Dear **********

    I very much enjoyed your discussion on wellness presented at U.S. Foodservice and conversation with you on the subject. I believe that you were right on the mark with respect to wellness issues and provided valuable information to the audience.

    You also provided a positive commentary on the product, Juice Plus. I’ve made some preliminary investigation on this product and would very much like to have your support in verifying it’s quality and effectiveness as per marketing claims. Although everything appears to indicate that this is a quality product, I want to be certain that the benefits are not overstated. Juice Plus is a multi-level market product. This is not necessarily a bad thing. However, it should be known that such marketing practices tend to inflate the cost of the product in order to satisfy all of the sales cost requirements. I have endeavored to examine the claims made by this company in order to determine if this is indeed a unique product that merits its high cost. Here are some research observations that I’ve made and for which I would appreciate your addressing.

*    Juice Plus makes claims as to the quality of their product by way of laboratory analysis. This is commendable, however, they do not mention if the work was carried out at an independent lab or done in-house. Also, no absolute quantities are listed, only comparative values. A true assay of quantities would provide better support.

*    The lab analysis compares the Juice Plus product to other food products. The sources for nutritional information are various food data banks including the U. S. Department of Agriculture. This is likely not a problem, but it is important to know that comparisons are being made utilizing different measurement techniques.

*    Although ingredients are listed, it is well known that without standardization, tremendous variability in nutrient quantity can be realized. What are the quantized standardization values of the ingredients in this product?

*    Comparisons are made with items that may not necessarily be comparable. For example, Juice plus capsules are compared to fruit juices. Fruit juices contain mostly water and on a per serving basis, will certainly not contain the equivalent nutrient density to a concentrate as is found in the capsule. This can be misleading. In addition, commercial fruit juices contain added sugar. It is worth note that serving sizes of vegetables often exceed Juice Plus contents for selected nutrients.

*    A very limited number of nutrients were examined, principally being selected vitamins, calcium and fiber. The nutrients examined were not the same nutrients being touted as the principle benefits of this supplement. The broad spectrum of antioxidants and phytochemicals was not addressed. Harvard Medicine, the Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry and the USDA Human Nutrition Research Center at Tufts University all are examples of organizations that provide an evaluative broad spectrum antioxidant score. I would like to know where this product sits in comparison on these evaluations

*    Citations from two well-respected journals are used to indicate the nutrient activity within the body. These studies use this specific product to demonstrate the immunity and antioxidant capacity. It is worth noting that one study was funded by the company, Natural Alternatives International which is in a business alliance with NSA Incorporated, the manufacturer of Juice Plus. Natural Alternatives International carried out the second study themselves. The fact that they produced positive results is no real surprise. In addition, this makes them questionable as “third-party” researchers. They are not truly independent. If “the most studied nutraceutical in history” is indeed such, there should be plenty in the research literature. Cursory searches of the medical literature do not provide such, however, the product may not be specifically addressed. I would like to have some independent references. This should be an easy task as this is the “most highly researched product”. I would like to see some. Please help with this.

*    A research paper is cited using Juice Plus in a measure of weight loss. This research paper is published in The Journal of the American Nutriceutical Association (JANA). Claims are that this is a peer-reviewed journal, however, the editorial board does not represent a broad spectrum of researchers in the field, but is limited to nutriceutical interest. I believe that the research study is somewhat flawed in its design. Additional variables were introduced in the form of the initiation of exercise. The study does not utilize double-blind protocol, baseline caloric determination or, more importantly,  crossover study. The results leave open a number of questions. This is enhanced by the fact that individuals in this calorie-reduced program were observed to have gained fat-free mass. This is contrary to most of the voluminous literature on weight loss, even among athletes.

*    A citation is made to a publication from the Center for Treatment of Infectious Diseases in Atlanta, a publication authored by Dr. Richard E. DuBois, M.D. Dr. DuBois is an excellent member of the CDC, is well respected in the field, and writes extensively on the benefits to be gleaned from the addition of antioxidants in the diet, a principle source being plant chemicals. All of the benefits he cites are well established in the current scientific literature and apply to phytochemicals in general. Juice Plus is not mentioned in the article. His tape solves this concern. I would like to know if he is remunerated in any way.

*    Why is this product different from other well respected products in the marketplace at significantly reduced cost. As an example consider the following:

Flora, Inc. Greens Blend: - Suggested Retail Price = $25

Greens: 1.78 g/ 22.3%
Pines™, Barley, Alfalfa, Oat and Rye Grass powders,** Chlorella, Spirulina.

