Dr. Joe Schwarcz Warns Against Acai Health Claims

Sorry MonaVie Scam, I have to step in here to clarify a couple things. I have read several of your blogs, and there is some pretty good info. However, I am also a physician, and I think some of your statements are misrepresenting Dr. Schwarcz’s comments. 1) He is NOT saying that MonaVie is a scam. I think a better interpretation is that he is recommending that smart consumers who are looking to improve their dietary intake of fruits/antioxidants can so so in a more cost effective manner. 2) He does state that “any health claim for acai is plain conjecture,” but this hardly equates to “you are wasting your money,” as you summarized. Plus, his statement is not even true. While I agree that just because something works a certain way in a lab (i.e. in vitro), it does not mean that it must occur the same way within the human body (aka in vivo), but there are plenty of articles/studies/book chapters/etc. that support the idea that increasing one’s intake of fruit/antioxidants will have health benefits. Whether it will cure cancer is very much an overstatement from what we know at this time. 3) Just because he says that it would be easier to “load up on apples” (i.e. because they are obviously more readily available in the U.S., and cheaper at this time, it in no way should be taken to mean that an apple is better than MonaVie.

I certainly have to question not only Beatrice’s credentials but what her understanding of Monavie actually is.

I can’t fathom a physician or anyone who knows a thing about the product making the suggestion that a highly processed, chemically preserved fruit juice such as Monavie lacking in any real nutrition could remotely be better than a fresh piece of fruit – such as an apple.

Or maybe a naturopath (hopefully not posing as an end stage cancer specialist!).

Wow. Happy Thanksgiving to you all. Sorry that I was out of town and not following up on this post. Thank you MV scam for your responses, but your comment that “It would be great if you’d opine on the actual points made in the discussion rather than attempt to cleverly pick on word choices that are irrelevant to the points the doctor made” is a bit confusing to me. I thought that my comments were very clearly directed at specific points/conclusions that you were drawing based on Dr. Schwarcz’s article/comments.

Let me try again by responding to your responses in order…

1) You say: “I don’t believe I made the claim that Dr. Schwarcz said that MonaVie is a scam. In fact, I specifically pointed out, ‘While this article might not mention MonaVie specifically, it deals with a number of issues that we see in MonaVie community every day.’”
My response, comment, opinion, etc: Let me quote the last paragraph of your blog: “So there you go, just a pile more evidence from an unbiased doctor telling you that MonaVie is a scam.” While he of course did not say that MonaVie is a scam, you are graciously drawing that conclusion for him.

2) I am very aware that you think MonaVie is a waste of money. I’m not here to debate that, as it is each person’s own opinion. MonaVie (the juice) has not provided any health benefit to me, as I follow a regular diet/exercise program (as much as possible, being as though I am still completing my medical Residency). However, whether it be placebo effect, or whether it is an expensive way to consume antioxidants/fruit/glucosamine/plant sterols/acanthocyanins/phytonutrients/etc…the fact of the matter is that there are people who report health benefits after using the product. I understand that the FDA does not (and should not) support such claims, but that doesn’t even matter in the grand scheme of things. If a person that has experienced joint pains for years starts drinking MonaVie Active and suddenly notes an improvement in their pain, then maybe approx $40 per week for a bottle of the juice supplement would be worth it to them. Could they get the liquid glucosamine for cheaper over-the-counter? Yup. Should they already know this if they have been following up with a physician regularly for their condition? Yup. Do some people have the financial means to purchase overpriced juice with a potentially beneficial supplement? Yup. The bottom line is that we are all adults, and we make our own money, and we can spend it how we want. And whether it be placebo or an over-priced supplement, people are in fact finding benefit in the product. Many people have the same beliefs about many other “natural remedies” (i.e. garlic, green tea, honey, etc, etc, etc)…and yes, I know that they are not as expensively priced as MonaVie, but again I state that we are all adults and can spend our money as we wish…especially if we find the cost-benefit ratio acceptable.
I agree with your statement that eating actual fruits is better than only drinking fruit juices, since you miss out on many of the nutrients from the skin/pulp, as well as fiber. However, juice can be a great way to supplement your fruit/vegetable intake, or to add to smoothies, recipes, etc. And yes, it is better than nothing for those individuals who are too lazy to eat a piece of fruit.
Regarding your comment that you “believe that Dr. Schwarcz’ statement was that acai is not known to have any health advantages over other fruits.” This is very debatable. Acai is definitely more nutrient/antioxidant dense than
many other fruits, so the argument could be made that there are advantages of consuming acai vs other specific fruits. However, it is widely believed that the ideal diet incorporates a variety of fruits/vegetables, and this definitely has a health advantage.

3) Finally, regarding your last response, you state “if you click the link, you’ll find evidence that indeed an apple is healthier than MonaVie.” Your link only leads to a commentary that demonstrates that an apple has a higher ORAC and phenolic value than one fruit servings worth of MonaVie, based on 2007 USDA data. The first problem here is that you are equating nutrition value with ORAC and phenolic scores. The relatively recent focus on consumption of antioxidant-rich foods is because of the theoretical protection that they may provide against oxidative stress-damage to cells within our body, but this does not equate with nutrition in the sense of carbs, proteins, and fats that we need for cellular growth. Therefore, you need to understand that acai is more nutrient-dense and antioxidant-dense vs a Golden Delicious apple. Now this is where we need to clarify how MonaVie plays into this. MonaVie is not synonamous with acai alone, since there are 18 other fruits in the MonaVie blends. Therefore, I agree that too much focus is put solely on the nutrition/antioxidant data of acai vs the actual MonaVie juice blend (even if acai is the main ingredient, and there is a patented process that theoretically preserves more of the nutrient pulp/fats of the acai berry in MonaVie juice products). In your example, you compared a 150g apple w/skin to 4oz of MonaVie. I happen to have a bottle of MonaVie Pulse, so that will be my reference for Nutrition label, and my Nutrition reference for a 150g apple w/skin is: http://nutritiondata.self.com/facts/fruits-and-fruit-juices/1809/2.
Apple (150g) = 77 total calories (2 from fat), minimal fat (listed as 0g), 21g total carbohydrates (4g dietary fiber, 15g sugars), and no protein.
MonaVie (4oz) = 90 total calories (20 from fat), 2g total fat, 16g total carbohydrates (4g dietary fiber, 14g sugars), and <1g protein.
Now, I think it is clear that with regard to actual nutritional benefit, measured by fats, carbs, and protein, MonaVie clearly is somewhat better than an apple. With regard to ORAC scores and phenolic values, I will trust your sources and calculations, which show that an apple is better in that regard…but the problem is that you use the values for MonaVie that are derived from a paper/study performed by Dr. Schauss, a man whom you are openly skeptical of because of his affiliation with MonaVie. Like you, I also look forward to MonaVie publishing their data of actual content amounts for each fruit in the blend…especially acai.

I could write for hours on the various issues you have with MonaVie, and the issues I have with MonaVie, but let me make these very important side notes:
1) While there have been a multitude of studies and subsequent articles that demonstrate the benefits of antioxidants in vivo, there are no conclusive benefits of antioxidant vitamin SUPPLEMENTATION in humans (in vivo). However, there are numerous studies that do allow us to conclude that DIETS which incorporate foods with high antioxidant levels do correlate with improved health.

2) While I am not fully knowledgeable about the details of MonaVie since it started in 2005, I do know that it's distributor base definitely outgrew it's leadership core in 2008-2009. When you are recruiting individuals to follow the "simple" business model, and they do not necessarily truly care about the nutritional value/benefit of the product, they likely only see the income potential for themselves. Therefore, I am not surprised that distributors did not take the necessary time to learn about the product, and were subsequently making inaccurate claims (even some of the higher ranking individuals haven't gotten it straight, as you have named these people before). I'm not saying that this is okay, but it is hard to change this overnight. What I have seen is that MonaVie is definitely pushing to develop more individuals into leaders, and their online/print training materials reflect a more accurate description of the product.

