Date: Thu, 07 Feb 2008 17:02:29 -0500
From: webcompliance@mannatech.com
Subject: Cease and Desist

TO: Peter Bowditch

RE:Impermissible Use of Health Claims Attributed to Mannatech Products 1.5.47
http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles/comment/mannatech.htm

Dear Peter Bowditch:

We need your immediate assistance with a critical issue related to your website. It has come to our attention that you currently have statements on your website which are or could be construed to be unauthorized health claims which go beyond stating that Mannatech nutritional products promote the maintenance of health and general well-being. The statements made on your website are contrary to Mannatech policy.

Demand is hereby made that you immediately remove from your website any statement or reference which (i) states, suggests or implies that Mannatech nutritional products prevent, treat or cure disease, (ii) states, suggests or implies that Mannatech nutritional products are a substitute for a doctor’s standard of care, and/or (iii) is in any manner in contradiction with Mannatech’s existing policies and procedures. Demand is further made that you refrain from engaging in this activity in the future.

Please contact the undersigned in writing within five (5) business days from the receipt of this letter advising that you have made the requested modification to your website and confirming that you will refrain from such activity in the future.

Failure to comply with this demand may result in legal and compliance action up to and including litigation in which Mannatech will seek injunctive relief, damages and attorney’s fees and costs as allowable under Texas law. Mannatech will undertake all actions necessary to secure your compliance.

Having brought this to your attention, we are confident that you will understand our concerns and act immediately. We will be monitoring your website, and await your response in writing. Please contact the undersigned at webcompliance@mannatech.com if you have any questions regarding Mannatech’s position in this matter. Nothing herein shall be construed as a waiver of any rights Mannatech has at law or in equity, all of which are expressly reserved.

Your prompt attention and cooperation in this matter are greatly appreciated.

Respectfully,
Mannatech Legal, Ethics & Compliance Department

I am rather puzzled by your Cease and Desist demand as I can guarantee that I have never made any claim for the effectiveness of Mannatech products in the treatment or management of any disease or ailment, human, veterinary or agricultural. I would not make such a claim as I would not believe it to be true, and truth is important to me. If you read the web page you objected to you will see that the only claims of effectiveness for anything from Mannatech are made by people extolling (and presumably selling) the products. In fact you might even see where I took someone to task for claiming that sugar pills were an effective treatment for Parkinson's Disease.

I must thank you, however, for your clearly implied admission that Mannatech products are useless in the treatment or management of any disease. I will quote you in future when Mannatech distributors abuse me for not recognising the amazing curative properties of the products.

I will, of course, be removing nothing from my site and will be making no changes to the way I comment about Mannatech in the future. As is my usual policy, your email and this reply will be featured prominently on my site.

Thank you.

TO: Peter Bowditch

RE: Impermissible Use of Health Claims Attributed to Mannatech Products 1.5.47
http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles/comment/mannatech.htm

Dear Peter Bowditch:

We previously contacted you requesting your assistance on a critical issue concerning your website. We have requested and made formal demand that you immediately remove any statements from your website which are or could be construed to be unauthorized health claims which go beyond stating that Mannatech nutritional products promote the maintenance of health and general well-being. The statements made on your website are contrary to Mannatech policy.

Demand is hereby made that you immediately remove from your website any statement or reference which (i) states, suggests or implies that Mannatech nutritional products prevent, treat or cure disease, (ii) states, suggests or implies that Mannatech nutritional products are a substitute for a doctor’s standard of care, and/or (iii) is in any manner in contradiction with Mannatech’s existing policies and procedures. Demand is further made that you refrain from engaging in this activity in the future.

We remain confident you understand our concerns and also appreciate that it is imperative that you promptly comply with the demand to cease and desist, and to document your compliance in writing within five (5) business days of the receipt of this letter. If you have already complied with this demand, we thank you and appreciate your cooperation.

Nothing herein shall be construed as a waiver of any rights Mannatech has at law or in equity, all of which are expressly reserved.

Your prompt attention to this matter is greatly appreciated.

