MonaVie Lies about the ORAC score of MonaVie?

Paul,

What does that have to do with MonaVie lying about how much ORAC is in the juice?

There are four very obvious problems with your medical talk here:

1) MonaVie has not been approved to help with psoriasis. It’s largely sugar which is something that people with diabetes should really think twice about.

2) We have no way to verify your claims are truthful. I could post that MonaVie raised my blood pressure and we’d have a stalemate.

3) We don’t know if there are outside factors that contributed to your blood pressure. It could be something as simple as having less stress because you saw something funny on television. We simply don’t know as you weren’t part of a controlled medical study.

4) All the results, again if true, can be attributed to the placebo effect (look it up) meaning that you could just get the effect from something much cheaper.

“now there is proof ( Univ of Fla. ) that Monavie is helping in the attack on cancer cells in the human body. This not hype as the FDA has just released the info.”

Show me that information from the FDA. Until you do, I’ll just say that Univ of Michigan showed that MonaVie causes cancer cells in the body. That way we’ll both have unverified claims cancelling the two out.

As for the business, even MonaVie is Embarrassed by Their Income Disclosure Statement. So maybe it’s possible for anyone to succeed in the business, but it’s also possible for almost anyone to beat Tiger Woods in golf. It’s not extremely, extremely unlikely to the point that the thought isn’t worth entertaining.

The report from the University of Florida that you cite is years old. Talcott has since said that he regretted how blown out of proportion it was taken. For what it’s worth, vitamin C destroys cancer cells in a lab too: see some articles here: http://www.google.com/search?q=vitamin+c+destroy+cancer+cells.

Also, it’s important to note that MonaVie isn’t acai and acai isn’t MonaVie. There are sources of 100% acai out there (Sambazon and Bon Dia come to mind), while the acai in MonaVie is diluted by 18 other fruits. In the end you don’t know how much acai you are getting in MonaVie.

Ben, I’m sending you an e-mail now, because I don’t under what you mean by, “My question is why the offense can’t get behind a good strong offense?”

Remember that the “F” in FDA is for “food.”

The FDA won’t back products, but they can make it so that companies that have plant sterols in them can make claims about cholesterol. Other similar claims can be made legal or illegal depending on what they allow (according to my understanding).

They can also look at the labeling and conclude whether MonaVie is consistent in their guidelines. For instance MonaVie lists freeze dried acai at the top of it’s ingredient list and it mathematically can’t be (by what we know about the ORAC of MonaVie and freeze-dried acai).

YES the ‘F’ in FDA is for food but EVERYONE knows that uless you are putting DRUGS of some sort into something they dont really pay much attention. If you really think about it, people ‘way back when’ used to live a lot longer due to ALL THE FRESH FRUITS they would eat. Now a days, most people live off fast food and processed food. They lived longer becuase their bodies were getting the ‘good stuff’ from all the fresh fruits they were eating and they didnt have all the fat and additives that most of our food is not a day. MonaVie gives you an ‘easy way’ to get in all your fruits every day! Yes, you say that it is expensive… have you ever gone to the grocery store and bought ORGANIG fruits and a variety at that??? PROBABLY NOT, and if you have you would know how expensive that was… probably ends up being about the same!

I understand that part of it… it SHOULD NOT totally replace the fruits you eat but it is a way to get in the variety of fruits that you need. Have you ever tried MonaVie???

I actually have tried V8 fusion along with a few other juices of the same nature. I AM open minded and willing to try things BEFORE trying to talk poorly about a company. I did not like V8 fusion, I did not like the other juices I tried either. I tried MonaVie, I liked the taste of it but after my case ran out (about a month) I too was ready to ‘give up’ on MonaVie as well, I didnt ‘feel’ anything… so I stopped drinking it… Thats when I really realized the things that it had done for me! So, Mr Negativity… think what you want about it but at least I was open minded enough to TRY other things, you on the other hand really have NO right to talk about a company when you yourself have not tried it!

damn i’m tired of reading of some monavie pompous saying people are negative people cause they are smart enough not to get ripped off from mr. ripoff. i’ve got friends who tell me i’m a negative person for trying to explain the facts, but sometimes the facts aren’t positive unless your talking about saving saving money which seems pretty positive (to me atleast), but if getting ripped off is a positive view to you do it, but don’t call people negative cause your not selling them your juice.

People buy the Girl Scout cookies, because it supports the Girl Scouts and their activities. I have asked them numerous times to start providing more healthy options and have noticed that they sell various mixed nuts now. At least we are adding some protein and cutting down on the sugar. Another thing to note is that there is reported very, very little money going to the Girl Scouts. You are better off just make a donation to the group if you want to help them out. Then go and buy some cookies or whatever healthy option you see fit.

MonaVie doesn’t help people. That’s really the bottom line. It’s expensive juice that isn’t shown to be more valuable that any of the stuff that you find in the store for 1/10th or 1/20th the price. The product is being marketed illegally by distributors as providing health benefits that it doesn’t. You don’t see that going on with store juice.

