Mannatech: Overpriced Sugar Pills
I recently read and saw a show about Mannatech on ABC News and was surprised by quite a few things so I decided to take a closer look on my own.
Mannatech Background: From their own site
I visited their website to get some information about their products and services, a few things jump out to me right away.
- a disclaimer saying that statements said on this website have not been evaluated by the FDA, this is standard fare in the health industry, so no big deal but where IS any documentation showing ANY of the products being sold HAVE been evaluated by the FDA?
- WARNING #1: Page dedicated to the “Science of Wellness”. Wellness is NOT a science, this is equivalent to using the “Science of Creationism” to explain our beginnings. In other words, wellness is a belief, not a scientifically proven fact.
- WARNING #2: Scare tactic about how you may not be getting “enough” glyconutrients in your diet due to pollution, industrial farming etc… simple solution would be to simply eat more fruit and vegetables if you are really eating that BAD a diet or if you are that concerned, set-up your own hydroponics system or backyard garden.
- WARNING #3: Multi-level marketing approach, I would dismiss this entire company simply based on this. Does the Herbal Life plague ring a bell?
- WARNING #4: The CEO of Manatech is also the founder of Mannarelief Ministries who uses the “love of God through world-changing nutritional products designed to improve the quality of life and health.” I guess this explains Warning #1 quite well.
- WARNING #5: Pharmaceuticals are highly complex, require extensive testing and are promoted by highly skilled people. Although this company isn’t a pharmaceutical company and makes no mentions otherwise, it IS blurring the lines extensively throughout it’s web site.
- WARNING #6: Board member on the Council for Responsible Nutrition. This is an association that aggressively pushes for self-regulation of the supplements industry and keeping the FDA as far away from said supplements as humanly possible. This is no different then the Better Business Bureau approach which has no jurisdiction for any type of enforcement and simply take your money to become a member. Why NOT put stringent double blind, pharmaceutical grade testing and evaluation on all supplements?
Clarification regarding warning #4
Regarding warning #4, I absolutely give high praise for whatever the CEO of Mannutech can do to change the fate of under-privileged and poverty stricken children around the world, no matter his methods nor beliefs. What I don’t like is this mix of God and Science, simply believing something doesn’t make it a fact.
Mannatech Background: Based on ABC News Findings
When ABC News takes the time to not only write an article about your company but a three month investigation, heads are going to roll. In this case, I am very happy they put the spotlight to confirm my suspicions that arose simply by visiting Mannatechs own website.
- When asked point blank during an interview by ABC News if Mannutech products cured cancer or where promoted as such, the answer completely dodged the question.
- Video after video of sales demonstrations purporting that their product Ambrotose is able to cure cancer. I saw this bull shit at The Health Expo in Toronto last year and it turned my stomach.
- Unless you have a congenital defect, your body DOES produce enough glyconutrients that Mannatech tries to scare you otherwise.
- Proof that the science behind Mannatechs Ambrotose works is funded by the company itself, sure sounds like Atkins all over again doesn’t it?
- CEO of Mannatech, Sam Caster has a history of selling things that either didn’t work or didn’t even come close to what was claimed, sure sounds like another Kevin Trudeau doesn’t it?
- Sales associates (ei: multi-level distributors) telling others how to work around legal restrictions about their products
Mannatech isn’t all bad
I don’t believe everything Mannatech does is bad, it does help children around the world with SOME of its profits, for that, again, I give them praise. They are providing income streams for people around the world who wouldn’t have them otherwise. They are putting “health” into the forefront for massive amounts of people, although highly misguided and biased with a strong profit motive.
As this is a Christian company doing Gods work through an affiliated Ministry…
… then they should not only show their values but live by them. From what I see, they have broken Commandment #3 (do not misuse the name of God), Commandment #8 (do not steal) and of course Commandment #9 (do not lie). Mannutech and its distributors tie in faith to their product in various subtle ways, they steal lives from individuals who could possibly be saved using proven medical science (who cares about the wasted money) and lie to get their stuff out the door. If their stuff REALLY cures the plagues of this world, spend 25% of your estimated half a billion dollars worth on double blind studies in a clinical setting with a few hundred Cancer, HIV Positive and other patience. If I had any of these conditions, you would be the last people I would ask for help.
The Bottom Line
I believe, God being my witness, that Mannatech is no different then an Evangelized Herbal Life, I really do wish the FDA clamps down on the entire supplements industry to put an end to all this *wellness* nonsense.