Respectfully,
Mannatech Legal, Ethics & Compliance Department

I am not sure why you didn't receive my response to your earlier Cease and Desist demand, but as it appears on the page in question and I assume you have checked that page before sending the current email I am at a loss as to why you do not seem to understand my position on this matter. For reference, here is my previous response:

I am rather puzzled by your Cease and Desist demand as I can guarantee that I have never made any claim for the effectiveness of Mannatech products in the treatment or management of any disease or ailment, human, veterinary or agricultural. I would not make such a claim as I would not believe it to be true, and truth is important to me. If you read the web page you objected to you will see that the only claims of effectiveness for anything from Mannatech are made by people extolling (and presumably selling) the products. In fact you might even see where I took someone to task for claiming that sugar pills were an effective treatment for Parkinson's Disease.

I must thank you, however, for your clearly implied admission that Mannatech products are useless in the treatment or management of any disease. I will quote you in future when Mannatech distributors abuse me for not recognising the amazing curative properties of the products.

I will, of course, be removing nothing from my site and will be making no changes to the way I comment about Mannatech in the future. As is my usual policy, your email and this reply will be featured prominently on my site.

Thank you.

To make matters quite clear, the following statements describe my position:

• I am not a Mannatech distributor, so your rules do not apply to me.

• At no place on my site do I state, suggest or imply "that Mannatech nutritional products prevent, treat or cure disease".

• At no place on my site do I state, suggest or imply "that Mannatech nutritional products are a substitute for a doctor’s standard of care".

• I don't do either of these things because I have no reason to believe that "Mannatech nutritional products prevent, treat or cure disease" or "Mannatech nutritional products are a substitute for a doctor’s standard of care". I fact, I believe quite the opposite.

• If you do not want me to publish such claims made by Mannatech distributors then you should instruct Mannatech distributors not to email people with such claims.

Once again I must thank you for your admission that claims for any medical usefulness of Mannatech products are baseless.

As always, your email and this response will be published prominently on my web site.

Thank you.

From: "Michelle"
Subject: Your anti-vaccine emails
Date: Tue, 06 May 2008 11:25:26 -0400

I just wanted to say thank you for leaving the emails up that I sent you back in 1999 and 2000, the funny thing is, here we are in 2008 after my initial challenge to you, and you are still unable to provide any proof yet.

Of course your emails are still up there. Why would I want to remove evidence of your stupidity, ignorance of and resistance to facts, and your dislike (perhaps hatred) of children? I particularly like the way you emailed me (using what was obviously my email address) to tell me that I worked for me. A better example of stupidity would be hard to find.

Let me refresh your memory: I challenge you NOW to show me REAL proof that vaccines are totally safe and totally effective. Prove to me my daughter didn't die from vaccines. Prove to me that the thousands of reported reactions to vaccines are from something other than vaccines. Prove to me you know something about vaccines, or the dangers, etc..

I am not surprised that even all these years later, I am still waiting to hear back from you with any evidence or proof.

What would be the point? As I said above, you wouldn't recognise a fact if it bit you on your extensive and ever-widening posterior.

I am conducting research into the motivations of anti-vaccination liars and I wonder if you wouldn't mind answering some questions:

1. Why do you lie about vaccines?

2. How many dead children in a pile do you need to trigger a spontaneous orgasm?

3. When unloading dead children from a truck into a mass grave, do you prefer a mechanical shovel, a pitchfork, or do you like to get personal and use your hands?

Sincerely
Michelle M

Date: Sun, 06 Jul 2008 19:05:27 -0700
From: JOE HARRIS`
Subject: Peter this is what people think of you that have children like yours

Still your friend, Just don't understand you Remember me mentioning a new way to do multi dose vacc's without presevitives you never got in touch with me if you care so much about the children of africa you have a strange way of showing it.

Your friend in christ

PS. write back soon !

Joe -------------------------- TX

Please remember this guy over sees a 18 million dollar Bill Gates hookworm vaccine grant.

He is totally in bed with Pharma.

One of his PR interviews he talks about how he courted Pharma for checks to develop his vaccine. God bless his daughter, I guess rather than a shot at recovery she will be a (Pharma) trust kid to the likes of Leona Helmsley's dog.

