Entrepreneur opinion

Statement on the reply from Stiftung Warentest regarding our open letter dated 19/09/2017

11/11/2017, Statement by Prof. dr. Enno Freye, MD Specialist in Special Pain Therapy, Nutraceuticals, Micronutrients, Civilization Diseases, Restoration

"... the reply of the Stiftung Warentest proves once again how one can legalize things and disregard the actual facts (one can also say create a smoke screen.) All of this distracts from the actual problem: the marked vitamin malnutrition in the (?) This is of course no easy thing to rectify! Indicators for this misjudgement include the repeatedly-cited BfR recommendations that were plucked from thin air and therefore cannot be considered to be reliable. For example, the amount of Vit D3, with 800 IU is considered unrealistic because it only prevents rickets but does not reach the required plasma level > 40ng / mL, which has been shown to reduce the rate of cardiovascular disease and cancer. This is clearly demonstrated in several meta-analyses !!!!

It is difficult to work through the argument, because, as I said, the problem is disputed just to make sure that the Stiftung Warentest indicates risks to consumers(where possible, these should be clearly identified and backed by literature) only to once again relativise whether or not a high "daily dose" actually represents a detectable health risk and that vitamin preparations may be necessary individually for life and illness situation. Readers are left in the dark with such findings and ultimately all that remains is the glaring headline "vitamin preparations doses clearly too high", the article in the magazine lacks facts and clear statements. What is the reason for this: Stiftung Warentest wants to retain its credibility and justify its existence, therefore continuing to be considered as a credible organ that is then also cited elsewhere. And now for a possible conspiracy theory: is this vitamin deficiency supply possibly even wanted in the long term? This suspicion grows when one sees the chronic results of a vitamin deficiency occurring. Illnesses (in spite of our advanced medical achievements), the population is getting sicker and not healthier. Who ultimately benefits from this? Ask the pharmaceutical industry how many drugs a man or woman over 50 takes - the number increases with age!

Prof. Dr. Enno Freye"

Statement of our members to the article in the mirror, from 06/11/2017 "Doctors operate without medical reason"

10/11/2017, Statement by dr. Peter J. Mewese, pharmacist

"Dear Mr. Scheffler,

The costs in the health care are always a cause for annoyance, as reported here in SPIEGEL:

This article shows that drug-related discipline is about generating sales, not evidence-based medicine. It is a mockery, what happens there. I suspect that, unfortunately, politics is part of the problem! "Healthcare", as it is significant in this area, is a financially powerful, major industry that would be harming itself if it were to sell an effective methodology for health.

In a profit-driven society and economy, service providers can have no genuine interest in freeing their clientele of their suffering. Maximizing profits involves keeping people so ill that they need medical care, but, if possible, not letting them get so ill that they will fail as a payer. And politics is a service business. It requires economic and social "business" to make itself indispensable through its service! In addition, the pharmaceutical and chemical industries probably donate a lot ... As long as the system does not slip away, politics will be satisfied ... that's where it is needed! And the citizens are practically hostages of this constellation. You only have to pay.

The most freely available power of citizens over the individual application of LM and NEM (also foreign) is an expression of freedom and self-responsibility - and therefore of dignity! All aspects that professional politics are keen to avoid.
There could be one aspect that could be attractive to the field of politics: a liberal - but also quality-assured by appropriate rules - market segment for traditional (in the broadest sense) remedies and methods including NEM and functional foods could form a certain counterweight to the pharmaceutical complex ... according to the principle of divide and rule. An important prerequisite in this sense would be the definition of those means which are under the control of a medicament authority or similar, which should be limited. It is best to exclude all drugs that have low toxicity and low efficacy in clinical trials from compulsory supervision by such authorities. That should also apply to methods.

The idea of ​​aligning medical treatment with scientific-technical feasibility is idealistic, but not pragmatic! This inevitably adds to the spiral of costs!
Of course, the HPs and the like are unwelcome competition - especially with regard to the IGEL system. Black sheep that discredit the state are everywhere. There is also no lack of academics. In addition, the HPs and similar non-academic health professions can be viewed under the aspect of applying divide and rule. That would be a possibility for politicians to allow a little more competition and freedom of choice for individual citizens in this area of ​​the health economy - and to inspire them to take responsibility for themselves.