References
http://abcnews.go.com/2020/Story?id=3228488&page=1
http://www.mannatech.com
June 18th, 2007 at 3:26 pm
The only real problem that I can see with your post is that you use the term “glyconutrients” without quotations. It’s a word that has no scientific origin, but instead a marketing origin. You’re giving Mannatech too much credit here.
————————-
Ethan, you are correct… it does sound scientific doesn’t it… that’s probably why I never heard of it before Mannatech came on the scene after three years of university studies into biology and nor did the doctors interviewed. I think Mannatech is at least honest in that they are selling you nothing more then sugar with a very healthy mark-up. I wish the FDA would just shut them down and throw the executives peddling this junk into jail for fraud after taking away all their assets (personal and corporate).
From Wikipedia:
Glyconutrient is a term used by the multi-level marketing company Mannatech, and other supplement vendors, to describe dietary supplements that primarily consist of sugar. As Mannatech uses the term in labeling many of its products, glyconutrient refers to mixtures of polysaccharides, such as exudate tree gums and high molecular weight aloe vera extracts containing fermentable dietary fiber and plant extracts, as well as simple sugars or starch. Citation needed The company’s SEC filing more precisely identifies the contents of Ambrotose, its lead product, as “a glyconutritional dietary supplement ingredient consisting of a blend of monosaccharides, or sugar molecules.” In the marketing literature, these sugars are said to be the following eight simple sugars: Xylose, Fucose, Galactose, Glucose, Mannose, N-acetylgalactosamine, N-acetylglucosamine, and N-acetylneuraminic acid.
June 27th, 2007 at 1:41 am
[…] I reviewed the company Mannatech a few weeks ago for their successful attempts at circumventing laws, selling nothing but useless overpriced sugar pills and telling those taking them it will cure their cancer, aids and a host of other outrageous claims. (Mannatech: Overpriced Sugar Pills) […]
July 9th, 2007 at 10:32 pm
bioch.ox.ac.ukbioch.ox.ac.ukuspto.govuspto.govbioch.ox.ac.ukbioch.ox.ac.uktechnologyreview.com
Hi Jon,
Some responses below to your article about Mannatech. Also, a quick response to Ethan, Wikipedia is good but not always accurate. Glyconutrition is now a recognized component of the field of Glycobiology. Oxford Uni and a number of other research institutions and teaching hospitals now have glycobiolgy departments. Here is the link to Oxford: http://www.bioch.ox.ac.uk/glycob/ It’s also interesting that MIT don’t seem to have a problem with this area either
I like a debate, it helps find the truth, I have answered each of your comments below in green, I look forward to your comments on the ones you have problems with or do not agree upon.
Glycobiology IS a science. Glycoprotein IS a scientific term. Glyconutrition or glyconutrients are NOT a scientific terms nor do they have any scientific origins other then Mannatech. I have yet to see a scientific paper anywhere with the word glyconutrition, please post a link if you find one, I have had zero luck finding one anywhere produced by a unbiased third party. Please post unbiased proof that glyconutition is a recognized component of the field of Glycoprotein. The only patent I was able to find regarding Mannatech is of their proprietary blend, which is proves nothing regarding its effectiveness (just to clear that up). You can read their patent at:
http://www.uspto.gov/web/patents/patog/week13/OG/html/1316-4/US07196064-20070327.html
The clinical studies performed under this banner are on people with glycolipid-storage disorders, not HEALTHY people without conditions that cause this to happen. Please read the report yourself and show me successful double blind clinical trials on HEALTHY people without glycolipid-storage disorders.
http://www.bioch.ox.ac.uk/glycob/papers_gen/biochemist_(2006)_28_p4.pdf
Under the banner of Glycomics, they have stated that this area of research will be one of the top 10 emerging technologies that will change our world this century. See the article here http://www.technologyreview.com/Infotech/13060/page10
I read the article Steve, very interesting and I look forward to benefiting from Glycobiology in the future. I still see no link between this article and the term glyconutrients, which was the point that Ethan posted a comment about nor do I see the term glyconutrients anywhere in the article.
The only thing I see here name association without the cross – meaning Mannatech talks about Glycobiology but Glycobiology doesn’t talk about Mannatech (ei: glyconutrition).
Now on to Jon’s comments:
Jon said: I visited their website to get some information …….
