job answering my honest request for some real reports of health-issues linked to fermented code liver oil going back to five years ago. I’m not holding my breath for you to come through either…
Not only does Masterjohn fail to address all of Daniels evidense of rancidity, he backs up her assertion of fclo being cut with vegie oil and provides aditional evidense that it is over activated and harmful.
The names on report thing is a total red hearing, that has been explained numerous times already. It’s simply not a credible agument.
I simply provided the earliest report of problems I’ve run cross so far. There have been many many more reports since them and I Highly doubt any made it into official govt databases. You’re shifting the goal posts.
The original point was, WAPF has been ignoring problems for years and it took going public o get action. That particular report was on their own website for all to see.
Not that you’d assent to the truth of any of the problems with GP WAPF. Deny deny deny is the order of the day.
I provided facts and you’ve provided nothing but assertions, still failing to provide the details you claimed you possess (but apparently don’t as you’ve failed to provide them.) The names are not red herrings — it is simply a fact that one side divulges them, the other does not.
The only “goal post” that was shifted was when you said you had reports but have failed to list even a single one (the example you provided was ludicrous to say the least. ) Please, provide some 4 and 5 year old credible reports of safety problems with this product.
Your logic is impeccable. Let me see if I can understand it. A publicly available comment box from an article 5 years ago has an anecdotal complaint about the taste of a product and the organization responsible for publicly publishing both the article and the comment thread ignored “problems” until “going public” happened. Huh?
Also, your statement that Masterjohn “backs up her [Daniel’s] assertion of fclo being cut with vegie oil” is a whopper of a misrepresentation of his analysis. Regarding her accusation about the vegetable oil coming from bottled pollock liver oil that is diluted with thermally damaged vegetable oil, Masterjohn calls it, “wild speculation.” He goes on to say that the trans fat levels could be related to microbial action or adulteration (among a list of 4 possible alternatives) and that while the latter possibility should not be swept under the rug, GP should be given the chance to respond. The lab tests I noted above form a portion of that response and I’ve seen no further concerns voiced on this topic based on those results.
And to top it off you end with an ad hominem attack calling me a denier. That one is quite in vogue these days when people can’t carry an argument with facts.
You continue to miss the point and you misread Chris’ analysis. He called the ‘livers in cattle tubs misdirection’ a wild speculation.
CLO diluted with vegetable oil he not only called a reasonable explanation (along with bacterial action), he called it the simplest explanation.
So until we see some good science demonstrating how his fermentation process is creating trans-fats that otherwise shouldn’t be in CLO, Occam’s Razor demands we pin the blame on vegetable oil adulteration.
And even if it is caused by bacterial action, we must ask the question, should we avoid FCLO because it contains harmful transfats? Especially since other fresh CLOs do not contain it.
Pete, try to post your gibberish on Chris Masterjohn’s blog and see what happens to you. You know your statements are false, so stop trying to troll Larry. Larry is correct and you know it.
Go ahead Pete. Go discuss it with Chris. Chris will respond to you, and then you can post his words instead of your twisted interpretations. But then I imagine that you already noticed how he shut down the other trolls. Perhaps you already tried to post and your comment simply wasn’t accepted.
While you’re there you can read my comment on your bogus trans fats fears too. In the worst possible scenario, FCLO would not even contribute 1% trans fats to a modern diet. By FDA standards, the Green Pasture FCLO is trans fats FREE.
“Larry is correct and you know it.”
Masterjohn said that trans fats being created by microbial action was plausible, but that adulteration by a veggie oil was the simpler explanation.
He is right though, GPP deserves a chance to respond. GPP has had 6 weeks in which to do so, and has responded to every other major point, which means that they are avoiding this one on purpose. Why?
“In the worst possible scenario, FCLO would not even contribute 1% trans fats to a modern diet.”
The people eating the modern diet are suffering from a plethora of conditions and then dying of a myriad of diseases. Isn’t the reason that we are all even having this discussion that we don’t subscribe to the standard american diet because it is deadly?
“By FDA standards, the Green Pasture FCLO is trans fats FREE.”
Very interesting. Please post the link to the FDA regs that support this claim.
The whole “where did the trans fats come from?” is a red herring though. As is the amount of trans fats. As is the fact that there are trans fats in the meat (fat) of certain ruminant animals. All red herrings. The issue is that there ARE trans fats in the product. We have no idea where they come from, how they got there, and what type they are. What do I mean by type? This article explains: http://www.westonaprice.org/action-alerts/natural-vs-industrial-trans-fat-labeling-in-restaurant-food/
If recent test results from GPP are indicative of what they have been getting all along, they KNEW trans fats were in the product, they didn’t put that on the label, and perhaps worse, they didn’t tell anybody. They have had years to figure out what type of trans fats these are, and one would assume if they were responsible, they would have done that. I think they are responsible, so I’m assuming they did that. They never informed people that there were good trans fats in the product. With every single other selling point that they seized upon, every ambiguous description that was used to make the product more appealing, you’ve got to imagine that if they had cancer preventing trans fats in the product, they would have let people know. They didn’t. Even if they didn’t ever get testing done in the past to determine the type of trans fats in the product, they’ve had plenty of time to do it recently.
There are trans fats in the product. They are almost certainly not the good type. GPP has never put that on the label – unless Victor can provide evidence to the contrary that seems to be a violation (again) of label laws. Worse they never told anybody there were potentially harmful trans fats in the product. There are people with desperate health conditions that have been taking this product to try to get better. Those with certain pre-existing conditions would almost certainly be more susceptible to damage. And perhaps most damning of all, GPP has failed to mention trans fats one single time in all of the weeks since it was revealed, and in all of the pages of material that they have released. Instead of addressing trans fats, they are playing the “it’s a good product, see all these scientists say so, trust us” card, and I guess hoping that people don’t make an issue of it. Any time somebody says, “what about the trans fats?”, they respond, “We don’t use vegetable oil.” Yeah, that doesn’t address the issue of trans fats at all.
Wow Steve, clearly you did not even read your own post. Or my previous posts. Or do any basic research. Your assertions are false, so stop trying to misdirect people.
You contradict yourself: you say in your second paragraph that GPP responded to every major point except the vegetable oil / trans fats allegations, and then your last paragraph states that they always respond with “We don’t use vegetable oil.”
How is it even possible for you to make such a contradiction? And that is not your only contradiction:
You said “Worse they never told anybody there were potentially harmful trans fats in the product.”
Then you say that GPP’s own tests show trans fats. Again, you do not make any sense. GPP has shown and discussed trans fats long before Daniel’s bogus report surfaced. This is not new.
And finally, please learn to use Google. You don’t need to ask me for a link, as the FDA information is all over the Internet. The FDA labeling requirements for trans fats state:
If the food contains less than 0.5 grams of trans fat per serving, it can be labeled as trans fats free, 0 grams of trans fats, or anything to that effect. No trans fats labeling is required if the content is is less than 0.5 grams per serving.
The recommended FCLO daily serving is 5 grams (one teaspoon). (Actually, the recommended serving it 2grams(2ml) on all labels that I have seen, but we’ll use 5g to drive home the point).
The calculations (using the worst case data from Daniel’s report):
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.
To drive home the point further, consider that 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 1% 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 an impact.
My full post is at WAPF here:
http://www.westonaprice.org/uncategorized/questions-and-answers-about-fermented-cod-liver-oil-fclo/#comment-265154
If you really cared about health concerns you would have done the research to understand this context Steve. But instead you keep trolling with accusations that have no meaning, as you are focused only attacking. I honestly cannot understand why you, a distributor of health products, continue to discredit yourself with this kind of trolling. If you were honestly concerned about trans fats, you should feel relieved to now understand it was a false alarm.
