YL: Quackwatch Unveiled

December 1, 2004

Hey Pam,

> I still have access to YL pages as a previous distributor and in

> their virtual log in access - they list a link that refutes the

> quackwatch site....It's a pdf file and is 18 page...and while

> most of it of course is complimentary to GY and YL - I did find

> the info on Dr. Barret and the other guy on his site very

> disconcerting - they sound worse than GY!

First .. the article does NOT " Refute " anything .. first usage of the

word " Refute " means .. " To prove the falsity or error of a statement or

the person advancing it. " They have not done that .. they have merely

presented an alternate position that contradicts the original position.

It is wise to emphasize the positive and disregard or confuse when

discussing the negative .. this is the way arguments are conducted and

so there should be no surprises when folks read the article.

And the person making the rebuttal is Dr. Terry S. Friedmann, who is a

Young Living dealer .. so I would not expect him support a position

that was not in the interests of himself and Young Living.

As for Dr. Barrett .. he is not necessarily a person I would like to

pattern my life after. I have written before that the industry of

alternative medicine has created other industries .. those who work to

promote hype and those who work to expose hype and sometimes I associate

the former with being outlaws and the latter with being bounty hunters.

But .. even considering that most bounty hunters are criminals operating

with permission of the law .. despite their self interest they do serve

mankind now and then. Barrett is one of those who can't get it wrong

every time.

As for who believes or doesn't believe this or that about YL .. I will

never lose sleep over it .. I can only present information that folks

with inquiring minds can use to make their own decisions. But I will go

down the line and comment on a few of the positions Friedmann presents.

And .. I ask folks to ask themselves if .. I and others are doing what

Dr. Friedmann claims we are .. " spreading lies and attacking freedom of

choice in healthcare, " then why does YL not sue me under any of the laws

regarding interference with commerce, slander, etc. ???

> Trying to be objective here on both sides....since I'm kinda in

> the 'middle' of the oil thing with my mom who is deeply into YL

> and her 'better than mine' oils....so if anyone has any

> clarification on this paper that YL wrote, would appreciate it.

Its not easy to be objective when one follows their emotions and that is

where most YL followers are. Its not easy to prove a point using logic

or science when the one you are speaking to doesn't want to be convinced

and they already have their minds made up. And its not easy to use

science unless one has enough good science in their kit bag to handle

a discussion.

> If this is OT - personal replies are appreciated too.

Nothing OT about trying to teach folks to consider the proper and safe

use of EO .. and giving them an opportunity to see the other side of the

the story instead of just the information YL puts out.

> http://enews.essentialscience.net/welcome.exm

Whether or not this Essential Science is really essential .. or really

science .. is questionable unto itself. Anyone who buys the YL oils

based on their claim of their oils being the ONLY oils that work is a

long way from scientific and the information they put out will be a long

way from essential .. unless one is a YL'er and wants something to hang

their hat on so they can continue to be mesmerized by the information YL

and friends puts out.

But here is my position on some of the comments in that article:

1. Dr. Friedmann starts out trying to confuse folks by commenting that

taking vitamins is healthy .. nobody has said its not.

2. He says that the success of alternative and complementary medicine

has caught the attention of conventional medicine as the focus of two

important statistical studies published in the New England Journal of

Medicine and the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA).

True this is .. but it is refuting nothing nor does it have a thing to

do with the credibility or lack thereof of YL claims.

3. He goes on about PubMed and the National Institute of Health and the

NCCAM .. the entire first page contains this humma-humma.

All the above is intended to mesmerize and confuse simple folks and to

prep them for what is to come.

4. He kicks off the second page with references to Jesus Christ .. and

the intent is in line with the YL philosophy that is preached to their

followers .. those who criticize YL are devils .. or wolves .. and Gary

Young is a sheep amongst these Devils and Wolves.

5. Note that he does NOT attach the handle " Dr. " to Young .. he uses D.

Gary Young .. but that stands for Donald. So those who said D. Gary

Young is NOT a doctor of anything are not liars to be refuted.

6. Then he describes a YL Follower .. " His Mind is Made Up: Don't

Confuse Him With Facts.:

7. Then he goes on to discuss Steven Barrett and I have no comment to

make on that .. gave my position on that above.

8. On page 3 he gets into accusing Barrett of lying about Young's

involvement in the death of a child .. there was some involvement but

not certain if the fault was Young's .. not enough to take it to court.

9. Then he goes into Gary Young's miraculous recovery using his oils

after being told by a doctor that he would never walk again. That is

refuted with documentation .. you people have read it in the previous

post .. and it is refuted by people who are very close to Gary Young ..

people I have personally spoken with.

10. Then in Part II .. on page 8, Friedmann makes a attempt to justify

Gary Young's education .. and even though his words can confuse those

who are easily confused .. and those who don't read what is written

carefully .. he merely supports the argument that Gary Young does NOT

have a diploma from an accredited school.