People buy things they can’t afford all the time. How many people do you see driving around in cars that cost $70,000 who don’t have any significant retirement savings… a lot. That’s where the logic of “If you have the money to buy the juice, good, if you don’t, well then don’t.”

“If someone feels better even with a placebo, is that such a bad thing?” Yes, it’s a very bad thing. It means that it’s not treating the cause of the problem and will probably give you a false sense of security. This could mean not getting checked out medically until it’s too late. Oops, sorry, the placebo just killed someone. I’m exaggerating, but you get the point.

“These people aren’t making you do anything, yet you are trying to make people do what you want.”

I don’t know what you are talking about here. I’m not making anyone do anything. I’m simply proving that there’s little value to buying MonaVie so that everyone has the facts. If what I’m saying is factually incorrect here, let me know and I’ll fix it.

I agree with you Fred, I think that MV Scam has way to much time on their hands… and it is very funny to say the least! lol… is only one were more open minded and not so ‘negative nancy’!

FRIUT PUNCH?!?! Really??? that right there shows that you truely know NOTHING about MonaVie! It is WAY more then a ‘fruit punch’ but you think what you want… and spend all your time being negative…

Fruit punch is various fruit juices mixed with water. Tell me how MonaVie differs from that?
Other than the ridiculous price.

I’m confidant that I know more about MonaVie than any of their distributors. Feel free to challenge me on the science of the product.

talk to you about placebo? why would someone make that mistake your obvisouly have your mind made up about monavie, and don’t sound open minded in the least of the science of monavie but the rest of us here i believe are. So how about you don’t tell us what to do, thats why this place exist to talk about whats going on with monavie and if it works and if not why would someone think it works. i don’t know why you think monavie has vitamins in it if you’ve done any research on it at all or looked at the back of the bottle where it shows nutritional facts or should i say lack of. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mona_Vie read up lil one

John said: “the way that monavie differs from other health drinks is that it doesnt filter out (seeds)(skins) (leaves) ect. anyone who simply looks in the glass can tell its got far more in it than just regular juice”

**John, what you’re describing is poor homogenization. This isn’t a good thing. It indicates that MonaVie doesn’t want to pay the extra expense to properly homogenize the product.

John wrote: “but also pasturize there juices for long periods of time cooking out most of the vitamins.(if you need reffrence matierial on that i can give it to you) now thats not to say that monavie does not pasteurize (they do) but its done with a process called flash pasteurization which heats and cools the monavie very quickley and locks in the freshness of the fruit without damaging it due to long term heating ….monavie has a patent on this process as well”

**John, all fruit juices use flash pasteurization (HTST- High Temperature Short Time). MonaVie does not have a patent on this. It’s the standard in the industry. What MonaVie does not do, is use aseptic fill (sterile fill). This is why MonaVie must add the preservatives sodium benzoate and potassium sorbate. Companies that use the aseptic fill process (Welch’e, Ocean Spray, etc…) have no need for preservatives.

I don’t need to respond to your comments about cyanide and hydrogen, since they are obviously way out of line with mainstream science.

John,

Welch’s does list the polyphenol antioxidant level in one serving of their concord grape juice directly on the back of the bottle at the bottom of the nutrition label (where MonaVie should list the same info, but fails to do so).

An 8 ounce serving of Welch’s concord grape juice has 250mg of polyphenol antioxidants.
The cost for this amount of antioxidants in one serving? .13 (That’s thirteen cents).

Food Tech,
I have posted this info about Welch’s before, on the juice scam site, but couldn’t find it quickly this morning. I noticed the polyphenol antioxidants on the label quite some time ago. Anyhow, I must have pushed a wrong button when I did my calculations earlier this morning, You are right. Still, the Welch’s price is extremely low. And yes, the $3.12 is accurate, where I live, at my local Sam’s club for a 64 ounce bottle of Welch’s Concord Grape juice. Where my error was, was in the breakdown of cost per 8 ounce serving. I really don’t know what I did, but the bottom line is: 8 ounce serving of Welch’s concord grape juice is .39 per ounce. Of course, that’s not a sale or coupon price, so it is possible to get an even lower price than that per serving.

I wondered how they were able to state specifically the level of polyphenols, but I thought it must be something like you are saying…that’s the lowest possible polyphenol antioxidant amount per 8 ounce serving of Welch’s concord grape juice.

So, MonaVie is $11.67 for 8 oz. and Welch’s is $.39 for 8 oz.

And if you want to compare it to an apple, you would need 9.5 oz. of MonaVie, or $13.86 per DAY per PERSON to get the same antioxidant capacity.

Thanks for the update

So it appears that a reputable company such as Welch’s would rather err on the side of saying the antioxidant capacity is lower than by inflating the numbers to make it look better than it really is.

i guess you would need to see who does and does not use gmo foods in there fruit drinks ..i dont care what the orac score is on any of it or how many vitamins it has ….if its gmo its garbage

No. The calcuations are expressed per amount of starting material. It’s impossible to run the assay on unfiltered material. This is SOP.

thats true but, when paired analysis was performed, by which each person’s
response to JB was compared to the same person’s response to PL, a
significant reduction of lipid peroxidation in the serum was observed at
2 h postconsumption (p < 0.01).