I'll never understand why parents wouldn't at least try for recovery or improvement, but to deny someone else the shot at uncovering core issues HHS concede cause Autism is heinous in my book.

The CDC pulls Hortez out as needed. He was the speaker at the closed door press conference before the DC rally a few years back.

My question is this to the media, if he swears up and down vaccines had nothing to do with his daughter's Autism then prove it. Submit her shot lots, porphyrin levels and metabolic results and measles titers for public review. Before you exploit your own child and mislead thousands of others.

As we are often scrutinized for making assumptions. Peter Hortez should not be trusted on his word alone - bring data.

Right now it is proven that Thimerosal and other toxins do provoke developmental neuro-damage as per the manufacturers safety data sheet. That is a fact.

I am saddened that some people will even exploit their Autistic kids for money.

I hope and pray he will come to his senses and consider his daughter before the almighty Pharma dollar.

 Karen Beauvais
Mom to Joshua, who had 276X the EPA allowable amount of Mercury in his infant vaccines.

Subject: Response to September Issue Cam or Scam
Date: Thu, 06 Nov 2008 16:44:50 +1100
From: "Mark Smith"

Hi,

I was surprised to find your article on homeopathy, acupuncture and chiropractic. [See this article here. PB] I didn’t realize there where people “out there” dedicated to look for anything negative related to “alternative” therapies.

Why not? Did you assume that quackery would be immune from investigation?

In fact, I would have thought that if this were the case that allopathic medicine would have been your first port of call, as the leading cause of death in the USA is from iatrogenic sources

Ah, yes - The Lie That Will Not Die. I don't know why later figures aren't available, but here are the 10 leading causes of deaths in the USA in 2005. If you have any later information you might like to let the CDC know so that they can update their web site.

• Number of deaths: 2,448,017
• Death rate: 825.9 deaths per 100,000 population
• Life expectancy: 77.8 years
• Infant Mortality rate: 6.87 deaths per 1,000 live births

Number of deaths for leading causes of death:

1. Heart disease: 652,091
2. Cancer: 559,312
3. Stroke (cerebrovascular diseases): 143,579
4. Chronic lower respiratory diseases: 130,933
5. Accidents (unintentional injuries): 117,809
6. Diabetes: 75,119
7. Alzheimer's disease: 71,599
8. Influenza/Pneumonia: 63,001
9. Nephritis, nephrotic syndrome, and nephrosis: 43,901
10. Septicemia: 34,136

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/deaths.htm

(it is the third leading cause of death in Australia).

Australian numbers are more up to date, but again I encourage you to contact the Australian Bureau of Statistics with your later information so that they can update their web site. Here is the situation in 2006:

1. Ischaemic heart diseases - angina, heart attacks, and blocked arteries of the heart (I20-I25): 22,983
2. Strokes ( I60-I69): 11,465
3. Trachea and lung cancer (C33-C34): 7,348
4. Dementia and Alzheimer's disease (F01-F03, G30): 6,542
5. Chronic lower respiratory diseases - asthma, bronchitis and emphysema (J40-J47): 5,443
6. Colon and rectum cancer (C18-C21): 3,858
7. Blood and lymph cancer (including leukaemia) (C81-C96): 3,693
8. Diabetes (E10-E14): 3,662
9. Diseases of the kidney and urinary system (N00-N39): 3,192
10. Prostate cancer (C61): 2,952

http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/mf/3303.0

From what YOU say alternative medicine (I prefer to use the term complementary) has no effect (other than placebo).

I didn't say that at all. What I said was, and I quote, "All of the above treatments work. They work provided that the patient has a self-limiting or mild psychosomatic condition". Real medicines have a placebo effect as well. The objective of clinical trials is to see if the medicines have an effect greater than placebo. If all you can claim is placebo then all you can claim is nothing, so there should be no charge. Why do quacks want to charge money for things that do nothing? Surely that would be fraud.

If this was the case then at least the mortality rate would be a lot less!!!

Are you saying that the mortality rate for alternative medicines is the same as for real medicine and can be reduced? I'm pleased about that and I look forward to reading the research on how that can be achieved. A good start would be a system of reporting adverse effects.

