Glyconutrients: a Sweet Scam
There are essential fatty acids. There are essential amino acids. There are not essential sugars. We’ve received so many questions about glyconutrients, I feel it’s necessary to respond here at the blog.
For the record, “glyconutrients” are worse than bogus – they are a scam. This term was invented by a multi-level marketing company called Mannatech. (While MLM’s aren’t all bad, they can certainly be a red flag.) In this case, the entire concept of supplementing with “glyconutrients” – minute amounts of plain old simple sugars – is not only unscientific; it’s just silly. There is simply no compelling evidence to support the glyconutrient claim that the human body is somehow deficient in certain forms of sugar due to our modern lifestyle. Among the many dubious and weasel-worthy “explanations”, the central claim is that scientific discoveries in recent decades have shown that there are 8 types of sugar and that your cells – gasp – use these sugars. I’ve had burps that are more mind-blowing than this “science”.
Those selling glyconutrients often have appealing websites and fairly standard marketing blurbs about good health beginning at the cellular level. (E.g. “When your cells are healthy, so are your glands and organs.” No sh*t, Sherlock.) Please pardon my French, but I really hate to see this sort of meaningless malarkey being bandied about like it’s genuine science. The numerous warning letters, lawsuits, and scathing breakdowns on many reputable scientific action sites – it’s almost painful, really – should be sufficient to keep people away from those selling this worthless sugar pill supplement, but I still get a lot of questions. I don’t normally like to directly criticize supplements, but in this case, I have to speak up.
(This is the best single website analyzing glyconutrients. Do a search on any reputable science organization’s site, or check out a scientific glossary, for that matter, and you’ll see that “glyconutrient” is not even a scientific term. We might as well say “aminonutrient” or “lipidnutrient”.)
Glyconutrient supplementation purports to provide your body with certain special types of sugar that aren’t available, apparently, in our modern food supply. (The important one, evidently, is mannose, hence Mannatech.) The glyconutrient claim is utterly specious. The body converts one form of sugar to another quite easily whenever it needs to – there is absolutely no “deficiency” issue here, period. While we need to get essential fatty acids and the complete profile of amino acids to function, we do not need to supplement with simple sugars. The supplement won’t hurt you, but you may as well suck a lollipop if you’re after “glyconutrients”. My guess is that the lollipop is not only tastier, but cheaper.
Don’t be a sucker.
Further reading:
The 10 Dumbest Drugs Ever Invented
Subscribe to Mark’s Daily Apple feeds
Posted By: Mark Sisson
(
That’s a good explanation and helps sort it out. Yes, I once bought some snake oil from the company mentioned and it was just that.
Passing off sugar as supplements in a nation where most people eat way too much sweetener. What will they think of next?
Personally I like the claim of “better essential fatty acids than the EPA/DHA in fish oil” and all those “amino acids” they provide….yet the nutritional label on the bottle has 0 grams of protein and 0 grams of fat. Huh? Are these magical nutrients that are so scientifically advanced they don’t even exist in physical form but yet supply our body with the breakthrough healing never discovered before? Ummmmm…..I think not.
You have to appreciate how ballsy the whole concept is. These are sugar pills and they admit it! It’s so ridiculous it could be a Monty Python sketch.
“Pssst… Hey Kid… You wanna get fit and strong? I got just the thing: it’s called a Pla-ceeeeeeee-bo.”
This just in from an FTC report on U.S. residents falling for scams:
“An estimated 4.8 million Americans bought bogus weight-loss supplements, patches, creams or other products, making fat-fighting fraud the most common scam.”
Amazing!
If you can find it, look at Mannatech’s patent. The list of things that Mannatech is supposed to treat is hilarious. Snakebite, frostbite, AIDS and Cancer. Asthma, allergies and chronic fatigue. If something bothers you, Mannatech will fix it.
Josh,
It’s hilarious, except that so many folks have been snookered by these sugar pills…what’s next…
I’ve heard good things about glyconutrients.
