Major Exhibitor Pulling Out of the WAPF Conference


Randy Hartnell of Vital Choice Wild Seafood

In the wake of Sunday evening’s ouster of Kaayla Daniel as a Weston A. Price Foundation director, a major exhibitor is pulling out of the WAPF conference upcoming in Anaheim.

Vital Choice Wild Seafood, which was slated to be a $5,000 gold sponsor and to donate several thousand dollars worth of food for the conference, informed WAPF on Monday morning that it was canceling its sponsorship. The Vital Choice president, Randy Hartnell, had described in a blog post Sunday his disappointment with WAPF’s enthusiastic backing of Green Pasture, the maker of fermented cod liver oil that was said by Daniel in an August report to be rancid and made from pollock instead of cod livers.

WAPF had three weeks ago kicked Ron Schmid’s Dr. Ron’s nutritional supplement business out of the conference as a gold sponsor, based on his contention that the Green Pasture fermented cod liver oil led to heart failure that nearly killed Schmid. That leaves six gold sponsors listed on the WAPF conference web page, along with three platinum sponsors, which includes Green Pasture.

In the blog post, on Kaayla Daniel’s web site, in the form of a response to an irate Vital Choice customer, Hartnell said, in part, “I am not a scientist myself but hang out with quite a few of them so have a rich network to whom I can readily turn with related questions. People I know have tested the FCLO and expressed confidentially to me that they would never personally consume it based on the extreme oxidation levels. These are experts in the field who have no agenda other than the truth and public well-being. I firmly believe these are Dr. Daniel’s objectives as well. The fact that the product in question has been mis-branded and mis-marketed as having been derived from one species (Gadus macrocephalus) when it is clearly another (Gadus chalcgorammus) speaks to the integrity of the vendor, wouldn’t you say? I have been in the seafood industry for more than 30 years and can tell you that this type of bait-and-switch fraud is very common in the seafood business, as it is relatively easy to perpetrate on unwitting consumers……I’ve never run across anyone within the seafood industry who would mistake cod for a pollock or vice versa. It seems to me that only someone with a financial interest in confusing the two would attempt to make that ridiculous case.”

Before Vital Choice “quit” the WAPF conference, it was clearly  skating on thin ice for its criticism of GP, and thus was in danger of being “fired” from the conference, as Dr. Ron’s had been. Hartnell, an outspoken former Alaskan fisherman, was emphatic in his reason for departing the WAPF conference, after 12 years of sponsorship. “We cannot endorse any organization that knowingly promotes a potentially hazardous product, and the irresponsible producer of that product, and attempts to deny and cover up critically important information about it. We regret we have no choice but to take this position, and are hopeful that one day commonsense and accountability will prevail for the well-being of all WAPF members.”

Sally Fallon Morell, the president and founder of WAPF, has continued to position the dust-up over her ongoing endorsement of Green Pasture as a minor spat, of little consequence to her or WAPF. After the removal of Daniel last evening, she put out an email to foundation members announcing the removal, and adding: “Certain sensationalist blogs have claimed that there is ‘chaos’ and ‘carnage’ at the Weston A. Price Foundation.  I would like to assure all of you that here is no carnage, no chaos at WAPF. The office is very calm. We have received a few phone calls about the cod liver oil controversy, and we have pointed them to our statements on the website (Concerns about Fermented Cod Liver Oil, Questions and Answers About Fermented Cod Liver Oil). Many supportive emails have come in. No one has cancelled membership over these concerns, and no current chapter leaders have resigned. Registrations for the conference are way ahead of last year, and we look forward to seeing many of you there.”

In another reaction to the Daniel ouster from the board, Ron Schmid, the naturopathic physician and owner of Dr. Ron’s, today sent out an angry letter of warning to nearly 600 WAPF chapter leaders about the Green Pasture product, referring to fermented cod liver oil as “rancid (rotten) pollock liver oil (RPLO)” He acknowledged that “many people have taken RPLO with no apparent ill effects, and even benefits.”

He maintained, “If the dose is small enough for the individual, the benefits of the nutrients may outweigh the damage toxins do for some time.”

Schmid added, to the chapter leaders: “All over the internet, people continue to sell RPLO. Stores carry it, health care professionals recommend it to their patients. Meanwhile Sally threatens lawsuits against those of you who even question the stuff. “ He then offered a legal challenge: “To Sally and the WAPF board, and to David Wetzel and Green Pasture, I say this: You say I am slandering RPLO. Well, sue me. Not your chapter leaders, me. I welcome it. I’ll see you in court, where the truth will come out.”

162 comments to Major Exhibitor Pulling Out of the WAPF Conference

  • Mark mcafee Mark mcafee

    As the first to comment….let me say this….pasteurized cheese just killed more people and the news never mentions the fact that it is a pasteurized cheese.

    Remember this: there is not one outbreak of illness recorded in the CDC database listing a raw dairy product as a source of listeria death or illness. According to UCDavis PHDs, listeria illness is associated with pasteurized dairy products….not raw dairy products.

    Listeria thrives under refrigeration and loves a cold dead dairy product. Raw dairy is not dead it is alive with enzymes & good bacteria…that inhibit listeria. It is sad that the truth about the lethality of pasteurization is not exposed.

    As to the subject matter today …..

    In stead of thinking about any negative issues at WAP I prefer to consider the powerful work done by FTCLDF and all of the healthy happy kids alive today because of Nourishing Traditions.

    • Theresa

      Looks like someone is lobbying pretty hard for an open WAPF board seat.

      • Jaded

        The outsourcers would have a club of their own!

      • carolyn

        here again, why is someone (mark( who is just trying to be positive seen as some kind of conspirator with an ulterior motive?

        • Dana

          Because he’d rather be Pollyanna and police people’s tone and attitude instead of face the truth. I do appreciate Nourishing Traditions but I think even that book has some inaccurate claims in it. (I don’t mean the core nutrition stuff, but some other things.) And then there’s the way so many WAPF adherents care more about the grain and legumes they eat than anything else. Oh they talk a great game about Dr. Price’s work but they completely ignore it or they would be focusing more on organ meats than “soaked and sprouted” grain. Good lord. I could go on all day.

          This does nothing to change my attitude about real food though. I don’t need some nonprofit organization to shepherd me, I can hold opinions all by myself.

      • Ora Moose Ora Moose

        THERESA, ARE YOU LOBBYING? oops caps lock again. Lay off on Mark, he is as transparent as you could hope for in corporate enterprise. What do YOU stand for

      • Jeanmarie

        Mark McAfee would be an asset to the board, and it probably needs a shake-up (not sure why Mark’s photo is appearing next to my reply!). Chris Masterjohn would be an asset. I think Sally is now alienating more people than she is attracting, but, I don’t blame the board for getting rid of Daniel. It was entirely proper for her to bring her concerns to the board and they seem to have looked into them, had tests done, and concluded there was no problem. Maybe they were right about that, maybe they weren’t. Most of us commenting dont’ have the technical expertise to really have a valuable opinion on the subject. But after the board investigated and then rejected her concerns, if she still felt strongly that something was off, it would have been appropriate for Daniel to resign and then pursue her own investigation. But keeping your own probe under wraps then the big reveal, done in a way calculated to damage relations and reputations, really leaves the board no choice but to oust her. I have no opinion on her qualifications, though I think it’s the WAPF’s loss. Maybe this will lead to a needed shakeup of things at WAPF. But let’s not throw the baby out with the bathwater. I’m very interested in the new foundation and may be able to make it to the founding conference. It can only help the real foods movement to have more organizations doing more good work, but I really hope this doesn’t turn into a bunch of warring factions that just make outsiders want to avoid the whole steaming mess. Pursue truth with integrity, not with vindictiveness.

        • Jeanmarie

          OK Mark’s photo disappeared once my comment posted. This is my dog Zimmy, no reference to Mark intended. Too bad there’s not an Edit button for comments. 😉

        • Steve Tallent

          I wish we had more information about what actually happened at the board meeting. I feel like neither side is telling exactly what happened there in its entirety. I can certainly see the point in resigning from WAPF before publishing a report like that, but as I thought about it, I had a different take on it. I thought about what I would do if I was a board member that really cared about the organization but thought it was getting entirely to cozy with another potentially toxic party. (I don’t mean that the product is toxic, just that something could happen to that other party that might drag down my organization if they were still tied together.) If I resigned, then what I was doing might look more like an attack on my own organization than if I didn’t. And even if I accomplished my purpose I would be alienated in some measure from the org I was trying to save. I thought that maybe she did what she did in the way that she did it to make that GPP potato so hot that WAPF would have to drop it and step back a bit. It was like she was trying to drive a wedge between GPP and WAPF to create some separation, but WAPF refused to be separated and has taken those blows on the chin. Yes, this whole thing has seriously damaged the reputation of WAPF, and Daniel’s report was the catalyst. But it didn’t HAVE to damage WAPF’s reputation, and I don’t think it was intended to – unless you think that Sally IS WAPF, in that case, there were a couple of less than complimentary things said. I not naive enough to think that Daniel’s motives were 100% altruistic, because people and their motives are complicated. But I see nothing to indicate she was trying to damage WAPF, drive away members and chapter leaders, or lead a revolution, rebellion, or exodus. If any of that happened, it was because of WAPF’s own subsequent action. But hey, Sally said they haven’t lost any members or “current” chapter leaders, so they should be fine, right?

        • Steve Tallent

          It sure seems that if this whole thing didn’t cause WAPF to step back from GPP that it sure isn’t going to cause a shakeup in the board or leadership at WAPF – except for them to promote one of their current board members to VP and add a new junior member. (I wouldn’t be surprised if it was Sandrine Love). You have to wonder how the board would have voted regarding more research into FCLO if most of the board members weren’t either related to Sally, or dependent upon her good graces for a significant portion of their income. What would a financially independent board look like and how would that affect WAPF operations? I don’t know. I know some might say that they are capable of acting independently and appropriately even if there are conflicts of interest, but there is a reason that it is labeled a “conflict” and a reason that judges and others have to recuse themselves.

          • Jim Schmechel

            It would be interesting to know which board member(s) abstain from voting on certain issues due to a potential conflict of interest.

        • Eric Garza

          For what it’s worth, the only thing I thought was inappropriate was the tone she used throughout the report. Working on her own analysis privately and releasing it on her personal website doesn’t seem unreasonable to me. Inconvenient for WAPF and those in that organization who have ties to Green Pasture Products perhaps, but not unreasonable.

          And yes, I also hope this leads to a shake up at WAPF that compels them to think hard about their mission and whether they’re sticking to it. Time will tell.

    • Peter Han

      Hopefully the “carnage” does not spill over into the FTCLDF and that it remains ever distant from the WAPF – the more distance from these in-fighting hens the better.


      Thanks for the kind words Mark and others. I wish right now people were able to focus on some amazing things happening in the food movement, like the introduction of the PRIME ACT which came out of the FTCLDF’s first Food Freedom Conference, the growing support for the Raw Milk bills in Congress, and more.

      FTCLDF cannot do what we are doing to protect small farmers and real food without the membership and support of average people who care about what they eat and who they get it from.

    • Ron Schmid

      Mark, suppose you labeled your milk “Jersey Milk” for ten years. Then somebody came by and saw a bunch of different breeds all over your pastures. How do you think your customers would feel?

      Seems to me your head is in the sand.

      • David Gumpert David Gumpert

        To Ron, in connection with your what-if (and to John, and Jeanmarie, and others who think Green Pasture and Dave Wetzel are being singled out for mob assassination)–Another version of the Green Pasture story did play out at Organic Pastures back in 2009. People were all over Mark McAfee for supposedly outsourcing raw milk, and then selling it as Organic Pastures milk. Now, Mark argued that there was nothing illegal about outsourcing the milk, since it was from a trusted organic milk producer, and also that it was used only for making butter. And there was no indication or suggestion that anyone was getting sick.