For those people that do have health concerns, they should be focused on the amines, or potential unknowns that may cause an incompatibility for them. Every food has potential to be incompatible with somebody, and FCLO is no exception. People should be encouraged to take personal responsibility for all food consumption.
It doesn’t matter what the science says, as it cannot tell us everything. And it does not matter what my opinion is or your opinion is, as each person is different. Please Steve, encourage personal responsibility for all food products and give up this failed crusade against FCLO. The FCLO continues to show itself as an excellent product.
“Wow Steve, clearly you did not even read your own post. Or my previous posts. Or do any basic research. Your assertions are false, so stop trying to misdirect people.”
I read your previous post. You provided nothing but derisive opinions on what would happen if certain information was posted other places.
“GPP has shown and discussed trans fats long before Daniel’s bogus report surfaced. This is not new.”
GPP has 7 articles that predate the Daniel report that mention trans fats, talking about trans fat damage, why hydrogenated oils should be avoided at all cost, etc. Not once do they mention that it is in their product. Unless you can produce evidence that is currently on their site or pull up something from the internet archive, it appears your statement that they have shown trans fat in their product and discussed it, is completely false.
GPP has 2 more recent articles that discuss the trans fats. Both are Sathivel commenting on trans fats. Once he says that their previous tests did not show trans fats. That means something has changed – test sensitivities, or something in or about the product. He also throws out a red herring saying that trans fats are present in beef and dairy products. In the next article, he just throws out more red herrings, but doesn’t actually discuss the trans fats in the product.
You are right that I was a bit confusing in the way I worded part of my post that seemed to result in a contradiction. Let me be clear this time. GPP has issued numerous statements about the Daniel Report and their products in question. Not ONCE have they addressed the issue of trans fats in this notifications/articles. People want to know. So they are asking questions in the comments. What about trans fats? Any word on trans fat? And the reply is, “we don’t use vegetable oil.” That is not the question. The biggest problem with veggie oil is indeed trans fats. But even without the veggie oil, THERE ARE STILL TRANS FATS and people want to know why. No word from GPP on that. GPPs old test results never showed trans fats as it was just data extracts from testing and they left that part off if it was there. GPPs new test results show trans fats. They still have not issued any public statement addressing the trans fats issue.
“And finally, please learn to use Google. You don’t need to ask me for a link, as the FDA information is all over the Internet. The FDA labeling requirements for trans fats state: If the food contains less than 0.5 grams of trans fat per serving, it can be labeled as trans fats free, 0 grams of trans fats, or anything to that effect. No trans fats labeling is required if the content is is less than 0.5 grams per serving.”
I do know how to use Google. The thing is, in argument, it is up to the person making the assertion to prove the assertion, not up to others to disprove the assertion. You know that. You have required anybody making assertions to back it up. (Of course that you have discounted most of their source material is beside the point.) You are right that they don’t have to list it on the label. However, you are wrong that they can label it “trans fat free”. Since it is a dietary supplement and it is that low, they CANNOT list it, or say anything about it.
From FDA: “Amounts of “0 g” and “Not a significant source…” statements are not allowed in the nutrition labeling of dietary supplements (i.e., Supplement Facts). Consequently, when the amount of trans fat in a dietary supplement is less than 0.5 gram per serving, trans fat must not be listed on the Supplement Facts panel.”
“If you were honestly concerned about trans fats, you should feel relieved to now understand it was a false alarm.”
I’m concerned about a company having a harmful substance in their product that seems to be a result of the process they are using. I’m concerned that this company has probably known about this and chosen not to disclose it because it would hurt their sales. I’m concerned that they may have decided it was “safe enough” because the amount was low. I’m concerned that they may have lowered their serving size to accommodate this. I’m concerned because although I follow FDA labeling laws, I don’t really believe much of what they have to say. Food pyramid? Crap. RDA? Crap. But even the FDA doesn’t recognize trans fats as safe. Let’s put that in context: HFCS, food dyes, artificial sweeteners, and all sorts of other crap are “generally recognized as safe” and this stuff is so bad that the FDA is making food manufactures take it out of their foods. GPP has an article posted on their site, “Why Hydrogenated Oils Should be Avoided at All Costs submitted by Dr. Donald” the last line of which is: “PS: Hydrogenated and partially hydrogenated oils is another name for Trans-Fatty Acids”. GPPs own site is proclaiming “Avoid trans fats AT ALL COSTS.”
“People should be encouraged to take personal responsibility for all food consumption.”
Couldn’t agree more. That’s why we are committed to transparent labeling. If we know it is in the product, it is on the label. People have to use their bodies as experimental labs to figure out what is good for them quite enough without hidden components of their “healthy” supplements biting them in the backside. We ask for the allergen menu when we go to restaurants so that we can avoid the MSG, the HFCS, the gluten, and other stuff. Certainly cuts down on the guess work, and we feel better several hours later and over the next few days than if we had just eaten stuff willy nilly.
“For those people that do have health concerns, they should be focused on the amines, or potential unknowns that may cause an incompatibility for them.”
For those people that do have health concerns, it seems to me they should be focused on getting the nutrients that they need from well sourced whole foods or other nutritional supplements with less question marks surrounding them. For those that don’t have health concerns, daily intakes of CLO of any kind does not seem to be in line with Dr. Price’s recommendations. If anybody is reading this though, don’t take my word. Don’t take Victor’s word, or Pete’s word, or Sally’s word, or Wetzel’s word. If anything good has come out of this situation it is a clear reminder that you need to do your own research and know WHAT you are taking it and WHY you are taking it and WHAT it is supposed to do for you. If there are any question marks about something, move on, or at least try an elimination diet type of thing with it.
And still with the accusations of trolling? You of all people. Of course you call it “experimenting” when you do it, don’t you?
Steve, glad we can at least agree on a few things. Let’s see if we can make this easier by focusing on one core question: Is FCLO a trans fats health risk?
My answer is NO. Not at all. Here is why:
The worst test result from Daniel’s report says 3.2% trans fats. The average of the multiple tests listed on the GP website shows 1.2% trans fats. Let’s compromise on 2%.
FCLO recommended serving: 2 grams
2% x 2 grams = 0.04 grams
FDA recommended daily target is 2 grams.
Thus FCLO contributes only 2% to an FDA recommended diet.
Or FCLO contributes less than 1% trans fats to the standard american diet.
A hamburger or an order of french fries can have 100 times the trans fats of a single FCLO serving. In America, it is easy to find a meal that contains more trans fats than one years worth of FCLO servings.
The amount of trans fats that FCLO contributes to a diet is simply insignificant. So how can you say it is a health risk because of trans fats?
Man, as a species, has been consuming trans fats since forever. I do not believe that you, the FDA, or anyone else, is talking about a zero trans fats diet, so we should dispense with extreme statements that imply such. (We do however want to eliminate all artificial trans fats)
About 20% of our trans fats come from natural sources, which are mostly animal fats and dairy. Thus, you are always going to have some trans fats in your diet, unless you are vegan. I assume you are not making a vegan argument here.
Consumption of FCLO would add an insignificant amount of natural trans fats to a normal diet. In any diet (other than vegan), FCLO would not be considered a trans fats health risk.
I have not seen anyone actually talk about the numbers. So again, I ask, how is FCLO a trans fats factor?
That fact that there even needs to be a discussion on whether the amount of a bad component in a daily health supplement is enough to do harm, is pretty ludicrous, isn’t it? Your arguments are pretty much exactly the same as the arguments for having mercury in vaccines and for pretty much the same reason – it is a health giving product and these are small amounts. The “more good than harm” philosophy.
Still throwing out the red herring of animal and dairy trans fats, huh? That would seem to indicate that you didn’t read the WAPF article I put up earlier. There are good trans fats, and there are bad trans fats. No amount of bad trans fats is good. If these were good trans fats, a savvy marketer like D. Wetzel, who has promoted every other unique good thing about his product, including mysterious stuff that he can’t quantify or explain, would have been marketing these easily quantifiable and explainable good trans fats, don’t you think?