Uhhh…not to seem overly sarcastic, but…so what?

1. One can’t just dismiss the failure of MV in the ORAC test, which was performed by an independent reputable lab (Brunswick) -– and by “reputable”, I certainly don’t mean a lab supported by MLM supplement- and juice companies and run by a con-man, like AIBMR.

2. The lipid peroxidation assay that AIBMR used (TBAR/malondialdehyde measurement) is a notoriously poor, imprecise, non-specific and unreliable assay for measuring the footprint of free radical production to test antioxidants. I know – I performed the assay many times, and I am well-acquainted with the scientific literature on the subject. I’ve also used many of the assays that are considered reliable alternatives to the TBAR assay.

3. If the reported effect of MV on TBARS was robust, it would have been statistically significant in the primary (unpaired) analysis, but it wasn’t:

“The difference between JB and PL did not reach statistical significance at 1 h (p < 0.11) or 2 h (p < 0.22).”

The paired analysis was performed post-hoc after the primary (unpaired) analysis failed to show a significant effect. In properly-designed clinical trials, you can’t just change the primary efficacy endpoint or method of statistical analysis when the test compound fails to show a significant effect – that’s considered cheating.

4. The authors expressed the TBAR results as “percent improvement” instead of using the proper unconverted data (e.g., nmol/mL of malondialdehyde produced). This is a convenient way of hiding bad data — a red flag for any reasonably savvy scientist.

5. Even in the unpaired analysis, the results were poor. The graph (Figure 6) shows a flat line for Monavie (i.e., zero improvement from baseline…nothing changed), the effect differed from control by less than 20% (not a very robust effect), and the error bars were huge (indicating extreme variability and overlap of the two datasets compared).

6. Because Monavie contains vitamin C -– a potent antioxidant –- it would be expected to inhibit serum lipid peroxidation in the TBAR assay. According to the label, 4 ounces of Monavie contains 100% of the RDA for vitamin C – that’s about 60 mg. As I said before, the TBAR assay is non-specific; it won’t distinguish between the antioxidant effects of vitamin C versus those of any other compound.

7. As has been pointed out here repeatedly, the time course of the study was too short (only two hours) and the intake was atypical (4 ounces at once instead of the recommended 2 ounces consumed twice a day). That is a glaring flaw in the study’s design – blatant cheating. They should have tested the effects over a 24-hour span, drinking only 2 ounces at a time.

8. The man who conducted the study is a liar, a miscreant, and a fraud. We have documented these facts on numerous occasions — read the archives. He did not disclose that he has a financial interest in Monavie; he has a bogus PhD from a diploma mill; he was outed in the media for faking his academic credentials; he has lied about the contents of MV; he has made prohibited medical claims about MV; he has fraudulently cited nonexistent research publication while lecturing Monavie distributors about the products alleged effects on cholesterol in high risk subjects, and in arthritic subjects.

wow.. haters haters haters. it is true though. the juice is overpriced. but it’s also true majority of people are stupid. they work harder rather than smarter. sometimes working hard just doesn’t cut it. if you really take the time to study monavie, you will find ways to make money EASILY and drink the juice for FREE. without having anyone pay for your juice. without getting customers. there are ways to earn income and get the juice for free without hurting others financially. just 99% of people out there are too dumb to figure it out. HAHa. i’d rather drink monavie for free than pay anything at all for v8 fusion and other juices. wow.. think people. work the system. don’t let it work you. and you’re all hearing this from a 22 year old. sad. quit being negative. maybe if some of you were more positive and persistent, you’d find yourself lovin monavie and it’s juice. haaaaaaaaters. rich dad poor dad – robert kiyosaki. read it. might open up you’re mind to network marketing. think and grow rich – napolean hill. read it. it might teach you some things, change your life around, and hopefully make you a fortune. be open minded people. there’s opportunity all around you. whether it be monavie or somethin else. quit hatin. that’s probably why some of you are still at the bottom struggling.

MonaVie Scam – you are hopeless – you cannot even comprehend what you read. You’re like an old record. Everytime you mention Kiyosaki – you repeat the same BS. [Editor's Note: Don't hate the player, hate the game... Kiyosaki wrote it clear as day. You are best off trying to find someone who actually supports your scam than pulling up names of people like Kiyosaki who clearly don't.]

MonaVie lover – I love MonaVie too – but these idiots are hopeless – MonaVie Scam has interest in teaching how to achieve financial freedom through investing and not through business building like in network marketing – this is simple explanation why he is so harsh on MLMs. However, he does not have any credentials to teach what he preaches – he is totally lost – he wants to save the world from the company like MV but does not have anything to offer instead – he hates everybody and everything – he is a loner who never got any attention in his life – this website is his lifeblood. He means nothing without it.