Best regards
Dr. Peter. J. Mewes


Statement from our members on the "Plusminus broadcast of 26 July 2017 Vitamin D"

13/10/2017, Statement by Prof. dr. Enno Freye, MD Specialist in Special Pain Therapy, Nutraceuticals, Micronutrients, Civilization Diseases, Restoration

"... I'm not at all surprised in this world of media where “fake news “is the order of the day (see especially the political scene) and here with the vitamin supply, that a chronic deficit (especially among older people) is further negated. One can refute this simply with the present study situation - but who reads this, and besides, this is an intentional outcome. The population must be kept ill, so that cash can continue to flow; after all, only medication offers the hope of recovery.

Prof. Dr. Enno Freye”


Statements of our members on "Stiftung Warentest unsettles consumers, as false claims are made"

22/09/2017, Statement by Thomas Olbert, Apeiron Handels GmbH & Co.KG

"Reputable and sound reporting on the topic of "health"

Health food supplement reporting is very popular with readers. The media compete for a huge audience of all ages. Large target groups bring high ratings and so it is not surprising that the reader is drawn in by often very lurid headlines is Such headlines are irresponsible and convey a dangerous half-knowledge, in many cases not even that, to readers not well-versed in this subject. Readers are consciously or unconsciously advised or suggested to adopt specific behaviour. In my opinion, this is grossly negligent.

If you then review the content and content of the publications on their truth, then the untruths used to inform the consumer about health issues is often scandalous. It is all the more important that all those who want to deal with this very sensitive topic do so seriously, especially in consumer advice publications, communicating  professional knowledge to ensure that the statements made are legally secure and thus the truth.

The consumer often only "consumes" the headline. Health is certainly an issue that is of great interest to most people. But health is not an issue that should be reported at tabloid level. Products that are declared wrong and not compliant with the law are rightly objected to by the authorities and, if applicable. taken from the market because they may be unsafe, contain health risks, impart false information or suggest properties that the product pretends to have but does not actually possess.

However, in reports and publications on this subject writers and authorities seem to have agreed on a legal vacuum, where the truth plays no or only a very subordinate role and consequences are neither contemplated nor even feared in the event of infringement.

This type of coverage leaves behind a completely unsettled consumer and also harms the reputable manufacturers. Those who misuse health on the basis of incorrect or insufficiently researched reports in order to influence ratings, trends and consumer behaviour are irresponsible and grossly negligent. This is at least equivalent to the dangers carried by an incorrectly declared product. Again, in my opinion, the authority would have a duty to intervene and act accordingly. to insist on a corresponding correction in the same place and to the same scope.

Ultimately, what remains is the knowledge that Health is our most precious asset. The responsibility to maintain this cannot be taken from us. The consumer is therefore well advised not to accept all publications on this topic at face value, even from supposedly reputable sources, and to question them critically.

Thomas Olbert
GF Apeiron Handels GmbH & Co. KG "


19/09/2017, Statement by Daniela Lipgens, hajoona GmbH

"I am always enthusiastic about the degree of expertise and security with which Büttner mastered these topics and think it is really exemplary that the association has reacted in this manner here. I thought you might be interested in getting feedback.

Here you can see, unfortunately, that the media on a broad front and not only to this topic, only conduct their research half-heartedly before releasing their opinion unfiltered to consumers.

In that sense, it feels good to belong to an effective association.

Daniela Lipgens
GF hajoona GmbH "


19/09/2017, Statement by Jörg Büttinghaus, Kappa Ingredients GmbH

"It has also been reported that vitamin K2 is stored as a fat-soluble vitamin in the body.

K2 is fat-soluble, but, depending on the vitamin (K1 or K2), only remains in the body for 1 to 72 hours (half-life)."


Jörg Büttinghaus
Vice President Sales & Marketing
Kappa Ingredients GmbH