My disclaimer: I’m involved as a Mannatech rep after doing my own due diligence and testing the product on myself and asthmatic son. I supply the product to members of my community at no profit to me so they can gain the benefits without me feeling that I have compromised my ministry as a Christian minister. My son is so convinced of the benefits that he became a rep as a possible source of income, but mainly so that he could see others benefit too.
I am happy he was able to get rid of his asthma symptoms but the symptoms causing asthma can come and go depending on the environment you live in. People with this condition can go years between severe attacks, just because he doesn’t have asthma attacks can be pure coincidence with other changes that happened in his life and by no way can this be called a cure.
o Mannatech tried to get FDA comment. But, it’s not a drug and doesn’t “cure’ anything. Simply allows the body to do what it’s supposed to do if it has the right resources. Fresh fruit and veg don’t do it well enough anymore.
Scientifically, evolution may happen very fast but to simply say that our diet of fresh fruit in vegetables no longer work effectively for the body has no scientific basis at all. There IS soil depletion from intensive mono-culture farms but that is why fertilizers are used, which by the way artificially BOOST plant production cycles due to a thriving environment. A plant cannot grow and bear fruit if it’s unhealthy, concentrations of different nutrient values may change but they don’t all of a sudden disappear or become harmful. FDA does not give “comments” as you say without a double blind scientifically rigorous clinical trial. If Mannatech wants FDA certification that their product works, they have the funds to get this done ASAP but so far, they have not. If they want to sell a product that changes the internal chemistry of the body, they have to earn their bumps like all the other pharmaceuticals out there.
I realize you do not believe in Evolution so I am going to get philosophical on you here. If God created vegetables to feed the human body, why did God decide that in the past few decades to chemically alter the DNA of the vegetables we have been eating for the last thousand years so that we now need dietary supplementation through artificial means.
o Plenty of research on Glycoscience.org. Over 8000 research papers published in peer review medical journals. Of course you will criticize this site for being “self-serving” but if they didn’t do this you’d be justified in having an even bigger gripe. You’d expect any company that is researching and validating their product to do publish their findings, so you can’t then turn around and criticize them for doing exactly that. Sorry, yuo can’t have it both ways!
Lots of research, great, every few months they find a new chemical in lab rats that prevents the onset of some diseases or severely affects their biology but these effects rarely are shown on human subjects. Even studies performed on our closest living genetic cousins often don’t produce the same effects in humans. Research is one thing, clinical work done on human subjects is quite a different ball game. Steve, where is a double blind clinical study. Pharmaceutical companies spend BILLIONS every year on self-funded studies that go through rigorous impartial test, why has this never been done by Mannatech?
o FDA has finally recognized that nutrition and diet are essential aspects of good health.
No argument there Steve, but this is self-evident. The FDA is on the warpath against supplements by the way, as we would both consider Mannatech products a supplement, using the FDA now that you know this fact does nothing to prove your case.
Jon said: ” WARNING #1: Page dedicated to the “Science of Wellness” ……”
o “science” is the study of the physical world using systematic observation and experiment” “wellness” is the state of physical wellbeing achieved and maintained through good diet and regular exercise. So, the “Science of Wellbeing” must therefore be the systematic observation and experimentation of the physical state of being well through diet and exercise.
Believe it or not Steve, your interpretation took me a few minutes to work out and sink in but it doesn’t change the fact that wellness is simply a biological interpretation by our brains while science is one of logic performed by many brains. Sure, they both involve our idea of perception but the difference is that science can be replicated by other brains who don’t have the same perspective while wellness cannot be measured other then anecdotally.
Put another way, if there was a dish of spicy burritos that we both ate from, I may hate their taste while you love it. Science would be equivalent to the ingredients making up the burritos while wellness would be their taste. We both ingested the same thing but your brains response was different to mine.
o Wellness is not a theory that can’t be discussed or researched . It is a state of physical being. It is also a fundamentally different approach to disease that suggests that being well rather than being ill is the normative focus the human state. The pharmaceutical industry would have us believe otherwise and profit nicely from it.
If I get rid of your double negatives Steve, you are stating that wellness is a theory that can be researched, again, you are mixing perspectual interpretation with science. The instance a scientific experiment cannot produce predictable results, no matter how many times proven otherwise, it is no longer considered a scientific fact. Wellness cannot be held up to this level of scrutiny, hence it may be researched but provide no scientific theories, only anecdotal evidence.