11. He then goes on to discuss all of the self study Gary Young has

been involved in .. including a short course on Gas Chromatography at

Anadolu University, Eskisehir, Turkey. In fact, the short course was

conducted by the Medicinal and Aromatic Plant and Drug Research Center,

Anadolu University .. and at one time .. Gary Young had written on his

bio that he studied with Professor Dr. Husnu Can Baser, who was then of the Research Center .. but the day Gary Young was there I

spoke with Professor Baser on the phone and learned that the short

classes were NOT being presented by the professor .. and I later wrote

all of this in a post .. and Gary Young changed his bio. I will send

that post if I can pull it up .. and I am not sure that the information

Dr. Friedmann is disagreeing with is actually what I posted many years

ago anyway.

12. He then talks of Young's impressive design and fabrication skills

when it comes to distillation equipment. I know nothing of these French

fellows he writes of .. but I do know that while Gary Young was visiting

in Turkey he saw the still of my friend, Namit Mumcuoglu, and wanted one

like it and Namit produced one .. and sent it to him in America.

13. On page 11 .. paragraph 7 .. He mentions me and Professor Mustafa

Keviz of Anadolu University .. and that the UN Development Organization

had not invited Young to speak at their function. And .. that Professor

Baser had refuted the statements I made regarding what he told me. Says

that Professor Baser can't imagine why I would make such statements

unless it is due to jealousy, etc.

But folks .. in 1995 and even later .. I was not selling wholesale or

retail EO .. I only exported essential oils in lots of 100 kilos or more

and only those oils that were Origin Turkey .. there was no competition

between me and Young Living as I did not open my company in the USA ..

the company from which I sell oils in smaller lots than 100 kilos .. and

to buyers other than major clearing houses and wholesalers .. until the

Summer of 1999.

And .. Professor Baser knows this well .. we used to be friends.

More on this later .. but as for Professor Baser's alleged clarification

regarding his and my comments .. I'll just say that if its true .. and I

don't know that it is .. then Professor Baser has lost total credibility

in my eyes because such clarification would make him a dishonorable man.

I am not a liar .. Professor Husnu Baser knows this .. and he knows what

he told me .. more than once. And I have written him twice asking for

clarification on this alleged e-mail to Young .. he has not answered.

And I will conclude this portion of my comments by saying that Professor

Baser is no longer the Director of the Institute under discussion.

14. On page 14 it mentions a class Gary Young taught at Ege University,

Izmir, Turkey .. in the summer of 1996. Nobody said he did not teach

a class there .. but I have said that the class he taught was not for

students of Ege University .. as some would have us believe .. the class

was for Young Living people who came to Turkey with Gary Young .. use of

Ege University classroom space was arranged and paid for by YL. True it

is that some of the Ege Professors also pitched information to the YL

attendees. Likely it was the best information presented .. methinks.

15. On page 16 he mentions the accident that killed a worker when one

of Young's stills blew up .. whether it was but one accident or not is

no big deal to me. If someone is an expert then they should know a bit

more about pressurization, etc., I think. Personal opinion this is ..

but of all the stills operated here in Turkey .. by folks who do not

claim to be world class experts .. I have NEVER heard of an accident

where anyone was hurt. If it has happened .. I've not heard about it

and as I am in the know here I will assume it has never happened.

16. On page 17 .. paragraph 14 .. he discusses the quality of YL oils

and points out that they are " therapeutic grade " .. whatever that is ..

and are proven to be so by GCs from a French organization that is AFNOR

approved.

GC and GC/MS can do a few things .. IF .. the analyst is a good one ..

it can tell us what kind of oil we are dealing with .. it can tell us

the Origin of the oil if the analyst has a good enough archive of

previous tests .. it can show us if an oil is adulterated .. sometimes.

I say sometimes as its possible to boost preferred chemical components

by adding them to the still prior to the distillation process and its

possible to boost preferred chemical components by adding them after

distillation. In many cases, adding a chemical after distillation can't

be detected unless it is a synthetic and in some cases even synthetics

can't be detected at the level of testing via CG or GC/MS .. finally, it

can tell us if an oil has been BADLY adulterated .. this is possible

because the range of normally expected chemical components can be too

high on one end and too low on the other .. absence of a minor trace

chemical can tell much to a smart analyst.

What a GC or GC/MS can NOT tell us is whether an oil is " therapeutic " or

not .. this is hogwash. It can tell us (when we are lucky) if the oil

is pure or adulterated .. and if it is a quality oil .. meaning, the

range of chemical components fits within that expected percentage or

footprint that previous tests .. or archives .. show us what a pure oil

is. As for the " Therapeutic " standard .. I maintain that any natural

oil is therapeutic and you should all hope that I am right because there

are a lot of oils out and about that are pure but mediocre in quality ..

and they will work to some degree .. and if this were not the case then

folks who are into AT would not have noticed any benefit from them.

And .. all of my oils are GC or GC/MS tested too. Difference is .. I

will give any buyer a copy of the GC or GC/MS if they ask for it. I

challenge you to get a copy of the GC or GC/MS on a YL oil.

Sign In

YL: Quackwatch Unveiled

Recommended Posts

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Join the conversation

Support the Ashram

Join Groups

Top Downloads