I am still awaiting a good explanation for the transfats in FCLO.
Until then, I echo Chris Masterjohn that the simplest reasonable explanation for them is FCLO is adulterated with vegetable oil.
Not only does Occams Razor demand we accept that as the cause, as Chris M. and Daniels point out, adulteration with veggie oil is common in industry.
GPP denies they do this, but then if they were, would you expect them to admit it?
I wouldn’t expect the trolls to admit it either.
@ Steve Tallent & Pete: I think it’s fascinating that D. Wetzel chose to market his FCLO as a food rather than a supplement because of the Vitamin D controversy back in his 2009 article in Wise Traditions. He states right in that article that they will no longer make any claims of Vitamin D on the label because of the anticipated new rules. “Anticipating increasingly stringent controls
on supplements, we have decided to label the fermented cod liver oil as a food—which it certainly is. Thus the label will contain a suggested dose and list vitamin A as a percentage of the RDA. There will be no mention of vitamin D on the label.”
Further down the line in that same article, Sally Fallon is talking about the dust-up with Dr. Mercola over the Vitamin A and Vitamin D squabble concerning CLO. What’s interesting is that Sally is snidely raking Mercola over the hot coals about recommending “the sun, tanning beds or a Vitamin D3 supplement rather than using CLO”. She claims taking a D supplement is more unnatural but doesn’t seem to feel that consuming CLO is unnatural simply because it’s considered a “food” because of the way D. Wetzel decided to label it (or maybe the word should be classify it). Is it a “food” because you take it from a spoon? It’s all in the wording, the marketing and the frame of mind, I guess. But even Sally’s wikipedia friends call CLO a nutritional supplement, not a “superfood”. Who classified it as a food? Who classified it as a superfood? Was that the FDA?
From what I’ve been able to gather, FCLO and CLO contain EPA, DHA, Vitamin A, Vitamin D and Vitamin K (mostly K2 according to D. Wetzel’s 2009 article re: FCLO). Personally, I get all of those from raw milk, raw cream, real butter from pastured animals, gouda cheese – and even supplemental pills if I feel I might need more. Why would it make one iota of difference if I was getting all the stuff I need from raw dairy & pastured beef, and/or a few pills as long as I’m still consuming them in adequate amounts from a quality source?
You make some interesting points. One problem with his marketing it as a food is that he clearly labeled it as a “dietary supplement”. Says so right on the label. If he had labeled it as a food, he would have had to list trans fats on the label, even if it was just to say “0g”. Either way, he was violating the label laws in multiple ways. And he explained why in an article on his site, basically saying that FDA labeling guidelines don’t apply to FCLO since it is unique.
You are right to say that you get the same things from other foods. There is nothing unique in CLO or FCLO that is vital to our sustained health. There is little to no K2 in FCLO. But there being no K is the main reason for taking a high vitamin butter oil with CLO. You get a synergy and can cut down on the CLO. This was of great value to Dr. Price as he thought higher doses could be toxic. If K2 was there, you would not be able to discern whether it was peroxides (oxidative rancidity) or K as the test for both is the same according to Masterjohn. The only thing I think you could get out of fish oils in significant quantities that you need is the Omegas. But eating fish could give you that, plus iodine.
@ Steve Tallent: You can also easily get omega 3-6 from chia seeds and hemp seeds/nuts. There’s a good description here if you scroll down to the “product description” area.
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00RKQ2UB4?*Version*=1&*entries*=0
We don’t eat much fish, never developed a taste for it. We do eat salmon but not on a regular basis.
Why can’t you have a conversation without trying to make personal attacks against Wetzel? Again you try to insinuate something with your ‘savvy marketer’ comments. If anyone is guilty of such, that would be you.
You are the one grossly misrepresenting yourself and the facts, as you use trolling to avoid the question posed to you.
You, a distributor of many products, are displaying incredible ignorance and an intention to deceive, as your products are filled with many artificial ingredients which are known to be a health risk – magnesium stearate, GMO derivites, etc., etc., etc.
Clearly, your ‘mercury in vaccines’ analogy applies only to you, as your business clearly demonstrate that you do not care how much poison you push onto people. Yea, you do a lot of slick and savvy marketing to portray yourself as clean, but you are pushing products loaded with harmful artificial ingredients.
I have never been a big fan of ‘supplements’ exactly because they contain many hidden dangers, and this is why I appreciate Dave Wetzel’s efforts so much, as he strives to provide us something that is as natural as possible. All evidence shows that his intent has always been good.
I am done here. You are clearly not interested in truth or health.
I wasn’t making a personal attack against Wetzel. If anything, it was complementary. He IS a savvy marketer, much better than I am. As such, if he had something good to say about the trans fats in his product, I believe he would have said it.
You’re the one making personal attacks. You’re the one accusing people of trolling for comments, when by your own admission on another site, that is EXACTLY what you have been doing here. If you took a little time to do some research on my products, you would know more about them, and would know there are no GMO – we actually test for it, that the magnesium stearate is in minute quantities, is used for lubricating the machinery, and is from a planet source as opposed to the one you’re supposed to avoid. And hey, the only reason that you know it is in our product is because we put it on the label even though it is in quantities lower than we have to report. So if you want to avoid it anyway, you can. GPP didn’t give anybody that option.
How many logical fallacies can be used in one short comment? Let’s see, you managed to squeeze in ad hominem, tu quoque, fallacy fallacy, appeal to nature, genetic, and we might even say there was an appeal to emotion in there. Well done, sir. Hats off to you!
“And to top it off you end with an ad hominem attack calling me a denier. That one is quite in vogue these days when people can’t carry an argument with facts.”
If this “Not that you’d assent to the truth of any of the problems with GP WAPF. Deny deny deny is the order of the day.” is what you consider to be an ad hominem attack, then “Really Pete? That is your idea of a “report?” Some person on a combox saying she doesn’t like the taste! You fail.” would definitely be even more so, yes?
I applaud for writing so fairly on both sides of the subject. I have been a regular user of FCLO, but I have stopped using until this whole mess is cleared up by WAP. We spend a lot of time informing ourselves on the best supplements to take to remain in good health and lots of money buying the best products and organic food. I don’t understand why WAP can’t be impartial on this subject…. Just like bad fish, it smells!!
Until it has been cleared up, I will not be using FCLO.
I thank ‘the three amigos’ for having the courage to remain vocal and and not to be intimidated by powerful corporations… This smells just like big pharma and big business.
Thank you, David. You are taking the good and honorable path. Sally’s latest actions are deeply unsettling. It is a real tragedy. WAPF will lose all but the sheep.
One other thing to add this morning as we all await the results of the special WAPF board meeting designed to remove a PhD in nutrition from a supposedly nutrition based organization. Dr. Daniel has posted a letter from Randy Hartnell, CEO of Vital Choice which is a major WAPF supporter and well respected in the world of business and sustainable fishing, with his permission. I am reposting it here in full but it can also be found on Kaayla’s website.
Dear _____, Thanks very much for taking the time to go into such detail about your concerns. It sounds like you’ve got your mind pretty well made up so I realize that anything I say may be of little consequence.
We have been very strong supporters of the Weston Price foundation for more than a dozen years. I believe you would be hard-pressed to find another company that has been more supportive by way of cash and product donations, or by promoting the annual conferences to our significant customer base. This is one reason I am a Weston A Price Foundation Activist Award recipient.
Since I founded Vital Choice in 2001, I have had a very strong interest in nutritional science. I have attended scores of related conferences around the world, and had the pleasure and honor of developing friendships with top nutrition and lipid scientists. I am not a scientist myself but hang out with quite a few of them so have a rich network to whom I can readily turn with related questions.