Jon said: “• WARNING #2: Scare tactic about how ……..”
o The “scare” tactic is clearly evidenced with solid research and historical data about the degradation of food quality. Eating more fruit and veg would do it if our farming practices were up to speed. Clearly growing our own own fruit and veg would be preferable, and we used to. This is simply beyond the capability of most western people’s lifestyle. Really, who can get their backyard garden to provide a year-round supply of fruit and veg? For most of us, the answer is “Not me!” Doesn’t it make sense then, just as we have provided ourselves with supermarkets and other outlets so we can get what we want when we need it, to also provide the ingredients that are missing from part of our food chain when we want it and need it?
What you fail to realize Steve is that most fruits and vegetables in the Western World (increasingly globally as well) are produced in greenhouses under better conditions then those found in nature using hydroponics, which run year round no matter the external environment. Yes, soil depletion is a factor but the agricultural business can only make money on healthy fruits and vegetables, hence they are changing practices. Those tomatoes you are probably eating grew up in a nutrient rich environment with optimal conditions better then either of us could find in our backyards. If you want further proof, look at human height patterns around the world which have adopted a Western diet, notice how they are all going UP! This is due to improved nutrition (not the opposite) and improved environment (although counter-intuitive, I know). Another thing you will notice with a little study is the obesity rate increases at about the same rate as the diabetic one, I find this interesting as well because are talking about the ingestion of sugar pills… we get too much sugar as it is!
Jon said: “• WARNING #3: Multi-level marketing approach, I would dismiss ……..”
o MLM or network marketing is simply another form retailing. Not sure why it’s OK to line the pockets of multi-national corporations that create profits for their shareholders and pressure suppliers to cut costs so the store can have a “sale”, but then it’s not OK to share the wealth with regular people in your neighbourhood or who are running a home-based business, who are educated about their product and generally provide excellent customer service.
Education about a commercial product is one thing, selling what you refer to as better then pharmaceutical grade medicine (am reading between the lines here) that may influence medical decision is a whole other ballgame. I wouldn’t go to my neighbor who took a few night courses about cancer for chemotherapy anymore then you would go to a doctor for religious doctrine.
Jon said: “• WARNING #4: The CEO of Manatech is also ……..”
o Again, why is it OK for profit-driven CEO’s to be inspired by the need for money, and not OK for someone who believes in God to create a product that actually does improve health, that does create wealth for many who previously had none, and to do so from a motive of caring for other people? Which one would you trust most? The profiteer or the philanthropist?
This isn’t about profiteers vs philanthropist, it’s about promoting useless sugar pills and trying to alter peoples perception that they are just as good or better then pharmaceutical grade medication. I have problems with pharmaceutical companies myself but I don’t let that get in the way of questioning their medication should I need it.
Jon said: “• WARNING #5: Pharmaceuticals are highly complex, ……”
o Yes pharmaceuticals are highly complex. Too much and they’ll kill you! Good nutrition also requires training, but it won’t kill you. As we become much more aware of the role of diet in things like cancer (see your own website), auto-immune disease, etc. the more likely it will be that the lines do blur between disease and wellbeing. We are witnessing the end of a lie sold to us by companies that do know better and can’t help themselves because they are profit-driven. The focus is shifting from illness to wellness, and it is scientific.
To be blunt Steve, if Mannatech products actually modified any internal chemistries going on within the human body WITHOUT FDA approval, they would be banned outright and sued to oblivion. Exercise, lifestyle choices and diet DO change your internal chemistry, this is a scientific fact. Luckily for Mannatech, the FDA isn’t too quick on their feet when it comes to these types of issues (smoking, junk food and alcohol being my pet peeves) affecting health.
Yes, pharmaceutical companies (corporation wise) are profit driven, but don’t forget you have real people with families and a passion to help their fellow human being working exhaustive hours dedicating their entire lives to improve all of us. My problems with the pharmaceutical industry are in the areas of marketing and direction, NEVER in the area of medicine. You are blurring the lines here Steve, 90% of cancers can be preventable by a proper lifestyle based off statistical data off the CDC, but cancer isn’t one disease, last count there where over 400 different types of cancers. Some cancers are highly influenced by genetics while others are more lifestyle based with a big grey line in between. For instance, lung cancer rates are extremely low for people never exposed to smoke (of any kind) but high in those who are. On every page of my blog and even the about us section of myfoodcount.com, I clearly state I am NOT a doctor and to seek sound medical advise from one should you have a medical condition.