        But many readers were all over him because they felt lied to, that he has misrepresented his products as coming entirely from his own dairy. To Mark’s everlasting credit, he stayed with people, discussed it on this blog, and eventually changed his way of thinking about the whole situation. As I remember it, he committed to selling only his own dairy products, or informing customers if he wasn’t using his own dairy’s milk. There was none of this business of taking down web pages, stonewalling behind Weston A. Price Foundation, and other questionable practices that are upsetting people to the point that Wetzel’s apologists feel he’s being subjected to mob rule.

        People who search out what they think is the healthiest food and then pay top dollar don’t react well when they learn they’re possibly being screwed….as well they shouldn’t.

        Take a look at this blog post from back then for more info:

        • Amanda Rose

          Before we give Mark too much credit, we had to hammer him to even look at his labeling. The first hint of outsourcing went public in the fall of 2007 and he promised not to do it again. That outsourcing was associated with a cream recall. He blamed the source dairy, a company that was flabbergasted since the cream was purchased through a milk broker and the dairy processor did not know it was being bottled raw. Bonnie at the Ethicurean called Mark out and Mark stated on this blog that he would never outsource again. I was helping him with a political campaign at the time and saw tankers bringing in product after his promise (4-5K gallon trucks I would estimate). For months I offered to help him educate his customers about his practices. Finally, I went public and posted about it in the spring of 2008 and you all did the “shoot the messenger” bit here on this blog. We fought and scrapped but Mark implied he had stopped outsourcing, it was all a big mistake, and that I just had some sort of ax to grind. I got hammered locally and here on this blog but Mark did get kicked out of the big Fresno Farmer’s Market (Vineyard) because they have actual standards. He admitted later that he continued to outsource into 2009.

          Approximate timeline and stylized McAfee quotes (search this blog for actual quotes):
          Fall of 2007: Yes, I outsourced but I’ll never do it again.
          Spring of 2008: Yes, I outsourced but it was a big mistake and the real problem is that Amanda is a bitch.
          Sometime in 2010: Yes, I did outsource into 2009 but I’ve stopped now.

          Sitting here in 2015 I will add: OPDC’s herd of 100 milk cows produces a powerful amount of product.

          Ron’s comment is interesting because OPDC products implied for a very long time that the cows were 100% grassed. We squawked enough that those got changed. I worked with Brian Shilhavy on that eye-opening video that probably helped with the label change. There isn’t enough grass on those 250 acres to make any real difference. A good part of the acreage is farmed for feed, leaving limited actual pasture land. The dry cows need land too, as do the calves in their crates, bleating for their mamas. The roads and outbuildings need space. The non-mobile mobile barn needs space. The offices, creamery, and parking lot needs space. It’s all competing for space on about 250 acres.

          Personally, I have moved on. People can buy anything they want but is Mark McAfee a model for the current FCLO situation? I sure hope not. All of the wordsmithing I see at GP reminds me of OPDC. Maybe they have a club.

          In this current dust-up, let’s shoot a little bit higher than the OPDC case. Surely consumers deserve better.

          • pollock is not cow

            You persevered until the truth came out. Many thanks. Do I remember correctly that Sally and the national WAPF were some how implicated or at least not interested in the truth coming out regarding their favorite raw dairyman?
            Regarding wordsmithing– I remember seeing posts on on a WAPF Yahoo group regarding grass feeding. When OPDC was asked “Are your cows 100% pastured?” the answer was yes. When asked “How much grain per day is each cow fed?” the question had to be referred to management and the truth came out that they were indeed fed a portion of grain.

          • Sue B.

            I do wonder why Mark was given so much leeway and a chance to make things right but GP is not. I think we need to work with what we have – educate our producers on what we want/what we find acceptable. It’s absurd to me the GP witch hunt when Wetzel has responded to labeling concerns (will now list species used), and he immediately had a third party come in and retest. I wonder why those results were not hungrily posted here. I’ve been patient with judgement waiting for all the facts to come out, observing the postings and omissions of each “side”. And it’s telling when pertinent information like GPs recent tests are not shared. It’s like the Crucible around here.

          • Steve Tallent

            GPPs recent test results have been published here. I have looked at them. And the analyses by the scientists. I was inclined to trust Dr. Sathival before. After reading this most recent report, no longer. He barely mentioned Transfats and then completely changes the script. Here’s what he said, “The above-mentioned commercial analytical labs report showed an average of 1.19% trans fatty acids in your oil. It is normal to have very low level of trans fatty acids. Some labs may not report trans fatty acids in fish oil because they are, if present, present only at undetectable level or at levels less than 1%.” The second sentence is meaningless except as a smoke screen. Levels ARE above 1%. Levels WERE reported. 1% is NOT “very low levels”. He then launches into a talk on Free Fatty Acids as if it was the same thing. It could be of course that his original evaluation was edited.

            For those of you that don’t know about transfats, they are considered so bad, that years ago, the FDA required they be listed on all labels and more recently decreed that by 2018 they CANNOT be present in a product. This is the same FDA that things that Round Up and GMOs are completely safe. THAT’S how bad transfats are considered. GPP has not been putting it on their label, seems to have no intention of putting it on the label (because that would involve expensive per batch testing) and apparently, like Dr. Sathival, would like to pretend that it is not there or doesn’t matter that it is there.

            Sathival mentions 7 test samples, but we are only have links to 6 tests, so you have to wonder what happened to the other one. One test had lower levels of PV, Anisidine, FFAs and even transfats. The others were all higher – including one that was right at the max acceptable level of PV. (Maybe the other test crossed that threshold?) The fact that Sathival had to reference Grootveld’s test results to explain away things in these test results is not good sign.

            Sathival is very careful in how he says that the product isn’t rancid. He doesn’t outright say that the product isn’t rancid. He is very careful to say that the product doesn’t show signs of OXIDATIVE rancidity. He says that the high level of FFAs in the product are NOT the result of oxidative rancidity. However, he does not say that they are not the result of hydrolytic rancidity – which they probably are.

            High levels of FFAs, even if they are not signs of rancidity, are not healthy. They are linked in multiple studies to insulin resistance.

            Certainly seems that Sathival is not showing the kind of scientific integrity that we would like to see. One has to wonder why.

          • janieinMN

            just a couple supporting links re studies linking FFA to insulin resistance and inflammation in the major insulin target tissues (skeletal muscle, liver and endothelial cells) and thus are an important link between obesity, insulin resistance, inflammation and the development of T2DM, hypertension, dyslipidemia, disorders of coagulation and ASVD –

            elevated plasma levels of FFAs are not only a major cause of insulin resistance in skeletal muscle and liver but may, in addition, play a role in the pathogenesis of coronary artery disease.

            from the American Diabetes Association –

  • Rob

    Wow David!! I’m almost out of my coconut oiled popcorn drenched in raw grass fed butter and salted in fine ground REAL Salt! The emotion in your words is so profound. I can almost feel what you were feeling as you typed this.! All you need now is a climatic explosion with some cheesy catch phrases to wrap up this Hollywood blockbuster style account. Or maybe a nice speech quoting some Dylan Thomas…. ” Do not go gentle into the good night….” Good stuff. Be proud good sir. Be proud.

    • Ken

      The speech will come when the new organization is up and running.

      • Rob

        Yes! It will be glorious! I hope it’s like from the Simpson’s movie!! The scene where all the folks are carrying pitchforks and torches. Then David, Ron, and Kaayle will be a silhoutted underneath the screen and come forth with rallying cries of “Burn Green Pastures!! Burn it to the ground!! Make GP burn for their deceiving ways!! Make them burn for making us pay a premium cost of value that has helped some and not others but still continued to pay for it!! Make GP burn for duping us deeper than Monsanto or the vaccine industry combined! Oh wait, they never duped us. We just wanted to feel like we were duped b/c we don’t wanna take any personal account….. for our actions. ; )

        • Dana

          This isn’t about whether this stuff didn’t help some people but they continued to pay for it. This is about a company LYING ABOUT WHAT THEY ARE SELLING.

          If you want other people to take responsibility for themselves, why don’t you lead by example. It’s YOUR responsibility to learn what the actual issues are before you open your mouth and start criticizing.

  • Peter Han

    I don’t think Sally should be so worried about “cancelled” memberships this year; I mean, why would I cancel something that I already paid for and won’t get any money back? She should be more concerned about the lack of membership renewal next year.

    • L

      When my renewal came due a month ago I didn’t renew. It never occured to me to phone the WAPF office and announce my resignation. I tossed the last WAPF journal in the garbage. The wacky, broad column design layout made it unreadable anyway. I only read it for the ads.

    • Eric Garza

      Bingo! My membership renewal comes up in December. I won’t be renewing. My chapter will also expire, unless someone else in my area wants to take it over.

  • Gary

    Thank you David, thank you Randy Hartnell (for doing what I fully expected you to do-there is no substitute for integrity), and thank you Ron Schmid. He won’t sue, for obvious reasons. Peter Han, you’re absolutely right. I won’t rejoin until they put Sally out to pasture. The fallout in membership and conference attendance will occur next year. The FTCLDF still deserves our full support.

    • Augie

      Are there no nutritionist PhDs on the board? There is a psychic healer though

      • Ora Moose Ora Moose

        Agree on supporting FTCLDF separately from however you feel about WPF and their leaders of today and tomorrow, change is inevitable that’s why they still make pennies and that’s more than a metaphor on personal income more of a comment on how they’re not getting rich quick.

        Augie, psychic healing is perhaps the hardest to master and administer because everybody is so, different can’t you tell

      • Oxidized

        what about Tom Cowan MD

  • Ken

    Just a reminder that Green Pastures does have a return policy. We just shipped our Fukushima pollock oil back to nebraska and received a refund of over $550.

  • Steve Tallent

    It is always surprising to see somebody that follows their morals when they know it might mean a loss of revenue. Whether you agree with their position or not, it is kind of inspiring.

    It is unfortunately not so surprising and definitely uninspiring when people are doing things that seem, at least on the surface, to be questionable, and their stated reasoning is to keep a small company in business.

    • Ora Moose Ora Moose

      Steve, was that a subliminal slip? As in follow Fallon Morell, is that an expensive mushroom? Seems to be

      • Steve Tallent

        @Ora Moose, maybe it’s just because I’m tired after traveling all day yesterday and a lot of long days leading up to that, but I’ve read this half a dozen times and have no clue what it means. 🙂 So I can’t answer your question.

  • Ora Moose Ora Moose

    One thing for sure, there’s bound to be a whole lot of interesting conversationalities hope someone like David can provide illuminations

  • Jim Schmechel

    Read through the current biographies of the Board of Directors for WAPF:

    Are the current Board members a good fit to their mission statement?:

    “The Weston A. Price Foundation is a nonprofit, tax-exempt charity founded in 1999 to disseminate the research of nutrition pioneer Dr. Weston Price, whose studies of isolated nonindustrialized peoples established the parameters of human health and determined the optimum characteristics of human diets. Dr. Price’s research demonstrated that humans achieve perfect physical form and perfect health generation after generation only when they consume nutrient-dense whole foods and the vital fat-soluble activators found exclusively in animal fats.”

    They just removed from their Board:

    “Dr. Daniel earned her PhD in Nutritional Sciences and Anti-Aging Therapies from the Union Institute and University in Cincinnati, and is certified as a clinical nutritionist (CCN) by the Clinical Nutrition Certification Board of the International and American Association of Clinical Nutritionists in Dallas.”

    Wasn’t she a good fit for their mission statement?

    While the following link doesn’t exactly apply to WAPF, the concept of it does:

    We can see the Manager of the organization (Sally Fallon Morrell), being also the Treasurer, and the President of the Board of Directors. Corporate Governance should become a priority for WAPF as soon as possible, in my opinion.

    I would guess, unless we see significant improvements to WAPF, we will see less and less support to their organization as time goes by.

    • Pete

      The bigger issue than the combining of the manager and the Board president is the combining of the Treasurer and President. The former is a matter of practice/preference, the latter is a matter of law and likely illegal…

      President and Treasurer are the only to officers the corp is required to have, and they are required to be separate. I’m not a corporate law lawyer but I have a hard time seeing how this is not illegal.