I agree that there are charlatans out there that exploit people who will do anything to relieve their symptoms but that is not due to the professions out there, it is more related to those individuals, and it occurs in medicine also. The biggest charlatans are the pharmaceutical companies who drive the medical machine, their guinea pigs are the general public. If their product kills or maims enough people they take it off the market and repackage it as something else.

So all alternative and complementary medicines undergo extensive safety trials involving millions of test subjects to prove absolute safety before they are sent to market, do they? As an example, the day after Vioxx was withdrawn from the market I was offered a quack substitute that was guaranteed to be safe. How could this be known? (By the way - the people who suffered ill effects from Vioxx were not using it according to the clear instructions on the label, but why should that fact mean anything to the critics?)

Yet, if someone has an allergic reaction to royal jelly, the AMA wants to shut down the whole naturopathic community.

You might like to point me to the safety trials for royal jelly that were undertaken before it was sold to the public. You might also like to consider risk/benefit ratio. As the risk of allergic reaction to bee products is quite high and there are no trials or research indicating any benefit of royal jelly (except to the wealth of those selling it), the ratio is infinite. Here's something else to think about - should royal jelly be "prescribed" for someone who is also taking one of the large number of alternative products which "boost the immune system"?

By the way - the AMA has no say over who practices what in the medical field. They can express an opinion but they can't stop anyone doing anything.

I would have thought that if you were going to make comments such as you have that you would have done a little research (there is a plethora of research articles out there on the benefits of “alternative medicine”) beforehand. Having said that I understand that everyone is entitled to their own opinion, even if you feel the need to spread your opinion to as many people as possible. But I would be interested to find out your opinion based on the same scrutiny of the pharmaceutical and medical industry.

And I would be interested in your explanation of how the mutually exclusive world views of chiropractic (or in your case, osteopathy), homeopathy and acupuncture can be reconciled. Do bacteria and viruses cause disease?

Mark Smith
Osteopath

Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2008 10:17:24 -0800
From: Tam erica
Subject: It takes a fool to fool a fool...

Wow! What a wonderful anti-vaccination site this is!! Now Im even more sure of the choice I made NOT to vaccinate my precious, healthy children that God has blessed me with.

When I was twelve years old, I stood in a line, in the hallway of my school with all 48 of my classmates. I was waiting for my turn to have several needles, all connected in a circle, injected into my arm all at once. I bare the scar from it to this day as a reminder. When I think back about that day now, as a 41 year old, I see it from a ceiling view and it makes me think of the Pink Floyd video where the children are lined up and marched into the meat grinder. "All and all, we're all just bricks in the wall"...... and im nothing to the government. Well, except for maybe a test subject. We'll always be good for that, as long as we accept it. I wish my mom would have stopped it from happening to me. I wish I would have listened to the child voice in me, as I stood waiting in that line, that said, "this is strange.. this is wrong.", and stepped out of that line and said, "I have rights and it will be a cold day in hell before you inject me!". But, I was only a child and didnt know I had rights..... and my parents were out to lunch.

My children attend public school in Indiana and they "tryed" to trick me into thinking that I had to have them vaccinated. Thank the good Lord that I knew better. And I cant believe the amount of people who told me I was wrong because they had believed the lie and were pressured into having their children vaccinated by the schools, until I proved them wrong by sending my unvaccinated child to school by signing a paper saying that I didnt agree with vaccinations for both medical and religious reasons. Unfortunately, it was too late for my best friends little girl, who was developing normally until her first vaccines at age two, now she has slight autism. She didnt want to vaccinate her but didnt believe me that she didnt have to in order to enroll her in pre-school. Now she has guilt that haunts her.

I didnt plan on typing past my first two sentences because I agree on one thing with "what's his name" that runs this site....... no sense in talking to fools.(unless you're after easy prey) Guess I got carried away. Have a great day and God bless us all even though we dont deserve it.

From: "Glenn Wells"
Subject: Congratulations
Date: Sat, 24 Jan 2009 06:13:27 +1100

Hi I was looking at your site and I thought to myself this guy would be perfect as a US Public Relations guy. I do feel sorry for you though, having a closed mind is not very healthy.