Mannatech is a CORPORATION just like the pharmaceuticals are a CORPORATION. If Mannatech was so altruistic, they would close the CORPORATION and rename it non-profit. The very being of a CORPORATION is to make a profit for its shareholders, nothing wrong about that but don’t compare a pharmaceutical corporation with a Mannatech corporation and call them two different entities as legally, they occupy the same legal structure.
Let me ask you a quick question Steve, if your own mother had lymphatic cancer, would you tell her to go on innocent God-influenced Mannatech sugar pills or receive chemotherapy with radiation treatments from what you call evil profiteering pharmaceutical companies? I look forward to your answer.
Jon said “• WARNING #6: Board member on the Council for Responsible Nutrition……”
o As indicated in point #1, the research is happening and has been for years. Slowly even the mainstream medical fraternity are taking notice. Being a CRN member is more of an asset since there were plenty of charlatans in the dietary supplement industry in its infancy. CRN, according to its own website, was founded to bring accountability and best practise to the industry. It now assists with legislative formation and helping manufacturers comply with good scientific principles, the very thing you were warning us about. Again, you’d be rightly critical if someone was on an organization like this. You can’t have it both ways.
The Council for Responsible Nutrition (CRN) has NO control over anything, they have no enforcement abilities nor are a regulatory body, they are a lobbying group that companies and individuals send money to help keep the FDA from cracking down on the supplements industry. I WANT THE FDA TO CRACK DOWN on the supplements industry and put all these bogus claims. I think they should set their sights on the whole “wellness industry” before things get anymore out of hand then they are now.
Jon said: “Clarification regarding warning #4″
• What’s the problem with mixing God and science? Many of the world’s leading scientists are Christians and find their faith and science highly compatible. Some have even come to know God because of their science! You’re quite right, just believing in something doesn’t make it fact, but as far as I can tell, no one has yet disproved the existence of God scientifically, and the effectiveness of glyconutrition is not dependent on anyone’s belief.
Please re-read my article Steve, you missed something very important. My problem with Mannatech IS that they are trying to blur the lines between Science and Religion within the medical field. To say I have a huge problem with this is an understatement. Being Christian is one thing, using this to treat medical conditions is quite another.
I do not with to convert you to Atheism so I will not answer your other question regarding Gods existence, I have come to the conclusion that if there was a God, God would have committed suicide long before we came along… you can read my blog article entitled “IMMORTALITY: Not all it’s cracked up to be” (second article) at http://myfoodcount.com/healthylife/mfcblog/2006-september.html
Jon saisd: “Mannatech Background: Based on ABC News Findings……if Mannutech products cured cancer or where promoted as such, the answer completely dodged the question. “
o Exactly. It doesn’t cure anything. It’s a bit like asking whether an orange is going to cure a cold or cancer. Of course the answer is “no”. Does that mean the orange is useless or deceptive? Of course not! It’s the wrong question.
Like I mentioned earlier Steve, diet DOES change the bodies internal chemistry, so far, you have shown NO proof that Mannatech products do anything beyond anecdotal evidence with your own son. Here is the million dollar question, if Mannatech products don’t CURE anything nor change the bodies internal chemistry, then why take it? Please try to do so without using any word that sounds like prevention.
Jon said: “• Video after video of sales demonstrations purporting that their product Ambrotose is able to cure cancer. I saw this bull shit at The Health Expo in Toronto last year and it turned my stomach.”
o Sorry, but Mannatech can’t make that claim. What they can do is allow people to share their own stories of what has happened when they have put these nutrients into their diet. My own son can tell you that he has had chronic and acute asthma for most of his 19 years. Now, 6 months after changing his diet to include Ambrotose, his doctor said he no longer has asthma. Scientifically proven? No. Clinically trialled? No. Cured? No. Does he have asthma any more? No. Did anything else change in his environment? Not that we know of. Conclusion? Ambrotose was probably a contributing factor in his body restoring healthy lung function.
You bet it Mannatech cannot make this claim because their products, as you mention yourself, cannot cure anything. You run through a lot of questions but only one is important: Did he change his diet? YES! Diet modifies internal chemistry which does play a role in asthma symptoms. I am happy he doesn’t suffer from asthma, please don’t get me wrong, I am simply saying it wasn’t Ambrotose that did it, if it did, then not only would Mannatech products be showcased at every scientifically driven expo in the world, but all the pharmaceutical companies selling steroids and other treatment options would go out of business instantly. Mannatech wouldn’t be worth 500 million, they would be worth 500 billion and have no need to use any type of MLS to sell their product nor require the services of God to do so.