      • janieinMN

        In Illinois, it’s the President and VP, or President and Secretary who cannot be the same person in a non-profit corporation. You linked to a government organization, which may have different rules (and may have put that exclusion in their by-laws). For non-profit organizations, the rules for directors, officers, etc is in their by-laws – which are part of the incorporation process. IL state law requires minimum of 3 directors on the Board. One person can hold one or more officer positions, except as stated at the beginning of this post. I do not know if non-profit corps rules vary state-to-state, but I would imagine that the state laws follow the federal, at least in part, in this… because non-profit affects the tax status – FEDERAL.

  • Jeanmarie

    I think Dr. Ron’s extreme overconsumption of both regular CLO and subsequently FCLO for over 30 years has a lot more to do with his health problems than which brand he consumed. Multiple tablespoons a day for decades is not recommended by anybody, and if it were, that should be questioned. Seems like he’s trying to avoid responsibility. I’m not a fan of WAPF politics and have had my disagreements with them (notably Sally’s curious anti-Paleo stance), and I disagree with the hero-worship too many WAPF members seem to have for Sally (though I have tremendous respect for her overall work over the years), but I can’t help but see a certain personal vindictiveness in Kaayla Daniel’s actions. This blog has, it seems to me, been fomenting excited responses rather than calm, sober deliberations and seeking of truth. I see blame and good on all sides. I hate to think this movement will become splintered into warring camps over this. Please reflect on your own part in this. Are you out for truth or for clickbait?

    • Karen

      Jeanmarie I didn’t take Tbsps of fclo and stayed in the wapf range of 1 measured tsp/ day for around 6 years. I faithfully took taking it every day. For the past 6 years, my crp numbers were in the 4-5 range and I couldn’t ever bring it down.
      I retested last Thurs after 30 days of no flco. The test came back today at 3.23, the lowest it’s been in 6 years. (my last blood test in June was 4.13). No other changes in diet or supplements.

      It pretty darn clear to me this is a case of “stop the poison = stop the inflammation”.

      • Karen

        won’t allow an edit but to be clear “I faithfully took fclo every day for at least 6 years”.

        • sherry elton

          I think you should all get a real problem. Most of you are just fueling a fire; and you have no idea how it was started. Does it make you feel powerful to twist the knife? It makes me feel sad.
          I take no sides. I support anyone who wants to further education around the whole food revolution. Maybe together we can save the world.
          I will also be eternally grateful to the WAPF, which I first heard about in 2003.
          It was through the foundation’s work and journals that I first learned about “the cholesterol/statin fraud” and GAPS, both of which have led me to be able to help a host of people, including my family and myself. I continue this work to this day.
          Nothing will change how grateful I am to the WAPF and Sally and Geoffrey.

          Have you forgotten that maybe your lives have been changed by them for the better too?

          My advice is to stop twisting the knife and getting pleasure from other peoples challenges.
          There is only love or fear. Send out love to help heal the wounds and the world, God knows it needs your love.
          If not love, then there is only fear.

          Sherry Elton
          GAPS Practitioner
          New Zealand

          • Karen

            Sherry, I have been following and supporting WAPF almost from it’s beginning. I’ve been to many conferences, donated money to WAPF, and given memberships to family members. And I certainly do know how all this started and no it’s not a powerful feeling to watch an organization I’ve had so much respect for behaving this poorly. I certainly agree with being sad. It is incredibly sad to watch such bad behavior especially when the stakes are high for many people’s health.

            All I can say is I followed the dosing for fclo and have used it faithfully almost since it was produced. This is the longest I’ve been off it. Problems I could not get to clear up are suddenly now going away. Looks to me that’s what happens when you remove a poison.

          • Victor Cozzetto

            FCLO is not for everyone Karen. Dave Wetzel makes this as clear as possible by using his own daughter as an example. The lesson here is that we must all take more responsibility for our own health – which we are all trying to do. Mistakes will always be made, but that does not lend fault to the product. We should be promoting awareness of FCLO compatibility, and how to deal with that. That would be constructive.

          • Karen

            Well I agree with you on one point and it’s that fclo is no longer for me. I don’t do well when I find out I’ve been unwittingly taking a poison.

          • Victor Cozzetto

            Karen, may I ask which test results make you think it is a poison rather than an incompatibility?

          • Steve Tallent

            On a personal level, I don’t really see the distinction between an incompatibility and a poison. If my wife, despite her care, unwittingly takes in some gluten, she’ll be in bed for a day and lethargic for a week. It is common for her to say that she got “gluten poisoning”. I can eat gluten with no problems. I’ve never thought to take issue with her calling it a poison, because for her it is.

            Perhaps you don’t know how hard it is for some people to get their inflammation (crp) down, because you’ve never struggled with it. The single biggest trigger of inflammation is food consumption. For Karen’s to drop so much so fast when they have been consistently much higher for the past 6 years is quite telling. If she attributed it to not eating organic chips and salsa, or organic avocados, I would be fine with her calling it a poison. It seems apparent it is not only, “not just for everyone”, or “just not for her”, but it is an actual poison for her. Which brings up the point that it CAN be a poison for people, which then leads to, WHO is it a poison to, WHO is being harmed, and HOW do we find out. Running around with our fingers in our ears, saying, “blah, blah, blah, I can’t hear you it is a safe product show me the conclusive test results look at all the people that have been helped we need to keep this small business alive it’s a conspiracy” isn’t going to get it done or help the people that need it most.

          • Karen

            Victor if there’s a chance of “incompatibility” with fclo wouldn’t you think a warning would be in order and certainly more study of the oils? And especially for people like me who never had any overt signs of this incomatibility.

            I really don’t care what the actual poison is in the oils (probably rancidity=poison). Havng high inflammation levels that nothing will bring down suddenly drop in 30 days is a great big deal. I suspect had I’d worked with a doctor who saw these results, NO, NO, NO warning signs would be flashing in their head on fclo recommendations.

          • Victor Cozzetto

            Karen, I think there will be more warnings in the future, but heck, Dave Wetzel has already used his own daughter, even on video, to show that FCLO is not for everyone. Not sure what else he can do. Bread and Milk do not contain warnings, nor do other foods that have far more compatibility issues. Our labeling laws have improved over the years to identify known allergens in products, but even there, as a society, we are not perfect. So yes, things should and will continue to improve.

            If the community worked together constructively, we could possibly improve things more quickly. Attacking the product will not help us get to that goal more quickly. The FCLO is going to continue to grow in popularity, as more and more tests will validate it. But this is not a good thing in the current climate, as it will only make people too eager. We definitely do need more caution and education, but putting such on the labels is not good enough. It doesn’t work for cigarettes, alcohol, viagra, etc. 🙁

            We need to make people more active in taking personal responsibility for what goes into their body. We are all trying, but it is a learning process. Your story does not need the words ‘poison’ or ‘rancid’ to be valid, and you would influence more people without them.

          • Karen

            Victor I’m not using the words “poison” and “rancid” lightly. It was the word “rancid” in Kaayla report that sent off warning bells in my head about the source of my crp elvated readings. And poison is exactly what something is that causes chronic inflammation.

          • janieinMN

            maybe a better word would be “toxic”?

          • Steve Tallent

            Bread contains an allergen warning – “contains Gluten”. It’s been forever since I’ve bought milk, but I would imagine it also contains an allergen warning. GPP can’t take credit for having a unique processing procedure that yields whatever positive constituents, without also taking responsibility for the resultant substances which could cause problems. They can’t just say, “contains cod liver” if their process makes it different than what it would be if people just ate straight cod liver. You can’t take credit for the good and claim a better product, and claim no responsibility at all for any ills. I picked up my bottle of FCLO/HVBO blend to give it to my daughter and there was no video on the bottle saying, “hey, this isn’t for everybody, some people don’t tolerate it”. There were no warnings at all, just something about traditional, blah, blah, to make me feel all warm and fuzzy.

            And then there is the other part of it where you principle marketing venue is using strong arm tactics to suppress getting to the root of WHY people are having bad reactions to it. No you’re not allowed to discuss it. No, you’re not allowed to say anything about it except, “It didn’t work for me.” We need to take personal responsibility yes, but we need to hold our vendors and counselors to a high level of responsibility as well. Not disclosing important information is kind of a big deal – especially in the real food world. Suppressing important health and nutrition information when your stated mission is health and nutrition information dissemination, in order to protect a separate business interest seems to be a clear breach of fiduciary duty.

          • Steve Tallent

            “Mistakes will always be made” – except D Wetzel, and GPP, apparently. The product they make will always be perfect – every single batch.

          • Victor Cozzetto

            Well said Sherry. It speaks volumes that people here somehow find fault in your comment. If people could put their fear aside for a moment, they would realize that there are far better places to put their energy.

          • Ken Conrad Ken Conrad

            If fclo is not for everyone and a criteria cannot be established as to who should or should not take it, then it’s not for anyone. The same goes for vaccines or anything with potential toxic side effects.

            Apart from the cod versus pollack issue, the dosage issue, the various health issues, the rancidity issue, the Pacific versus the Atlantic issue, the radiation issue, the outsourcing issue, the recently mentioned essential oil issue, and the conflict of interest issues… the only thing that brings all the above issues together and serves to undermine the credibility of GP and the WAPF is the attempt to ignore and/or sweep them under the table.

            It would be nice to see some constructive resolve on those issues, however, that’s not going happen if key people are marginalized and shut out from participating in the organization.

            Sherry, I agree with much of what you said apart from not knowing how the fire was started.
            This issue has been smoldering for a long time with the occasional flare-ups. It didn’t turn into a raging fire until the WAPF leaders attempted to put out the flames with a fight fire with fire scenario… namely, a shut up or get kicked out approach. When dealing with a real fire, this type of scenario may work at times, if conditions are right. That being said however, when you’re dealing with people and the flames that fuel their emotions, using a fight fire with fire scenario, is akin to throwing an accelerant on the flames. As the saying goes, “people who fight fire with fire usually end up with ashes”.

          • Steve Tallent

            Sherry, I can appreciate your sentiment. I think it is a good thing. Have you posted this on the WAPF page? On any of the pro-GPP/WAPF pages? Sally is running kicking people out of her organization, out of her conferences, telling chapter leaders what they can say or can’t say, what they can do and can’t do, and threatening to kick them off of their support group, or remove them as chapter leaders, and even threatening to sue them. Is that love? Or fear?

          • Victor Cozzetto

            Sally is protecting innocent people from a libelous report, as she should. The report is a hideous twisting of words that has confused many people, and her conclusions are not supported by her own data. People think she said the FCLO has high amine content, GMOs, radiation, etc., when in fact Dr. Daniel did not say those things. She does however try very hard to make it sound that way.

            Furthermore, in her own words, Dr. Daniel concludes “This is a preliminary report based on limited data. More research is needed, with considerable funding required.”

          • Steve Tallent

            If it doesn’t have high amine count, then Chris Masterjohn dismissing the burning throat symptom as amine intolerance seems completely bogus, doesn’t it?

          • Victor Cozzetto

            You obviously didn’t read the report Steve. Dr. Daniel spends several pages trying to terrify you about the dangers of high amines, and in the end two of her three tests are at the low level of what Dave Wetzel has already posted. One test is high, but that is inconclusive, and Dr. Daniel is left to twist words. In the end, the tests do not bear out any of the pages of fears that she wrote about in the lead up to the results. And here are her words, which confirm low amines, but still weaves in insinuations like fraud…

            “Samples sent to the same lab — Lab #4 — as part of this investigation showed non- detectable levels for all eight biogenic amines tested, suggesting that Green Pasture did not achieve low levels of biogenic amines by fraudulently submitting cleaner-than-usual samples or a processed cod liver oil from his competitors.

            However, in his Frequently Asked Questions section, he reveals tyramine levels for FCLO range from 5 to 50 ppm.

            Samples sent to Lab #2 showed a presence for biogenic amines, with none at high levels.”

            We didn’t need pages of accusations and fear mongering from her. She did the tests, and there were no surprises. Obviously she was expecting something different, as she invested a lot of time writing about it.

            So, yes, the FCLO can have higher amine levels than regular CLO, but not what Dr. Daniel was trying to insinuate, and in line with what Dave Wetzel has already told us.