People I know have tested the FCLO and expressed confidentially to me that they would never personally consume it based on the extreme oxidation levels. These are experts in the field who have no agenda other than the truth and public well-being. I firmly believe these are Dr. Daniel’s objectives as well.
The fact that the product in question has been mis-branded and mis-marketed as having been derived from one species (Gadus macrocephalus) when it is clearly another (Gadus chalcgorammus) speaks to the integrity of the vendor wouldn’t you say? I have been in the seafood industry for more than 30 years and can tell you that this type of bait-and-switch fraud is very common in the seafood business, as it is relatively easy to perpetrate on unwitting consumers. Part of the reason I founded Vital Choice was to provide a level of product quality and integrity that is all too rare in the seafood industry, so I have very little respect for the people who victimize consumers in this way. And consumers aren’t the only victims of this type of fraud. If you are a cod fisherman and somebody else is mis-labeling their cheap, inferior pollock as cod, he wins and you lose. Having been a fisherman who suffered at the hands of this kind of deceit, i have nothing but disdain for such bad actors.
Furthermore, I’ve never run across anyone within the seafood industry who would mistake cod for a pollock or vice versa. It seems to me that only someone with a financial interest in confusing the two would attempt to make that ridiculous case.
I believe your characterization of Dr. Daniel is extremely misguided, as are the conclusions you’ve reached and accusations you are making as a result. I have been aware of this unfolding story for more than a year and can tell you that Dr. Daniel’s primary objective is the well-being and best interests of the Weston Price community that she has for so long and so faithfully served. I would suggest that you may want to reserve judgment, as I believe the truth will eventually prevail.
I hope you find my perspective at least ‘food for thought.’ We have hundreds if not thousands of fans in the Weston Price community. We have little to gain and much to lose by coming down on the wrong side of this issue. The ‘safe’ thing for us to do would be to keep quiet and wait it out, but we will not be bullied, coerced, or intimidated by anyone into sacrificing our principles and integrity. With what I know, I believe Dr. Daniel and others are highly worthy of our support and until evidence convinces me otherwise, we will continue to provide it.
Sincerely,
Randy Hartnell
Founder & President
Vital Choice Wild Seafood & Organics
Remember that at the end of the movie The Three Amigos that the heroes were fully backed by the faceless community that simply wanted to protect the health, integrity and well being of their little town. ¡Viva los Amigos!
Sometimes the most powerful thing you can say, is nothing. Or at least be funny.
OK.
Theresa, my comment wasn’t meant at you just got posted as a reply but it wasn’t and I like the 3 amigos.
Theresa, thank you for posting the letter from Randy Hartnell. We should all applaud his courage in providing his insights and background about the seafood industry. He could have remained silent, like so many have, but instead he is putting at risk significant revenues and marketing opportunities to provide us with an insider view of how FCLO fits into the seafood industry.
@ Theresa: Marvelous! Thanks for sharing the info from Randy Hartnell. Interesting stuff coming from a guy who knows his fish. I thank him for being “up front” in his statements.
Dr. Daniel still holds the winning hand, IMPHHO.
Teresa thank you for taking the time to repost this. This is pretty powerful. I’m so grateful for the people willing to step forward with what they know. I already see a few problems clearing up now that’s it’s been one month off the fclo but in a million years I would have never traced them to the fclo. I totally trusted that WAPF did the research…..omg was I wrong.
Why am I getting the feeling all of this is propaganda? Or does everyone have such dismal lives they need to be heard or just think their opinion matters. Including your rant about what you think is right. Whole, raw, local organic, grass-fed, and prepared in the kitchen food is the only answer. I. My mind anyone who pushes supplements are looking to make a profit. You said so yourself but sugar coated it with blah, blah, blah. Get real and stop whining already. Eat real food. Food is medicine. Most likely your diet was poor or would not need supplementation in the first place. Supplements are for people who are unable to eat food as intended or as a temporary nutrition boost. Aside from the fact all products should be safe for consumption, never put all your eggs in one basket. End of rant.
@ Jessica: Whom are you addressing with your post?
Jessica I also am not sure who you are addressing this to. WAPF has had an article called “Cod Liver Oil: The Number One Superfood” up for years. (It’s down now that it’s been pointed out the dosing on it was tbsp amounts). And I believe by the time you end up posting here 99.9% of the people are incredibly food savvy. They know who raises their food and what makes it nutrient dense. Your rant is totally wasted here.
Jessica,
Maybe you’re getting that feeling because you haven’t really read the posted information. I wholeheartedly disagree with your assertion. I recall a big firestorm on the WAPF chapter leader board about this years ago. Consider: our topsoil is depleted; our available food is nutritionally bereft – even if it’s organic, it’s still by and large not packing a punch because of the state of the soil. Our society is overrun with chronically ill people who cannot assimilate what nutrients are available. It’s a fallacy to think that retreating to the kitchen is the magic bullet solution for this national malnutrition crisis. Not everyone can live in the country and enjoy the fruits of being able to feed their soil for long enough to restore it. I live near 2 organic farms and after 10 years, their soil is certainly better than when they started, but it’s nowhere near rich enough to provide the nutrient spectrum necessary. I can feed my chickens the best diet in the world and feel smug about those lovely orange yolks, but I can’t live on just eggs. Eventually, it all comes down to the soil. That’s where the real food comes from and that’s what we’re missing. To be sure, supplements can be a trap, a rip off and a cop out, but they also can and do fulfill a very necessary hole for millions. I can’t imagine that anybody on this board is expecting FCLO to substitute for their core diet.
Thank you, Randy Hartnell! This is a man I trust implicitly. I wonder if Vital Choice will be missing at Anaheim? Blunder upon blunder, with no end in sight.
Thank you, David Gumpert, for posting your perspective and thanks too to, Randy Hartnell, of course, Kaayla Daniel, and everyone else assisting to bring this to public attention.
I am not satisfied with Sally Fallon Morell’s response. She created a situation that is beyond her competence, re: FCLO. Wonder what else she is hiding…
I am withholding my donations to WAPF. If they fire Kaayla Daniel, I doubt I will ever donate again.
I am also making purchases from VItal Choice, Dr. Ron’s, and others who support further research.
If we have learned anything from people like Mary Enig and Weston Price, I thought it was to question dogma. Where’s the board’s appreciation for Kaayla Daniel’s report?
Sally Fallon Morell could be silencing individuals such as Sarah Pope and Sandrine Love. Their ignorance at the same level of any politician this group loves to criticize hurts this once great organization. It makes me sick to my stomach.
Bunch of hypocrites.
We have definitely been turned off by the constant steam links to Sarah Pope’s blog on WAPF’s Facebook page, and the really, REALLY bad information that has been presented in some of those. Not just bad advice, but just stuff that was propaganda, and untrue propaganda at that. I know a LOT of people have been turned off and a number of them have left the WAPF fold over it. I couldn’t understand why WAPF would continue to support work that was so shoddy. Honestly, it was very similar in that regard to this situation. It was ruining WAPF’s reputation and rightly so, and they wouldn’t turn away from promoting her or even saying that her views didn’t represent theirs, despite pages of complaints on their Facebook page. I still don’t understand, but I have a theory.
I greatly appreciate your writing these blog posts, David.
Some of us have put in many hours of our time to furthering WAPF, and spent money out of our pockets in maintaining our local monthly meetings, along with printing literature to give away at our meetings. In return for that, I expect the organization to communicate to me on all important matters. I have received very little communication from WAPF since this debacle started. I have received much more information from your blog.
In my opinion, the board of directors for WAPF has much more to consider than simply whether to remove Kaayla Daniels (which it sounds like they already made a decision prior to their board meeting?). The future of the organization is in their hands. A series of board meetings would be in order, in my opinion. There are so many topics to cover right now. Important decisions that need to be made soon.
