This post is in response to some confusion that has surrounded Fermented Cod Liver Oil (FCLO) in recent months, as competing products try to discredit it.
At the end of this post I propose a solution that can perhaps bring both ‘sides’ together for a common purpose. But please bear with me for a moment as I lead up to that…
Anyone relying solely on science for the answers has missed the point of this FCLO issue entirely. You have committed two sins that defy the very logic for you being here (in the traditional food space):
Sin #1: You are insisting that science trumps experience. Yet we are here exactly because we are tapping into the personal experience of our ancestors. Our science will never be able to completely understand water, let alone FCLO. The march of science is relentless because it is forever incomplete.
Sin #2: You are dismissing personal responsibility. Each individual is supposedly taking responsibility for their own health by joining this subculture, as they attempt to wrest control away from big business, big government, and whomever else is trying to deceive them or make them dependent. Trying to make WAPF or GP responsible for individual ‘FCLO abuse’ violates this essential idea of personal responsibility. The people must become aware of, and responsible for their own experience.
Dr. Weston A. Price did not use science to ‘find’ the answers. He used it to confirm what was already proven by the traditional people. The entire idea of pursuing ancient traditions is founded on the fact that they were much healthier than us. Their experiences proved the efficacy of their diets. Science just helped communicate that to us. Dr. Price looked for healthy people and tried to figure out why they were that way. He succeeded.
Dave Wetzel has actually done a similar thing, which most of you are disregarding. He is trying to provide a completely natural FCLO that eschews modern intervention to the greatest extent possible, and relies only on traditional processes, in order that it might provide benefits that we cannot yet quantify or understand. He succeeded.
Now we have people like Dr. Kaayla Daniel and David Gumpert making (IMO) libelous statements in an attempt to throw out the wisdom of experience. In my opinion they are certainly guilty of libel; however, their more serious crimes are committing the sins I mentioned above.
They are attempting to return people to the leash of scientific ‘authority’ – give up your personal responsibility, ignore the wisdom of experience, and be guided only by the rhetoric of supposed leaders; which of course would be them, and not WAPF. Ironically, they do not have science to support their guidance, so they are using fear, uncertainty, and doubt (which is why it is libel in my opinion).
They are asking us to ignore the countless people around the world reporting the spectacular effectiveness of FCLO for nearly ten years. They are also asking you to disregard the science. Yea, OK, it was rancid fish oil from China that was mixed with vegetable oil, devoid of nutrition and filled with toxins. Yea, ok, that is the product that cures rats of rickets in rat assays, helps heal cavities and eczema, etc., etc., etc.
Let’s put all that aside.
If there is a common issue that we can rally both sides around, perhaps it is this: There is a problem in the consumer base with FCLO ‘abuse.’ While the term and idea has not been discussed to my knowledge, I believe that both sides would agree that it matches the single concern about FCLO: There are people out there that are not compatible with FCLO, and they need help in understanding that.
This is not at all new or unique. All food products are potentially dangerous to someone, and we must stop promoting the idea that personal responsibility is not required. A glass of wine is good for you. For most people this is true. But not for all. And obviously alcohol abuse is not good for you. This advice is given by countless doctors and experts. And it is the same as the FCLO advice, and any number of other foods. Dave Wetzel has a daughter that is not compatible with FCLO, and he promotes that fact.
We need to encourage more personal responsibility, and educate consumers about weighing their own experiences with that of others, and with science too. This would be a legitimate and helpful pursuit that would be in line with everyone’s concerns.
There is definitely FCLO abuse occurring in the consumer base, and that doesn’t have to mean that we are blaming the consumer. Some people are just too eager, and the product is somewhat new to them, and to all of us. FCLO is like a magic pill for some people, and those stories of success are what drive the product sales – and possibly product abuse. In some ways, the product is a victim of its own success.
Blaming WAPF and GP is not correct, appropriate or constructive by any stretch. Certainly, we can all improve. Empower the people to use their own experience and make their own judgments – not only about FCLO, but about all their foods.
(If you wish to comment, please consider doing so at the Weston A. Price Foundation, where I have duplicated this article as a post here.)