          • Steve Tallent

            Victor, I wish you could hear yourself. Anything that tests good for GPP is accurate and anything that puts a negative light on their product is “inconclusive”. All tests on WAPF or GPPs page are perfect, even if they aren’t the original report, are undated, have no lab, technician, or scientist information, and do not disclose the funding source. Anything by anybody else is invalid, if any one of those pieces of information is not disclosed – even if it is the original, unedited, scanned test results with lab names blackened out.

            And you’re arguing against a point that I didn’t make – which of course is probably part of your experiment to frustrate any attempts at an open and honest discourse and either drive people to silence or anger them so they will say something you can use against them. The point that I made was that Masterjohn attributed the common “burning throat” symptom to intolerance of amines, and therefore dismissed the concern. If the amines are actually low, then that would seem to be a faulty conclusion on his part and another explanation for the symptom needs to be found. If it IS amine intolerance, then a warning on the label or on the website that, “this product contains amines and some people have experienced a burning sensation in their throat due to amine intolerance” or better “If you experience a burning sensation in the your throat, discontinue use of this product immediately. This could indicate an intolerance for naturally occurring substances in the product” would be in order, don’t you think?

          • Ken Conrad Ken Conrad

            Well she’s certainly the queen bee and has undoubtedly chosen a contentious and intimidatingly way of going about protecting their innocence.

          • Gary

            Sherry: I, too will be eternally grateful to WAPF for all the ways it has improved the health of so many people, for creating a wonderful community of eaters, educators, healers, and farmers who gather together once a year to share, teach, learn, and enjoy fabulous meals. What you seem not to understand is that this controversy has nothing to do with any of that. It is, instead, solely about a fraudulent product, fraudulently marketed, one which has damaged the health-by their own personal testimony-of dozens of people, while being portrayed as an essential super-food for babies children, and adults. Compounding this serious problem, Sally has hunkered down, circled the wagons, and, quite frankly, treated with nastiness, those who question the safety or marketing (by the chapter-leader network) of this stuff. Powerful people often have outsize egos. All of us have difficulty at times admitting our mistakes, but for the powerful, it represents an existential threat to their continued governance. This is what we have here. A colossal blunder. A very damaging blunder which has hurt this wonderful community. Read what Randy Hartnell has written. He is a straight-shooter if there ever was one. A man of unimpeachable integrity.

          • Victor Cozzetto

            Actually Gary, it is about a fraudulent report. In Chris Masterjohn’s words:

            “I find the antagonistic tone of the report to be unfortunate, and many of the accusations reach beyond what the evidence should allow for. If this report stands on its own, I do not think Green Pasture gets a fair hearing.”
            “I published a clear conclusion that I don’t believe the oil is rancid in the sense of having undergone lipid peroxidation. Personally, I have tried to avoid making specific product recommendations, but I feel comfortable expressing my confidence that the oil is probably beneficial for people who tolerate it well.”
            “I take it in the coldest four months of the year in small doses or when I feel the need for immune support and have no current plans to change that practice.”

          • Steve Tallent

            In other words, Masterjohn didn’t say that it wasn’t rancid, just that he didn’t believe it had undergone lipid peroxidation. I’m not sure what other kind of rancidity there could be, but he seems to be leaving the window open for something. His “clear conclusion” is so full of conditional phrases that he could never be pinned down and it really doesn’t say anything at all, and isn’t even really a clear opinion piece. “I didn’t say that oil was beneficial, I used the words “probably beneficial”. I didn’t say that it was probably beneficial for everybody. I didn’t say that it was probably beneficial for people who tolerate it. I said I “feel comfortable, expressing my confidence that the oil is PROBABLY beneficial for people who tolerate it WELL.”

            It is interesting to see how you’re all about a “fraudulent report”, but you keep dismissing what, even after all of these weeks, seems to be fraudulent business practices. I’m not saying that Kaayla Daniel’s report ISN’T fraudulent, there are certainly some things in there that seem to be written in such a way as to lead the reader down a particular path or line of thought to a conclusion that may not be true – not unlike a lot of articles on the GPP page. But Daniel has never received a penny from me due to any misinformation or deception.

          • Karen

            The “tone” of Masterjohn’s report is total wishy-washyness. He never really concludes anything definite except that it’s semantics. As a friend put it….in case the job with WAPF falls through it’s a resume for the other side. (And remember he’s received a ” minor but significant proportion of my income” from WAPF…… whatever the heck that amount is)

          • Emma

            My greatest unease about Masterjohn’s report is not that WAPF has paid him what I perceive to be considerable amounts of money in the past (including an entire term of post graduate bills), but much more concerning is that WAPF is planning on funding a lab for him in the near future so he can do testing specifically for the foundation.

            If you were Masterjohn, and your potential income and career were directly tied into financial support from WAPF hopefully within the next year or two, would you produce a report that clearly casts doubt on FCLO and supports Daniel’s analysis?

            WAPF needs to get unimpeachable, neutral, third party analysis from marine experts in the field.

          • Karen

            Want to see how important Masterjohn considers this mess of paper he produced for WAPF?

            Take a look at the comments starting with Sept. 2 and move on down to yesterday’s comments. He hasn’t even bothered to look them because there’s nothing but spammers now posting ” How Dr Eboehi The Great Spell Caster help Bring Back My Ex Lover: Husband” and send your email to Chief Nwaluta for wayward husband help.

            This stuff started on his blog Sept 2 so it’s pretty obvious he doesn’t think it’s important enough to read people’s comments for the past 2 weeks much less try to answer questions.

            Look quick because they could be all be gone by tomorrow if he’s still not too lazy….here ya go for a link

          • Pete

            I don’t know why he disengaged, maybe he got busy. But I do notice he stops interacting with commentors when they start bringing up damning information, or drawing conclusions from his paper that are bad for WAPF/GP.

            Heaven forbid he acknowledge there is a problem.

          • Karen

            I would at least think on an issue this big he would care enough about his readers to clean his blog up and respond now and then. I guess not though. He did say he had to pull an all-nighter to write it so I guess he had to recover and get back to real life after he guaranteed his wapf lab income.

          • John

            Or maybe you could read when and why he replies to comments, instead of the mob here twisting everything through their crazy conspiracy theory aluminum foil hat approach to the internet…

            “Dr. Jeff,

            I did not reply to this comment because I do not have time to reply to all comments and therefore try to reply only to those where my reply will shed new light on something of interest.”

            Lord forbid people show patience, charity, and prudence in this discussion… no no no, they don’t do what we think they should be doing, don’t agree with us, off with their heads!!!

          • Joel

            “Don’t agree with us, off with their heads!!!” You mean like Sally Fallon kicking Ron Scmidt out as a sponsor? Or calling a special meeting to remove a PhD in nutrition? Do as I say not as I do? Is that what you mean?

          • D. Smith D. Smith

            Yes sir, very much like the post someone made earlier about “showing love” yada yada yada. Were they talking about the same kind of “love”, kindness, understanding, and working side-by-side that Sally Fallon et al showed to Ron Schmid and Dr. Kaayla Daniel – and then the chapter leaders?

            @ John: If he had time to respond to that post AT ALL, he had time to answer it and not just make excuses, which is exactly what I see.

            There is no patience needed here because these questions should have been addressed immediately if not sooner, in order for them to save face, and if they had nothing to hide. As I’ve mentioned before, none of those folks were gonna say word one without a lawyer behind them saying yes, no or not on your life. There’s a lot riding on what they say in their responses. I’m a wrestling fan (high school, not professional junk) and I know stalling when I see it. When people stall, there’s a reason.

            Also, I would love to know Granny Sue’s reason for not wanting to support FTCLDF any longer. I’ve wondered what to do about that “arm” of WAPF myself. Yes, from what I see they do good things – but there has to be a reason why people like Granny Sue are not in favor of supporting them.

          • Amanda

            Schmid deliberately broke conference rules, after he was warned not to. That was his choice. Why should he get special treatment as if the conference rules apply to everyone but him? (Hint: he shouldn’t).

          • Steve Tallent

            For once, I agree with you Amanda. Nobody should get special treatment. Yes, Dr. Schmid was warned. He knew the consequences. As an N.D. and a man of conscience, I think he was more than willing to pay that price when the other option is to keep silent about a product that he believes is hazardous to human health and potentially deadly. How could a man of conscience tell people at WAPF that he is concerned about their health and makes quality supplements to support that health and make a few bucks thereby, when the price for doing that is not warning them about a product that he enthusiastically promoted for years, but now believes dangerous? Do you want Radiant Life to be silenced by WAPF if they believe that Dr Ron is selling a dangerous product, or would you like to hear the warning and make up your own mind? I agree that there shouldn’t be special treatment. But standard treatment should allow vendors to speak to their own customers (that they have spent years gathering, nurturing, and servicing) about health concerns, even if another vendor is involved.

            Speaking of special treatment, can you tell me of another vendor that has gotten the treatment that GPP has gotten from WAPF?

    • Lee

      My understanding of the Paleo diet is that it is low in fat, eliminates entire food groups: dairy, grains, beans and legumes. It is high in protein which depletes vitamin A. There is no emphasis on proper preparation of foods for better digestion and no recommendation of fermented foods. It doesn’t recommend raw meat or organ foods either. Naturally this would not be compatible with Dr. Price’s research discoveries. It seems logical to me why Sally would not recommend it. Just thought I would throw that in.

      • Steve Tallent

        That’s probably because your understanding came from reading Sally’s evaluation of it. Here is a link to Chris Kresser, that might give you a better understanding of Paleo. One thing he says is that Paleo is high fat.

        • Aurjan

          Kris Kress posted this comment in his “The definitive fish oil buyers guide.” at his url

          “That’s why it’s essential that you ask for something called a Certificate of Analysis (COA) from the manufacturer before you buy their product. A COA is an analysis performed by an independent lab to measure the ingredients of a product and confirm whether it lives up to the claims made by the manufacturer. If the manufacturer won’t provide a COA, I start to get suspicious.”

          He highly recommends Green Pasture Fermented Cod Liver Oil here….
          Does Green Pastures provide this COA ??? I have never seen it on their website.

          He says, ” because fermented cod liver oil contains vitamins A, D and K2 in addition to EPA and DHA, and because most people are deficient in some or all of these nutrients, this is currently the only product I recommend to everyone – patients, family and friends – regardless of their health status.” Dr. Daniel’s testing showed very low levels of K2, and low D3, no D2, as GP and Sally claim… They claim it is the D2 that is found in FCLO. But if you read any testing methods, D2 is ADDED to the D3 when testing to isolate it. D2 is not found in cod liver oil according to experts like Dr. Michael Holick and others and it is not equal in efficacy to D3 according to many research papers.

          • Steve Tallent

            If there was K2 in the product, how would they know? According to Masterjohn, the peroxide test is the K2 test. How could you determine whether it was K2 or rancidity?

      • Karen

        “Sally” evaluated paleo poorly not many us WAPFers. And Sally continues to evaluate the early paleo movement as though it’s never moved forward. Even the paleo researchers admit early on they made a huge blunder in how they evaluated what people were eating. At the Atlanta Ancestral Health Symposium they said as researchers it was embarrassing that they chalked up all meat as muscle meat leaving out all nutrients from organs, fat and insects consumed. Sally doesn’t seem to be able to hear any of this and is stuck in a time warp of what she heard once. I don’t understand it.

        • Steve Tallent

          Perhaps she is threatened by the paleo movement? It seems like they could have worked together synergistically, but perhaps she doesn’t play well with others when she can’t be in control?

    • Ron Schmid

      Jeanmarie, you might read my story “Too Much of a Not so Good Thing” and get your facts straight. You might also read the history of the WAPF dosing guidelines. I am afraid though, you will like many people will not let the facts get in the way of your opinions. It is true that a lot of arsenic is worse than a little. But arsenic is still arsenic.

  • David Gumpert David Gumpert

    Kaayla Daniel reports that the Marine Stewardship Council is investigating the misuse of its name on the Green Pasture web site. Reports on Facebook that the offending web page mysteriously disappeared from the GP site today.