[Editor's Note: I'm all about network marketing... Tom confuses network marketing with multi-level network marketing... The two are not similar. One is a sustainable business model and the other is an unsustainable pyramid scam. I love many things, and I have other websites that are much more popular that this one. It speaks volumes about Tom that he has nothing better to do with his life than comment on this website... it's much worse to mean nothing without being a commenter on a website that you don't own.]

**Sigh**

When are you Monavie distributors going to grasp the fact that Robert Kiyosaki didn’t get rich networking marketing – in fact Kiyosaki’s roots stem from Amway whereby he didn’t succeed in working as distributor, but instead got his finger in the pie of the tools business selling various motivational tools which eventually evolved into the story of Rich Dad, Poor Dad (not forgetting rich dad who has since been confirmed to be a fictional character).

Let’s not forget that Amway made more money from its own sales force from the secret tools business than from selling Amway products – a pyramid within a pyramid so to speak!

Critics of Kiyosaki (who has no financial expertise) consider him a fraud and describe his advice to be not only seriously flawed but downright dangerous.
http://johntreed.com/Kiyosaki.html
http://www.reviewopedia.com/robert-t-kiyosaki.htm
http://www.thesimpledollar.com/2007/01/26/deconstructing-robert-kiyosaki/

In fact, in 2006 ABC 20/20 put Kiyosaki’s investment advice to the test by giving 3 people $1000 each with a goal of starting up their own business and making a return within 20 days. During this time, Kiyosaki coached the individuals and perhaps not surprising to some, one lost all the money, one made zero and the third made $243.
http://abcnews.go.com/2020/story?id=1982669&page=1

If there’s one thing that’s consistent amongst Monavie distributors, that’s the inability to think beyond what Monavie, a company who have a vested interest in ensuring distributors discount facts and accept only what they have taught them.

Tom – if Robert Kiyosaki even remotely knew what he was talking about, he wouldn’t recommend anyone invest in a company such as Monavie whereby the losses amongst the sales force are within the vicinity of greater than 99%.

Tom states “Aussie – you sound like an old record – or you forgot you already said this hundreds times – it is called dementia – you should eat some fruits – get some apples from Food Tech.”

Facts need to be repeated for aspiring distributors such as Tom who are unable to pursue their regular field of employment due to an obviously inability to process and analyse information for themselves.

While you continue to make statements which are entirely unfounded and in complete contradiction to the facts, we’ll continue to draw upon the facts which serve to enlighten people about the TRUTH.

Gee, you’re certainly spending a lot of time debating the topic instead of investing into the business – business a little slow perhaps???

Aussie says:

Tom – if Robert Kiyosaki even remotely knew what he was talking about, he wouldn’t recommend anyone invest in a company such as Monavie whereby the losses amongst the sales force are within the vicinity of greater than 99%.

This is completely false because Monavie is one of the most successful Network marketing companies of all time. That would mean he wouldn’t reccommend network marketing at all.

Aussie you truly are a moron.

I’m pretty sure Kiyosaki is much more credible than you

Larry says “This is completely false because Monavie is one of the most successful Network marketing companies of all time. That would mean he wouldn’t reccommend network marketing at all.”

Wow. The most successful network marketing company of all time, you say? Oh really, says who?! Monavie?! Laughable.

Monavie’s own 2009 Global IDS confirms the 99.64% loss rate amongst its own sales force – this doesn’t sound like success to me, more like an abysmal failure.

What evidence do you have to suggest otherwise?

Just as MonavieScam pointed out – Kiyosaki still isn’t MORONIC enough to invest in a company where the absolute majority of the revenue is being derived from the investments and purchases of its own sales force and where 99.64% of the sales force are losing money.

Perhaps you should be thinking about following suit…

It sounds like the fault of MonaVie for letting those 70% register and remain as distributors if they aren’t doing anything with the business. Of course it’s quite possible that they are trying to do a lot with the business and are failing. Any skewing of the numbers is MonaVie’s doing.

Larry, are you telling Anonymous Aussie to look outside of America? You realize that she’s from Australia right?

And you just claimed that she did some research and now thinks she’s an expert as if it’s a negative thing? That sounds reasonable to me. If I do a lot of research on Shakespeare, I think it would make me an expert on Shakespeare. At the very least anyone who has read an article here knows more about MonaVie than Mitch Briggs (see articles on this site).

Aussie said: “The most successful network marketing company of all time, you say? Oh really, says who?! Monavie?! Laughable.”

http://www.directsellingnews.com/index.php/site/entries_archive_display/global_100_the_top_direct_selling_companies_in_the_world

Aussie said: “My math is pretty accurate and in accordance with the information provided within the IDS”

I guess you probably saw IDS upside down as you come from Australia and did not see that IDS you refer to lists less than 100K active distributors – the rest is refered to as wholesale customers.

If you use IDS correctly then you will not find too many companies out there with so many distributors working part-time and making so much money.

Aussie that Canadian IDS is an awesome find. The percentages match the US’ almost identically. This is strong evidence (some would call it proof) that the compensation plan is mathematically set to perform on these percentages on average.

Tom, Did any of these wholesale customer sign distributor agreements? I’ve heard they did.