3) While I disagree that MonaVie is devoid of any nutrition, as is commonly sited by various individuals on your blogs, there is definitely room for improvement. Whether it is because of info on your blog, the Men's Health study, or recommendations from MonaVie's "scientific advisory board," MonaVie is adding additional fiber, Vitamin C, and other supplemental nutrients to improve the products health value. And from what I understand, they are doing this at no increase in the product cost. That should make you feel a little better, right? [Insert sarcastic grin here]

4) I agree that some of the physicians/scientific professionals that have spoken on behalf of MonaVie products have been chosen poorly, and/or have discredited themselves through their actions/words. While I am encouraged by the fact that MonaVie is willing to invest money into scientific research regarding the value of their products, I would like to see large-scale human trials. However, I am also very aware that such trials are not always easy to organize and conduct via independent/non-biased institutions, so financial limitations may come into play here. I don't know. As a physician, I always read scientific articles with a level of scrutiny, and I have been underwhelmed by the scientific data that MonaVie currently touts. While the in vitro studies may be promising, they usually only end up confusing most distributors who have no scientific background…so this is another reason why I am not surprised that many distributors are making inaccurate health claims…most of the time unknowingly, I'm sure.

5) The MORE Project…ah yes, just another thing that you choose to attack on your blog…more ammunition to discredit MonaVie. I don't even really care about the details of whether Dallin Larsen's second cousin's nephew-in-law is the chosen accountant. The bottom line here is that The Larsens wanted to use a portion of the company's earnings to "give back" to the country that has provided a majority of the means for this successful product. Do most people join MonaVie to support the MORE Project? Of course not. They either want to get people started and/or start the "Reveal/RVL" diet, consume the energy drinks, or drink the "over-priced" juice/gel packs…or they just want to make money. If I buy a case of the juice and only 40 cents goes to the MORE project, then great for them…maybe they feed a kid for a day. Regardless, the fact is that MonaVie is helping to make positive changes within Brazilian communities. I read in another one of your blogs that MonaVie used MORE Project funds to help with an Anaheim disaster. I agree that I would be disappointed to know that, for example, my Habitat for Humanity donations were actually being used to build a new house for one of their executives. However, that is not the case here. The fact of the matter is that MonaVie (MORE Project) funds/donations were being used to support a disaster that occurred on U.S. soil. Unlike the funds that are going to the MORE Project, you cannot question whether these funds were being used properly…yet you still use this as an example to knock MonaVie. This is a pathetic move in my opinion. I think that even if the donating MonaVie members were unaware that some MORE Project funds were used to help Americans during a crises, I doubt that they would have objected. Do you receive any type of income from this website, and/or your lazyman website? Do you donate any of this money, or is it just supplemental income? (Feel free to link this comment to the appropriate blog, as I am too busy/lazy to try to do so, and I know my rant has been long and off-topic of this particular blog at times).

**As an additional side note, I recall reading on yet another blog that you were blasting a commenter by saying that wild blueberries had higher ORAC scores than acai berries, and you even referenced a link to a Wikipedia-based chart that did not even site the ORAC score for acai berries. I believe you then challenged the commenter to provide evidence to the contrary, if it were available. However, if you would have followed your own link, and then followed the subsequent Wikipedia link for the USDA document that they referenced the chart from, you would have been able to see that acai (Pg. 18, whether it be berry, pulp, or powder) clearly has a higher ORAC score than wild blueberries (Pg. 20), which is sited as acai = 102700 vs wild blueberry = 9621. Here's the link for that since I still have it up on my computer: http://www.ars.usda.gov/SP2UserFiles/Place/12354500/Data/ORAC/ORAC_R2.pdf

I was wasn't expecting responses from the rest of your MV scam cronies, and honestly I don't even care to engage in their schoolyard bully tactics. You guys are like 15 year-old dorks. Were you picked on a lot in school? Probably social misfits still. Typing all of this is tiring to me, and it actually frustrates me because I am putting off preparing a lecture just to get all of this out.
Anonymous Aussie says: "I certainly have to question not only Beatrice’s credentials but what her understanding of Monavie actually is.
I can’t fathom a physician or anyone who knows a thing about the product making the suggestion that a highly processed, chemically preserved fruit juice such as Monavie lacking in any real nutrition could remotely be better than a fresh piece of fruit – such as an apple."
My response: I'm not claiming to know everything about MonaVie, but I know a lot, and I learn more everyday. I don't take everything I hear at MonaVie meetings as fact, which I wish I could say for a lot of the distributors, but it doesn't mean that they all spread malicious lies to suck helpless people into a "scam" just to get rich off of them. Let me ask you these questions: How is MonaVie "highly processed?" What chemical preservatives does MonaVie use, and what is wrong with using these chemical preservatives? As for MonaVie "lacking real nutrition," I'll refer you to the above discussion of what actual nutrients are…looks like MonaVie wins on that one, huh? Even a Naturopath would have been able to figure that one out ;)

Vogel says: "I’m guessing at best a chiropractor. Who else, in the midst of a weak argument from authority, would claim to be a physician and not list their degree/title?"
My response: GET A LIFE! You are the most pathetic of all the cronies. You know why? Because not only do you insult as your initial response to anyone that does not post anti-MonaVie sentiment on these blogs, but you spend so much time researching rebuttals to every pro-MonaVie post. Do you really have nothing better to do? And was that an insult to Chiropractors? While they are by no means a physician, they are specialists in their field, which involves a decent amount of knowledge about the musculoskeletal system. Whether any of you want to believe it or not, I am an actual living, breathing, practicing physician in a well-respected U.S. medical Residency program. There are only two types of certified physicians in the U.S. – MDs (allopathic) and DOs (osteopathic). I am a D.O. that graduated medical school in California. My full name does not matter, just as your full name does not matter.

Rasheed says: Who cares what Rasheed said…good thing he's an attorney because he definitely has no future as a comedian.

P.S. – If any of you plan to give your usual commentary on "you must list your sources of evidence of your comments," then just send me your e-mail address. Unlike most of you, I use actual medical resources that you need a paid account to access (i.e. UpToDate, MD Consult, AccessMedicine, or good old fashioned medical textbooks). I'd be annoyed, but happy to cut and paste specific sections of text from these sources into a personal e-mail. Also, MV Scam, I had sent your buddy the lab guy an e-mail almost a month ago to get a copy of the "independent" MonaVie trial he conducted, but still have not heard back. Was that a bad e-mail address you posted for him, or was that just a BS offer? Can I get a copy of it? Thanks.

Beatrice said:

Rasheed says: Who cares what Rasheed said…good thing he’s an attorney because he definitely has no future as a comedian.

Exactly. You can now see how idiotic it is to say on an Internet forum what credentials you have in efforts to make your points seem “more valid” to the oblivious person.

My intent wasn’t to be funny. It was to make the point that claims of credentials is foolish, and it seems like you understood that well from my post.

Although even in real life, people are fooled: Look at “Dr.” Lou Niles. I rest my case.

Even if these numbers were right:
“Apple (150g) = 77 total calories (2 from fat), minimal fat (listed as 0g), 21g total carbohydrates (4g dietary fiber, 15g sugars), and no protein.
MonaVie (4oz) = 90 total calories (20 from fat), 2g total fat, 16g total carbohydrates (4g dietary fiber, 14g sugars), and <1g protein."

It means monavie pulse is only slightly more nutritious than a 50 cent apple. (Congrats on the victory?!?!)

The funniest thing is that Monavie capitulated and reformulated their juice; it is, as of very recently, fortified with all sorts of vitamin additives. So now they can at least pretend that the juice has something to offer nutritionally. It kind of reminds me of those commercials where they advertise that a bowl of Count Chocula — along with milk, OJ, toast, a side of eggs, and a vitamin pill — is “part” of a balanced breakfast. Which part might you ask? The part that matters least! Same with Monavie. They just basically tossed a 5 cent multivitamin pill into a bottle of near-worthless juice. Ditch the juice and keep the vitamin pill, and you’ll have lost nothing nutritionally. In that sense, Monavie is the nutritional equivalent of Count Chocula.

I just wanted to jump in to note that I am still following both posts that I recently commented on, and I do plan to respond…likely at length, per usual. However, I do not have the time right now to adequately address several of the comments made since my last post. I will say that I am amazed at how representative of Cluster A PPD you all are. I would suggest that you spend some time looking that up in the interim, and once you’ve finished sulking about how well you fit the mold, then you can take a short-course Benzo or low-dose Haloperidol before you make your next insulting post. MV Scam, I wish that I could truly respect your request to leave all comments in the proper place, but I just don’t have the time to read all of the blog topics and their subsequest posts. I’ll just try to be better about addressing one issue at a time.