  • Mark mcafee

    To quote Carli Fiorina ( and I am not even a republican ) “life is not measured in money, it is measured by acts of grace and love”.

    It is time to rise above petty differences and embrace the good. If it is time for change…so be it, let it be change that comes about because of goodness and grace.

    Lets keep our thoughts and prayers focused on Michael Schmidt in Canada, he is facing up to 10 years in Canadian prison for supposed acts related to sheep knapping and I am sure raw milk pioneering. He is one of the great nutritional heros of our time and deserves our support as he transcends conflict and stands before the establishment to face a crime. A crime not under god, not an immoral crime…not a crime that hurt anyone, but a crime of violating corrupt regulations that protect corruption. Martin Luther King, Ghandi and others faced the same fate and prevailed.

    Bless you Michael …we love and support you!!!

    • Ken Conrad Ken Conrad

      Hopefully Carli Fiorina’s sentiment will translate into freedom of choice as to what food and drugs we consider appropriate for our individual and children’s well being.

      Couldn’t agree with you more about Michael.

    • Gary

      Mark: Thank you. What the Canadian government is doing, and has done, to Michael Schmidt is evil, but they don’t care. As Dr. Boyd Haley says, bureaucrats don’t have a heart, and they don’t have a brain; what they do have is a tenacious grasp on job security.

  • Victor Cozzetto

    Update about the labeling from Dave Wetzel on the Green Pasture site. New label, and a nice article explaining it:

    • Steve Tallent

      1) Rosita’s bottle says morrhuae oleum, which apparently means “oil from Gadus morrhea”. So, not the scientific name, but in essence references the species.
      2) “Despite some unfounded rumors, we do not benefit from any cost savings based on species alone.” While I believe they may not benefit from any cost savings by substituting Alaska Pollock for Pacific Cod, I do not believe for a second that they do not have a cost saving from using those fish instead of Atlantic Cod. Do you?
      3) While the Alaska Pollock consumes the same feed and has similar EFA and vitamin profiles, to the Pacific Cod, the same cannot be said when comparing those fish to Atlantic Cod.
      4) From the way that he worded his statements and the way he went out of his way multiple time to include all of the Gadidae family, I suspect that he has used more than just Pacific Cod and Alaska Pollock in his product.
      5) Interesting the way he referenced the FDA to say that the FDA does not define CLO, but does say that Pollock is in the Cod family, while leaving out that the FDA does not allow Pollock to be LABELED as cod.
      6) I’m glad this dust-up has resulted in GPP getting serious with complying with all labeling laws – even going beyond what is required – because in the end, that is good for consumers and good for the entire nutritional supplement industry. Getting that allergen information on the label is critical. Can you imagine if somebody had a terrible reaction due to residue from equipment used to bottle something else?

    • Bob Thorson

      GPP: “We currently do not import livers … ”

      Hmmm. After viewing the packaged Pacific Cod livers with Chinese characters on the labels on the GPP Webpage “What the scientists say” one wonders why DW uses the word “currently”. Has GPP imported product from Chinese factory ships, the best price I read, in the past? Or next week? Why not “use” instead of “import”? And on and on.

      • Julie D.

        I just saw it. I predict that photo will be gone shortly.

        • Karen

          You looked just in time….it’s gone now

          • Julie D.

            Wow. that was fast.

          • Steve Tallent

            Sandrine Love, and perhaps others, are watching these conversations very closely and reporting to GPP and WAPF. Yes, Wetzel had a number of curious phrases, just like Sally. They are definitely making use of all of the tools in the English language at their disposal. Like Sally saying that they have lost no membership, and “no current chapter leaders have resigned”. If they resigned, they wouldn’t be current. Half of the chapter leaders could resign, and at any point in time, her statement would still be accurate, and at the same time, be completely misleading. And if anybody thinks that these phrases are not being used to be accurate AND misleading at the same time, I think the preponderance of evidence pretty clearly does not support that position.

          • Karen

            okay….I see it now, looks like Chinese writing to me. I guess it those Chinese-Norweigan fishermen. Saved a pdf of the page just in case it’s ever wanted.

          • Pete


            Its a handy utility. The Internet is forever.

          • D. Smith D. Smith

            That link posted by Victor (above) was dated today (September 23, 2015), of all things, and is just so much BS. I don’t know why Wetzel would bother to apologize for taking “so much time” to address this issue, after all, his attorneys had to approve of every stinkin’ word, you can be sure of that. This wasn’t an effort on Wetzel’s part, it was a protectionist “bulletin” put out by his legal advisors.

            And the label still boldly says “from COD” – no specification, just cod.

            In that article, too, frozen livers are mentioned as being the best way to ship. No kidding? But, what happens after those livers are thawed and liquid-ey and then supposedly fermented???? Really.

            The other link posted by Julie D., was dated August 31, 2015. IOW, this is all information which has been updated or entirely re-written since the SHTF on August 23, 2015. Amazing.

            Lucky thing we have those archives Pete mentioned.

          • Steve Tallent

            Maybe the photo is indicative of Asian fishermen’s involvement of some kind, I don’t know. I don’t have any other explanation for what look like Asian characters. I’m no expert, but a quick Google search of Asian characters and these seemed to resemble East Asian characters more than Chinese, Japanese, etc. Which would make sense. However, I can read the English and it looks like it references the ship F/V (Fishing Vessel) Bristol Leader.
            Probably could contact that company and ask them about the Asian looking characters.

          • sherry elton

            In response to some above … I’m not saying there isn’t a problem with FCLO and that is needs sorting. I’m simply suggesting we do it unemotionally. Let’s leave the anger and vindictiveness at home and solve this with with love in our hearts for all. Wars have never solved anything.
            I’m with Mark, let’s send our great powerful collective energy to Michael and keep him safe.
            And keep discussing the FCLO debate rationally … smiles to all … have a great day …

          • Bob Thorson

            Something to hide? I read that the fish processed on the Chinese factory ships are not bled which may account for the dark colors found in RPLO.

      • janieinMN

        Looking on a map – the Aleutian Islands in the Bering Sea is “approximately” midway between the USA & China (on my PC screen anyway)… and extremely close to the international line… they could be fishing the same seas… and getting the same fish… don’t trust China processing AT ALL!… after all that’s come out in the last month (Dr Daniel’s report, GP and WAPF), I wouldn’t trust GP labeling, sources or location statements. Using the term “currently” implies they haven’t always, and won’t always.

        I was glad to see they’re updating their labels… but disappointed in the wording of his article — implied he’s doing it out of the generosity of his heart, because his customers want it… never admitted that he’d been violating FDA labeling laws. “However, even though the FDA has determined that these fish are from the same family, after hearing your concerns, we are going to update our label to include a specificity that does not exist in the cod liver oil market. Our new label will include the species name from the Gadidae family that is in each bottle. I have not been able to find any fish oil supplements that list the species of fish, though I am aware of some that list the genus.” — okay, “fish oil”? I did a google search using ‘fish oil ingredients’, and the VERY 1st listing showed ALL the species on their label!! hh-mmm…

        His statement “Allergen labeling is becoming more refined. We are still working on the wording, ” was quite telling. The allergen labeling act became the law in 2004 and implemented (effective) Jan 1, 2006 (illegal to not follow the FDA requirements for the FALCPA, “Food Allergen Labeling and Consumer Protection Act of 2004”). He’s been in violation of allergen labeling laws for 9 (nine) years! What’s taken so long?

        He quotes the FDA about Alaskan Pollock being in the Cod family – but that’s only been since early 2014 (FDA Seafood List), but says NOTHING about FDA “requirements” to list fish by SPECIES… just proclaiming that he’s going to do something that no other CLO manufacturer does… he’s going to go further and list the species. This is his choice and it has nothing to do with the FDA is implied.

        “par for the course” for this manufacturer who has previously claimed that FDA requirements don’t fit his FCLO, so he’s not going to comply with them (whether it’s listing species, or Vitamin A & D content… whatever).

        He’s only complying now, because he got ‘caught’ — but he’s pushing that it’s his free decision to do so, and not because of the FDA. Regardless, this is all coming about as a result of a ‘whistle-blower’ – THANK YOU to Dr Daniel!!

        • Steve Tallent

          Glad you were able to see that. I had one of my customers ask about it who wasn’t able to see past the insinuations in the article. The way that he worded his article, I got the distinct impression that he has used more than just Alaska Pollock in his product. He referenced the Gadidae family so many times and in so many ways, that I would find it hard to believe he wasn’t using many other types of fish in his “cod” liver oil.

          If you search “FDA” on his blog/articles you’ll find another article about labeling that basically says that the they don’t think FCLO is a supplement, they think it is a food, the FDA does not have a category for Cod Liver Oil, so they think labeling laws don’t apply to them.

          • janieinMN

            whether ‘food’ or nutritional/dietary supplement, there are codes/regulations regarding labeling that have been violated by GP — and there are many posting (and quoting GP) trying to ‘justify’ that without having done research with the FDA (rules/regulations/codes/requirements all available through simple searches at the FDA website).

        • janieinMN

          I find the information here quite interesting:
          The Walleye Pollock (common name for Alaska Pollock), is also simply called pollock (legal marketing name for Alaska Pollock is Pollock or Alaska Pollock). Species is, of course, Gadus chalcogrammus.

          “Walleye pollock produces the largest catch by volume of any single species inhabiting the 200-mile U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone.”

          They distinguish further between this species per their location – Bering Sea, Gulf of Alaska, Aleucian Islands, etc. “Pollock in the Gulf of Alaska is managed as a single stock independently of pollock in the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands. The separation of pollock in Alaskan waters into eastern Bering Sea and Gulf of Alaska stocks is supported by analysis of larval drift patterns from spawning locations, genetic studies of allozyme frequencies, mtDNA variability, and microsatellite allele variability.”

          “In the U.S. portion of the Bering Sea including the Aleutian Islands region, three stocks of pollock are identified for management purposes. Pollock in the Bering Sea is the largest of the three,…”

          GP’s current plans for its “new” label lists Pacific Cod, and when asked, answered (via comments) that it’s 100% pacific cod (and, “if we need to change this in the future we will update the label. This is an allergen concern. I’m not sure how all the other fish oils companies will comply. Most of them bend all sorts of species. Right now fish oil industry does not list species. Many labels don’t even list genus. Can’t imagine a label with 10,20 … different fish listed on the label. Even fish gelatin products will need to outline the species on the labels.” — ‘will need’ implies future, it ‘has and does’ need. This has been an allergen labeling requirement by the FDA since Jan 1, 2006 (for 9 yrs)… whether it’s whole fish, or fish products (fish sticks, fish protein, fish gelatin, fish oil, etc — whether in whole or part, fish allergen labeling requirements became VERY specific in 2004 and manufacturer’s were given until Jan 1, 2006 to comply — all labeling from that date on were required to list species for any type/part of fish product (whether whole or as ingredient) – this was only exclusive of product already on the shelves (purchasers/retailers) sold by the manufacturer prior to that date. manufacturer’s were not allowed to sell their product without listing the allergens per the FDA allergen labeling requirements from this date forward.

          Re GP’s new label FCLO, confirmed by them being from 100% Pacific Cod (only 14.x% of 2013’s total catch, per the AFSC — pollock was 63.3% of the total groundfish catch off Alaska). Would an independent, surprise inspection (ie FDA, NOAA, etc), confirm that? GP also stated in their article “As noted on the label we are using Gadus macrocephalus (Pacific cod) as this was in excellent supply in the past year.” — excellent supply? so are they guestimating vs testing? oh boy…

  • Ora Moose Ora Moose

    Not sure who brought up the radioactivity issue and it’s getting hard to search and find anything on here. Just remember that even low levels are harmful because it’s a cumulative effect, so if you get exposed to even just a small level every day multiply that times 365, no matter if it’s fish or sunshine.