All the best to you.

Glenn Wells

Thank you, Glenn. I'm actually in Australia like you so I don't think I will be doing any US PR work. I feel for your closed mind problem but there's not much I can do about it, I'm sorry. Perhaps you could join a skeptics group and they could arrange an intervention.

From: "Kimo"
Subject: Boyd Haley
Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2009 19:48:53 -0500

How many autistic children do you have?

None, but I have a very close relative who has Asperger's Syndrome.

Did you note when the symptoms of Autism occurred?

It wasn't diagnosed precisely for a year or so, but one of the nurses noted the way the baby attended to stimuli immediately after birth, so that's when the signs first appeared. Let's say at five minutes old.

I notice that you refer to Dr. Haley and others as “anti-vaccination” liars...which of course screams “agenda” within your own articles.

Why? They lie so they are liars. It's quite simple if you understand how English works.

I’m pretty sure (having an Autistic son and following this whole “theory” very closely) that none of them have espoused getting rid of vaccines, but rather eliminating Thimerasol as the preservative.

You haven't been paying attention, have you? Why do they oppose MMR, which has never contained thimerosal? Why do they oppose all the vaccines which no longer contain thimerosal? The only answer I can think of is that they hate children and want to see them dead or maimed.

I’m not a Bio chemist, but you engage in the same “wow them with technical speak” B.S. that you accuse Dr. Haley and others of engaging in. Let me see…you use the Helicopter pilot analogy to as a way to demonstrate what you believe is an idiotic response. How about this…”Mercury is only one of 23 atoms in the Thimerasol compound.” My reply…who gives a shit…can you tell me what happens to that Mercury atom after my son’s body breaks down the Thimerasol? No?

Yes. When the thimerosal breaks down, one of the products is ethyl mercury which leaves the body in the urine and stools. The mercury goes with it. Liars will try to tell you that thimerosal breaks down to methyl mercury or that ethyl and methyl mercury have the same effect on the body, but they would be lying. After all, lying is what they do.

Let me guess, you’re not a doctor but a blogger…you have a really impressive degree in “blogging”.

You don't have to guess, because it is stated quite clearly on my web site. You are not the first person claiming the ability to research facts who can't even find out the simplest things about me and you won't be the last. And by the way, to be a blogger I would need a blog. This site isn't one.

Here’s another common response “Billions of vaccines have been given with no ill effect.” Again, who cares if hundreds of thousands have had an ill affect? I don’t think anyone believes the Thimerasol alone is the culprit…but rather that those who’s Autism may have been triggered by it have a genetic disorder where their bodies can not detoxify as effectively.

Yes, that's the lie that had to be invented when the "autism epidemic" didn't go away after the thimerosal was removed from vaccines. It's the lie that had to be invented to dispute the repeated and extensive scientific studies which have shown that there is no connection between thimerosal and autism.

I’m no medical doctor either, but I know that injecting children THE DAY THEY ARE BORN with molecules that contain mercury is…idiotic.

And what vaccines which contain mercury are given to children THE DAY THEY ARE BORN? See the full list of vaccines here. Please be specific.

The final proof in the pudding is that pharmaceuticals “voluntarily” removed Thimerasol. Given that they, much as your “advertising based” blog-site, chase the almighty dollar, why would they remove it if there were no ill effects?

It was done as a public relations exercise because they were being distracted from the task of protecting children by liars telling lies about autism. It made some vaccines more expensive because it meant that they had to be packaged in single-use vials and probably saved the manufacturers some money because they could leave out an ingredient.

FOAD!

Why so coy with the acronym? We're all adults here. I'm not too shy to spell it out and tell you to fuck off yourself, but I don't want you to die.

Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2009 08:24:32 -0700
From: John H
Subject: What Is It Excatlly You Support?

Mr. O'Neill

I am not Mr O'Neill.

What Is It Excatlly You Support?

The Medical Industrial Complex?  Really?  Are you simply against individuals CHOSSING FREELY the medical path that best suites them because it's a path that doesn't suite you?  Is your day job really pushing dope for big pharma?  Do you sleep well at night?