Quick notes:
Vogel: As you will see when I get a chance to comment, MV Scam in no way evicerated by “blithe tirade.” And I am not hiding in any “shadows” by not throwing my full name on this blog. I don’t recall seeing your full name anywhere, and even if you did a Google search to verify my credentials (which I assure you that they are legit), I’m sure it would in no way add any credibility to my comments (in your mind). Believe what I say, or not, doesn’t matter to me. Prove any of my medical comments to be false, and I will accept if the source is credible. And seriously, “Monavie is the nutritional equivalent of Count Chocula?” Yeah, that’s accurate and relevant…at least I’m not exaggerating my statements, as you all love to do. Let’s stick to the facts.

NotFooled: Your comment is worthless. My intention was not to gain a “victory” by proving that MonaVie is more nutritious than an apple, it was simply to prove that it was an inaccurate comparison, which MV Scam took the time to write an entire blog about. You guys get so caught up about telling the truth, and presenting the facts…well then swallow the pill when you’re wrong. Plus, you’re like the skinny little bully in the background saying “yeah, get him” when you are contributing nothing to the conversation…not even sure why MV Scam allows such comments to be posted…probably would’ve deleted it if it was someone from the pro-MonaVie commenters.

AA: I wasn’t asking you those questions about preservatives and processing because I didn’t know about them. I was asking because you were making the comments, but not supporting them with facts. Then you make a resoundingly ignorant statement: “it’s nothing more than a processed/refined fast food, far from the natural state of the fruits themselves, it’s chemically preserved, contains very little nutrition.” Idiot. With regard to the ORAC scores, I was simply directing MV Scam to the USDA document that provided the data showing that acai has a higher ORAC score than wild blueberries. And Vogel, of course I know that the water weight, etc. of a non-freeze-dried food product is going to effect it’s ORAC score, but it was the USDA document that listed the ORAC score. I was simply pointing out that there was an acai value listed, if MV Scam would have followed the Wikipedia link to the chart/document he referenced. Regardless, the acai berry has a higher ORAC score than wild blueberries, and just because acai berries were not listed on the Wikipedia chart does not mean that you can infer that wild blueberries have a higher ORAC score. Get your facts straight. The same goes for any comparison to the “acai juice blend” listed on the USDA chart. It does not specify which acai juice blend, so you cannot use that value to represent MonaVie, since you have all so keenly pointed out so many times that “MonaVie is not synonymous with acai,” being as that it is a blend of 19 juices.

More to come…

When it comes down to it, looks as if Beatrice is doing everything in her power to keep her business alive. Calling us all names, pointing the fingers elsewhere…CLASSIC!

Beatrice said: “and I do plan to respond…likely at length, per usual.”

If you REALLY want to get involved in the debate here than I’ll take the liberty of suggesting that you don’t comment “at length”. It makes it harder to have a coherent dialog. If you tackle 1 or 2 points at a time, it will make it easier for all of us to focus the discussion. If you scattershot verbiage at length, it gets you nowhere. I’m saying this to help you because I really want you to put your best foot forward. I get so bored sparring with the usual weak contenders.

Beatrice said: “Vogel: As you will see when I get a chance to comment, MV Scam in no way evicerated (sic) by (sic) “blithe tirade”.”

Yes, he VERY clearly did. We ALL see it. Your tirade was the essence of blithe; you were E-V-I-S-C-E-R-A-T-E-D – and not just once but twice. He just did it to you again today.

Beatrice said: “And I am not hiding in any “shadows” by not throwing my full name on this blog. I don’t recall seeing your full name anywhere,”

Here’s the difference – you make arguments from authority and allege that you have credentials as though that should give your comments additional weight; and yet you don’t bother to present any evidence that you have any credentials. I on the other hand don’t hide behind my degrees here because I simply don’t need to. My comments carry weight because they are truthful and supported by facts; whether or not I claim to be a doctor has no bearing. You have 3 choices: claim to be a doctor and prove it; don’t claim to be a doctor and proof will be unnecessary; or claim to be a doctor, don’t prove it, and look like an ass. Take your pick. As it stands now, you’re in the ass category.

Beatrice said: “…and even if you did a Google search to verify my credentials (which I assure you that they are legit), I’m sure it would in no way add any credibility to my comments (in your mind).”

No it probably wouldn’t, but it would ensure that you pay a price for claiming to be an authority while making comments that are far less than authoritative. If you want to put your reputation on the line, then put it on the line. Otherwise, don’t posture.

Beatrice said: “And seriously, “Monavie is the nutritional equivalent of Count Chocula?” Yeah, that’s accurate and relevant…at least I’m not exaggerating my statements, as you all love to do. Let’s stick to the facts.”

Really? Don’t be so sure. Are you prepared to go head-to-head with Count Chocula in a nutritional comparison? But really, you’re missing the point. Monavie has nutritional value mainly because isolated nutrients are added to it as fortification. Count Chocula does the same thing. Good quality juices don’t need to.

Beatrice said: “NotFooled: Your comment is worthless. My intention was not to gain a “victory” by proving that MonaVie is more nutritious than an apple, it was simply to prove that it was an inaccurate comparison, which MV Scam took the time to write an entire blog about.”

Actually, NFs comment was not useless, and you were not even remotely capable of discounting JS’s comments about the apple vs Monavie. Don’t spray a bunch of crap on the page and then arbitrarily declare yourself the victor. You are yet to make a single legitimate point in the Monavie vs. Apple debate.

Beatrice said: “You guys get so caught up about telling the truth, and presenting the facts…well then swallow the pill when you’re wrong. Plus, you’re like the skinny little bully in the background saying “yeah, get him” when you are contributing nothing to the conversation…not even sure why MV Scam allows such comments to be posted…probably would’ve deleted it if it was someone from the pro-MonaVie commenters.”

OK, now you’re trying to bully a regular contributor. Think you’re tough? Take me on! Put your worthless degree on the line and I will figuratively slap you silly with it like a redheaded stepchild. Stay focused and don’t get distracted by extraneous comments that rub you the wrong way. Concentrate and bring you’re A-game. I don’t want to see you crumple to the canvas too early.

Beatrice said: “Then you make a resoundingly ignorant statement: “it’s nothing more than a processed/refined fast food, far from the natural state of the fruits themselves, it’s chemically preserved, contains very little nutrition.” Idiot. “

How dare you! AA’s comment was 100% accurate and you have no business calling her an idiot. Go toe to toe with me you churlish hag. Monavie amps up their crappy HIGHLY-PROCESSED juice with nasty preservatives and the equivalent of a multivitamin. If you are really a doctor (not!) and still believe that this qualifies it as a good product, then I suggest you go burn your diploma right now and find a new line of work.

Beatrice said: “With regard to the ORAC scores, I was simply directing MV Scam to the USDA document that provided the data showing that acai has a higher ORAC score than wild blueberries. And Vogel, of course I know that the water weight, etc. of a non-freeze-dried food product is going to effect it’s ORAC score, but it was the USDA document that listed the ORAC score.”

Well, no you clearly don’t understand. If you compensate for water content, acai doesn’t beat the blueberry. And Monavie ain’t acai, so it’s a moot point. Monavie has been shown to have a low ORAC score and low levels of the anthocyanins and polyphenols that are so loudly hyped in their promotional literature. Do you still not get it?

Beatrice said: “More to come…”

Ho hum…I’ll sharpen my pen AND my sword.

MonaVie Scam-
Great point….I should’ve known.

Looking forward to “More to come…”

Good job Rasheed! Hysterical!

Mackwiz – I was literally thinking about where someone would throw in the word “synergy” somewhere into the discussion as well!!!!

Classic!

My point #1:

My initial comment: In the article, I DO NOT feel that Dr. Schwarcz is saying that MonaVie is a scam. “I think a better interpretation is that he is recommending that smart consumers who are looking to improve their dietary intake of fruits/antioxidants can so so in a more cost effective manner.”

[Editor's Note: The title of the article was "Acai-Miracle or Scam." I think it is safe to say that the doctor did not conclude that acai juice blends are miracles. Instead he took issues with the claims that are being made about acai.

While your interpretation is not necessarily incorrect, he clearly wasn't talking about the cost effectiveness more than people being tricked (or scammed) by unproven claims.]