There is actually a great ebook that just came out at http://www.gotsugars.com
It’s got great information on glyconutrients and how to save when buying them.
Thanks Mark,
Since my daughter was diagnosed with cancer, we have been bomboarded by true zealots of the Mannatech camp. One should expect hostility when confronting personal conviction with truth, but some have considered us child abusers because we will not let a daughter have this miraculous cure! My wife has suffered from guilt over this mater. Your article has helped her to let go of the guilt and to focus on our daughter’s recovery. It seems the old quest for the fountain of youth is universal. I resent only the fact that the manufacturere know the truth and are willing to prey on the fears of the pitiful..
JJ
Glyco nutrients work. They are not dangerous, make your own try and see yourself. You will be a fool not to try
OK sure. Send me some for free and I will return my verdict for the same charge.
I am a researcher on this topic and I would have said the same thing at one point. But what you say about the term glyconutrient is misleading and half true. The term was made by Mannatech – that part is true – they patented the process of stabalizing all combination of saccharides greater than 2 that do not occur in any one plant in 1994. So since they discovered the science and own the patents… seems fair that they can name it whatever they want. That is after all… how science works. The discoverer chooses the name.
You may also search under glycoconjugates, glyco-proteins, glycoforms. The study of science around carbohydrates is referred to as GlycoBiology. There are a handful of pharmaceutical drugs on the market or in development that use saccharides as a transport mechanism to the cells. Cracking the gene code began in the 1950’s. Imagine how many people laughed at that. The mathematical combination a dna molecule can make… are very few, proteins are only 4 sided as well and thus their configurations are limited as well… but simple sugars are 8 sided and are theoretically able to combine in over 15million combination. Thus glycobiology and carbohydrate technology is considered in the scientific field to be the new frontier far surpassing the genome or protein unraveling. Also – Mannatech did not start as a MLM company – they began as a Research Development company, patented the process of stabilization and extraction and released a product in the early 90’s to the retail market… unfortunately… it did not sell, because people had never heard of anything like this before. They decided after the failure in retail market, they needed an avenue to educate people and Marketing One on One works best for that.
Now it is a general term, but the scientific term for glyconutrient would be mono-saccharide or simple sugars. In nature these may exist in chains called oligo-saccharides. Such as in human breast milk – which is found to be 1/3 solids made of glyconutrients or saccharides in long chain combinations (Science & Medicine Nov/Dec 1997). The greatest nutritional milk in nature is found to have 5 of these necessary sugars. They are not essential… they are necessary. There is a difference here… Essential means your body cannot convert or create it by process “necessary” means it does have a process to create it. Your body has a wonderful backup system to break down glucose by a 43 step enzymatic process into some other simple sugars (http://www.longevinst.org/nlt/newsletter8ext2.htm)
I believe people should “prove truth to themselves” the days of believing the experts is over. One can no longer say I am a doctor and so listen to me… they must explain why and show why as well. After all the US is ranked 72nd in health worldwide. If you would like to actually be an expert – prove things to your self. There is overwhelming evidence and research but not enough education yet.
Also – I would think it pretty hard to be “scammed” by any company that stands behind a product with the industry’s only 100% 6 month money back guarantee. They know they work, and they want you to prove it to yourself.
A few articles over last couple years.
Science Magazine, dedicated an entire issue to educating the science and medical community about Glyconutrients, Glycobiology and Glycoscience. March 23 2001 Special Issue: Carbohydrates & Glycobiology
Physician’s Desk Reference (PDR):
For Nonprescription Drugs and Dietary Supplements is used by 99% of all doctors and healthcare professionals before recommending solutions to their patients. Glyconutrients are listed for compromised immune systems.
Scientific American
Issue July 2002.
“Sweet Medicine: Building Better Drugs from Sugars.” Sugars play critical roles in many cellular functions and in disease. Study of those activities lags behind research into genes and proteins but is beginning to heat up. The discoveries promise to yield a new direction in medicine, and a change in paradigm to one of wellness.