I sleep very well. Children with whooping cough do not sleep well, nor do children with diphtheria. Meningitis from measles can make children scream with pain, causing their parents to lose some sleep. The parents of children who die from vaccine-preventable illnesses must often spend sleepless nights nursing their grief. Not that any of this would be of concern to you, of course.

In reading your web site I'm really trying to fathom what on earth it is YOU DO SUPPORT / PUSH?

In reading your web site I'm really trying to fathom what on earth language it is written in, although it does bear a superficial similarity to English.

If you're really a big supporter of the 'established' medical 'industry' you obviously must be a EUGENISTS / TRANS-HUMANIST.  Here in the U.S.A. our own government and 'established media' has estimated that the very 'sound' medical establishment you SEEM TO defend tooth and nail kills over 200,000 annually.  The first 100,000+ are killed due to 'established' big pharma drugs, vaccines included and, other 100,000+ are killed due to misdiagnoses by the very type docs you defend to the end.  If you wish to CLAIM I'm "making these figures up", go haead, they aren't very hard to find for anyone eho's just slightly inquisitive.

Yes, those numbers can be found on many web sites written by liars and deluded opposers of medicine. I would never claim that you made up the 100,000 number, because in fact I was the one who made it up. You can read about that here.

So Mr O'Niell, are these death toll numbers NOT high enough for you?  Would you like to see them rise?  All in the name of 'sound established medical practice'?

All The Best!
John H.

From: Paul Krismanits
Subject: Question about Mannatech
Date: Tue, 05 May 2009 22:31:02 -0400

I read everything you have posted and I must ask, are you an idiot? You say over and over again that their doctor didn't win the Nobel Prize but I googled it and he DID win it in medicine in 1999. Look it up yourself http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/medicine/laureates/1999/.

You might like to point to exactly where I said that Dr Blobel didn't win the Nobel Prize. If your Google skills are good enough, you might even find where I said:

Dr Günter Blobel, who won the Physiology or Medicine Prize in 1999 "for the discovery that proteins have intrinsic signals that govern their transport and localization in the cell".

Did you notice the web link there? It appears to be the same one you gave me, and I had it in 2006.

So what it didn't have to do with their product?

If it had nothing to do with the product, why do they use his name as a form of endorsement?

The dude still works for them!

Does he? Then why did he get a lawyer to issue a Cease and Desist order against Mannatech for saying that his research had something to do with sugar pills? Most people don't stay employed if they set lawyers on the boss. Even you recognise (see above) that his research had nothing to do with Mannatech.

Also, I couldn't find ANYWHERE but your own site where it says 1994 for the prize.

I was quoting from a message sent to me by a Mannatech distributor. The fact that the lie doesn't appear elsewhere just makes it even more ludicrous.

Your attempt to discredit through this one area is ludicrous. So one salesman who didn't quite know what he was talking about e-mails you and you use that against the company?

No, I used it against the writer, but surely even you can find examples of fraudulent claims of Mannatech-related research winning Nobel Prizes. You can see some Nobel winners complaining about the lies here.

Since you know MLM so well, you should know that their salespeople are self-employed. THe company itself never made that statement.

Of course it didn't. MLM companies rely strongly on the distributors making the claims, so that the companies can use what is called "plausible deniability". It just seems rather a strong coincidence that the same lies keep coming from different distributors.

So what is it? Did you just try Mannatech and suck so now you have to go nuts on it?

The education in basic arithmetic I received in school prevented me from ever joining any pyramid scheme, however well disguised from the law they might be. I don't have to keep a dead dog in my house to know that something rotten smells bad.

That sure is open-minded. I read over and over your site, and your just a smug SOB who is twisting stuff to fit your own opinions, without any real regard for the truth or any desire to find out what it really is. You must be a Democrat.

Why? Do Democrats have a better grasp of reality than members of other parties?

Oh, and I bet this e-mail never finds its way onto your page. Coward.

You lost that bet, didn't you? On four pages to start off with, and then only three after it drops off the front page.