Your initial response: “I don’t believe I made the claim that Dr. Schwarcz said that MonaVie is a scam. In fact, I specifically pointed out, ‘While this article might not mention MonaVie specifically, it deals with a number of issues that we see in MonaVie community every day.’”

My response: Let me quote the last paragraph of your blog: ‘So there you go, just a pile more evidence from an unbiased doctor telling you that MonaVie is a scam.’ While he of course did not say that MonaVie is a scam, you are graciously drawing that conclusion for him.

My conclusion: By making your closing statement that this article provides a “pile more evidence from an unbiased doctor telling you that MonaVie is a scam,” you are drawing a false conclusion that is not the stated opinion of the author. Therefore, you are presenting your opinion/interpretation as fact, with the intention to influence your readers and discredit MonaVie as a product and company.

[Editor's Note: Just like a lawyer in a closing argument, I took the information in the article and made a conclusion. It is up to the reader as the jury to agree or disagree with it. I think I presented a strong case with the note of the title specifically mentioning "scam", the rest of the article's content including the quote "any health claim for acai is plain conjecture", and ending with "... if that turns out to be the case, you will hear about it from the New England Journal of Medicine, or some other such peer-reviewed publication, and not from you neighbour who has become involved in selling acai juice through a multi-level marketing scheme."

One of the important things to note is that by saying "acai juice" it encompasses MonaVie (and all other acai juices). The doctor chose to cast a wide net to address multiple potential acai products. MonaVie is included in that category... thus it is accurate to draw the conclusion I did.

It seems your goal is to debate my style of writing in an attempt to draw attention away from the very, very important points that the doctor made in the article. When you do this Beatrice, you lose a lot of credibility.]

I would appreciate your opinion on my above point and conclusion. And per your request to make a related comment on the article:

[Editor's Note: I have commented on your above point and conclusion.]

Dr. (PhD) Schwarcz’s comments do reflect the idea that the science/medical community generally does not OFFICIALLY endorse any specific product (i.e. “natural remedies,” supplements, functional foods such as MonaVie, etc) as being a treatment/cure for any disease until there have been studies to support/validate such claims, which are typically published in peer-reviewed journals (i.e. NEJM). I follow the same principles.

[Editor's Note: This is the main point of why I published this article... though the doctor makes a bunch of other great points about Belem in northern Brazil and such. There are people making many health claims of acai... we've seen them on this site time and time again. We should take a minute and commend the doctor for this... while we condemn MonaVie for creating a situation where distributors can profit from spreading these unsubstantiated claims.]

As a side note to your readers: Dr. Joe Schwarcz is NOT a medical doctor (MD or DO). He has a Doctorate of Philosophy (PhD) degree in Chemistry, and he is a a professor at McGill University in Montreal, Quebec. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_A._Schwarcz)

First of all Beatrice, chill out. Stop taking everything so seriously. I have reason to believe you’re a distributor because if you were just a consumer of the juice, you wouldn’t care so much as to post here so often.

Second, general statements can sometimes be better than specific. How many companies tout the acai berry as their crown jewel? Too many to count. So you’d rather Schwarcz’s article state that individual companies are scams because they use these misleading claims to capitalize on the consumers.

Beatrice, you say that just because Schwarcz’s never said that MonaVie is a scam, we cannot draw that conclusion. Well, the law says that stealing is wrong. Yet when a guy named Joe steals, Joe gets prosecuted, even though the law doesn’t say “If a guy named Joe is caught stealing, he can be prosecuted.” No, it’s general, because there are way too many specific cases that are possible.

If Joe used an argument such as “BUT THE LAW DOES NOT SAY THAT I AM PROSECUTED” the jury will laugh their asses off telling the guy to tell them another joke.

Now, Dr. Schwarcz’s word is not law, but he’s got his PhD in chemistry. Science is science. Research must be done before any outrageous claims are made. Again, it doesn’t matter what Schwarcz’s credentials are, but his advice makes sense: you can get the same nutrition from an apple for much cheaper.

So stop trying to pull a red herring by saying that since MonaVie wasn’t mentioned in the article, we can’t use the article against MonaVie. MonaVie makes the same outrageous claims about acai (and some even more outrageous claims!). Debunk that.

Response to post #31 by Vogel:
1) Why so defensive about Dr. Schwarcz? All I did was clarify his credentials for your readers, just as you and MV Scam spent an entire post to do the same for Dr. Carson (I am not looking to discuss this topic here, just making the relation…and I was going to put a link, but when I clicked on your shortcut for “MonaVie – Dr. Carson,” I couldn’t find the post I read several weeks ago where he supposedly chimed in to defend his comments/presentation). I am not familiar with Dr. Schwarcz, so I decided to look him up on Wikipedia, and I felt it was relevant to share his credentials with the readers on this blog. Simple enough. Don’t need to get your panties in a bunch.

[Editor's Note: Your tone that Dr. Schwarcz wasn't a medical doctor is the issue that I had. You start going down one path (as if you are going to disparage him) and then show his completely legit credentials that even surpassed my expectation (I didn't realize he was faculty at McGill. That's HUGELY reputable.) Vogel is write for calling it drivel. It made no logical sense.

You made the mistake that I once made, confusing Dr. Carson (co-founder of MonaVie - and his bewildering interview on CBS Radio - http://www.juicescam.com/monavies-dr-carson-on-cbs-radio/) and Dr. Clayton (Wellmune and MonaVie board member). The article about Dr. Clayton was the one you wanted here: MonaVie M(Mun), Dr. Paul Clayton, and Wellmune]

2) I am indeed a physician in residency (a D.O., as I stated previously…but obviously you and MV Scam have a recurring problem with over-looking/forgetting certain things that are blatantly stated), and I was never bragging about it…I mentioned it in the first post because I felt that it was pertinent for MV Scam to know that I was not just another “typical” MV distributor that you all seem to gang up on for every blog post, and that I was truly looking at this article from a scientific/medical perspective…which is why I felt the need to chime in to ensure that readers actually read the article and did not take MV Scam’s opinions/interpretations as fact, and that Dr. Schwarcz is a Chemistry professor, NOT a physician. I feel no need to defend myself or my credentials. I’m sure your readers are very aware that anyone can go on here and claim to have any type of degree (so there is no need for constant reminders and examples). It’s up to them as to whether they take my word for it, and hopefully my supporting comments, insights, and references will support my credibility.

[Editor's Note: That was all well and good, but you didn't look at the article from a scientific/medical perspective. Instead you spent almost all the time complaining about my writing technique and the conclusions I was drawing.

Again, I don't know why you'd draw attention to the fact that Dr. Schwarcz is a chemistry professor and not a physician. In discussion of juice, the chemistry professor's word for me carries more weight.]

3) First of all, I already clearly stated that MonaVie is not paying me to make any comments or defend/promote their company or product. I could just as easily say that some other MLM company or juice company (i.e. Campbell’s, since MV Scam is always promoting their V8 juice products…and yes, I know why he draws these comparisons, so no this is not an invitation for a tangential conversation). However, that’s a key point here, I have no reason to convey such conspiracy theories or propagate rumors. Why? because I am here to discuss facts and relevant commentary.

[Editor's Note: I would again like to ask you for your motivation. I'm here to help consumers make a better purchasing decision. I'm also here to help steer distributors away from being part of the 99.64% who lose money. You are obviously not here to protect consumers as you've agreed that its grossly overpriced. You obviously have no motivation to protect the company because you admitted that their scientific studies were misleading. If you are not being paid, then what is the reason? I can't believe that you are just evil and look to mislead consumers for sport. That's about the only explanation left.]