Defatted seed and fiber: 4.35 g/ 54.4%
Brown flax seed** sesame seed,* sunflower seed,* oat bran, rice bran, golden flax seed (whole),* psyllium husk.

Food Concentrates: 1.0 g/ 12.4%
Carrot, Soyforce™ powdered sprouted soybeans,** tomato, beet powder, broccoli, kale, parsley, Udo's Choice® Digestive Enzyme Blend powder (amylase, lipase, protease, cellulase, glucoamylase, invertase, malt diastase, lactase, pectinase (with phytase) and bromelain in a base of beet root fiber.

Phytonutrients blend: 0.87 g/ 10.9%
Cinnamon bark, ginger root, peppermint leaf, bilberry leaf, burdock root,* licorice root, bee pollen powder, hawthorn berry, milk thistle seed, dulse powder, kelp, red clover lossom,* chrysanthemum flower, yucca root, lemon grass, American ginseng root, artichoke leaf, standardized ginkgo biloba leaf extract 24:6, slippery elm bark, dandelion root and leaf*, rosemary leaf, sage leaf, thyme herb, standardized grape seed extract.

       

Free of wheat, dairy, yeast, animal & genetically modified ingredients. Certified organic

        Jarrow Formulas Green Foods

 

Yaeyama Chlorella                                                500 mg
 (chlorella vulgaris, a single cell, fresh water algae)
Spirulina (Spirulina microalgae, Organic)                500 mg
Wheat Grass Juice (Triticum vulgare, Organic)       400 mg
Barley Grass Juice (Hordeum distichon, Organic)   400 mg
Green Kamut Juice (Triticum durum, Organic)        420 mg

Quinoa (Chendopodium quinoa, Organic)               300 mg+
Spinach (Spinacia oleracea, Organic)                      100 mg
Broccoli (Brassica oleracea, Organic)                     100 mg 
Parsley (Petroselinum sativum, Organic)                  300 mg
Kale (Brassica species)                                            80 mg  
Botanicals
Green Tea Extract                                                    30 mg 

 (45% polyphenols, 30% catechins)(Camellia sinensis)
Milk Thistle                                                              50 mg
 (80% Silymarin, Silybum marianum)
Grape seed extract 100:1                                          20 mg
 (95% polyphenols, Vitis vinifera)
Ginkgo Biloba Extract                                              30 mg
 (50:1, 24/6 ginkgoflavoneglycoside/terpene
  lactose, <5 ppm ginkgolic acid)
Bilberry Extract                                                        20 mg
 (100:1, Vaccinium myritillus)
Licorice Root Extract                                               50 mg
 910% Glycyrrhizin, Glycyrrhiza glabra)
Photonutrients:
Inulin-FOS                                                             200 mg
 (chicory extract, Cichorium intybus)
Bioflavonoids (35%)                                                25 mg
Lecithin                                                                  500 mg
Others Nutraceuticals:
Rice Essence (rice bran solubles)                            500 mg
Beet (Beta vulgaris, Organic)                                  200 mg
Tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum, Organic)           300 mg
Apple Fiber (Malus domestica)                               800 mg
Ginger 50:1 (Freeze-dries)(Zingiber officinale)           30 mg
Probiotic Bacterial Metabolites and Cells:
Metabolin (Propionibacterium shermani                  100 mg 
 metabolites and cell walls)

 

Suggested Retail Price: $24.95 

 

        As you can see in these two examples, they essentially contain the same ingredients as Juice Plus and then some. In addition, specific amounts and concentrations are provided. Each of these companies have extensive research support and, in addition, have the track record of living up to label claims by independent labs which do not get support in any way from these companies.

 

In summary, although I have no reason to believe that Juice Plus is not an excellent product, however, these are questions that need to be addressed prior to making any recommendations. The parent supply company, Natural Alternatives is well supported by manufacturer credentials. My only point is that, although the benefits gleaned by fruit and vegetable extracts are truly exceptional, such extracts are manufactured by many very reputable companies and are available in stores at a significantly reduced cost. There is nothing that I can determine immediately that is particularly special worthy of this product that merits the high cost. Often, the quality of the product is inversely I hasten to add that much is still being learned about various plant nutrients and getting as much nutrition as possible from the source, rather than an extract, might prove more advantageous in the long run. Supplementation with a high quality vitamin/mineral supplement along with such extracts should serve to be viewed as insurance to as high quality diet as is possible.

 

 

Sincerely,

Dr. Mike Jezercak