MLM yg da dlm pemerhatian tu ko xyah sibuk nak gebang la bro. ini MLM yg genuine pun jd mangsa. ko nak kutuk Monavie, ko tahu x Monavie nyer annual sales setaun brapa?? ni semua MLM genuine beb. xde org wat aduan apa2 pun. xpenah aku dgr aduan org komplen pasal Monavie or Xango ke menipu. pastu pandai2 nak cakap bnda tu scam. mengarut hape?? kalau ye pun penah ade experience buruk dlm MLM xya la nak kata semua MLM scam. ko nak cakap kitorg menipu- sebenarnye ko tu yg xde ilmu n knowledge pasal product kitorg. eXfuze ni extract bukan jus. yg ko dok sebuk2 kata eXfuze tu jus pekehal? xke fitnah cmtu? aku rasa da berbuih odie tu explain eXfuze bukan jus tapi extract. extract concentration dia lagi tggi. ko nyer kepala da susah sgt nak terima info kot? kawan aku pegawai farmasi la beb. dia da test eXfuze n dia sendri cakap produk ni memg sgt bagus. xde gula, bukan jus n sebagainya. bukan claim semata2. dia da biasa test produk so dia lagi pakar. yg korg dok merapu meraban tah hape2 ape kehal?
tolong la bertamadun sket. ni perangai da la buruk. bahasa pun buruk. xtahu nak cakap apa.
salam
memang sah ko tak baca ape ape.. aku tak sebut pun pasal juice atau pasal superfruit. oleh kerana ko dah sebut pasal extract ni meh sini tepek kan keputusan lab test mengenai extract ni. tu.. kat tread ko exfuse pun orang dah tepek kepalsuan claim yang korang buat tu. cuba citer extract dan jus tu ape bezanya. kalau boleh tepekkan kat sini macam mana proses extract "bahagian yang baik sahaja" buah ni? sila ha.. jangan tangguh tangguh
aidid dah tunjukkan pun semua product yang ko sebut tu menipu tentang kelebihanya.. nak sangkal gak.. meh tepek sini lab test semua product tu.
ok lets see..
aku kopipes dari wikipedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wolfberry
Marketing literature for wolfberry products including several "goji juices" suggest that wolfberry polysaccharides have extensive biological effects and health benefits, although none of these claims have been supported by peer-reviewed research.
A May 2008 clinical study published by the peer-reviewed Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine indicated that parametric data, including body weight, did not show significant differences between subjects receiving Lycium barbarum berry juice and subjects receiving the placebo; the study concluded that subjective measures of health were improved and suggested further research in humans was necessary.[25] This study, however, was subject to a variety of criticisms concerning its experimental design and interpretations.[26]
Marketers[which?] of some wolfberry products claim that polysaccharides have specific physiological roles mediated by specialized cell receptors "master" control properties over other bioactive chemicals and cells.[citation needed] Characteristic spectral peaks are claimed to define one berry's geographic origin from another.[47]
These assertions are an important marketing message for wolfberry products branded as Tibetan Goji Berries or Himalayan Goji Juice.[48] Such statements, however,
have no scientific evidence published under peer-review[citation needed] and are not compliant with regulatory guidelines for marketing natural food products (see below, Marketing claims under scrutiny in Europe, Canada and the United States).
acai
Marketers of these products make unfounded claims that açaí and its antioxidant qualities provide a variety of health benefits, none of which has scientific confirmation to date. False claims include reversal of diabetes and other chronic illnesses, as well as expanding size of the penis and increasing men's sexual virility and sexual attractiveness to women.[6]
As of June 2010, there are no scientifically controlled studies backing up any of these claims. According to ABC News correspondent Susan Donaldson, these products have not been evaluated (in the United States) by the FDA, and their efficacy is questionable.[7] Specifically, there is no scientific evidence that açaí consumption affects body weight or could promote weight loss.[8]
noni.. ni mengkudu ye kalau korang tak tau buat rojak sedap tapi baunya...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morinda_citrifolia
Noni has been evaluated unsuccessfully in preliminary clinical trials for possible use in treating cancer,[13] although the US National Cancer Institute has undertaken further preliminary studies for potential preventive effects against breast cancer.[14] Since 2007, there have been
no other registered clinical trials on potential health benefits or
anti-disease effects of noni[15] which remains scientifically undefined for any effect on human health.[14]
GAC
http://www.aseanfood.info/Articles/13005361.pdf
These additional analyses allow us to re-evaluate the
discrepancies in the published values for carotenoids in
gac fruit, and to conclude that this fruit is an
extraordinarily high source of lycopene, and contains
considerable amounts of beta-carotene and alphatocopherol.
Systematic analyses are needed to separate
the effects of ripeness, storage conditions, and natural
variability, on the nutrient composition of this fruit
sea-buckthorn
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sea-buckthorn
Nutrient and phytochemical constituents of sea-buckthorn berries have potential value to affect inflammatory disorders, cancer[3][11] or other diseases,[12]
although no specific health benefits have yet been proven by clinical research in humans.
brown seaweed
http://www.burnthefat.com/fucoxanthin_scam.html
Researchers concluded that 300 mg of PSO + 300 mg of brown seaweed extract containing 2.4 mg fucoxanthin had "clinically relevant anti obesity properties in reducing body weight, body fat and liver fat content."
Supplement companies are now holding up this lone human study as "proof" that fucoxanthin is an effective fat burner.
However, even when a single study shows what seem like promising results, I always want to see it replicated by an independent (unbiased) research group before I would ever recommend it. It's astonishing to see how many supplement-company sponsored studies are never replicated by any other research group. Or, other research groups refute the findings of the first study after addressing flaws in the original study design.
More research is needed on the mechanism of action as well. While some people see these results as "incredible"
I see these results as "in-credible" (not credible), as the magnitude of weight loss does not seem to match the mechanisms proposed