Please do not stop communicating to us through this blog. I thank you for covering this difficult topic for us, and allowing us a place to discuss this topic. Your website is a large benefit to the WAPF community.
What speakers are replacing Kaayla and Dr. Ron at the conference?
A little bit off topic, but has anyone considered eating Cod Liver or any other Fish Livers, as a whole food, instead of taking the derivative oil as a supplement? That seems like the safest way to get the nutrients contained in this whole food. Or am I mistaken?
In this PPNF article: http://blog.ppnf.org/cod-liver-oil-a-historical-perspective/
It discusses eating the fish livers as a food:
“Cod liver and its oil have also long been used as foods in this region, as can be seen in traditional dishes such as Norwegian mølje, made from separately cooked cod flesh, liver, and roe, with drizzles of the fresh oil. The Russian zakuski tables—sumptuous buffets of hors d’oeuvres—often included salat iz pecheni treski, a salad featuring cod liver and its oil. Dishes using various parts of the cod, such as the heads, stomachs, and even the roe stuffed with the livers, were common in Newfoundland, Scotland, Iceland, and other Northern European cultures—with the oil adding flavor and a nutritional boost.”
I apologize for drifting a bit off topic, but I have been thinking about this for a while.
Fresh cod livers used to be available at Rawesome.
That’s my cue to post the CL tasting video again. 🙂
The chicken recognized it as food 🙂
http://www.theprimalist.com/have-you-tried-actual-cod-liver/
“when I supplement with fermented cod liver oil, I try to get it over with as quick as possible and I hurriedly wash it down with water. I was expecting the cod liver to be like that, but worse because I’d have to chew it.
Silly me. Cod liver is incredibly tasty! It has a mild flavor – the smoked even more mild than the regular, and it tastes and smells absolutely nothing like cod liver oil (thank goodness!). Mind you, I’ve only ever had fermented cod liver oil. Cod liver reminds me of sardines without the crunchiness, and less fishy. The texture is smooth and pâté-like.”
WAPF has had scientist in England test the FCLO. They have explained their results that invalidate daniel’s testing have people read it?
I’ve read it. This testing was apparently completed in December 2014, months before Kaayla released her report, and presumably before at least some of her testing was done. Some say that the test results invalidate Daniel’s report, but I don’t know. For one thing, that report only dealt with rancidity. I don’t remember any mention of FFA levels, and am pretty sure there was no DNA testing (you can’t do that on the oil itself and have to do it on the liver). Also, I don’t know if any testing was done that would find transfats. Daniel did a lot of different tests. I don’t see how one single test, or some guy sitting around writing a blog, can invalidate her findings or the expert opinions of the scientists doing the tests. I also don’t see how not posting the lab names invalidates the lab results either. I’ve only seen one original set of lab test results on Green Pasture’s site that listed the lab name. Everything else was just posted data no lab info or dates or client info or methodology or anything. The one thing I would also like to see it radiation testing done. The last testing that I saw reported was in 2013. And they were testing people to see if they were harmed by taking the product. He says they do geiger counter spot checks of inbound livers, but doesn’t give a methodology – like what levels they are looking for or finding. I’ve learned through this whole thing that he is very careful with his wording. So I think it is safe to say that they are not testing every liver that comes through, and maybe not even every shipment.
I’m not an expert on fermenting or rancidity, so I’ve pretty much stayed out of that part of the conversation. I was directed to a blog post a couple of days ago by a friend, because my name was mentioned in it. This person IS an expert on fermentation, and weighs in on the FCLO issue.
http://fermentacap.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=41:fclo&catid=7&Itemid=200
Unfortunately The guy writing at fermentacap.com is not an expert in fermentation. He says you cannot ferment meat, but that is incorrect. I would rely on Sandor Katz as a fermentation expert. Salami is one example of a fermentation meat product. Also fish sauce is a product of fermentation. There are many other examples. And as a side note, when i cook liver for dinner I always soak it for 12 -24 hours in yogurt or kefir — a type of lacto-fermentation if you will. My personal experience is that the soaked liver is higher in B vitamins than unsoaked liver. Whether or not one can ferment cod livers is a red herring, the real issues are rancidity, FFAs, trans-fats, different vitamin balance because the product is from pollock not cod…
A very good article, Steve.
@ NS: There is a difference between lacto-fermentation and what GP is doing. The guy from the above article link is right when he says that livers soaking in a barrel will produce botulism, given the right (read: heated) conditions. Personally, I would be very wary of a product like this. Trans-fats and rancidity are huge issues to me, and should be for anyone contemplating using the FCLO. No oil should burn your throat, not olive oil either. I don’t use olive oil because it, too, smells rancid upon opening. The reason it smells rancid is because it IS rancid. There would be no other reason!
A smooth avocado oil or walnut oil will never ever burn the throat and both of those have immense health qualities, as well. I’ve been using both for a long time and never, ever had a bottle smell rancid from the get-go.
I can’t even imagine using a product as controversial as FCLO as a health sustaining addition to my diet. It just doesn’t seem logical, but then again people will believe almost anything given the right sales pitch. Guess GP is long on PR.
You have to worry about botulism any time you are fermenting meat products. That is why having the right percentage of brine solution is critical. Sandor Katz has a pretty good discussion of this in his book Art of Fermentation. My comment about how I prepare liver that I serve for dinner was just an aside. I was just giving one example. I don’t know how GP conducts their fermentation. But if they were producing livers contaminated with botulism we’d find out pretty quickly.
I disagree with the content of the article Steve linked. I doubt you can ferment a pure liver oil, but it’s certainly possible to ferment liver. I’ve been fermenting beef, goat and sheep liver for years to make something comparable to the Inuit’s high meat. This entails chopping the liver into bite-sized cubes and putting them in a mason jar that I cover and put in the refrigerator for some number of months. As the glycogen in the liver is fermented by bacteria into lactic acid and acetic acid, a film of oil rises to the top of the livers. Sometimes the film can be quite thick, as much as a quarter of an inch. It’s never occurred to me to skim the oil off and eat it by itself though, I always eat the fermented liver and the oil.
My point is: liver does ferment.
Sally Fallon Morell letter to WAPF members Sunday evening about sacking of Kaayla Daniel. What could she possibly be referring to about “certain sensationalist blogs”?
Dear Members,
We wish to announce that Kaayla Daniel no longer serves on the Board of Directors of the Weston A. Price Foundation. We thank Kaayla for all her many contributions to our work over the years and wish her the very best in her future endeavors. It was with great disappointment that the board was forced to deal with a
breach of fiduciary responsibilities.
Certain sensationalist blogs have claimed that there is “chaos” and “carnage” at the Weston A. Price Foundation. I would like to assure all of you that here is no carnage, no chaos at WAPF. The office is very calm. We have received a few phone calls about the cod liver oil controversy, and we have pointed them to our statements on the website (Concerns about Fermented Cod Liver Oil, Questions and Answers About Fermented Cod Liver Oil). Many supportive emails have come in. No one has cancelled membership over these concerns, and no current chapter leaders have resigned. Registrations for the conference are way ahead of last year, and we look forward to seeing many of you there.
Rather, we remain focused on our mission statement and our many goals:
· Providing accurate information about nutrition;
· Showing the scientific validation of traditional food ways;
· Explaining the importance of animal fats and the vitamins they contain;
· Exposing the many flaws in the theory that saturated fat and cholesterol cause disease;
· Warning the public about the dangers of modern soy foods;
· Promoting the consumption and production of whole raw milk;
· Warning the public about the dangers of vaccinations, use of ultra-sound on pregnant women, mammograms and other medical procedures;
· Supporting the many small artisan farms and businesses producing products like kombucha, sauerkraut, sourdough bread, grass-fed meat and eggs, and raw dairy through our Shopping Guide endorsements and the chapter leader system;
· Supporting the Farm-to-Consumer Legal Defense Fund, founded by WAPF to provide legal support to farmers producing raw milk and engaging in direct farm-to-consumer sales;
· Finally, teaching the principles of nutrient-dense traditional diets through our journal, our website, our Facebook page, through our conferences, and through the classes put on by our many volunteer local chapter leaders throughout the U.S and the world.