Jon said: “• Unless you have a congenital defect, your body DOES produce enough glyconutrients that Mannatech tries to scare you otherwise.”
o Actually it doesn’t. Glyconutrients are not produced by the body. They are a necessary part of a healthy dietary intake. Yes, the body is perfectly capable of producing its own healthy cells, when it has the necessary resources. Generally our western diet and food chain ensures that this is NOT the case.
Of course glyconutrients are not produced by the body, glyconutrients have nothing to do with science nor our bodies internal chemistry. This is a marketing word invented by Mannatech (I have yet to be proven otherwise). Evolutionarily speaking, we get our sugars from our diet as we where not born with photosynthetic cells.
The human race (using your religious timelines) has lived for a thousand years now on this Earth WITHOUT glyconutrients, if God wanted us to supplement his NATURAL harvest with glyconutrients, God would have given us a bottle of Ambrotose instead of a placenta to make sure we had received our lifetime dose. We have been able to “get away” without ingesting glyconutrients for over 970 years so far, what changed?
Jon said: “• Proof that the science behind Mannatechs Ambrotose works is funded by the company itself, sure sounds like Atkins all over again doesn’t it? “
o This is a very circular argument. If they did no research they’d be accused of selling a lie. If they do the research they’re accused of being deceptive. You can’t have it both ways! It’s a good thing they’re not the only ones doing the research and coming up with the same results. Tertiary institutions and teaching hospitals all over the world are now setting up glycobiology departments that are verifying and progressing the area.
Actually, pharmaceutical companies spend billions creating their own scientifically driven, double blind clinical studies with blood tests, low doses and extensive testing throughout. These test results are usually repeated several times, why hasn’t Mannatech done this? To repeat myself, Glycobiology IS a science, glyconutrients is NOT, there is no scientific relationship between these two words. NONE.
Jon said: “• CEO of Mannatech, Sam Caster has a history of selling things that either didn’t work or didn’t even come close to what was claimed, sure sounds like another Kevin Trudeau doesn’t it?”
o So having had a go and failed condemns a person to oblivion? Good thing we don’t practise that uniformly across life. Thomas Edison, Einstein, Pasteur, in fact almost every useful invention or discovery has been invented by someone who failed first.
Being an entrepreneur, I have learned far more from my failures then my successes, I admire Sam for keeping up the fight as an entrepreneur and creating a successful company. What I do not respect is that he has resorted to religion and deceptive MLS practices accomplish is stellar growth. Additionally, selling a light bulb that doesn’t work is one thing, selling nothing more then a placebo to those in dire circumstances is quite another.
Jon said: “• Sales associates (ei: multi-level distributors) telling others how to work around legal restrictions about their products”
o Likewise, every company who has to live within the law, finds ways to ensure that they can still achieve their goals. In fact, the information sharing that goes on between affiliates/representatives/distributors is mainly aimed at compliance with the law. How novel to find a group of people who try not to break the law.
Please review the ABC News footage and even your very own response to my blog article. You state in one hand that your son no longer has asthma because Ambrotose played a large role in relieving symptoms yet in the other Steve, you say that Ambrotose products can’t cure anything. You are trying to pull this on me without knowing it! You sound like a very intelligent man Steve, we both know the distinction you are clearly making but to the lay person, they will come to the conclusion that Ambrotose cured your sons asthma. What you are doing is providing X + Y and allowing the potential customer to figure out what they equate to without emphatically saying it. This approach I find very dishonest and so far, it has staved off legal troubles.
Jon said: “Mannatech isn’t all bad ….”
“Show their values and live by them …” So focusing on health rather than illness, sharing wealth rather than hoarding it, promoting generosity (yes there’s a prize for affiliates who give away the most product) instead of self-gain … these sound like reasonable values to live by and they do.
Deceptive marketing practices, corporately created scientific catch words and using God to justify the existence of your product are values to live by? The focus of Mannatech isn’t health, their focus is on duping the next poor sap to buy their products and using religion as the hook. Again, if their products don’t cure anything, why would people purchase them if they do not alter the bodies chemistry (if they did, the FDA would ban them). I see this whole “wellness” approach, not only by Mannatech but by the entire supplements industry as a plague that needs to be wiped out as it’s a loophole that has been exploited for far too long.
When was God’s name misused? I notice even Jesus placed a high value on healing and wellness. Why is it a crime to see the value in something and think that it might be God’s idea?