  • Victor Cozzetto

    Another great post from Dave Wetzel at Green Pastures. This one with scientific analysis, test reports, the scientist’s comments, bio, etc., all showing more good news for the FCLO, as expected. Hope this helps to clear up some of the misunderstandings that some of you are having:

    • Steve Tallent

      “Our reports and letters are for the exclusive and confidential use of our clients and may not be reproduced in whole or in part, nor may any reference be made
      to the work, the results, or the company in any advertising, news release, or other public announcements without obtaining our prior written authorization.”

      Wonder if they got written consent for their public announcement?

      • Steve Tallent

        I just wanted to mention that I didn’t mean to imply that they hadn’t gotten written consent. I have no clue. However, I posted the above to highlight the fact that it is normal for labs to have very strict policies about how you can use the information that they give you. Kaayla Daniel’s results were dismissed out of hand by many people because she did not disclose the lab names, because that was the policy of the labs. Many didn’t believe her. Doesn’t it seem to be a little more plausible now that you see such a statement at the bottom of test results posted by GPP?

  • Mark mcafee Mark mcafee

    I have patiently waited for six months to print these words and announce to the world what happened today in Basslake CA.

    In April 2015, I was invited to present to the CCDEH all about raw milk. I was able to invite Dr. Cat Berge DVM Phd to co present with me ( she came all the way from Belguim to make this presentation with me ) and ….as a result of this show of raw milk food safety talent…Dr. Stephen Beam, the chief of CDFA dairy food safety was also convinced to attend and present as well.

    The 2 hours of presentations were very warmly received. Remember that the annual CCDEH conference is a conference of all of the Directors of Public Health for each county in CA. This was huge!! Uber huge!! So huge that I did not mention one word for fear of being disinvited if I spoke one word of it prior to the conference. They wanted to know 2 things: why is raw milk growing? And how is raw milk safely produced?

    A mountain moved a little today. A full on epidiologic assessment of raw milk was made by Dr. Cat including QMRA’S showing raw milk as a low risk food!! Cat also shared the many studies that prove raw milks anti asthma and anti allergy values. Dr. Beam was fair and balanced as he shared the regulatory system which regulates raw milk in CA.

    Overall….a fantastic day for raw milk education.

    What a great day. So many of the health directors shared with me that they really appreciated the facts and new information. They really got it that RAWMI standards work to reduce risk and consumers love raw milk!!

    I even snuck in some Human Genomics bacteria DNA NIH studies and OPDC test data. Like I said….today, our CA county health directors became enlightened about low risk raw milk and that has huge ramifications.

    As far as outsourcing at OPDC is concerned. The word Outsourcing is being used like a cuss word. Amanda never understood the different classifications of milk products or their risk levels. She never understood our focus on food safety. She never understood class one raw milk verses class four cheese or butter. Class four raw uses are considered very low risk by our regulators. The products are not even tested for pathogens!!

    I have said this one million times….OPDC has never purchased or used outside organic milk for class one fluid purposes. Yes…OPDC has bought outside approved organic milk to make class four cheese and or butter. This is legal and this is fully transparent to everyone. No secrets and no coverups. This happens rarely….but it happens several times per year. It is a matter of feeding hungry people.

    Another word for outsourcing could be…” farmer collaboration”. Amanda if you consider yourself a raw milk advocate…..please look at the greater good of many organic farmers working together to feed many hungry people. This is good and this is progress. No secrets….no regrets. Full transparency.

    One more time…OPDC has never used outside milk for bottling!!!
    One more time….the purchased cream was being made into class 4 raw butter and not being bottled.

    • Steve Tallent

      Amazing to be able to speak directly to those folks and not have them get your information through their normal info streams where they are distorted and misrepresented. “Raw milk is deadly” is akin to an article of faith in the public health arena, and that is promulgated from the very highest levels. Must have been a shocker for so many of them to have the veil lifted. Of course, keeping it lifted is the hard part. When they start talking to other colleagues and getting the same old party line, many will slip back into the old belief system. Great to hear, nonetheless.

    • Amanda Rose

      Oh, Mark, Mark, Mark. You know well how well I know CA code and classifications of dairy product. Code aside, anyone with a working set of eyeballs and a basic knowledge of dairies simply need to visit your farm.

      As for your transparency, if you were so forthright with outsourcing, you would have let me help you educate your customers in 2007. I was eager and able. Instead, you decided to play Slick Willy. Shameful. This blog is a monument to your behavior. (Edited for possibly libelous material.)

      But let’s not live in the past. You are still outsourcing. You said so here. You promised on this blog in the past that it would stop and I missed your announcement that you started it up again. It sounds like David missed it too. He said upstream: “As I remember it, he committed to selling only his own dairy products, or informing customers if he wasn’t using his own dairy’s milk.” You (Mark) will predictably respond that David is just confused about the classification of dairy products in California and that he’s confusing milk and manufactured items and all of that, of course, tells my story. If David Gumpert can’t figure out if Mark McAfee is outsourcing, then there is not a whole lot of transparency at the customer level. It looks like Mark Kastel is confused too and you are supposed to update your scorecard every year. There are no excuses. Shame.


      Here’s an interesting story that gives insight into the character of Mark McAfee. I met Mark in the spring of 2007. I was buying milk directly from his dairy and I also working with Michael Pollan and a SF Chronicle reporter to fly over the VanderEyk Dairy holdings in Pixley and in the foothills here to do a “cow census.” We needed a pilot to fly us. Mark volunteered. It was to be a big bust-up of that 10K cow dairy parading as “organic.” The dairy was de-certified in the week before our flight was planned so the flight was a no-go. It would have been a lot of fun but we got scooped, so to speak.

      Guess where Mark was buying his outside product at that time? bahahahahaha. What a hypocrite. He was going to fly us over that dairy, poking VanderEyks, getting it decertified, and all the while he was buying it in bulk and selling it as 100% grass fed organic under his own label. (VanderEyks had no grass.) I was horrified in 2008 when I found out. It was around 2010 that I realized that Mark’s herd wasn’t even certified at the time. That VanderEyk milk was the closest his product came to actually being certified. I filed a USDA complaint and he had to certify his herd. What a nice touch for Organic Pasture cows to become organic. You’re welcome.

      The layers of shame are hard to count

      but I am sure the core problem is that I just have never understood how things work….

      • Amanda Rose

        Mark — As founder and member of RAWMI, how do you avoid commingling your outsourced product with your own milk? You mentioned that you buy cream but we know in the past that you have purchased milk and separated it. Do you have a separate tank for that purpose? I only remember seeing one receiving tank. How is it that your milk broker confirms that your outsourced product is free of TB and brucellosis? What do the other RAWMI certified dairies think of your practices? I don’t see a section in RAWMI standards on outsourcing for manufactured items (except it’s not allowed for milk), so it’s not clear how you handle the manufactured items that come from the outsourced milk.

    • Pete

      However cold we produce ace raw milk without RAWMI?!?

    • David Gumpert David Gumpert

      Mark, congrats on presenting to CA public health officials about the Raw Milk Institute and raw milk safety. I know it’s been a very long time coming.

      When I brought up the outsourcing (or “farmer collaboration”) issue in a previous comment, it was mainly to make the points that, first, when uncomfortable questions come up about favorite nutrient-dense foods, things can get very heated and emotional and, second, that you remained open during much of the process to discussing what was happening, and to clarifying what OPDC was doing. My purpose wasn’t to re-live the details of it. It was complicated, in large part because there was a regulatory layer we don’t have in the Green Pasture situation.

      In the end, since there weren’t illnesses being reported, it was up to California residents to decide if OPDC raw milk and other dairy products were products they wanted to buy. From what I gather, they buy quite a lot of it.

      The matter of Green Pasture fermented cod liver oil has gone somewhat differently, because Dave Wetzel hasn’t been willing to engage ongoing, and because there is the whole Weston A. Price Foundation dimension. Plus, there are a number of reported illnesses possibly associated with the product, which no one seems to be able to fully explain. In the end, it will be up to consumers to decide if this is a product they want to buy–I just would like to see that they are well informed about the pros and cons.

      • Amanda Rose

        From David: “In the end, since there weren’t illnesses being reported, it was up to California residents to decide if OPDC raw milk and other dairy products were products they wanted to buy.”

        You’ve missed a key point, David: California consumers did not and still do not know about the OPDC product sources. You didn’t even know he was still outsourcing. We’ve hammered Mark on this since 2007 and consumers still do not know. He is not a good model for the current FCLO situation.

        Just like you with FCLO, I too would like to see that consumers are well-informed on their dairy options.

      • Carrie Hahn

        David, I think you need to check the GPP blog. They have certainly been “willing to engage” and continue to bring information to the public as it is made available.

  • Mark mcafee Mark mcafee

    Steve, thank you….
    I am still impressed by today’s events. I think the Cat is out of the bag….and the genie has left the bottle on raw milk food safety. These directors attend meetings with FDA and set local policy.

    Nothing like the truth.

    This is huge!!

  • Ken Conrad Ken Conrad

    As a jersey milk producer and passionate about jersey milk I can certainly relate to what you are saying. It would be frustrating if I were falsely led to believe that I was drinking anything other then jersey milk.
    As far as Mark outsourcing milk and or cream to make butter, I don’t have a serious issue with that, as long as the outsourced product comes from a naturally managed herd and is free of chemicals, drugs and adulterated feed.
    Amanda brings up some very troubling questions with respect to Mark’s management protocol that he would be wise to truthfully and constructively address with clarity and conciseness. Forget about the regulations and what they permit you to do Mark and answer the questions so that we can all get some resolve here and move on!
    As far as Amanda is concerned she’d do well to leave Mark’s personal family affairs out of the discussion.
    In a nutshell… although it may be legal and considered common practice to outsource product, it should not be assumed that one is not obliged to inform the consumer. Consumers should be accurately informed at all times without fail of any changes in production protocol, so that they can make an informed choice. Accurate information is the only leverage that a consumer has; it is a powerful tool that relies heavily on choice and freedom of expression to be meaningful and effective.

    • Pete

      The outsourceing was a big deal back then because Mark built up his product talking up his own practices and proving the safety by posting test results on the website. People wanted to buy OP dairy, not someone elses milk under his label.

      That wasn’t his only consumer fraud, he sold his milk as 100% grassfed for years when it wasn’t. At the same time bragging how you can’t get sick from milk from 100%gf cows.

      We havnt witnessed a history of lies from Amanda, but we have from Mark.

  • Mark mcafee Mark mcafee

    OPDC has been continuously certified USDA organic since its inception in 1999. Amanda is not informed and making up psychobabble. In other words she is a liar. She also has no idea what a milk tanker was doing when she was visiting. It was taking away organic skim raw milk….to a milk broker. We do this all of the time. We sell off 90% of our raw skim to a broker…no one wants it in the raw market. That is not outsourcing….that is selling off a byproduct!!!

    To mention my daughters sexual harassment by CHP officers ten years ago makes me sick. Amanda….just go away. You are some kind of sick person. The courts reprimanded the officers and threw out all charges, that were trumped up to cover their harassment!! There was no DUI and zero alcohol was found in her body.

    How low can your lies go?

    • Amanda Rose

      Mark — Post a copy of your certification for your dairy cows in 2008 or 2009. You should have it on file and it’s probably even in a convenient PDF format. For this I mean your cows, not your pasture nor your processing plant. I’ve asked here before and you couldn’t produce it. That’s why I filed a complaint. Your Organic Certifiers certificate shows your cows certified from 2010 — the year I filed my complaint. That seems like an awfully big coincidence for a place that’s been continuously certified. Why don’t you post your 2009 certificate for us. Maybe I just never found your certifier and you happened to change in the year I filed the complaint.

      As for what that tanker was doing back in the fall of 2007, you told me yourself at the time as we sat in your office working on the campaign that it was bringing in product for butter. I expect you confirmed that somewhere on this blog. Inquiring web searchers can find it.

      There’s a whole lot of historical revisionism here. Your daughter’s case was about you, at least according to the Fresno Bee. Shameful.

  • Mark mcafee Mark mcafee

    Lets stick with the facts….OPDC has been continuously certified organic since day one. We have had three organic agencies. CCOF ( which we still use for our land and almonds ) COFA in Kerman for several years, then Organic Certifiers for the last several years.