Above all, our focus is on supporting the normal birth and optimal development of children. The optimally healthy children born to parents who follow our dietary guidelines are not only blessings to these families, but will be blessings to the whole world. These children are our hope for the future; they are the ones who will bring peace, health and prosperity to the planet.
The Weston A. Price Foundation looks forward to providing the information and support people need to obtain optimal health for many generations to come. We thank all of you for your continued support.
Sincerely,
Sally Fallon Morell, President
The Weston A. Price Foundation
“Breach of fiduciary responsibilities.” Give us a break. Dr. Weston A Price is rolling in his grave to have his name so sullied in the name of such snake oil sales.
could anyone address why the labs in Kaayla Daniel’s report required her to black-out their names on their analyses.
Kaayla addressed that question long ago on her blog.
I just asked her on FB… she said because of the cost. She paid about $10k for the analyses in her report and the labs would have charged about $30k for reports with their names.
Why would the WAPF leaders insist on enforcing “fiduciary responsibilities” with respect to an issue addressing the quality of a product available to the public?
Why the need for such a legalistic, secretive and autocratic approach when common sense would seem to suggest that it would be in their best interest if they were transparent and accommodating?
Despite all the good done by many institutions such as the WAPF, (government, religious, scientific medical and legal etc.), they or rather its leaders, are inevitably inclined to become preoccupied with control. Unfortunately, this preoccupation with control can become obsessive and assert itself via a lack of common sense and a lack of respect for human dignity.
Inevitably, in order to save face when presented with conflict and disagreement… honesty, humility and freedom of expression end up being sacrificed on the alter of human ego and greed.
Nailed it. This “reason” only makes sense if it is filtered through the lense of “rocked the boat with regards to the fermented fish oil pyramid scheme racket.”
Here is a dictionary definition of fiduciary: “relating to the responsibility to take care of someone else’s money in a suitable way”. Taken from this site: http://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/fiduciary
It was my understanding that Dr. Daniel used her own money to do her research, so this can only point to WAPF’s monetary relationship with Green Pastures, no? Or is it that WAPF is worried that their members will think their membership fees are being squandered on valuable research?!!
That is a very puzzling way to word their response, you’re right about that Ken and Theresa.
you can’t go by a dictionary definition (unless it’s a dictionary of legal terms.) A board of directors has a fiduciary duty to a corporation -whether its a for-profit or a non-profit.
I grabbed the following info. off one website but there are plenty of others.
“Potential and sitting board members care about the scope of these duties as a corporate governance issue.”
In the setting of a for-profit corporation, “[s]hareholders can sue directors for breach of fiduciary duties through a derivative action (and directly in certain instances) and hold them personally liable for damages to the corporation. For example, HP shareholders sued the board for breach of fiduciary duty when the board forced CEO Mark Hurd to resign.”
http://www.dypadvisors.com/2011/08/22/fiduciary-duties-of-board-of-directors-basics/
the fiduciary duty of board members include:
The duty of care
The duty of loyalty
and you can read more about those on the above website or any others you find.
If the BOD of WAPF voted to not pursue further investigation of GP, then for Daniel to go outside the board and pursue the investigation on her own and publish her findings to the membership could be argued to be a breach of the duty of loyalty. A board must speak with one voice. There can be dissenting voices but once the board votes, debate and discussion is over.
Now on the other hand, if the majority of directors are voting on policy that is in direct conflict with the mission of the organization, and involves conflicts of interest, then you get into a situation where those directors are engaging in their own breach of fiduciary duty. That’s why I was saying the membership could rise up and take action against the current board and it’s president for their breaches. It is possible there were other avenues that Dr. Daniel could have taken, if she believed the majority was in breach of it’s duties, but perhaps she felt the only way to bring this wrongdoing to the light of day was to take the path she took. Most people who serve on non-profit boards have really very little clue about their legal duties and responsibilities, the proper way to conduct meetings, and to govern the organization and the ways in which they can conduct oversight of themselves, management etc.
Kaayla did not publish her findings to the WAPF membership, did she? I thought she published them on her personal website:
http://drkaayladaniel.com/are-you-hooked-on-fermented-cod-liver-oil/
As far as Corporate Governance: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporate_governance#Principles
Members of WAPF should consider demanding that Management is separated from the Board of Directors. You could think of it this way. The United States Government has separate branches for a reason. Most people can relate to this type of thinking rather than corporate thinking. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Separation_of_powers
I guess members could ask for a lot these days…..
I was rather hoping they would reconsider their position, use some common sense, and take into consideration WHY Dr. Daniel wanted the truth about a questionable product – which they heavily endorse – and anyone with a conscience would/should be concerned. Even though it would have been a tenuous alliance, at least Dr. Daniel would have been there as a “watchdog” and the membership might feel better knowing someone was there to watch out for and protect their health interests, not just WAPF’s monetary interests. Seems that’s not going to be the case.
Personally, I withdrew my financial support from WAPF a couple of years ago when 1) they had such a weird stance to the paleo people (now, I don’t even care about paleo or primal or whatever but it was their response that irked people), and 2) they were so heavily into promoting Sarah Pope, which I never understood because any number of people at WAPF were already saying what she was saying, not to mention a thousand other general bloggers talking about the same issues. Sarah fits right in with the rest of the unbendable minds at WAPF though, I guess, because she can be extremely sarcastic and snippy on her blog. I haven’t been back to her blog much in the past two years because of her lack of investigation into the Kerrygold Butter accusations she was making. Don’t know how that turned out, but many of the commenters on that subject/topic highly suspected she was wrong in her assertions, but she would never relent. 3) I was also appalled at Dr. Tom Cowan’s attitude of not questioning this product and not being supportive of Dr. Daniels’ concerns.
I probably will no longer recommend people go to the WAPF site for information. Dropping a board member because she wants to find out the truth about something is beyond wrong, especially when she had tried to alert board members of her concerns long before she went out on her own to look into it. I’m sure she knew the risks, but at least she stayed true to her inclinations. She may be better off away from that stifling relationship. I wish her the very best.
JMO.
I received the Member Alert in my inbox. More of the same. There must be a hidden economic tie between WAPF or one or more of its board members and GPP. Why else would WAPF serve as a marketing arm for GPP? Chapter leaders do a world of good, but it appears they are an important part of that marketing operation. I will be in Anaheim, but won’t be renewing my membership as long as Sally is in charge and WAPF functions as a marketing tool for GPP. I’m with Randy Hartnell, Kaayla Daniel, Ron Schmid, and everyone else who doesn’t suffer fools gladly.
Gary it may be time for the members to examine Sally’s fitness as ED and president, and bring action to replace her. That’s one argument for remaining a member of the organization. I will probably be renewing my membership for that reason.
NS: That was the implication of my comment. She simply is no longer fit to lead this fine organization. Randy Hartnell’s letter was the last nail in the coffin for me. He knows fraud in the seafood trade when he sees it.
I’m not sure what rights the membership actually has. I suppose that would be in the charter or bylaws, neither of which are legally documents of public record and which WAPF seems not to want to make public, as well as governed by state and federal law. A non profit doesn’t have to have official members and if push came to shove, I think WAPF would merely abandon membership and sell subscriptions of their journal before allowing membership to have a whit of a say over the BOD or the president thereof.