Regarding your comment that “you haven’t even finished your alleged residency yet – so even if you are an MD, you don’t know $HIT about psychiatry yet.” You obviously very little about medical school or residency. the fact is that I am in residency for Radiology. All physicians spend their first two years of didactic (classroom) training learning the basics of relevant human biochemistry, anatomy, physiology, pathology of disease, and treatments. The next two clinical years are spent in clinics/hospitals putting that knowledge to use. I have already completed all of my basic psychology training, and I have passed all 3 of my Board examinations, and I have treated several patients with the diagnosis that I suggested for you. The fact of the matter is that I am not a licensed Psychiatrist, but I am very well qualified to make most any of the diagnoses that are sited in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM). Regardless, you obviously didn’t catch on that I was only halfway serious, and was poking fun at the tirades and conspiracy theories you all have putting forth towards me. I guess I am no more humorous than your buddy Rasheed (I know you think he is has more wit, but it’s hard to be biased when you have your head so far up his ass). So, I will try to decrease my attempts at humor/sarcasm, since that is not my intention here anyway. And maybe you can heed the advise that Rasheed put forth for me to “chiil out,” and “stop taking everything so seriously.” Besides, your temper-tantrums are only facilitating irrelevent side-conversation.
Do you have any actual response to my first comment toward MV Scam in post #28 or #30?

Just FYI, your harsh words, name-calling, and insults do not scare me one bit. I will go toe-to-toe with you on any of the relevant blogs/comments that I am actively involved in the discussion, but I will no longer be responding to any of your off-topic tirades or attempts to change topic. I’ll just continue my discussion with anyone who is willing to interact like a level-headed adult, instead of a 8th grade bully.

Beatrice,

I too am intrigued as to you interest in Mona vie. Would you be willing to attest that you have never received any compensation from nor do you have any affiliation with any person, organization, distributor or business associated with Mona vie in any form whatsoever?

While it could be technically true that you may not work for Mona vie corporate or as a distributor, this would not rule out working for a distributor, an organization such as R3 global, some subsidiary, affiliated company or be commenting on behalf of someone who is associated in some way, such as spouse or family member.

Can we also agree that if any such link were established it would represent intentionally misleading the discussion in regards to being an unbiased medical professional?

Beatrice said: “Response to post #31 by Vogel: 1) Why so defensive about Dr. Schwarcz? All I did was clarify his credentials for your readers, just as you and MV Scam spent an entire post to do the same for Dr. Carson (I am not looking to discuss this topic here, just making the relation…and I was going to put a link, but when I clicked on your shortcut for “MonaVie – Dr. Carson,” I couldn’t find the post I read several weeks ago where he supposedly chimed in to defend his comments/presentation). I am not familiar with Dr. Schwarcz, so I decided to look him up on Wikipedia, and I felt it was relevant to share his credentials with the readers on this blog. Simple enough. Don’t need to get your panties in a bunch.”

First, I am not defensive about Joe Schwarz. You came on to this site complaining about the host’s article and arguing that you didn’t like Dr. Schwarz’s conclusions. For some unclear reason, you provided evidence confirming that Schwarz has a PhD in chemistry, a prestigious faculty appointment, and numerous awards as a mainstream scientific educator. You stress that Schwarz is not an MD, but I fail to see how that would undermine his commentary. If anything, a chemistry expert would be more qualified to discuss the chemical constituents of Monavie than say…oh, I dunno…how about a dumb F posing as a DO/radiologist in training?

Secondly, you seem to be confusing Carson with Clayton, which is excusable given that both of them are frauds, hacks, and liars who work for Monavie. Carson was the guy who allegedly developed Monavie – he has a PhD (not an MD degree) that he BOUGHT from notorious diploma mill Donsbach University. Clayton is the hack that Monavie hired (he alleged that he had a PhD, not an MD degree, too, but he never backed it up) to get up on stage, misrepresent his credentials, and lie to all those distributors about how Monavie was going to revolutionize healthcare. If you do anything short of condemning and distancing yourself from these dip$hits, then your moral compass is as bent as theirs.

Beatrice said: “I am indeed a physician in residency (a D.O)….”

Oh goodie for you. I’ll spare you the indignity of having to defend why the fabricated character in your little vignette elected to go to some $hitty second rate DO program after failing to get accepted at a good medical school (e.g. “I could have gotten into Harvard Med School but the DO program at West Cornpone State College of Technology is soooo much better”).

Beatrice said: “…I mentioned it in the first post because I felt that it was pertinent for MV Scam to know that I was not just another “typical” MV distributor that you all seem to gang up on for every blog post, and that I was truly looking at this article from a scientific/medical perspective…”

You’ve failed epically on both counts. First, you are very much like every other distributor; slightly more arrogant perhaps, but every bit as dishonest, strident, and incapable of making a compelling point about anything. Second, you haven’t provided even a grain of insight “from a scientific/medical perspective”. You posted a link to a USDA ORAC chart that quotes the ORAC value for freeze-dried acai powder (derived from Monavie/Schauss’ study), claiming that it proved something (what that may be, I can’t quite decipher) relevant to Monavie. And yet even after it was pointed out to you that you failed to consider the dehydration factor, and that the ORAC of acai is not particularly relevant because acai is not Monavie — and we already know (from Monavie’s published research) that the juice has a very low ORAC score (22 units per mL) – you still continued to belabor this non-issue. At this point, you just appear to be thickheaded.

Beatrice said: “I feel no need to defend myself or my credentials. I’m sure your readers are very aware that anyone can go on here and claim to have any type of degree (so there is no need for constant reminders and examples).”

If you don’t feel the need to “defend” your credentials (i.e. prove that you do in fact have any), then don’t claim to have them. I can readily understand why you wouldn’t provide proof, even if you did have credentials, because it would be an embarrassment to both yourself and the second-rate institution that allegedly trained you.

Beatrice said: “It’s up to them as to whether they take my word for it, and hopefully my supporting comments, insights, and references will support my credibility.”

That’s what it always come down to – evidence. Claims of credentials are superfluous if you provide the necessary evidence to support your arguments. So far, your scant “comments, insights, and references” undermine your credibility; your claim to have a an MD degree, even more so.

Beatrice said: “I could just as easily say that some other MLM company or juice company (i.e. Campbell’s, since MV Scam is always promoting their V8 juice products…”

If you did, you’d look like an even bigger idiot. Even suggesting this makes you look like an idiot. In what way is it relevant for you to say that you could make a false accusation that is not supported by facts or logic?

Beatrice said: “You obviously (know…sic) very little about medical school or residency. the fact is that I am in residency for Radiology…I have already completed all of my basic psychology training…and I have treated several patients with the diagnosis that I suggested for you. The fact of the matter is that I am not a licensed Psychiatrist, but I am very well qualified to make most any of the diagnoses that are sited in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM).”

You are joking right? A radiology resident making a psychiatric diagnosis of paranoid personality disorder? If you were in fact a radiology resident, then the only responsible course of action would be for you to refer any suspected PPD case to a board-certified psychiatrist for a diagnosis and treatment. Radiologists should be reading the results of medical imaging tests; not making psychiatric evaluations. It becomes clearer with each of your posts that whatever institution that provided your training not only failed you, but failed society as well. Ask for a refund and go sling your $hit juice full-time. It’s all you’re qualified for and you’ll be less likely to hurt anyone than if you go around pretending to be a doctor/psychiatrist.

After re-reading all of Beatrice’s comments and the replys, I say that for someone who is complaining about us filling up the blog comments with non-issues, you seem to be doing quite the same thing, going on and on about yourself and the people here then giving the same old yarn about MonaVie and acai instead of some real evidence to support your position.

“I will no longer be responding to any of your off-topic tirades or attempts to change topic.”

You are changing the topic just by saying that. You don’t get to do what you want and then accuse us of beating around the bush.

“I’ll just continue my discussion with anyone who is willing to interact like a level-headed adult, instead of a 8th grade bully.”

You insulted nearly everyone in this blog and then some (saying Vogel shaprens D&D swords, saying myself and others are peanut gallery idiots), what a hypocritical D bag…

I apologize for an off topic post but I have to backtrack here. I’ll admit it was idiotic of me to call Beatrice paranoid of the FDA, because I was thinking of someone in another post comment string. I’m just stating this because I know Beatrice is going to come on here with holy hellfire calling me a misinformed peanut brained liar and deciever.

So to set the record straight (and be honest), I do not, repeat, DO NOT, stand by my statement that Beatrice is paranoid of the FDA, apolgize for making it, and hereby retract it.

[Editor's Note: Yes this was Keara.]

NotFooled,

To expand upon your point, I have been to a MonaVie meeting and the presenter and speaker himself suggested that the juice was a replacement to prescription medicine. This is what he said:

“You know how prescription medicine works right? You take one pill, then you have to take another pill to take care of the side effects of the first pill, then you gotta take another pill to take care of that pill, etc. I think we get everything we need from nature.”

