You made a very strong point here and I see where you are coming from. I guess the AP writer Paul had his reasons as you have yours. I’m merely an observer who questions certain practices.

I do see however where you are coming from. The one thing I don’t agree is your mention of

[quote]When is the last time you read human trials before you ate or drank anything at mealtime? Absurd![end quote]

The reason being is that normal food is readily available in the supermarkets (and I’m not questioning the actual safety here as a lot is to be desired these days when it comes to that) but since XanGo is a network marketing company they have to abide by much stricter rules and regulations.

Since both of us don’t make these rules, it is just what it is. Putting out wrong claims either by distributors or not, is what the real problem here is. And those are what this blog post is based on.

Things are made controversial in the news in order to ensure readers stay tuned!
The article I am referring to was from the AP writer Paul Foy. I have never seen a more poorly researched and obviously biased article.

I am appalled at the bias displayed in this article. No person who has actually tried (90 days) this product would even think about writing this.

I think it is more than coincidental that the writer Paul Foy is from Salt Lake City..the home of XanGo corporate headquarters! Sounds like someone has a personal axe to grind, doesn’t it?

This article has so many holes in it that I am astounded that it got printed. The title itself is misleading. Since when does a food have to go through human trials to have value? That’s right, XanGo is a food and is not required on any level to have human trials.
When is the last time you read human trials before you ate or drank anything at mealtime? Absurd!
The other things wrong with this article:

1. I don’t know of anyone who actually pays $40 a bottle. Consumers are smart enough to get a wholesale membership.

2. Even though the ORAC score doesn’t tell the whole story (xanthones are the true benefit of this product), I have never seen any ORAC study that shows mangosteen to be HALF of blueberries? and less than cherries? Give me a break! So much for the so-called unbiased independent lab studies!

3. Now, all of a sudden, antioxidants are neutralized by stomach acid don’t work in the human body? So, the thousands of studies available on PubMed.gov (US Government National Library of Medicine) are invalid?

4. The “other beneficial chemicals barely known to science”?
Would this include Catechins which are the main reason people drink Green Tea? or Polysacharrides found in Aloe Vera? or Proanthocyanidins found in Grape Seeds? Mangosteen contains more of these chemical compounds by weight than any of these 3 top selling food supplements!

People, do your own research at XanthoneEducation.com and see for yourself the science that backs up what those of us drinking the product already know. Go there and read what Dr. James Duke of the USDA (30 years) found in the mangosteen fruit.

Still skeptical? Shut your yap and put your money where your mouth is and try the product! The company offers a 30 day no hassle money back guarantee…you don’t even have to return anything! Now what’s your excuse?
How can anyone be negative about something without ever having tried it? This is the ultimate display of hypocricy in my opinion. I suppose you still think the world is flat too? or that space travel is impossible? or that the internet will never work?

DC