MonaVie, Noni, Xango, Zrii: How They Stack Up
Everyone always says their company’s product is the best. But who knows really what to believe? We put MonaVie, Tahitian Noni Juice, Xango Juice, and Zrii Drink to the test in this side-by-side comparison of their vitamin and mineral benefits. Full Story…
This side-by-side comparison is a real eye-opener when it comes to the product effectiveness of Xango, Zrii, MonaVie and Noni Juice when compared to the Mannatech PhytoBurst product. Your child could drink gallons of the competitors drink products and still not even come close to the advanced nutrition of two little chews. Amazing!
We love this product!! The kids love them. They taste great and they’re PACKED with nutrition.
Xango juice contains antioxidants and not the vitamins. This is a totally different area of nutrition. Antioxidants fight free radicals and inflammation in your body. It helped my mother and my grandmother. So Xango works on the different level. So, don’t make this mistake. Mannatech might be great in its own way. Do the research before making bold claims about other products being just a new buzz. I don’t think Xango would become one of the top 10 fastest growing companies in USA and achieved 1 billion dollars in sale over 5 years with just one product, without helping people. For more info contact nontoxicway@gmail.com
@Dmitri
Sorry Xango does not have the higher level of antioxidants that Welch’s Grape Juice has. Do your homework. Oh, yeah, when you measure ORAC value make sure it is ORAC-o testing for fat AND water soluble and then make sure you test NOT what’s in the bottle but whats in your blood after you drink it. That is the gold standard of testing…it is called Serum ORAC.
Great information Doug on the point of “Serum ORAC”. Thank you. If you’re on Twitter I would like to follow you. I’ve checkout out your blog at http://douglbullock.com/blog/. Would you like to do a link exchange? I will add you to our site upon request. Please visit our link exchange info at http://bit.ly/4uFB9S. ~ WB
Ok, so you’ve heard of the term ORAC by now. It stands for Oxygen Radical Absorbance Capacity and is used to describe the antioxidant potency of a food product or supplement. Unfortunately, if used incorrectly, ORAC values can confuse rather than enlighten you about the antioxidant value of a food or product.
Dr Mercola recently spoke with Ginny Bank, an industry expert in antioxidant research who holds four US patents pertaining to antioxidants and their applications, who explained ORAC and its proper use, shedding light on the ways consumers may be mislead by less scrupulous companies.
There are several methods available that companies can use to measure or determine how well an antioxidant works, but ORAC is more or less the gold standard – if used correctly.
When the ORAC method was initially developed, the USDA used natural products as the reference standard. They tested 20 to 40 different fruits and vegetables and published the ORAC values of these fruit and vegetables. It was done per gram and the data was available to the public.
However, the ORAC method was subsequently improved upon because it wasn’t very reproducible. The USDA started using a synthetic reference standard and changed the method to make it more reproducible. However, when they changed the standard reference product from a natural to a synthetic one, the ORAC values obtained increased quite dramatically.
Unfortunately, the data using the old method is still widely used as comparison tool, which leaves plenty of room for companies to mislead you without outright lying.
This can make one food appear to have a vastly higher ORAC value than another, simply because it’s ORAC was measured using the new method while being compared to a food with an ORAC score obtained using the old method.
It’s not even comparing apples to oranges. It’s comparing apples to eggs.
What this means is that in order for a food manufacturer to be able to substantiate their antioxidant claims, they must compare ORAC scores obtained through the same, new method. Unfortunately, many companies are not doing this. They’re comparing their food’s new ORAC score to old ones, falsely making their product appear superior.
“It’s almost become like a horse race,” Ginny says. “Like who has the greater number of fruits and vegetable antioxidant equivalent that they can claim on their label.
When, or even if, those industry changes will take place remains to be seen… In the meantime, you can become a better educated consumer by realising that this misleading technique is being used.
How the Data is Presented Can Also Lead You Astray:
You also need to be aware of the fact that the ORAC data can also be presented in such a way as to further confuse consumers.Technically the data may be correct, but it can be manipulated in such a way as to deceive those who are not paying very close attention.
Ginny explains:
“Oftentimes, things are reported in either no unit (just an ORAC value), or they change the units.
For instance, usually, in research, you report an ORAC value per gram material.
Here is an example of some of the manipulation: a product that’s reporting 1,275 ORAC units per 5 grams, because that’s the serving size [1 serving = 5 grams] and then they compare it to the ORAC value for the fruits and vegetables in ‘per gram’.
It’s really misleading to say, my five gram product has so much more than these fruits and vegetables, but not show in the graph that those vegetable and fruit numbers are actually only per gram.
Another example is to not use units at all.
“You’ve got companies saying, I have 17,000 ORAC units, and having a graph that’s got this big bar,” Ginny says, “but they never tell you what the units are.”
The ORAC method is a valuable test, but as a consumer it’s important to realise that there’s great variability between the old method and the new method, and that there are ways to manipulate the data.
It’s also important to realise that some companies do not test their product on a continual basis. They may test the ORAC once, put that score on the label, and never test again. This is more or less legal, but not necessarily ethical.
Many antioxidant products, especially supplements, are derived from natural raw materials such as plants and berries, for example. Each new batch or lot of raw material will therefore contain natural variations, not just in colour and taste, but also in antioxidant value.
A valuable tip for consumers is to check whether the company has published their data in peer-reviewed journals. Some of the best companies have done so.
Many companies “skew” their products by submitting a sample to Brunswick Labs by adding substances with an extremely high ORAC value, such as Cinnamon, just for the testing purposes. There is also a limit on how many ORAC units are necessary or can be assimilated.
The recommended intake is between 3,000 to 5,000 ORAC units per day. It appears that the body is only capable of absorbing this amount due to the tightly regulated antioxidant capacity of the blood. So taking 25,000 units all at once is no more beneficial than taking one-fifth that amount. The excess is just excreted by the body and is simply a waste of money.
Claims such as “Our ABC juice has an ORAC value of 50,000 per serving”, means nothing in terms of making it a better source of Anti-Oxidants.
So,make sure you’re not being hoodwinked by a company with few scruples!
Please read this letter of apology submitted by Brunswick Labs, who have been the “testing Medium” for ORAC sample testing:
http://www.brunswicklabs.com/apology_letter.shtml
Kind regards
Michélle Strydom