He said that right before going into the Acai/ORAC spiel, where he misrepresented MonaVie’s ORAC score by saying implying that MonaVie has the ORAC score of freeze-dried acai, which is untrue as stated through research and evidence on this site.

It is obvious to anyone reading now that he is trying to push MonaVie as a prescription medicine replacement by making the audience connect the dots. That is a MonaVie spokesperson talking. What defense and/or evidence, if any, can be presented for this dangerous deceit? How the hell are we the bad guys for pointing this out?

In case any readers haven’t read it, http://www.newsweek.com/2008/08/01/a-drink-s-purple-reign.html

From the article:

At sales meetings, like the one in Florida, Larsen says he reminds people that MonaVie “is just a juice.” Meanwhile an 18-person compliance department investigates distributors suspected of making false claims—although with a million sales people on the books, that’s easier said than done. “It’s next to impossible,” Larsen concedes, “like herding cats.”

Larsen claims at sales meetings it’s just a juice. But in reality, he makes “unofficial” claims that MonaVie cured his mother’s arthritis.

Also, when I was in MonaVie, I received emails weekly about events and such. Why couldn’t they just use that email blast method to tell distributors, “DONT MAKE ILLEGAL CLAIMS.” If they can get 20,000 people to spend $400+ on a TEAM convention, you’d imagine they could at least enforce the rules a bit y’know?

They don’t want to enforce the rules. They abide by the FDA as loosely as possible, walking right up to the line on the law. If it wasn’t for the FDA slapping them in 2007, the “offical” (offical to keep within the law only) product statement would likely be full of false medical claims. As Vogel said earlier, they aren’t herding cats, they are puppet masters, controlling the strings whilst claming the puppets are acting of their own accord.

I feel like a D bag myself at this point but one more post because I just re-read this entire thing (lots of text info and I skim too much…)

Beatrice:
“Poor Macwiz tried to ask a question, but you all had your heads so far up each others’ asses that you didn’t bother to acknowledge him til he made an irrelevant comment about “synergy” and “Count Chocula”…”

I asked why potassium sorbate was not used as the preservative in MonaVie and didn’t realize that this was off discussion, because I was responding with a question to AA’s comment alone where you were asked about sodium benzoate. So for everyone to not respond to me is quite valid as they were too busy dealing with debating you. Why are you getting butt-hurt for my sake, especially if you are going to make a hyper-anal criticism of me right after that? Oh I see, just so you can have another pointless tangent criticism. Bravo.

You started out all prim and proper then get all offended as if we are making “your momma” jokes. Not being able to take the heat in the kitchen, you decide to hurl yourself in the oven in an attempt to become a pro-MonaVie version of Vogel (sorry Vogel, I just feel like that is what she is attempting). I can only imgaine what kind of tirade you would go into if your patients would say they are going to get a second opinion (if you have patients, since you offer no proof).

Also, in case you want to make a “you have no life” joke about me (like you did with Vogel), yes, I spend lots of time on this blog because I like debating and after attending a MonaVie meeting, I am horrified by what they are doing and I desire to see the vampiric behavior stopped or at least try to inform people who are being conned. So if that is not having a life, then no, I don’t have a life. 8th grade insult indeed.

For real this time… I’m going back to the peanut gallery, no more from me today. Hail Beatrice.

Please see the following post for further discussion of ORAC values, nutrition, and my opinion on the quality scientific data in support of acai, antioxidants, and MonaVie products: 2010/12/06 at 10:14pm

MV Scam, you have misquoted me several times, and it’s becoming a recurring theme. I can see myself wasting a lot of my time back-tracking to correct such errors, and I just don’t have the time to do it. Up to this point, I not said anything negative about the scientific studies MonaVie has funded. I simply said that it was UNDERWHELMING, not “dubious” (or any of the other wording you have used in this blog post), and I said this because I would like to see more human trials…you can read more by following the above link.

[Editor's note: I have changed the link directly to your comment. I stand corrected on your quoting. To me, underwhelming is just a nice way of saying "dubious." I can see myself spending more time responding to your ridiculous acai/wild blueberry ORAC score issues. If you follow that link, I catch you in numerous logical fallacies (including one outright error/lie). I don't have the time for your errors either.]

NotFooled, I understand the concern you all share regarding the false claims that have been made, and will likely continue to be made, by MonaVie distributors. I am in no way defending this unfortunate instance. However, this is again distracting from any of us staying on point with this post. If people keep making lengthy commentary on shouting insults, belaboring on my credentials, or bringing up the same old off-topic anti-MonaVie banter that is addressed elsewhere, then we are only going to run in circles without anything of substance being conveyed…or even worse, it will be lost in the meaningless banter. I am already tiring of this ridiculousness. Vogel predicted that I would stick around for 2 weeks, but if we keep wasting time with name-calling, then that time will be even shorter.

[Editor's Note: NotFooled's concern about the false claims is a valid one. While it is off the topic of the original post, you started us down that road (especially with the wild blueberry/acai ORAC score thing). It might as well be addressed. The false claims are one of the core reasons why MonaVie is a scam. Please don't sweep the false claims under the rug as an "unfortunate instance."

Also, anything of substance will not be lost in the meaningless banter. I write and update articles with things of substance that come from the discussion.]

I can assure you that the people I know who are distributors for MonaVie do not spread such exaggerated medical claims, and if they attempted to, then I would be more than willing to correct such an error.
The fact that company execs have no way to control what every distributor says is just one of the unfortunate truths of MLM business.

[Editor's Note: Simple solution... keep the product, lose the MLM business model that hurts consumers.]

However, it is still the responsibility of the company to take action against those individuals who openly make fraudulent statements (i.e. in print, online, video/audio files), which MonaVie has proven they are willing to do.

[Editor's Note: This is false. People like Mitch Biggs are still allowed to keep their business despite building it on those false claims. I have not seen any action taken.]

MV Scam could be of more use if he put more time into helping identify and report such individuals to MonaVie, instead of pursuing his futile attempts to attack every facet of the company.

[Editor's Note: I did this with Mitch Biggs to see what would happen. As you can see from my comment above nothing of importance happened. Sure, I could spend all my time sticking my fingers in the dam plugging up holes, but there are another ten leaks. As the CEO points out, it's next to impossible to do like herding cats. It isn't my responsibility to herd all the cats that MonaVie is setting free on the world. Since both me and the MonaVie CEO agree that it impossible we need to fix the problem at the root of its cause. Again, I've given a solution. We just need MonaVie to implement it. Let's get this done for the sake of consumers everywhere!]

Especially, with posts such as this blog topic, and others that deal with ORAC scores or antioxidants, since we have established that there is not enough scientific human data at this time to make any conclusions on the topics. Dr. Schwarcz is not saying anything new in his article, and with such a scandalous and unsupported title to the article, all it does is provide an opportunity for MV Scam to add irrelevance to his blog. I’ve said before

[Editor's Note: Dr. Schwarcz may not be saying new to you in his article. It may be new to people researching whether they should get involved with MonaVie. We've seen others here wish they had a resource like this website years ago. Some said it would have saved them thousands of dollars. I'm sorry that I wasn't there for them now, but I'm there for them now.]

AA: Again, these are all off-topic posts…
I have no need to support my friends in their business endeavors. I have my own career, and what they choose to do is their own business. as I’ve said before, the people I know in this business have not been guilty of making such fraudulent claims. Some people are into health and functional foods, and if their friends/family/colleagues want to spend $40 per week for a product that it supported by limited human data (these comments are in reference to the juice-blend itself, NOT the supplements that have been well-studied in humans…such as Resveratrol, Glucosamine, Wellmun).

[Editor's Note: It's worth reminding those reading this comment that the limited human data doesn't show the $40 juice to be better than any other juice or simply eating a single blueberry.]

However, they would not hesitate to ask me for advice/opinions regarding the scientific data, nutrition, health safety, potential to reduce disease risk, etc. And I always provide honest advice, which they relay to their customers and down-line.

[Editor's Note: This is a scary thought considering your track record here.]

I’ve even had distributors approach me during meetings for medical advice, or to show me improvements in their actual lab results since using MonaVie.

[Editor's Note: "Using" MonaVie? Don't you mean "drinking"? It isn't like you "use" orange juice.]