Advance for Managers of Respiratory Care
July/August 2002
Feature article entitled “Glyconutrients Could Offer Novel Approach to Asthma.”
Scientific American
“Changing Cancer Cells’ ‘Surface Sugars’ Can Inhibit Tumor Growth.”
Medicine, Jan. 22, 2002
“The key to halting cancer cells may lie in their sugary coats”, scientists say. Carbohydrate molecules surround all cells and help them to identify and interact with one another. Now new research, published today in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, indicates that altering some of the surface sugars associated with cancer cells can control tumor growth. The findings suggest that the sugars could one day serve as targets for new anti-cancer therapies
Harpers Biochemistry
A medical textbook that has been educating healthcare professionals about Glyconutrients and their role in health and healing since 1996. From a clinical perspective, one class of nutrients absolutely necessary for optimal cellular communication and which is essentially missing from our food supply is glyconutrients. These are necessary carbohydrates (monosaccharides) that according to the 1996 edition of Harper’s Biochemistry, only 2 or 3 of the necessary 8 are commonly found in our diet. These monosaccharides provide the necessary building blocks that enable the cells of our body to communicate effectively.
Within the last couple years, I received an email touting the glyconutrients. Not only were they trying to sell them to me, they said I could be in sales. (MLM)
I investigated the names of all the supposed sugars. I think the only one that your body can’t make is fucose, not to be confused with fructose. Fucose is found naturally in Bladderwrack, a type of brown algae (seaweed).
It’s a lot cheaper to by a bottle of Bladderwrack Leaves.
I think the glyconutrient thing is a total scam!
John Axford, BSC, MD, FRCP, President of the Section of Clinical Immunology and Allergy at the Royal Society of Medicine, and a Fulbright Scholar became a board member for the afore mentioned company.
“10 Emerging Technologies that WILL change the world!” Glycomics (the study of glyconutrients) was listed among the 10 by M.I.T.
Glyconutrients are the only nutritional supplement in the world that has been presented at the World Congress.
Is there an agenda from the naysayers or is it just ignorance?
Gly-comics are a scam. I don’t care about the alleged “credentials” you have. If I had an agenda, wouldn’t I be trying to sell you something?
Maybe your not, but the guy with the book at the top of the page is!!!!!
“Alleged credentials?” I’m just passing on easily verifiable truths. Are you one of those “don’t bother me with the facts” types?
Here’s a few more: 1) the earth is ROUND. 2) the moon is NOT made of cheese 3) the planets DO revolve around the sun.
Give me something substantial brother, you said it yourself, “I THINK the whole glyconutrient thing is a scam.” What are your credentials?
Hey Oliver,
I wonder if you read the freely available article written in glycobiology, a peer reviewed journal. I am providing the link here:
http://glycob.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/full/18/9/652
It is interesting that although it is true that Glycomics has been pointed out as a science that will change the world, glycobiologists beleive glyconutrient to be a scham…
maybe you could provide better credentials?
Luc
My “credentials” are common sense. I’m not a board member of any “afore mentioned company”.
I have nothing to gain here, except; knowing I have helped “brothers” keep their pockets from potentially being picked by con-artists like yourself. I will not bother to respond to you again; if people are dumb enough to buy into what you’re saying, you’ve accomplished your selfish desire to fill your pockets.
Que Sera, Sera, Whatever will be, will be.
Helloooo! Why was a Nobel Prize awarded to the Dr who discovered these LONG CHAIN sugars being vital in cellular communication then? They are not glucose or a lollipop which are short chain! It was even reported by MIT to be the #1 technology that will change the world. As well as the Physicians Desk Reference contains the same facts, as well as many other science journal publishings, Time magazine, 20/20 did a piece on it too. You people are idiots. The M**** company merely patented their stabilization technology to bring it to the world.
I’m with you Jessica. I take the products and I think they are wonderful.
“Cast not your pearls before swine.” is what the good book says… Some people just refuse to accept knowledge at any cost. Some people just never get it.