I will give you the benefit of a doubt regarding existence. When ever God’s name is used to sell a product then it’s being misused WITHOUT EXCEPTION! What did Jesus do when he saw shops selling stuff on temple grounds in Jerusalem (indirectly linking God with commercialism)? Well, what Mannatech is doing is absolutely no different. You are selling products in Gods Temple (Church). What would God say about that Steve? I will save you the trouble, here is the bible verse:
John 2:13-16
“The Passover of the Jews was near, and Jesus went up to Jerusalem. In the temple he found people selling cattle, sheep, and doves, and the money changers seated at their tables. Making a whip of cords, he drove all of them out of the temple, both the sheep and the cattle. He also poured out the coins of the money changers and overturned their tables. He told those who were selling the doves, “Take these things out of here! Stop making my Father’s house a marketplace!”
Please, of all my direct questions to you Steve, this is the one I most look forward to hearing the most as it challenges the entire foundation Mannatech is based upon.
When did Mannatech steal lives from anyone? Do we make the same accusation of the doctor who prescribes chemotherapy to the cancer patient (eg my own mother), who then loses all quality of life and subsequently dies? Apparently not, although looking at the statistic of chemotherapy failure, perhaps we should reconsider. So far no one in Mannatech has suggested that a patient should stop using their medication or “proven” treatment in favour of Ambrotose. I have seen plenty of examples where a person has used them in parallel, and found that eventually the pharmaceutical solution was no longer needed.
Again, blurring the lines Steve, to every cause there is an effect. If the wind blows, waves are created, if there is an earthquake, the ground shakes. The FDA regulates drugs in this way, if something is made up of no cause then it cannot have an effect and the FDA couldn’t care less (ei: wellness industry so far). I am sorry to hear about your mothers Cancer and subsequent passing but to say that Ambrotose could have changed or altered ANYTHING beyond a placebo effect is simply wrong. In the ABC News interview, the young girl was foregoing medical treatment because of her great believe Ambrotose, Mannatech will be held responsible for her death in my mind. Did Sam get a hold of her ASAP to tell her to stop taking Ambrotose or at least use it in parallel with sound medical treatment? I would love to know!
When did they lie? They have not told anyone that Mannatech’s product will cure anything. They’ve told them exactly what’s in them, where they come from, and why they’re needed. Not sure what lies you’re talking about but so far I haven’t heard any. I did get the offer to try the product for myself and see what happened. If not happy, then a money back guarantee was offered. I didn’t need it.
Mannatech is too smart not to give out direct lies, Sam is too intelligent a man to fund a double blind clinical study of Ambrotose and Steve, you are too intelligent to answer the question as to use Gods Temple as a marketplace (directly and indirectly). Dumb people say lies, smart people give construed omissions and calculated half truths. The result and intent are the same, just one gets away with it a little longer. I invite you to forward this entire blog to Sam himself, I have some direct questions I would love to ask him via e-mail and I can assure you it will not be a walk in the park like the ABC News interview. I will do a heck of a lot of research so I know what I am talking about as I have done both in writing this original post and answering each of your questions one by one over the past few hours.
Jon said: “The Bottom Line ……”
My bottom line? It works. Mannatech are legally compliant and well motivated and well established scientific communities and institutions are taking notice of the developments in this scientific field. They don;t have all the answers yet, but that’s never stopped people doing good things before. Why start now?
Mannatech is legally compliant due to a loophole a mile wide that the FDA has yet to close but they ARE NOT part of any established scientific community nor institution. Associating yourself with a medical field is NOT acceptance by a long shot. I fully realize the beginnings of the medical industry where psudo-junk at best as well but at least after a few thousand years, realized their mistakes and cleaned house (to all our benefit). I can only hope that Mannatech will do the same.
What I do see in your article Jon is a series of unfounded and illogical conclusions and connections that are not based on any of the science you apparently hold in high regard. Follow your own rules and try to be a little less biased in your analysis of something you clearly have not research properly.
I have answered each and every one of your questions and assumptions Steve, please be kind enough to answer mine. I believe I have given Mannatech (and you) as unbiased an opinion as possible without bitting my tongue too hard, I look forward to your rebuttals.
August 3rd, 2007 at 8:02 pm
Thank-you so much for your ongoing debate! FINALLY someone who can stand toe to toe with ‘em to debate the issue: There is NO scientific double blind studies to substantiate any Mannatech claims, but in the over 10 years that I have one of these passionate members in my extended family, Mannatech has yet to take any steps to prove their non-science. Back in 1995, I had heard over and over….”oh, every Doctor will get ahold of this and use mannatech exclusively to treat everything. Just wait until the medical community gets ahold of this!” Well, it’s 2007 & I’m still waiting.
