Compared to asbestos

Have a watch of the below official Quixtar company propaganda. It's a PR gem.

It states the official sites are "legitimate" and implies sites that do make claims of risks or dangers or give helpful advice / unhealthy exposure to the product as "malicious attacks" by people "with a grudge". I have no grudge, in the same way I don't have a grudge against cancer. However I would like to find a cure, or at least educate people on healthy alternatives to carcinogenic and toxic items they may be deceived into believing are a miracle cure.

The video implies unofficial products reports on the internet are "seemingly official" and might "appear credible" but "most definitely are not". We in no way wish to appear official, but what is more credible, an unbiased independent information site, or an official site with a clear bias and commercial agenda?

Speaking of cancer, how about we apply this same "logic" to asbestos. The similarities between the two are unhealthy.






The top ten results for a google search on "asbestos" result in pages about death, survival rates, mesothelioma risks, removal and health sites. None of which are from "legitimate" (official manufacturer) sites. The "negative" / unbiased sites for both products come from very similar domains including trusted government sites and Wikipedia.

But what about the people who manufacture asbestos? Using the propaganda logic - they have been attacked by "people with a grudge" posting "seemingly official" information about all the patients who have become victims, undergoing chemotherapy and death, with mesothelioma attorneys in litigation suing for millions in compensation. It's "tragic" what was done to the organisations who manufacture it. It was successfully used by hundreds of thousands of people over thousands of years for it's durability and fireproof qualities.

In another video on you tube in the same series, the host states there are "fewer than 10 negative sites" (Completely false. There are 7 on page 1 alone!), but "tens of thousands of satisfied IBOs" then Doug Devos retorts that they've had hundreds of thousands of people join. Where are the tens/hundreds of thousands of positive websites?? Asbestos has had millions of satisfied users, including the ancient Greeks, Romans and firemen too.

Some say the only reason these opportunities fail are because "The Flaw is The Individual".
The only reason a mesothelioma patient formed symptoms to be diagnosed as such was through individual inhalation or asbestos exposure. Clearly they were not using it correctly, right??

Incidentally there is one major difference. The survival rate of the disease is around 7-20% (depending on which survey), much higher than the percentage of people who profit from systems similar to those featured in the video.

The way the asbestos related industries have dealt with their problems over the years is extremely interesting. The parallels of this very unfortunate disease such as the problems caused, the denials, legal fights and and government regulations make for very interesting reading. I recommend you should read other related sites to get more detailed discussions.