Aussie,

For all we know you could have just typed that up. And yes with all the time these negative people have on this site I do believe one of you would do something like that. To all of the people who are so against MonaVie, why don’t you turn your energy towards something like magic weight loss pills that are being distributed through out the world. These pills are much more harmful for the body and are making companies millions. Or how about tobacco companies? Tobacco kills thousands of people everyday. Are you attacking these companies in the same manner you are attacking MonaVie daily?

What exactly is the point of your lame argument Chris? Are you suggesting that Monavie no longer makes the claims that Aussie pointed out on the Monavie Forum website? Those claims were as follows:

“What is the ORAC score of MonaVie? Four ounces of MonaVie has an approximate ORAC value of 4,000 to 5,000 units. Health experts currently recommend consuming 5,000 ORAC units per day for optimal antioxidant protection. Also, by consuming four ounces or four servings of MonaVie Juice (120 ml or ½ cup), you will receive the approximate ORAC equivalent of 5-13 servings of commonly eaten fruits and vegetables. Please recognize that this refers to the antioxidant value (ORAC) and not to specific vitamins, minerals or other nutrients found in these fruits and vegetables that your body needs.”

Lazyman provided the evidence of an identical statement form Monavie corporate in this official company FAQ document.
http://www.juicescam.com/docs/Monavie-FAQ.pdf

Are you suggesting that Monavie no longer believes that this ORAC information is true and suddenly stopped making the claim? Are you also suggesting that Aussie pretended to be a distributor and posted Monavie’s marketing messages on the forum? Why? It makes no sense, dipshit!

As for your pinheaded question about why we aren’t discussing tobacco and weight loss aids, that’s equivalent in idiocy to going onto a golfing forum and asking why they aren’t talking about football. Quit being such a typical Monavie dimwit.

More importantly, are you conceding the truth – that Monavie has a low ORAC score and is not the nutritional equivalent of ANY amount of real fruits and vegetables? If not, you should be.

Vogel–You never did really answer my question. Instead you just kept the name calling coming. Why is your energy and anger geared towards a juice company instead of a company killing thousands of people per day? Instead of just calling me an idiot, dipshit, and a pinhead, why cant you just answer the question.

ya still didnt answer why you have some much pent up anger about MonaVie.

I do believe MonaVie has the amount of antioxidants that it claims. You can call me names left and right go ahead.

That wasn’t an answer. It was a complete evasion – you refuse to elaborate on the point that YOU raised. You implied that Monavie wasn’t making claims about the ORAC score of the juice or its equivalency to real fruit, and you made an unwarranted and patently absurd accusation against Aussie. You raised this murky issue and then didn’t have the sense to clarify what the hell it is that you are talking about. These are the relevant questions that I asked, and you refused to answer:

“Are you suggesting that Monavie no longer believes that this ORAC information is true and suddenly stopped making the claim? Are you also suggesting that Aussie pretended to be a distributor and posted Monavie’s marketing messages on the forum? Why?”

I get displeased when Monavie distributors disrupt reasonable discussions, as I do when they post vapid, off-topic accusations, as you did. I also get impatient when people try to derail the discussion by asking personal questions like “why are you angry”, when such questions have nothing to do with the subject of the thread (surely you aren’t so new to discussion forums that you are unaware of the need to post comments under the relevant threads). It appalls me that rather than just accepting the obvious, people like you act belligerently towards productive contributors on this forum, and then try to turn the tables by asking questions like “why are you angry”. Lastly, it annoys me when people such as yourself raise irrelevant questions about tobacco and diet aids. For the last time, tobacco and diet pills have nothing to do with this discussion about Monavie.

Your comments to date make no sense and you don’t seem to be prepared to elaborate on them. If you want to talk about the ORAC score of Monavie, then go ahead. If you want to talk about me, go somewhere else. Simple.

As it stands now, you’re just wasting our time. But that’s your goal isn’t it? You can’t say anything relevant or truthful to defend the juice so you derail the site with BS instead. If you want to ask relevant questions, go ask why your company uses liars, thieves, and child-raping doctor impersonators to promote the juice. Go ask them why they are claiming that Monavie has a high ORAC score when it doesn’t (22.8 units/mL). Ask them why they were bragging about using exclusive top-grade organic acai, when in fact they were using low-grade non-organic non-exclusive crap acai. Ask them why they are promoting Monavie as a good business opportunity when the statistics show that, in fact, the earnings potential for more than 90% of distributors is an abysmal joke. Just please stop talking about anger, tobacco, and diet pills.

I notice in your posts you know A LOT about MonaVie. How do you know so much about a company that you despise? How do you know that MonaVie uses “low-grade non organic non-exclusive crap acai”? Just a couple questions that I think we can both agree are on-topic

If Chris needs more answers about why we should be mad at a juice company, one doesn’t need to look much further than this: http://www.lazymanandmoney.com/monavie-scam-was-my-wife-recruited-sell-snake-oil/comment-page-44/#comment-223061. Illegal medical claims, which hurt consumers.