WAPF is incorporated in DC. Even if you can’t get them to release the by-laws and charter, the statutes governing the non-profit will likely have information on what the membership is allowed to do. Often, than can force changes to the board and by-laws during the annual meeting but I don’t know the details about DC law. But you’d need a sufficient number and you’d need to get it on the agenda (expect stonewalling on that point).
look here: http://dccode.elaws.us/code?no=29-4
Steve your comment that bylaws are not legally documents of public record, what do you base that on? Because in order to be designated a 501(c)(3) bylaws and minutes are public documents that a 501(c)(3) must make available on request.
I believe United Way is one of the largest non-profit organizations. They have a link to their bylaws on their website: http://www.unitedway.org/about/public-reporting/organizational-background/ Scroll to the bottom. They readily provide them up front. Also worth reading is their Code of Ethics document.
Their original filing is a matter of public record and from what I read should be available upon request from the IRS. But I can’t find info that definitively states that a 501c3 had to disclose their current bylaws upon request. I have seen a number of sites that claim that the bylaws of a no -profit are not public docs and do not need to be disclosed. Also read that even if a 501c3 is legally obligated to disclose bylaws, you might have to get a lawyer involved to force the issue. With the access that WAPF and FTCLDF to attorneys, they are not likely to be scared into any action by a letter from a lawyer. It might take actual court filings.
Most bylaws stipulate that they must be made available for review upon request by members. There is no requirement to disclose to or share with the public, though I believe you can petition the IRS for a copy.
Endorsing a brand product or preferring one over another is never, ever done any of the probably 100 I know of and worked with during my career and they are always on guard for any hint of it. I suspected that WAPF was in violation of federal antitrust law with their shopping guide. Here is an article that seems to say this http://www.thenonprofittimes.com/news-articles/associations-can-run-afoul-of-anti-trust-rules/
Meant to say about 100 non=profit associations (cannot edit comments on this forum)
David – I am so sorry that you are the latest target for this sort of thing. It is unfortunate, but know that after the last 15 years, working with you, watching and even disagreeing with you on rare occasions, you have my support, my sympathy and my loyalty. I consider you my friend (though in some circles you might be tempted to run from that!!)
Looking at some of the responses to this and a couple other recent posts, people seem surprised. They must not have been in the trenches with us for the last better-than-a-decade – because this is certainly not the first time WAPF has tossed the baby out because of the bath water, It won’t be the last, either.
And yes, I MEANT to say it this way!!
You have done the responsible thing, the right thing. Your actions have integrity. So do Kayla’s. I don’t know Dr. Schmid, so can’t say anything there.
I will be watching the new organization because, after all, I am always about due diligence before parting with either my energy or my money. I will be looking at the board. I will be looking at the affiliations and I will certainly see where the money comes from. And I will watch what they DO rather than what they claim to have accomplished.
Because of crap like this I dropped my membership to WAPF more than 10 years ago. Due to watching what was happening in the trenches in Wisconsin, you couldn’t pay me enough to support their other arm – FTCLDF either. I guess its one of those “you had to be there” things…
While WAPF provides valuable information – as proven by READING the studies and resources they provide links and bibliographies for in addition to the articles created from those sources – this is not at all surprising. I wish I could say it was. Really do.
Many many blessings to you my friend – and I am sorry this has happened to you.
GrannySue, please be aware that the nine-member board will be voted in by those attending the conference, and those nine will then choose the officers in the presence of the membership. Our proposed by-laws will require that this be done every year.
What happened the last time WAPF threw the baby out with the bath water? I missed that! It would provide some context, I think.
Okay my results off fclo for 30 days just came back. My crp inflammation levels have been hovering higher than 4 for the past 6 years. Nothing I did pulled it down. I happened to test in June so here’s the results.
June 2015 tests
Vit D – 20
CrP – 4.13 (always has been above 4 for years)
Thurs. Sept 17 results
Vit D – 31.5
CrP – 3.23
I switched to very low dose regular cod liver oil (1/2 tsp every other day of Rosita) and some more noonday sun so the sun alone might have pulled the D up.
I’m less concerned about it than the crp that wouldn’t budge for years and years. It’s a big drop in 30 days after years of staying between 4-5. I changed nothing else in my diet except to basically get off the fclo.
Your posted test results are meaningless, because you did not disclose the funding source, the name of the lab, the identity of the lab technician who performed the test, what the technician had for breakfast, the color of his/her socks, and the name of their dearest pet. And even if you did, you m̶u̶s̶t̶ ̶h̶a̶v̶e̶ ̶a̶ ̶P̶h̶D̶ ̶i̶n̶ ̶n̶u̶t̶r̶i̶t̶i̶o̶n̶ must be more qualified than you are (whatever your qualifications, they are not enough) to interpret the results. Sure anybody can read numbers, but only we can tell you what they really mean.
Steve haha…had to reread your post to realize you were being facetious! At least for me so far it looks like “stop the poison” and my body will recover like Dr. Rons. But I wonder who’s out there that isn’t going have it so easy to recover. And of course, no one has any idea what 7 years of faithfully taking rancid oil daily does.
Btw…this was a good ole run-of-the-mill LabCorp test. Not any fancy muscle test or other alternative measurements. And I’m going to test again in 30 another days to see where my crp is. Am hoping to finally see it in the range it should be given the quality diet I eat.
Oh, I can see through the veil. The fact that you haven’t disclosed the funding source means it was paid for by a company that wants to destroy GPP.
Truthfully though, I’m glad your inflammation is down and your Vitamin D is up. Both are things that my wife struggles with. She’s got Hashimoto’s Thyroiditis. Interestingly, Mercola says that rancid oils and transfats can increase chronic inflammation. Of course you can’t believe anything he says because he sells competing products. Other sites also say the same thing, but you never know – it could be a giant conspiracy. 🙂
Giant conspiracies can only be done by really big people
See any similarities? http://www.fieldandstream.com/articles/hunting/2013/04/finding-cooking-morel-mushrooms
chronic inflammation sound like a great name for a rock band if they’re cutting adge, or cutting something with something don’t ask me what that means
edge, not hedge, kinda like was not was http://www.spin.com/2012/05/20-years-ago-was-not-was-still-boggle-mind/
interested in how WAPF can state “Also, I find it amazing that people are so fixated on the label. Dave’s label complies with all the labeling requirements—Alaskan pollack IS cod and can be included in labels as cod.”
WHAT labeling requirements are they following? certainly NOT the FDA’s. They are extremely clear, could not be any clearer, that it is ILLEGAL to list Alaskan pollack as cod – per their Seafood List and the Seafood Species Substitution and Economic Fraud. In regards to fish, FDA requires not only ingredients to be species specific, but they also must be listed (each species) under ‘contains’ per the allergen labeling requirement. AND with their making claims of vitamin A & D, these are to be listed on the nutritional label – and they didn’t.
SO, again, would like to know WHOSE label requirements is the WAPF so sure that Dave at GP is complying with??
It is inexplicable how they can continue to say this. GPP itself has not said anything about this nor has it even admitted to using Pollock, except through back channels. I’ve asked WAPF for the specific regulations or labeling laws that they believe exempt GPP from the regulations you have cited above, and received silence for a reply. The only thing that I can think is that as long as you believe it to be the truth, you can continue to proclaim it as truth, and if you are conclusively proven wrong later on, you could say, “We didn’t know.” For some, that would work better than digging into it early on to make sure that what you are saying is truth and providing citations or documentations as the proof for any doubters or detractors. They have nothing to gain, and “plausible deniability” to lose by further investigation.