    For years I have wondered who the person was that sent in a spy to video OPDC and gather quotes from our marketing department….all conveniently done when I was gone. The editing of the video takes quotes out if context completely. That video is ugly….it makes untrue claims and is horrible. It ended up on the Caravale website. It is especially created to be twisted and mean spirited. It takes a special kind of sick person to intentionally work hard to hurt good people.

    By the way….our mobile milk was highly mobile until 2007…when AB 1735 was passed and coliforms were required to be less than 10…. We had to install water wash systems to manage our new udder management protocols and our first RAMP plan. This also required that our mobile milk barn become less mobile and be associated with enhanced stationary wash water systems at designed locations. This was not by choice…this was as a direct result of change of regulatory standards and law.

    We have 405 acres for our pasture systems. Not 205 acres.

    A very wise person gave this advice: how do you stop negative ugliness….you stop feeding it. Ugliness thrives when fed.

    Ugly is as ugly does.

    Amanda is not a raw milk advocate or supporter. She is a traitor to all raw milk and our movement and all the good things we have tried so hard to accomplish through RAWMI, education and outreach efforts. Her persistent effort to twist anything good into negative ugliness is a sign of sociopathic psychosis. Anyone who seeks to create negativity has a real head problem.

    I challenge anyone to find anything that Amanda has positively done to help raw milk or the raw milk movement….I have looked hard….it does not exist. Picking on my daughter is the lowest. There is an unwritten creed among the politically active. Thou shalt not involve family and especially children. Amanda is immoral and unethical was she contrives pure lies and brings my daughter into the fray. If this persists…Amanda will get a letter from my lawyer.

    From this point forward…..I will not feed this sickness. It is going to starve.

    • Amanda Rose


      I’ll exit too and leave you to earn your millions of OPDC dollars. Let’s reflect on what we’ve learned:
      * You’re still outsourcing at least for manufactured dairy products even though you promised in the past either to stop or to inform your consumers. In this current round at least you didn’t promise to stop. I suppose that’s progress.
      * You can’t produce an organic certification for your dairy herd in 2009. Shameful. (You can for 2010 to present because I filed a complaint against you that required that you actually get the dairy cows certified. Why weren’t they? I have some idea. Shameful.)
      * You can’t address how you keep your outsourced whole milk cheese milk from being commingled with your fluid milk since you have one main holding tank. Maybe some of those RAWMI people should complain to RAWMI’s director and get clarification. Oh right, that’s you. Shameful.

      I’m sure though that the core problem all of these years and the hundreds of thousands of gallons of factory milk that you’ve manufactured at a profit is that I don’t understand these things, that I am nasty and mean, and that I am just out to get you.

      I just checked my pockets. I don’t have consumer money in my pockets for a mislabeled and misleading consumer product. Does anyone else in this discussion have such money in their pockets?


  • Victor Cozzetto

    David, I find it astounding that you have allowed such offensive dialogue and personal attacks. What’s worse is that those comments are applauded by your audience with ‘thumbs up’ while relevant content is ignored or given a thumbs down. Quite telling of the atmosphere that you have fostered here, don’t you think? Is this truly the legacy that you want to leave behind? Does your blogs content the past month really represent your mission statement?

    You have moderated far less offensive comments than what I witnessed today. Please think about the big picture David.

    Your first two blog posts in this FCLO series seemed that you were mostly delivering Dr. Kaayla Daniel’s message, via your interview of her. But, in the posts that you have written since, you took a serious turn, and I believe that you have made many libelous statements, which you previously refuted. Recently you continue to hammer at this ‘mislabeling’ accusation, leveraging it to make all kinds of insinuations, but you are still incorrect. Certainly you must know this?

    The vast majority of CLO producers in the world use simply ‘Cod’ on their label, without specific distinction, and a wide variety of cod fish are used under those labels. This is a fact that every reader can confirm for themselves on Amazon or elsewhere.

    Some CLOs use ‘Norwegian’ or ‘Arctic’ on their label, and neither of those terms exists as a cod fish on the FDA fish regulations. This is standard practice for CLO. Long standing brands like Carlsons label ‘Norwegian’ to show the area, but do not list the specific type of cod in the ingredients. Again, this is standard CLO industry practice. And while there is no Norwegian Cod or Arctic Cod on the FDA fish regulatory list, Alaskan Pollock is in fact listed there under Cod. Not that it matters, since since it was Cattle Lick and not FCLO that tested for pollock.

    You, Steve Tallent, and perhaps others on this blog actually have experience with selling, so you certainly know this. Considering how heavily invested you are in this issue, there is no denying this knowledge. And yet you do. You made all your FCLO mislabeling accusations off one test from one sample of Cattle Lick.

    There is absolutely no mislabeling of the Green Pasture FCLO products, and Randy Hartnell, Dr. Kaayla Daniel, Steve Tallent, and you, all know this with certainty.

    You had no proof of mislabeling, no proof of intent to deceive, and yet you all spent considerable time making and defending insinuations and accusations. You know your statements are false, or you SHOULD. This is libel. According to the link that you gave me:

    The elements of a defamation suit; whether slander or libel, are:
    – A defamatory statement;
    – Published to a third party;
    – Which the speaker knew or should have known was false;
    – That causes injury to the subject of the communication

    You said you are trying to help people, but I am only seeing malicious attacks and misinformation. Please reconsider what you are doing here with your blog.

    • Gary

      Victor, you’re an endless source of amusement. Were there grounds for a defamation suit, Dave Wetzel would have had his attorneys on Kaayla Daniel like a chicken on a june bug, long ago.

      • Victor Cozzetto

        He could be here on this blog too, but he is not is he. Not everyone resorts immediately to legal action, and especially a smaller business that tries to keep its energy focused on its core business.

        Why not just consider my comment seriously for a moment. Is there some secret information you have that justifies your accusations and invalidates my concerns? Do you really want to be attacking an innocent man?

    • janieinMN

      victor, just like i had to answer your post in FB, i must do so here – to correct your blatant falsehood about what the FDA says about Alaskan Pollock:

      “sorry, but must correct you on your false statement re the FDA – it is ILLEGAL to list Alaskan Pollock as “Cod” – it’s species substitution and economic fraud and misbranding:…/FoodScienceResearch/RFE/ucm071528.htm (the 1st table is listing examples of common substitution/fraud – this is what is ILLEGAL).

      here is there list on what is ACCEPTABLE marketing names (FDA’s “The Seafood List”) – Alaskan Pollock can be called Alaskan Pollock or Pollock ONLY: search “Gadus chalcogrammus” –

      and due to the FLACPA, the SPECIES must be specified:…/guidanc…/allergens/ucm106890.htm…

      just because there are other manufacturers who do not list the species, doesn’t mean that it is acceptable. they are also in violation of FDA labeling requirements. did you also notice the other manufacturers all list vitamins A & D in the nutrition/supplement facts (also required by FDA), which GP does not.”

      GP picks and chooses what they WANT to disclose on their labeling and not what FDA law states they MUST. What they’ve been doing constitutes misbranding and fraud, period. It’s not defamation of any kind, it’s not malicious, it’s not misinformation – it’s what the FDA laws state in clear cut English.

      just fyi, FDA’s “The Seafood List” was last updated July 2015.

      • Victor Cozzetto

        Maybe you are confused because you did not check the link that lists Alaskan Pollock as Cod. Or maybe it is because you did not read the scientist’s statement of such on the new report at GP?

        Green Pasture has already posted information, and indicated that more information is coming. So I am not sure what the point of your effort is here. It doesn’t matter what you or I say. GP put up a link to the FDA that shows Alaskan Pollock listed as Cod, and they are clearly working on this issue. Just talk to them and be a little patient. They are a small company.

        You have your own idea about how they should label, and maybe there are twenty experts with twenty different ideas. It takes time to work such things out, especially when you are in a unique situation. There is no other FCLO producer, the CLO producers clearly demonstrate standard industry practice that does not match your FDA links, and the FDA itself has many links with differing information. The FCLO itself is hard to define, as it seems to fall somewhere between a food and a supplement. And GP openly discusses such things.

        It it is the pollock that is really bothering you, you can see my thoughts on that here:

        I have nothing further to say on any of this, as I am completely satisfied with my FCLO and with GP. I’m sure you will eventually be happy too.

        • janieinMN

          i have not listed any of my own ideas on ‘how’ they should label their products. i have only directed to the FDA who sets the rules for all labeling requirements re food and dietary supplements. their FCLO products are classified dietary supplements under FDA’s definition (see below). they have regulations, codes and guidance regarding the same. there’s no confusion on my part. the FDA does NOT list Alaska Pollock as the species Cod, they’ve only changed the genus to Gadus – the FDA is quite clear on Alaska Pollock as published in their Seafood List and that it’s illegal to label it as cod. the Alaska Fishery Science Center has more information if you want to learn more about the differences between the species of cod (as well as the NOAA).

          A dietary supplement is a product intended for ingestion that contains a “dietary ingredient” intended to add further nutritional value to (supplement) the diet. A “dietary ingredient” may be one, or any combination, of the following substances:
          a vitamin
          a mineral
          an herb or other botanical
          an amino acid
          a dietary substance for use by people to supplement the diet by increasing the total dietary intake
          a concentrate, metabolite, constituent, or extract

          • Victor Cozzetto

            Exactly. So clearly it is not a dietary supplement, as they do not add any ‘dietary ingredient’ at all. Not sure why you are confused by that, as it seems very clear.

            And I guess you still did not look at the FDA link that GP shared. It is current, and it contradicts your categorization. Personally, I have no interest, as it was never a concern for me. Again, my thoughts on that are already clearly expressed in the link I gave you.

            In any case, enjoy your discussions. I am moving back to other things, as I do not feel the need to be here any longer. I hope you all find satisfaction eventually.

          • janieinMN

            @victor – you seem to have misread the definition – it says “contains” a “dietary ingredient”, the “add” is in reference to adding further nutritional value to one’s diet. his FCLO falls under the substances listed (his oil is ‘extracted’ from the fish livers, is part of the whole (constituent), contains vitamins & minerals and is intended to add nutritional value to the person using it).

            either way, and this is kind of important to note, GP obviously decided to go that route (vs food) because his labels clearly state “dietary supplement” on the label, and has the “supplement” facts section. but, when you’re a supplement manufacturer (or food), you do not get to pick & choose which labeling requirements to follow… they’re not selective requirements… they’re mandated.

            i refer you to steve’s reply for the ‘details’ of the FDA link you referenced (which is actually one of the same links i and others have mentioned elsewhere).

            regarding industry practice — twice now i’ve done a simple google search, and each time it pulls up fish oil / CLO products that have proper FDA labeling (list the fish ‘contains’ statement by species)… some don’t, but so far, the do’s outnumber the don’ts… btw, they also list the vitamins & mineral content as required by the FDA.

            well, that’s all for tonight and probably all from me on this topic. this has taken quite a bit of time away from my studies that i need to get back to (coincidentally on the HUMAN liver! – but on its function not it’s nutritional value… hehe).

          • Amanda

            Clearly they won’t be satisfied until Dave Wetzel is put out of business, Sally Fallon is behind bars, and every WAPF member who agrees with them is tossed in a padded cell for having drank the WAPF/GP switchel-aid. 😉

          • David Gumpert David Gumpert

            Amanda, I think what people are asking is that Dave Wetzel be honest and accurate in the information he posts on his web site and on the bottles of liquid he sells. He’s clearly only made the changes highlighted in this blog post under duress. Had Kaayla Daniel not done her report, with followup on this and other blogs, you can pretty fairly assume Wetzel would still have the same misleading, even dishonest, stuff out there. I thought Weston A. Price Foundation was such a big proponent of “know your farmer.” I don’t understand why you and other Green Pasture apologists are so offended when people demand honesty in packaging and marketing.

