Sunday, October 13, 2013

MLM Woo: Marine Phytoplankton and Rose As Nutritional Supplement

Simple question: Do you eat algae?

Of course not. Waterborne insects, small fish and crustaceans, and amphibians like frogs eat algae. Remember those aquarium mini catfish that sucks the bottom and the sides? They're eating algae.

In large bunches, fresh water algae is also known as "pond scum".

How about marine phytoplanktons? That's just microscopic algae that live on the ocean. It's "sea scum" (instead of pond scum!)  Whales and some other cetaceans eat them. Crustaceans like shrimp and zooplanktons (micro-shrimp and others) eat them too. Marine invertebrates like sea stars, sea cucumbers, and so on also eat marine phytoplanktons.

Would you eat marine phytoplanktons? I don't see why you would when you won't eat algae. Clearly, fruits and vegetables are much more delicious for us land lubbers.

Or to put it even more plainly... Do you prefer eating this:

Or this?

The choice is clear, isn't it? You'd choose the latter.

So why is "marine phytoplankton" being marketed as some sort of super food?

Think about it, folks. Why would a LAND animal, such as human, achieve full absorption of MARINE phytoplankton? When there are plenty of LAND phytonutrients available as fruits and vegetables?

Or put it another way, why would any one pay to eat sea equivalent of pond scum, when there's plenty of delicious fruits and vegetables prepared any way you like?

And how much do you actually get any way?

Well, let's see, it's sold in 16 oz bottles, and you're supposed to take two sips per day. How much of this phytoplankton can there be? Borrowed from one of the online sellers, this is the label on the bottle:

Seems you're just paying for cranberry juice, apple juice, and some noni juice, hmmm? Every thing else is so little there's no proof that they will do anything. It's pixie-dusting.

But there's something else in this "FrequenSea" that shows this is just woo. Why? "Frequency" of rose. From their website:

Wait, rose has a "frequency"? No it doesn't. Some pseudo-scientist measured the "frequency" of rose OIL, not a real rose.

So what's the point of finding the frequency of rose oil? This "bio-spiritual" website claim that human have this "field" with a natural frequency, and you need to "tune" your body's frequency by taking certain oil for optimum health.

Oh great, this "frequency" of rose oil is some New Age crystal spirit energy crap thing that has NOTHING to do with nutrition at all.

That's right, Forever Green not only cited pseudo-science crap instead of real nutrition, it also cited it WRONG!

They got this ocean tank that takes food away from marine life, dry it and puree it, then package it (cost almost nothing to grab), then sell a tiny wee bit of it to you as if it's something special.

That is woo.

Enhanced by Zemanta


  1. Why would anyone pay to eat wild herbs when there are plenty of delicious fruits and vegetables prepared any way you like?

    Further, why would anyone pay to eat chemicals when there are plenty of delicious fruits and vegetables prepared any way you like?


    1. Wild herbs = naturalistic fallacy, i.e. "natural" > "not as natural"

      As for chemicals... there's no reason to fear "chemicals" when there's not enough of them in food to have any effect on you.