One older individual, who did not appear to be in the best physical shape, provided his medical record showing that both his cholesterol levels and blood pressure had decreased significantly after making no physical/dietary changes other than incorporating MonaVie Pulse in his daily diet. Who am I to argue with such data?

[Editor's Note: Oooh another pointless medical testimony... Thanks!]

To someone like this, $40 per week is nothing compared to what he would be paying for pharmaceutical medications that are not even guaranteed to have the same effect. The only thing I could suggest to him is that he could probably achieve the same effect for less cost by increasing his intake of cheaper sources of plant sterols and/or antioxidants via fresh fruits/vegetable…but can I guarantee that he will derive the same benefit? No. Nor would any other reasonable physician.

[Editor's Note: Given this alleged situation, a reasonable physician would conclude that the plant sterols, which have been approved by the FDA for the exact claim that you mention, were the cause. Thus a reasonable physician (and any kind of good friend) would tell that person they can do much better for less money. That is if this reasonable physician was actually trying to help people.]

We can’t even guarantee such claims for FDA approved medications, because the fact is that they DON’T work for everyone… just as I’m sure not everyone would find such reported health benefits of MonaVie. And what would I advise those people to do? Save your money, and stop using it… and anyone who is a consumer or distributor for MonaVie can do just that at any time.

[Editor's Note: Can you prove that people reporting benefits aren't just experiencing a placebo effect? I could tell people that I'm giving them medicine and give them sugar pills instead. A number of people will report that the sugar pills had benefited them. This sounds like you are using the try MonaVie argument.]

Too often you discredit the intelligence of the general public, who are constantly being prospected with products that claim to do all types of things, but do not live up to the hype.

[Editor's Note: Too often the general public does not buy the juice because they think it has value. They buy it because of the business. Of course you knew this because you've read: Skeptoid Agrees with JuiceScam about MonaVie. Let's put this to the test though and let people buy the product on a store shelf. Let's strip away the MLM aspect. MonaVie could make a lot more money in Walmart... if their product does what you say. So the question is, "Why isn't MonaVie on store shelves?"]

That is where we have to be smart consumers and use some common sense. By attacking an entire MLM business, your efforts are wasted. As I’ve said before, MonaVie will continue to grow for many years to come, whether you like it or not.

[Editor's Note: I've already conclusively shown that Interest in MonaVie is Fading. But hey, I'm not the only one: http://www.sequenceinc.com/fraudfiles/2010/05/03/an-anonymous-source-reveals-numbers-for-monavie/. There's a reason why MonaVie hasn't updated their Income Disclosure Statement since the middle of 2009. Of course you could have tried the same argument with Royal Tongan Limu juice (the company MonaVie CEO Dallin Larsen previously worked at) before the FDA and DoJ shut them down.]

Many of the top business professionals have accurately predicted the increased popularity of MLM business because people ARE looking for a way to achieve financial freedom.

[Editor's Note: If people are looking for financial freedom, they would be best served not investing their time in something that 99.64% of people lose money with.]

The way I see it is that there are two main problems with MonaVie:

1) Exponential growth of a distributor base, [Editor's Note: This is false claim as pointed out above] may of which may not well educated on the product and/or the claims they can make. But Dallin Larsen is right, he can’t have individual oversite to control what every single distributor says, and he is not going to call it quits on a very profitable company just because of a select group of individuals.

[Editor's Note: He can continue to sell the product on store shelves. That would the ethical thing to do to solve this problem.]

Many of the MonaVie distributors are actually honest/ethical people…as well as many high-profile athletes and other professionals.

[Editor's Note: And many of them are like the commenters here who lie and make illegal claims. Still others are like Humiliated who were bamboozled by others and thought they were being ethical when they weren't.]

That weighs heavy in the consumer public’s mind, and influences behavior…which is why many people are willing to shell out top dollar for the product.

[Editor's Note: There is little evidence that people are paying for the product itself. People are paying ]

This is why I say you should focus more energy on identifying the distributors that openly make fraudulent claims, and report them to MonaVie to be held accountable. This would be much more productive.

[Editor's Note: I'll take that challenge. Since MonaVie is "very profitable", I'll identify distributors making fraudulent claims for $10,000 a piece. They can Paypal me the money. This will help them with their compliance problem. Plus, I get the feeling that they'll do a much better job of educating distributors if they have money to lose. Right now, they have no incentive to stop distributor claims. On the contrary they profit on the false claims. Yet again, I offer MonaVie a perfect solution. They really should be paying me for ideas like this.]

Or make a list of common mistakes/misconceptions about the product to help educate consumers/distributors…like I said, MonaVie is only going to continue to grow.

[Editor's Note: What do you think this website is?]

2) The juice-blend is overpriced given the current human data to support the product’s actual health benefits, being that the benefits conveyed via testimonials/case reports are not generally believed to be “expected/guaranteed results.” The energy drinks are reasonably priced, compared to some other “energy” drinks…and they are quite tasty. Not sure about the gel packs. From what I have read and heard from people using the product, the RVL weight-management system appears to be legit, and is reasonably priced (I think about $3-4 per serving = 1 meal replacement) for the shake and snack bars.

[Editor's Note: Yes this is a major issue. The juice is like charging $200,000 for a Honda Civic. If you want to buy $200,000 Honda Civics from me, I'll be happy to sell them to you all day. That's one of the reasons why this website uses the word "scam." The energy drinks aren't as overpriced, but the suggest retail is $3.71 [source], which is a lot more than I’ve ever seen Red Bull – about twice as much. However it’s worth mentioning that the entire category is expensive. According to John Sicher, editor of Beverage Digest, “Energy drinks are premium priced. Some consumers are trading down. Others are buying them less frequently.” So the energy drinks are twice as expensive as something that is already premium priced. That’s hardly “reasonably priced.”

As for the RVL product, you should start at http://www.lazymanandmoney.com/monavie-scam-was-my-wife-recruited-sell-snake-oil/comment-page-51/#comment-328741 and read the next ten comments. Distributors complained about the pricing so much that MonaVie had to delete them. Compare the comments before censoring them with the comments after censoring them. Of course that behavior shouldn’t surprise. Here is one such quote:

“I was so looking forward to the weight management program, not for me so much as for some of my family. The price is a disappointment. For 2 people in a family, your looking at around $650.00 with shipping. Now this is a young family with 2 kids, they still have to buy food for them. In this economy there is no way they can afford this. And I know they are not the only ones, that could use this for their health, but can’t afford the product.”

Still think the product is reasonable priced?]

Most all of the other info that is constantly debated appears to be distraction (i.e. the “quality” of the acai, ORAC scores, exact nutrition values), and scare tactics (i.e. contraindications of use of MonaVie products are clearly stated under each product’s description on the website, and if there was such a serious cause for concern about patients on Coumadin not being aware of Vitamin K levels in MonaVie, and/or adverse health outcomes because of it, then they would have been mentioned in case reports by now). MonaVie has been around for 5 years now, and there is only one case report showing any adverse event possibly attributed to MonaVie consumption (i.e. use during pregnancy and a cardiovascular complication in the baby…which as far as I remember, the child lived, and there was no definite link to MonaVie made). I’d say that’s a pretty damn good safety record.

[Editor's Note: The other information here is made to educate consumers about the false distributor claims (i.e. those about acai, ORAC scores, etc.). You suggested above that I educate people on these things. The "scare tactics" are published peer reviewed articles that again amount to information that distributors and consumers should know.

It's sad that we have to talk about the safety record of juice. If that doesn't strike as a bizarre concept, you are even more twisted than it appears... and you appear to be quite twisted.]

Hey y’all. Just me. I don’t know who’s ass my head was allegedly up but I thought I would take a breather in order to convey something to Beatrice.

I started blogging on this site because of my experience (read ‘nightmare’) with MV. I first read & read and read some more. Then, I discussed the studies & nutritional “content” with friends that had backgrounds in science and nutrition.

I did not come on here trusting these people initially, so I dug deeper. I found out that Vogel and Food Tech spoke the truth. I found this extremely hard to “swallow” (no pun intended)because it meant that I had been consistently lied to and I had contributed to perpetuating those lies. It took me a while to digest that (again, no pun intended…well maybe slightly intended) and furthermore, to forgive myself for unintentionally scamming my friends and family. To be fair, the people who got me involved (it is horrible because I can’t bring myself to call them friends anymore) likely had no idea that they were spreading lies because they were so fixated on the “financial freedom” aspect, they didn’t bother to look beyond this.