Just google “Mannatech Lawsuits 2007″ and you get 69,000 entries! Get this: The latest rage is their Optimal Skin Care products which claim are totally preservative free because it uses some sort of super duper antibacterial Manna water or whatever. They are claiming that there are so many cancer causing ingredients in every skin care line out there and in shampoo and other cosmetics. All of these ingredients HAVE been proven to be safe by the FDA, but Mannatechers plug their ears and say “Na Na Na Na, I can’t hear you!” and still use all their scare tactic marketing. They will only have my vote and my purchases with solid research!
——
I wake up everyday, waiting, hoping, that Steve - the Mannatech Distributor, will reply to my replies regarding Mannatech. So far, close to a month and silence… I believe this silence speaks louder then any words he could write.
August 9th, 2007 at 6:43 pm
Sounds a bit like our Liberal and Labour Governments. They both sound alright and seem to make sense. So are both of them RIGHT. If the product is so good and it seems to have helped a lot of people why not distribute it in the normal way. A lot of people are looking for ways not to have to use drugs continuously myself included but MLM is not a tool for me to be involved in. Over the years they have gained themselves a poor reputation and not to be trusted. Surely their has to be a better way to distribute this product.
————-
Distribution methods is one gripe I have with Mannatech but the bigger evil is circumventing methods to avoid having to prove scientifically that their product works. If it works, prove it!
August 15th, 2007 at 5:46 am
I asked Manna Relief if they were members of ECFA (Evangelical Council for Financial Accountability). If they were really doing God’s work and are really evangelical Christians, they should join, but they have not. Also, the “charity work” they mention is simply distributing some of the Mannatech products to the needy. I don’t see anything on their site where they have provided anything else of substance except maybe the missionaries they send share their personal faith, too.
August 15th, 2007 at 5:52 am
Also, under the current law it is very difficult for FDA to touch this company as long as they carefully separate their drug claims from their product sales. If their products are so effective, why don’t they do the exhaustive research and full double blind studies and get them into drug status? That shouldn’t be out of reach now that the company is large enough and should have the resources to do so.
March 28th, 2008 at 3:38 am
This stuff is a joke powder crap. Dont buy it, dont get into it. It helped kill my friend.
July 3rd, 2008 at 6:04 am
Hi, I’m in Cape Town South Africa and am, along with nearly 10 000 other South Africans, enjoying Mannatech’s network and it’s products immensely! I want to add 2 ideas.
1) The person with the experience is never inferior to the person with the experience! John, Andrew, Christina and Jon, you seem very negative and spend much time digging graves rather than planting flowers - this is not good for your health - makes you acidic, but then again, we need grave-diggers to help bring balance …
2) When people want to get into detailed arguments re Mannatech like you all have on this blog, I nicely tell them: “Believe and receive, or doubt and do without.”
Some will and some won’t. (I just know that if I ever should have cancer, I’d consume loads of Glyconutrients as well as Starlight). If it helps my body heal itself by recognizing and successfully fighting off the tumour, then my life has been saved without any adverse side-effects of poisonous drugs! Remember, FIRST DO NO HARM
——-
I appreciate your comment but I fail to see what is so “negative” about asking for proof that a “medicine” (using this term extremely loosely) actually works. If the medical field was purely based on “belief”, we would still be using shamans to cure cancer instead of chemotherapy and surgery. Let’s get this right, cancer is the bodies own cells that fail to die, taking sugar (regardless of origin) is no different than drinking loads of water… sure you may feel “better” but the net result is the same… you being scammed out of your money. I honestly wish this actually did work, but from my standpoint, of which you are proof, Mannatech should be thrown out of business and its executives forced into solitary confinement for all the psychological harm they are causing to people around the world. They are worse than religion in my opinion, because they don’t help anybody but themselves.
July 3rd, 2008 at 6:05 am
Sorry for mistake: The person with the experience is never inferior to the person with the argument.
——
In the case of Mannatech, I completely disagree - if you would be so kind as to answer the questions from Steve (I am still waiting), that would be fantastic! This product is based on junk-science and “belief”, PLEASE prove me wrong - I would love Mannatech to respond to all of my questions but so far, I believe they fear the truth. “I feel better” isn’t proof, a double-blind independent study is at least heading in the right direction… something they can EASILY afford to do.