        • Steve Tallent

          Perhaps you are confused because YOU did not CAREFULLY check the link that GPP posted. Here is the pertinent info pulled from the GPP link:

          Format: Scientific Name || Common Name || FDA Market Name

          Gadidae (cods)
          Brosme brosme || Cusk || Cusk
          Gadus macrocephalus || Pacific Cod || Cod or Alaska Cod
          Gadus morhua || Atlantic Cod || Cod
          Melanogrammus aeglefinus || Haddock || Haddock
          Pollachius virens || Pollock || Pollock
          Gadus chalcogrammus || Walleye Pollock || Pollock or Alaska Pollock
          Urophycis tenuis || White Hake || Hake

          So you can see here that the FDA considers Gadus chalcogrammus to be a cod. You see that it’s common name is Walleye Pollock. You also see that the FDA Market Name is Pollock or Alaska Pollock. You see that the FDA Market Name for Gadus morhua is “Cod”, and for Gadus macrocephalus (the fish that GPP is using now) is Cod or Alaska Cod. The FDA market name for chalcogrammus is NOT cod. So yes, you are so right: the FDA lists Alaska Pollock as cod, and does NOT allow it to be marketed as cod. It may seem inconsistent, but it doesn’t make pollock marketed as cod any less illegal. It doesn’t matter what the scientists say. Scientists could look at a human body and declare that it is dead. Until a medical doctor calls it, that body is not LEGALLY dead. We’re talking about legalities here, and you keep skirting that issue.

          “the CLO producers clearly demonstrate standard industry practice that does not match your FDA links” What proof do you have of this other than what GPP has said?

          “and the FDA itself has many links with differing information” Perhaps true. Prove it as regards labeling Pollock as Cod. Every link I’ve seen is consistent.

          “The FCLO itself is hard to define, as it seems to fall somewhere between a food and a supplement.” It falls into one of the two categories though, so it has to follow Supplement labeling laws, or Food labeling laws – which I’ve heard are more stringent. Instead according to a previous GPP article on labeling, it has determined that labeling laws don’t apply to them.

          I’ve heard the excuse, “We’re a small company” before – from GPP a few years ago over another error. I don’t like it. I’m an even smaller company than GPP. We have a lot more products than they. We spend a lot of time, energy, money to keep our labels and our website descriptions accurate, compliant with FDA regulation, and up to date. If or when the FDA comes calling on us, ignorance or “we’re a small company” isn’t going to cut it. Just ask Urban Moonshine, or Wilderness Naturals.

          • D. Smith D. Smith

            I’m wondering why GP is the only company (to my knowledge) on the face of the earth who finds it necessary to try to produce fermented cod liver oil?

            The other thing I’m wondering is WHY??! What’s wrong with just plain old-fashioned CLO? I can’t even imagine there’d be all that much more “benefit” to a possibly rancid, high trans-fat *fermented* oil.

            Something about that just doesn’t sound natural – a fermented oil. Really?

          • L

            @D Smith, fermenting cod liver oil was a marketing gimmick.There was some trickery, trying to make it look traditional by mentioning Vikings and Grandma on the label.

            We depended on WAP to vet all things traditional and we were fooled. WAP hasn’t even tried to deny that they tricked us with this new-fangled oil.

          • Gary

            L: You’ve nailed it. Nothing more than a marketing gimmick. Our nation has a long history of this sort of thing: reread the sidebars on pp. 150-151 of Nourishing Traditions to get a flavor of the type of subterfuge that has long plagued the food industry.

    • Ken Conrad Ken Conrad

      Clearly Victor, you have a different perspective as to what constitutes free speech.
      I have been participating on David’s blog for a long time and I have no apprehension about saying that he has done an excellent job at moderating the comments here. Indeed, there is no question that discussions can sometimes get heated and polarized, but that’s to be expected when human vice rears its ugly head. The skill is in knowing when things have gone to far.

      With respect to the GP cod liver oil cattle licks, you state, “Not that it matters, since it was Cattle Lick and not FCLO that tested for pollock”. Are you suggesting that GP is bringing in by-product from other clo manufactures in order to make those licks?

    • D. Smith D. Smith

      [quote from 8-31-15 article at GP] “In my opinion, your company produces quality fish oil. Scientifically, you can still call your fish oil cod liver oil but I would like to suggest that you list species specification information on the label to remove any possibility of confusion.

      If you have any questions, please let me know.

      Subramaniam Sathivel, PhD” [end quote]

      He also had this to say: [quote] “Some consumers may have particular sensitivity to rancid flavors while other consumers may not notice rancid flavors (for example, parmesan cheese). In general, lipid oxidation data (PV), p-Anisidine value, and (TBA) are mainly related to sensory attributes.” [end quote]

      Both of those quotes are taken from this link:

  • Carrie Hahn

    As to DNA testing…if Dr. Daniel’s DNA tests were able to show pollock, why did those tests not reveal what “vegetable oil was being added” to the FCLO? If GPP was putting soybean oil in the FCLO as someone has theorized, surely soy been would show up in the tests results right?

  • janieinMN

    wondering if anyone here wants to comment on this — i’m not a user or seller of GP’s FCLO (and have no financial interests in any other type fish/CLO oil of any kind) – yet find it very disturbing that their website’s ‘purity statement’ has changed, repeatedly, since Dr Daniel’s report… it now claims the fish come from the Berring Sea, Aleucian Islands area… previously it read ARCTIC region. as of Aug 10, it still said Arctic –
    The archive snapshot of sept 7, shows the change to berring sea… coincidence? OR…?
    BUT, they still had arctic under the raw materials section. that didn’t get removed & changed to Bering/Aleutian until sept 24 (yesterday).

    seems like certain info/facts are disappearing / changing quite rapidly from their website as this scandal has been unfolding (ie the MSC stuff and the last of the Arctic source of their “cod” oil – just to name a couple).

    and yet, their new label is “pacific cod” because “As noted on the label we are using Gadus macrocephalus (Pacific cod) as this was in excellent supply in the past year.” what happened to all their “arctic” wild-caught “cod” (genus, not species). btw, the math seems to be contradictory (to their use of “excellent” supply) — per the catch reports from the Alaska Fishery Science Center.

    it just gets fishier and FISHY-ER! (pun intended, sorry).

    • Steve Tallent

      There does seem to be a lot of info changing, and disappearing. Some of that is to be expected as times, and supply and other stuff change. Some of it could be, “oops, we should have updated that a while back”. Some of it is probably changing it so that information presented in all venues agrees. I’m glad to see the change to the specific location of the source of their fish. The “Arctic” reference, was kinda vague. It was part of what made people think that they were getting Atlantic Cod rather than something else. Half of Norway and significant areas of the Atlantic Cod range are in the Arctic circle, although I don’t know where the managed fisheries are. The Bering Sea and the Aleutians are NOT in the Arctic circle. The Bering Sea is NOT a part of the Arctic Ocean.

      As far as supply, I have no idea what he is referencing. I assumed that he was referencing what was available to them, which is not necessarily predicated on the total catch, but more a case of supply and demand of frozen Pacific Cod Livers.

      • janieinMN

        thanks steve – that makes sense re the supply – forgot they said ‘frozen’ livers… i’ve seen the term ‘fresh’ several times and to me, fresh isn’t frozen (thinking produce)… keep forgeting about how fish is handled and has to be frozen to ‘preserve’ the freshness, etc…

  • Mark mcafee Mark mcafee

    The question has been asked and I will answer it.

    OPDC has several bulk tanks. In fact we bottle directly out of farm tanks to save time and do not even place most of our milk into bulk holding tanks. All milk is separated into fluid for bottling and milk for clas four products like cheese and butter. We have four bulk holding tanks and when our new milk barn is done we will have six tanks.

    Our organic certifications will be provided to anyone that would like to view them. They started in 2000 and continue in force today. There has never been a time period when OPDC was not certified organic. These certs will be posted next week. For your information….organic certs do not expire, but they are renewed each year.

    One more time….opdc has never bottled any milk except for our own. OPDC has never and would never use a non certified organic product in our production.

    I hope this resolves the questions asked. I will get the certs up on our website next week….they are in archive.

    It is not possible to sell organic products in CA stores with out triggering an audit of your certs. The idea that OPDC was not certified for some period of time is without Merritt. Stores require the certs….our insurance company and others require fresh and current copies. The same goes for organic brokers and the state of CA.

    OPDC is dedicated to trust and transparency.

  • Ken Conrad Ken Conrad

    Maybe my use of the term “pick your poison” with respect to fish oil has some validity after all.

  • Laurie

    It is a shame that Ron Schmid had such a terrible health condition but attributing Ron Schmid’s heart failure to Green Pasture’s FCLO as the only possible cause overlooks the fact that Mr. Schmid was a long distance runner, a group noted for heart problems due to the stress that such protracted exercise places on the heart. Even with superior nutrition, many in the advanced fitness community have discarded the protracted cardio exercise as a boon to health meme as dangerous advice, much as the work of Dr. Weston Price contradicted the low fat myths about cardiovascular health.

    Perhaps Mr. Schmid needs to re-think his exercise program.

    I do not know enough about the Science to evaluate the claims against the Cod Liver Oil. I am aware that
    the real food movement will be a target for the same group that organizes raids against organic
    farmers and seeks to regulate our right to have free choice about healthy food for ourselves eradicated
    to where only glyphosate-laden (ie “miracle grow for cancer”) genetically modified, plastic, irradiated food is what is available.

    I have been a customer of Green Pasture’s in the past and continue to receive emails. My feeling
    about Dave Wetzel is that he is sincerely well intentioned and I definitely believe that to
    be true of Sally Fallon Morell.

    While I do not know much about Ms. Kaylaa Daniels, I am disappointed that the way this issue played out, the end result was to DIVIDE the real food movement.

    I hope that other people who are concerned about protecting our providers, growers, and sourcers of real food can step back and look at the big picture of what has happened here. The enemies of human access to real food ALWAYS operate using the same methods and if they cannot achieve their goals one way they will do so in another. One way is to set up their own “alternative” option for the people who object to having their rights taken away. If the foundational group is strong, cohesive and committed to its principles they will use any means necessary to DIVIDE in order to Conquer their target group. Ms. Daniels may be sincere and Dr. Ron is almost certainly sincere and yet both can be used to undermine the powerful message that WAPF has uniquely and reliably been the best educational source of for many years now. If the fake food purveyors take down the real food community, using the standard book of tricks, they will also control the message.

    In spite of the money of their powerful enemies , the WAPF has made real inroads against the lies about nutrition that the profiteers publish from dawn to dusk, using their indoctinated white-coats to reinforce. I am sure that Dave Wetzel will work hard to improve his product however it came to be flawed in the first place. If it was as a result of a diabolical profit motive on his part, then in time, the truth will out and WAPF would certainly disown him and his product. I am truly sad that Dr. Ron Schmid had such a shocking and disturbing health discovery and if it was caused exclusively by contaminated product knowingly being sold by Mr. Wetzel, that fact will also be brought to, light if we pursue truth patiently and sincerely.

    I am more concerned that, whatever her conscious intentions, Ms. Daniel’s actions had the effect of creating division within a group which needs to be very strong as we move ever closer to the action plan of “Codex Alimentarius” and its gradual rollout. . It is my impression that the divisiveness of Ms. Daniel’s actions are the likely reason that she was asked to leave the board at WAPF. Given the current endangerment of our access to real and healthy food in general, I think that is sufficient reason. We should always be vigilant about standards and demand of our providers the highest integrity we can verify, yet we need to do so in a way that causes the least division to our central goals as much as possible.

    As an outside observer who deeply appreciates the work done by WAPF and their contribution to my knowledge to finally understand what true human nutrition requires, I feel grave concern about this challenge to their integrity. Personally I take responsibility for the health advice that I follow, and have found what I have learned from this organization to have been what has been missing from all the “health food” BS that industry propagandists used to deceive most of the public along the way. Re introducing nutrient dense food, which happened 15 years ago for me, turned my health around and the improvements have continued the duration. I have Weston Price and the people who have devoted their lives to getting his knowledge heard, to be thankful to.

    I hope this rift in the community resolves in a way that continues to bring this knowledge to more people everywhere and that the greater purpose of keeping real food available remain the greater purpose for all concerned.

Leave a Reply

You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>