It’s not an isolated case either. One would be wise to read http://www.juicescam.com/mitch-biggs-monavie/ about a high-ranking MonaVie distributor posting illegal medical claims.

If MonaVie is just a juice company, let’s see them just sell juice in grocery stores like everyone else. It’s a much more honest way to make a living than giving people to create dangerous lies.

FYI Aussie… as a MonaVie distributor myself, and being at MANY MonaVie events/tastings… NO ONE EVER gives illegal health claims… All that they do is MAYBE say ‘this is what I have noticed however, everyone is different and just because I have noticed it doesnt mean that you will feel the same things’ I have actually heard MANY distributors say ‘I felt nothing, but I liked the juice and the fact that its good for me so I drink it’ Where in that is there ‘illegal health claims’?? OH WAIT, There isnt…

It’s quite interesting that no one ever gives illegal health claims in events/tastings. We’ve seen them at numerous events on video. Obvious we have no insight as to what goes on behind closed doors in tastings, but we can see piles of illegal claims being posted on the internet. Here are just a couple of examples: http://www.juicescam.com/illegal-lies-monavie-jeff-cordeiro/ and http://www.juicescam.com/mitch-biggs-claims-monavie-prevents-swine-flu/. The later is from an Emerald level distributor who should know better.

I would like to remind you that you can’t even say, “this is what I have noticed” unless it is a MonaVie approved claim (see MonaVie’s own rules: http://monaviemediacenter.com/blogs/5-tips-every-monavie-distributor-needs-to-know-about-the-new-ftc-guidelines/). It has to be “subject to typical results.” There are very (maybe zero) typcial results from drinking a fruit juice.

Your testimonies about what happens at the MANY events and tastings and what MANY distributors say don’t coincide with what we see everywhere and we have documented on this site.

Here’s an interesting new post (from distributor Rick Parlante ID# 36784) that addresses Chris’ idiotic comments from yesterday.

“The USDA now recommends that we eat at least 13 servings of fruit and vegetables per day in order to maintain optimal health. While 13 servings of common fruit and vegetables may sound like no big deal you might be surprised to know that 95% of Americans rarely get three servings much less thirteen. This is the reason that most of the American population is considered nutritionally mal nourished. This requirement is for everyone in the household so if you have four people, you need to be purchasing 52 servings per day or better yet….364 servings per week. Did you ever wonder what that would look like or what it might cost? Well here it is…..MonaVie, as part of the convention highlights went and purchased that weekly requirement for a family of four and this is what it looked like! I personally have never seen a shopping cart come out of a grocery store looking anything like it. The cost for those fruit and vegetables was $272.00. The cost of one case of MonaVie Active is $130.00 which contains the same antioxidant equivalent of that shopping cart at less than ½ the cost. Now here’s an interesting point; MonaVie is part of a healthy lifestyle and in no way do we suggest these products as a replacement of fresh fruit and vegetables. However realizing how difficult it is to consume 13 servings of fruit and vegetables per day, Monavie provides a cost effective and healthy solution to increasing your daily intake in order to meet the daily requirement that our bodies desperately need.”

Monavie corporate is clearly going well beyond the tempered ORAC claims we discussed yesterday — not only are they promoting Monavie as the DIRECT EQUIVALENT of real fruit, they are claiming that Monavie is BETTER and more cost effective. That’s horribly irresponsible and could easily result in physical harm to anyone who might be foolish enought to act on Monavie’s advice.

And FYI Rick, the USDA does not recommend a minimum of 13 servings of fruit and vegetables per day. They recommend a MAXIMUM of 13 servings (5-7 servings is the average).

Monavie Distributor says “FYI Aussie… as a MonaVie distributor myself, and being at MANY MonaVie events/tastings… NO ONE EVER gives illegal health claims… All that they do is MAYBE say ‘this is what I have noticed however, everyone is different and just because I have noticed it doesnt mean that you will feel the same things’

FYI Monavie Distributor – I haven’t attended a single Monavie presentation/training session/seminar that DIDN’T involve distributors using illegal health claims to promote the juice to prospects attending same.

I’ve posted numerous times about having attended presentations and training sessions hosted by the Australian Black Diamond, Megan Wolfenden and it is she herself who instigates this illegal and fraudulent behavior – I have heard her attribute her mother’s ability to pick up her grandchildren despite being ridden with arthritis to Monavie and I recently listened to a webinar during which Megan reported visiting a villager in Malaysia who was able to walk, after years of being bedridden, after drinking Monavie. The other testimonials I’ve include lowering blood pressure, improving psoriasis and eczema, improving circulation, improving the symptoms of auto-immune disorders, assisting with weight loss, blah, blah, blah.

You’ve essentially confirmed what I’ve stated with your statement “All that they do is MAYBE say ‘this is what I have noticed however, everyone is different…” – which is in direct violation of FTC guidelines and company policy (Monavie Scam has provided you with the link).

Furthermore, it needs to be drawn to your lack of attention that distributors are not allowed to make unauthorised claims which use terms or phrases that even SUGGEST the product can prevent, mitigate, diagnose, treat or cure a disease.
http://monavieuniversity.zaah.net/?s=fruit+juice+products

There’s no excuse for you being ignorant of company policy and the law now, is there.