GP did post a letter from a ‘scientist’ after this all blew up – ‘defending’ their using pollock and calling it cod. It’s the 1st reference to pollock from them that I could find on their website since reading the report by Dr Daniel. http://www.greenpasture.org/fermented-cod-liver-oil-butter-oil-vitamin-d-vitamin-a/what-do-the-scientists-say/
it’s interesting to note that this article they posted does not show a date, but the references listed all pre-date the scientific reclassification of the alaskan pollock that took place early 2014. prior to that, it was in both a different family and genus. both then and now, it is illegal to substitute the one for the other, and illegal to call it by the other’s name…
another concern, is whether they do the required testing of each batch of their supplements (also FDA law & regulations). if so, why haven’t they made that available to the public? — it would either immediately prove Dr Daniel’s findings or disprove them and end the debate.
@janieinMN: “another concern, is whether they do the required testing of each batch of their supplements (also FDA law & regulations). if so, why haven’t they made that available to the public? — it would either immediately prove Dr Daniel’s findings or disprove them and end the debate.”
I asked the same question about specific batch-run testing a while back and of course no one could provide a solid answer. It would quickly end the argument, for sure. Apparently WAPF bigwigs read here, they just don’t reply. Also, if they had provided a reply, they might have had to take a step back and look at what is really happening and acknowledge that they jumped the gun and over-reacted in the wrong.
WAPF and GP have that unique american politically correct trait of collective amnesia, I suppose.
This “why won’t they just submit to independent testing” that has been brought up in numerous posts reminds me of a few years back and President Obama’s birth certificate debate. The long delayed published certificate didn’t end the debate. Once your mind is made up, it’s pretty hard to change. There are always too many “facts” that can be understood either way with “supportive arguments” for back-up, depending on your bias. For now, if one thinks the FCLO is bad- stop using it. If one hasn’t had any bad effects, be more cautious. As I stated in a previous post, I think much more digging needs to be done on both sides. Remember, businesses are always in it to make money and need to keep costs as low as possible. Once all the research has been done with names, institutions, funding means, and actual tests, then we can more accurately choose- most beneficial to the newcomer who doesn’t have old baggage. I just hate to see contention in the natural health realm.
Janieinmn, have you been assigned to this particular argument by someone ( cod vs pollock)? Seems to be all you’ve ranted about in every post I’ve read of yours on every website you’ve posted on. Give us a break would ya?
no jenny, i haven’t been ‘assigned’. i’m interested in this topic since Dr Daniel’s report was released and subscribed to receive notifications of updates/comments. and no, i’ve not ranted. i’ve merely done some further research into the legalities of what’s been discovered and have passed on that information. because i’m receiving notices on comments, i’ve also replied to some questions on the issue and set the record straight on several erroneous statements.
my interest in this specific topic is of greater concern because of the issues of food allergens and these are not declared (by “species”), as required by law (for our protection), by this particular manufacturer.
also, as a student Nutrition Therapy Practitioner, it’s important to be able to trust the integrity of companies that are manufacturing nutritional supplements. while i’ve never used CLO myself (and won’t – use or recommend, regardless of brand), i do use high-quality supplements for nutrients i’m unable to get from foods (limited diet) — for both maintenance & therapy — as do my parents, other family members and friends. i make recommendations to them based on what i’ve learned about the supplements directly from the manufacturers (whole food sources are always best, but sometimes supplementation becomes necessary for health). if you can’t trust the manufacturers to be honest about their product, manufacturing practices, sources of ingredients, etc – then we’re in trouble!
it’s also concerning to see an organization, that is pretty well known (WAPF), continue to defend this manufacturer/products – in spite of disturbing lab results – instead of taking a step back and proceeding with caution.
I keep asking Dr. Kaayla who paid the $70,000 bill for all that testing? She still has not revealed that. I took my FCLO and HVBO this morning as I have done for 9 years. What a bunch of whoooeeeyyy. When we discover who paid that $70,000 fee then we will have our answer.
where did you get the $70K figure? this is what Dr Daniel posted in answer to a question regarding the cost of the testing (& why labs were identified in the report) on her FB page: “Dr. Kaayla Daniel The tests I did cost close to $10,000. One lab said to publish full documents would be 3 times that. Yesterday at 12:44”
Everything I’ve read always referenced $10k. Would be REALLY interested in knowing where you got the $70k figure. Please tell us.
It doesn’t matter who paid for it. It might be David Gumpert or David Wetzell or the FDA or billionaire, playboy, philanthropist Bruce Wayne but the lab results would still remain the same.
GP is now addressing the labeling issue – it’s a good start 🙂
http://www.greenpasture.org/fermented-cod-liver-oil-butter-oil-vitamin-d-vitamin-a/fermented-cod-liver-oil-labels/
But more is needed (re GP/Dave and his label changes article) — ie allergen labeling: the ‘contains’ statement which was not in GP’s article, MUST list fish & shellfish by species (nuts by types, etc).
And certain vitamins must be in the nutrition facts section if they’re present in certain amounts (which the testing shows they are… ). if there are variables, that can be addressed with an *(asterisk) and a one liner elsewhere on the label.
I was shocked to discover last evening that Dave of GP actually thinks his product is above the law… that the FDA labeling requirements don’t fit FCLO, so he’s not going to comply. what? https://web.archive.org/web/20150924141031/http://www.greenpasture.org/utility/showArticle/?ObjectID=7008&find=fda&happ=siteAdministrator (article from 2010) – he also admits he’s not doing batch testing as required by law!
There’s definitely more going on here, than just what Dr Daniel’s report brought to our attention.
There is definitely some stuff in the article that you posted that would explain some of what has happened and some of what WAPF is saying is false.
“The FDA views a dietary supplement like a drug and the FCLO is more like a food.” Yet he doesn’t meet the labeling guidelines for foods either.
“After working with the product for 5 years my conclusion is that media medicine and FDA label requirements do not fit the FCLO.” Well, that kind of explains it, doesn’t it. As JanieinMN said, GPP believes the labeling laws don’t apply to their product(s).
“We will not compromise our products simply to satisfy FDA labeling requirements.” I believe the context was adding nutrients to products to equal a certain amount. Hard to tell what this “compromise” might be even after many readings.
“And it is not practical to test each batch – as our batches are small compared to mainstream manufacturers.” So not only are the rancidity tests that they have been doing for years, “not a good test” of a product like that, according to Grootveld, but they haven’t even been doing the test on every batch.
I was exhibiting at a Mother Earth News fair this last weekend. A person at my booth said to her friend, “Essential oils can’t hurt you.” We quickly corrected her. But I think it is indicative of the mindset that surrounds many natural products. It was surprising to me when I learned that if I didn’t keep my kombucha between certain temps that I could get detrimental bacteria growing, and make my family sick with the end product. Up until then I was all willy-nilly with it – and thankfully never got hurt. I get the sense that’s what is going on with GPP products. They believe this is food. Like a banana – except that a banana can go bad and they believe that FCLO cannot. Customers report a significant variation from bottle to bottle and GPP claims it is because it is a natural product. I don’t disagree that there will be variation from bottle to bottle, but we’re not talking about variations of nutritional profiles that can be seen on lab tests. These are huge variations in color, texture and flavor. We make some natural products and the only time we get complaints like that, when we’ve investigated, there was a problem in our manufacturing of it – the heat wasn’t right, the ingredient ratios off, or something like that. Since he doesn’t have a lot of ingredients, you have to think that there is a lot of variation somewhere else in the process. Maybe his rendering facility is not climate controlled, which would lead to high temps in summer and low temps in winter? I don’t know. But whatever it is, I think they are under the impression that it doesn’t matter how they handle the product because it is “natural” and “traditional”. And that because it is natural and traditional, it can never hurt anybody.
@steve – booth at mother earth event? what do you do?
think i found you – are you ‘this’ steve tallant? http://www.beeyoutiful.com/about
Yes. That’s me. 🙂 We do a little bit of a lot of things.
Thanks for this! Well said! I am worried about the WAPF, an organization I hold in high esteem. I hope they will find a way to do what is right. Keeping writing, David. Your posts are cogent and valuable!