I started writing about my experience, it was initially just cathartic, then I saw the incredibly hostile reaction of the Pro Monavie camp & was compelled to stay on and tell my story to anyone that would listen. I couldn’t, with a clear conscience, have the Monabots lying anymore.

I don’t know what your agenda is but just so YOU know, I got none of the benefits from the juice that they were raving about. Ditto for my victims, most of whom dropped out well before I did. Maybe I wasn’t convincing enough to invoke the “placebo” effect. I don’t know. I really wasn’t happy to find out that all of the nutritional benefits I had bragged to my victims about were B.S. as well. I don’t care if they have changed things since then and are now fortifying the slop with vitamins and fiber, it is still a COMPLETE RIP OFF. You can NOT deny this. It is not value for your money in terms of nutrition.

The more I learned about the conduct of Monavie and other, similar MLMs, the more I saw that it was bordering on white collar crime. I felt it was important to comment from a “layperson’s” point of view, having been involved, in order to give people another perhaps simplistic but honest perspective.

We read about people losing their marriages & homes because of the greed that lurks behind the corporate walls (read Larsen & Hart) of this hideous excuse for a company and it breaks my heart. I, for one, am proud of the work my friends have done and like to think that I have contributed (in some small way) to stopping someone else from going down that road.

Beatrice asks “Most of the people I know that are distributors are also consumers. Is this not a good thing? I would be skeptic/concerned if someone was trying to sell me, or promote, something that they were not willing to use/consume in their own personal life.”

Do you ask that the person selling you your vitamins or face cream like using the products themselves? Of course not.

Whilst Monavie promote the concept of a person being their own best customer, this is not how business is conducted in the real world where the survival of a business is dependent on gathering bona fide customers. The whole concept of building a business based on self-consumption is only seen in MLM/pyramid marketing scams, a concept which you appear entirely unfamiliar with.

Beatrice, again I also ask – what exactly is your interest in Monavie? You are the only person on this site who continues to remain elusive regarding this.

Beatricks said: “Vogel predicted that I would stick around for 2 weeks, but if we keep wasting time with name-calling, then that time will be even shorter.”

Ooops…so now that I called you idiot, liar, apologist, inept, company stooge/mole/whore, etc., I guess you won’t be staying around. What a tragic loss. Now who can we look to to eat up all that white space and server storage capacity?

Beatrice states “I’ve even had distributors approach me during meetings for medical advice, or to show me improvements in their actual lab results since using MonaVie. One older individual, who did not appear to be in the best physical shape, provided his medical record showing that both his cholesterol levels and blood pressure had decreased significantly after making no physical/dietary changes other than incorporating MonaVie Pulse in his daily diet. Who am I to argue with such data?”

Who are you to argue with such data, you ask?! No need to argue – it’s about to be spelt out for you!

For your lack of information and in the first instance, Monavie distributors and are obliged to conduct themselves in accordance with company Policies and Procedures which were agreed to when they chose to become a representative of the company and which states:

2.1.6. I will be truthful in my representation of MonaVie Products and make no claims regarding the health benefits of MonaVie Products that violate the law.

2.1.15. I will abide by all of MonaVie’s Policies and Procedures.

2.3.8. Unethical Activity. You agree to be ethical and professional at all times when conducting your MonaVie Distributorship…Examples of unethical activities include, but are not limited to the following, some of which are further described in these P&Ps:

2.3.8.1. Making unapproved claims about the Product;

2.3.8.3. Making false statements or misrepresentation of any kind, including but not limited to…performance of the Products;

4.1.1 Product Claims. You may make claims about the Products that are in the Official MonaVie Materials of the country for which it is approved. You shall not make claims about the Product that are not in the Official MonaVie Materials.
https://www.monavievo.com/corporate/documents/P&Ps_Global%20Version_US020810_0.pdf

Monavie’s own literature confirms that Monavie (nor any of it’s ingredients) does not treat, cure or mitigate the symptoms of any disease and condition and distributors are not allowed to use terms or phrases that suggest same.

Monavie specifically states that the products (including Pulse) are not intended to replace or mimic the activity/effects or benefits of any medications, that the plant sterol effects and benefits in MonaVie Pulse in relation to heart health and cholesterol are “significantly less than that found in drugs”, that MonaVie Pulse does not cure/ treat/mitigate, or prevent serious cholesterol problems AND that Monavie Pulse is actually intended for “healthy people, not for people with heart or cholesterol diseases”.
http://monavieuniversity.zaah.net/?s=fruit+juice+products

Despite your claims of the contrary, you have confirmed that distributors are making claims of reduced cholesterol levels and improved blood pressure, attributed to Monavie – which is EVIDENCE of distributors breaching company policy by making such unapproved claims about the product, breaking the law (namely, the FTC guidelines, as well FDA regulations) and thus conducting themselves in an unethical manner also.
http://monaviemediacenter.com/blogs/5-tips-every-monavie-distributor-needs-to-know-about-the-new-ftc-guidelines/

Seriously, WTF is wrong with you (you wouldn’t be self-medicating per chance?) – can you even lie straight in bed??? NOTHING that you have presented has been done in a truthful manner.

You’re so crooked that you can’t even bring yourself to agree that consumers should be taking the advice of Dr Schwarcz and be wary of the acai health claims – which are clearly being exaggerated and entirely unfounded!

You post the same dribble just as any ill-informed distributor has done to date, refer us to the site of Monavie itself for verification of information (is this what you’d refer to as doing “due diligence” – the promotional material of an MLM company?? HA!), FAIL to address the issue of the fraudulent health claims made by the founder of Monavie concerning the last juice he was promoting (Royal Tongan Limu) which are identical to the claims being made by Monavie’s distributors, FAIL to even acknowledge the illegal health claims being made by distributors that YOU have witnessed yourself, FAIL to address the issue of the 99.64% loss rate amongst Monavie participants which is evidenced in the IDS, FAIL to address the allegations of the underlying business of Monavie being a pyramid scheme AND continue to FAIL to inform us as to your TRUE interest in Monavie.

You haven’t provided a single opinion worthy of even remote consideration from a “medical” perspective and it’s no surprise that a dishonest, unethical and totally incompetent individual such as yourself has now joined the ranks of Monavie as a pyramiding, snakeoil hustler!

F-ing disgrace!

Thanks Vogel. :-)

I think we’ve been subjected to enough BS from Beatrice.

Beatrice, you say “This is why I say you should focus more energy on identifying the distributors that openly make fraudulent claims, and report them to MonaVie to be held accountable. This would be much more productive.” Seriously? My God. If I thought that that would do a modicum of good, I would have done it a very long time ago. I have been involved in this company and if it wasn’t for false information being passed around about the products, there would be NO information at all. That is what Hart & Larsen COUNT on. We have reported people to the FDA but the LAST thing I would do is report them to the company that encourages this behavior (behind closed doors, of course).

In addition, I can assure you that the people who are already knowingly spreading lies are not the ones I am interested in “talking” to. They are too far gone. I am interested in reaching people like Amy, who has recently blogged on this site. She is a social worker who had a “feeling” that there was something sinister going on with this company, after having been invited to a meeting. She found this site and after doing some further reading and investigation, has concluded that she is in agreement with us.

There are others that have blogged and thanked us for the information provided, it helped them to make the decision to stay the hell away from this company. Having blogged on here as long as I have, I happen to KNOW that there have been a lot of people that we have helped, whether you choose to believe it or not.

I wish it were just the overpriced products we were arguing about here but it simply isn’t. It is all of the other stuff that they are guilted into buying ( TEAM motivational crap, clothing, pamphlets, cups, books etc) and the conventions they are told they must attend to succeed, that have to be factored in.I can assure you that very few people remain “on the juice” without being sucked into the Monavie Vortex. I have seen people use all of their vacation time (if they haven’t already quit their real jobs) to attend all of these conventions over the years, thus neglecting their families for YEARS. They are promised time with their children once they achieve financial freedom, but the people I know haven’t moved up in rank in over 2 years. They have alienated friends and family.

This is way beyond selling overpriced juice and I believe in your heart of hearts, you know that.