And why are you not also complying with company policy which requires you to both identify yourself AND provide your distributor number?!

The MV convention lied to you. The FDA had no direct contact with MonaVie about endorsing anything. It sets guidelines for all to follow… including MonaVie. MonaVie may have listed some claims that you can legally make within those FDA guidelines, but distributors are not sticking to the list and inventing all sorts of unapproved health claims.

(So go stuff it.)

Vogel says: Here’s an interesting new post (from distributor Rick Parlante ID# 36784) that addresses Chris’ idiotic comments from yesterday.

Well done Vogel! I’m a big fan of your work ;-) I was going to attack that too… great job catching the “Minimum 13 servings recommended” crap. Let me add a couple of observations if I may…

1) Notice the title of the page: “Cost Comparison of MonaVie compared to Fresh Fruit and Vegetables”
Why would he compare the cost of monavie to fruits AND Vegetables, when monavie contains NO VEGETABLES? I’d say that is deceptive from the start (pun intended)! This is where the V8 Fusion kicks monavie’s butt so hard it leaves a permanent indent… V8 has a full serving of BOTH fruits and veggies in one 8 oz serving for 1/10 of the cost.

1) Notice that in the picture, Rick is holding 1 bottle of monavie and comparing it to a shopping cart full of low-ORAC score fruits and veggies. In his text, he says a CASE is equal to the shopping cart ORAC value. The picture with 1 bottle is a bit deceptive, no? SOP for many monavie distributors (unfortunately) is to never miss a chance to mislead (however small) with advertising. He says there are 364 servings of fruits and vegetables (for a family of 4 for 1 week) in the basket. I do not believe that 1 case of monavie provides the equivalent of 364 servings of antioxidants (a weeks supply for a family of 4). One bottle does not last a full week for a person if taken 2 oz 2 times/day. 4 oz x7 days= 28 oz recommended/week. One bottle has 25.35 oz. Look at the math, monavie comes up short! Yet another attempted deception.

2) $272 for a cart full of fruits and veggies? I don’t know where they went shopping, but they paid too much for those intentionally picked low-ORAC fruits and veggies!! If Rick had picked some higher ORAC score fruits and veggies, he could have cut the cost in at least half. I saw NO berries, plums, apples, etc. Just fruits that contain a lot of water, like watermelons and honeydews. Deceptive again! Notice that the USDA charts are nowhere to be found for comparison ORAC values, and they don’t state exactly what is in the cart. Misleading too!

3) Notice Rick’s web address?? Not surprisingly, Rick Parlante is the owner of “upyourantioxidants.com, which is listed as one of the 10 john doe defendants in the Quixtar lawsuit (that asserts he makes false and misleading health claims)!

4) I sat through a tasting party where Rick told lie after lie (over the telephone from Florida where he lives) making illegal health claims…yes, even the “cancer cure” crap with relatives of a stage 4 lung cancer patient IN THE ROOM. That’s when I did some research and found this site thank God, before any real harm was done to MY reputation or the cancer patient.

I hope he rots for years in prison for scamming folks!!

Ladies and Gentleman, I give you a MonaVie distributor.

Paraphrased… “Who cares if a company lies and tries to cheat people out of money… it’s natural!”

Cheating people out of their money is never acceptable. If a company does lie to cheat people out of their money, then it should be everyone’s duty to publicize the lie and get that company run out business.

Let’s reflect on this post… http://cashmoneylife.com/2010/08/30/when-companies-go-too-far/.

Jake states “i only got down to about the tenth or eleventh comment when i was finally fed up with all of your guys’ bullsh..”

I didn’t have to finish the first line of Jake’s comment to see that it was going to be absolute rubbish.

Jake further states “EVERY SINGLE company is going to lie about one thing or another to succeed.”

We’re not here to debate what every single company is doing to succeed – we’re discussing how Monavie and it’s representatives are misrepresenting the product (such as the company lying about the ORAC score of Monavie and making illegal and bogus health claims concerning the health benefits of the juice), misrepresenting the likelihood of success in the company (by withholding the fact that greater than 99% of the sales force are actually losing money) and misrepresenting the underlying business of the company (which we have consistently shown to be pyramiding and thus the losses of most participants is virtually guaranteed).

If you consider that all these misrepresentations, omissions and downright lies are made for the purpose of luring unsuspecting consumers into investing into the product and the venture for the financial gain of the company and it’s representatives, a decision which consumers would not have made had the truth been presented in the first instance, you will see that this constitutes fraud.

And fraud certainly isn’t usual the usual business practice for attracting customers and investors.

Jake further states “that is the nature of us humans.”

Fraud and unethical behaviour appears to be the nature of this company and many of its representatives, as is evidenced on this site alone – and you would clearly be in your element, if you haven’t joined the ranks of Monavie already.

Jake further states “there is a hater for everything.”