I have personally witnessed people recover from stage 4 cancer by taking Glyconutrients (and they don’t have to come from an MLM company either). But you just keep focusing on those who are trying to make a buck. And maybe those people are just trying to make a buck… But for Pete’s sake, don’t throw the baby out with the bathwater!
I don’t see chemotherapy doing much for the world except killing people… But that’s okay because it’s accepted as ’standard practice’. Are you kidding me? Why don’t they just poor battery acid into your veins, it may work even better than chemo. What a friggin joke!
It sounds to me like you have more of a problem with MLM than you do with Glyconutrients… Were you one of those people who tried it and got burnt? And now your on a mission to keep everyone down at your level of failure? (misery loves company I guess).
You sound like the perfect victim… It’s always something or someone else that’s the problem. Try looking in the mirror to find the real problem. That would be a good start.
Andrew… have you ever heard of this thing called “science”?
chemotherapy does not work because you have never seen someone cured from it? But because you claim to have seen people being cured of cancer by taking glyconutrient, than you have “knowledge”? Your argument is laughable!!
can you show us one peer reviewed study, only one, that shows the benefits of glycunutrient?
pubmed search “chemotherapy” = 1985246 articles
pubmed search “glyconutrient” = 5 articles… (one of which is in glycobiology, a peer reviewed article, who call glyconutrient a “scham”)
good luck with the sugar rush!
Luc
Okay, so we know that everyone has problems with the MLM aspect of making money. Of course, it’s understood that the pharmaceutical companies are making drugs for posterity sake.
With all of the testimonies and scientific research, it is disingenuine and absurd to say that glyconutrients are ineffectual and have no place in our diet and overall wellness. Period.
I guess the problem is there is no scientific research… if there is legitimate evidence, why not present it to the crowd??
Scientific evidence is something that can be debated… testimonies can be fabricated… which one do you prefer?
Luc
I fell off the real food wagon… (and landed on the sugar wagon) I was doing so well with health issues and weight loss that I thought an occasional cola or candy bar wouldn’t hurt…. well occasional became not so occasional… the sugar cravings are back! Anyway, when I saw my nutritionist the last time, she knew (before she saw the scale reading) that my eating habits had changed… she said my face was blotchy and red and I didn’t “look” healthy (I also gained about ten pounds) I also started having intermittent vision problems again and my pain levels have increased…
when I originally started eating PB, my nutritionist did not back me… she claimed it was unhealthy to eliminate entire food groups – grains – and told me to replace sugar with splenda… as a VA practitioner she has to tow the CW party line and advocate for the food pyramid… HOWEVER, once she saw the results of PB – weight loss (55 lbs in 8 mo on PB vs. 20 lbs in 5 years on CW), significantly improved lab tests, elimination of prescription meds, improved circulation and complexion, reduced pain, etc… she asked me for details on the lifestyle I was following and told me to keep it up!
Bottom Line for me… sugar in any form OR amount is addictive and not well tolerated… (when it comes to sugar I can’t apply the “80/20″ rule… that “rule” is just permission to cheat and pretty soon 80/20 is 20/80…) I’m finding it harder this time to get rid of the colas… the entire concept of supplementing with “glyconutrients” is bogus… if I have a little, I’m going to want alot… and all I want right now is healthy…
Read the entire string. The testimonies are only a small portion of the “evidence.” There IS third party testing, peer reviews, as well as articles in distinguished periodicals.
I admit to taking the products, but other than that I have no “dog in this fight.”
Oliver,
keep taking the product, but don`t lie to yourself… there are no peer reviewed articles on the benefits of glyconutrient… none!
Why you think that there are may be in the fact that you beleive glycomics to be the same as glyconutrients…
it is NOT the same thing, and glycobiologists took the time to make this clear in the freely available article that I linked in one of my previous post…
keep taking them if you think that they are helping you, but anecdoctal evidence is only that… anecdoctal…
Luc