Whilst your moral compass has clearly gone wayward, there are those of us who have an objection to intentionally misleading the sick and elderly about their health and being robbed and rorted by companies such as Monavie.

Jake suggest “if people wanna believe its helping them and they really feel it is then let placebo affect do its thing.”

Fortunately for both you and us alike, the FDA and FTC disagree with such a proposition. You should pay particular attention what the FDA had to say after shutting down Dynamic Essentials in 2003 and as at the time of destroying the remaining inventory after fraudulent health claims were made by the company and it’s representatives concerning Royal Tongan Limu – noting Dallin Larsen was the Vice President of the company and made the illegal disease claims himself:

“Getting rid of these bogus products, from a company that was giving false information about health benefits to consumers, underscores the message from FDA to those who would mislead consumers about their health,” said FDA Commissioner Mark B. McClellan, M.D., Ph.D. “We will not tolerate companies that raise false hopes for preventing and treating illnesses, when there are more scientifically proven steps than ever before that consumers can take to improve their health.”

Furthermore, you should pay particular attention to the fact that the FDA have already issued a warning to Monavie and former distributor, Kevin Vokes for the illegal marketing of Monavie as a disease cure.

Jake states “…you are pathetic and thats all i have to say. good luck with your ridiculous attemp at a noble life.”

The fact is that people ARE paying attention to sites such as this which has had great success in alerting consumers to the activities of this company and its representatives – activities which are not only immoral and unethical, but also illegal.

Furthermore, both the company and its distributors are feeling the effects of having their activities exposed – otherwise, why would anyone bother blackmailing or make threats on a person’s life if the effort to educate consumers was as “ridiculous” as described not by god, but a degenerate such as yourself.

Jake,
Personally, I am cutting my teeth – honing a skill – and I decided to start with lil’ ol monavie before I go after the big dogs, and you are certainly not in that league. You can’t even hold your own here…

Feel free to post rational, on topic discussion supported by citations/references that pertain to monavie and it’s low ORAC score. PLEASE prove us wrong if you are able, rather than try to distract from the argument with feeble nonsense like above.

Not once on the entire site have I found evidence that anyone (connected to monavie or not) has been able to refute the logic, reason, and research done here on this site, on any topic on any thread. There is a reason for that…facts and truth trump the crap that flows from monavie and its misled sales folk!

How off-topic can you get? Grow up or go away you cretin internet troll!

It’s hard not to feed the troll (Jake), but he’s just making this site more popular in the search engines by keeping the conversation going.

This website is about people getting scammed by juice. That’s the information I have at my disposal that the public needs to know. I don’t have information about cigarettes, banks, or insurance companies (other than what’s already well known). If you are going to talk about those, I’m just going to hit the spam button and you won’t be able to comment anymore.

I think Humiliated had it right. There’s a perception out there by people involved in MonaVie it is a good company with a good product. If the company is purposely trying to swindle people as you claim, join us and help spread the word so everyone can boycott their products. At least Toyota and BP don’t purposely set out with lies and intentionally create poor products.

Jake,

By your two previous comments, you are basically affirming that MonaVie is lying, and that it’s fine for MonaVie to lie? In that case…

Hey! Jake bro! I’m a Nigerian Prince but my throne has been stolen… Can you lend me some money to help me reclaim my throne? I will pay you back double once my rightful inheritance is passed down to me. Pretty please?

Jason,

You can’t get an accurate picture of MonaVie by just reading one article or one article and the comments. There are dozens and dozens articles here that objectively show the harm that MonaVie is doing.

It’s very odd that you say that MonaVie is the “BEST” in terms of product (Men’s Journal shows that Welch’s is better), start-up cost (most MLMs now have no start-up costs, but instead charge extremely expensive autoships – MonaVie is one of the worst in this area), and pay structure (99.64% of MonaVie distributors lose money). There are few complaints about it because most people still believe that the payday is there and that it is their fault for not working hard enough. Few realize that the compensation plan is designed to work against them.

Some of the people here have taken a “holier-than-thou” stance, but in my opinion it is justified. Pretty much anyone here is holier than a “rep beefing up their product with a tall tale of grandmas bum knee being miraculously healed” – that’s straight out fraud in an attempt to scam people. There’s one thing about exaggerating a point – there’s another to breaking FTC and FDA laws, which is what happens with “tall tales of grandma’s bum knee.”

Umm, perhaps you are the only one who lies to insurance companies. They’ll easily figure out that you lied on your form (they know what kind of car you drive and the features it has). If you ever try to cash in on that insurance, you are going to be in trouble. They’ll just say that the contract is void and you have to pay the whole thing. So, I hope no one here is lying to their insurance companies.

It’s not just 99% it is 99.64% who actually make any money. So imagine Fenway Park with 35,000 people in it. Each one is just as willing to work their butt off to get OTHER people to pay their $140 to cover yours. One 126 of those 35,000 people will be successful in making ANY money at all. If you like those odds, perhaps you are the kind of person who thinks that lying to your insurance company is “a good idea.”

AIBMR changes their links very often and they don’t properly redirect them as they should.

I suggest you do a search on the Internet.