Fermented Cod Liver Oil Scandal: Steve Tallent on Green Pastures’ Lack of Transparency

This is the sixth video in the Fermented Cod Liver Oil Scandal interview series.

FCLO- Steve_Tallent

Steve Tallent (with his wife, Stephanie) is the co-owner of Beeyoutiful.com, an online store that sells supplements and personal care products. Steve and Stephanie have been members of the Weston A. Price Foundation for several years, as well as sponsors of the annual conference.

This year, after Dr. Kaalya Daniel's report on fermented cod liver oil came out, Steve and Stephanie decided to pull out as sponsors of the WAPF annual conference in Anaheim happening next month. Not only that, but they have since stopped selling Green Pasture products on their website.

Steve has been very vocal online about his concerns with Green Pastures' FCLO. In this video, he discusses his problems with the company, mainly due to their lack of transparency, which includes issues with sourcing and labeling. He talks about what it means to be a “Full Disclosure company,” which Beeyoutiful is (and Green Pasture, clearly, is not.)

Steve also addresses the Chris Masterjohn rebuttal to Dr. Daniel's report.

Fermented Cod Liver Oil Scandal: Video Interview with Steve Tallent of Beeyoutiful

Show Notes

Beeyoutiful's First Response to the FCLO Controversy

Beeyoutiful's Second Response to the FCLO Controversy

Chris Masterjohn Rebuttal to Dr. Daniel's Report

Click here to download Dr. Daniel's free report: Hook, Line & Stinker: Hook, Line and Stinker!: The Truth About Fermented Cod Liver Oil

Check Back Tomorrow for Another Video in the Series

This is the sixth in a series of video interviews about the potential hazards of fermented cod liver oil.

Check back tomorrow for tomorrow's video! I'll be talking with Dr. Rudi Moerck, one of the world's leading experts on fish oil and omega 3 fats. You will be shocked at what he has to say about Green Pastures and fermented cod liver oil.

Read More About The FCLO Scandal

To learn more about the history of the FCLO scandal and get my take on it, please read my post, My Take on the Fermented Cod Liver Oil Scandal.

Share Your Comments

Please share your thoughts in the comments below or on my Facebook page.

Find Me Online

Ann Marie Michaels

I have 25 years of experience in digital and online media & marketing. I started my career in Silicon Valley and Los Angeles, working at some of the world’s top ad agencies. In 2007, after my first child was born, I started this little food blog which I grew to over 250K monthly unique website visitors and over 350K social media followers. For nearly 15 years, I've helped my audience of mostly moms and women 25-65 cook for their families and live a healthier lifestyle.

 The year after I started the blog, I founded a blog network in the health & wellness space called Village Green Network. I started the company on my coffee table and bootstrapped the business to over $1.3 million in annual revenue within 5 years. During that time, I helped a number of our bloggers become six figure earners. After being censored on almost every social media platform for telling the After being censored on almost every social media platform from Facebook and Instagram to Pinterest and Twitter, and being deplatformed on Google, I am now deployed as a digital soldier, writing almost exclusively about politics on my blog Cheeseslave.com. Because who can think about food when we are fighting the second revolutionary war and third world war? Don't worry, there will be more recipes one day. After the war is over.

37 thoughts on “Fermented Cod Liver Oil Scandal: Steve Tallent on Green Pastures’ Lack of Transparency

  1. We’ve been using Sonne’s No 5 Old Fashioned Cod Liver Oil, mostly because it’s a lot cheaper than the extra virgin kind. Anyone out there recommend a different brand than Sonne’s at a similar price?

  2. Gosh. Isn’t it just super that you can count among your acolaid’s starving an independent nutrition charity from sponsors and funding with your slander and intellectually bankrupt, straw man argument that WAPF is in any way responsible for green pasture, when all WAPF does is state that it, along with thousands of other products in their free shopping guide, on the face of it, satisfy their nutritional guidelines, along with a significant number of competing cod liver oils. I bet you sleep well at night. Most revengeful psychopaths do. Clearly you have an axe to grind, but maybe this Halloween, as you climb out from the shadows, you can wield it against your spiteful, misleading blog.

    1. Right on cue, as if to purposefully illustrate just how misleading Philip’s words are, WAPF publishes yet ANOTHER article in defense of and promotion for FCLO in their journal. Yes, yes, I know it is about vitamin D in CLO. However, it specifically references only one company out of the several that are listed in the guide. Wanna guess which one it is??? Anybody??? The article was basically a whole bunch of words to say, “Yes, we acknowledge that FCLO doesn’t have much vitamin D3 or even D2, but that doesn’t mean that it doesn’t have vitamin D because we believe there are several other forms. Keep taking it while we study this.”

  3. Did you watch the video Philip? Have you watched any of the videos?

    Personally, I’m concerned about the people that are reporting illnesses, conditions and other physical harm associated with taking this product, conditions that are going away when they cease their dosage. The number of reports are growing. It is not definitive proof of causation, but it is concerning. From my perspective, test results showing no oxidation, scientists giving their opinion that the product is good, and WAPF putting their seal of approval as the best cod liver oil available are all meaningless if people are being harmed. I don’t know why these problems are happening. The question is how to keep people from being harmed. I’m looking for answers to that. Do you have any suggestions?

    1. WAPF is a nutrition charity, not a food regulator. For all the products they have on their shopping list it should be “buyer aware”. I have no problem with people challenging any company, but holding WAPF responsible for yet unproven allegations for a product they do not produce is unjustified and attempts by blogs like this to conflate the issue into “destroy WAPF” is unjustified, and more likely influenced by their concerns that WAPF is not Paleo is not WAPF. Nobody gains by attempts to destroy a small nutrition charity.

      1. Thank you Philip. I agree with some of what you say. If my products were listed in the shopping guide and many people reported problems with one, what would you expect WAPF to do? Remain silent? Investigate and report? Immediately issue a statement in support of me, their sponsor, and my product? I’ve asked myself these questions.

        It is not my intention to destroy WAPF. I just want to see people safe. WAPF has not just put FCLO in their guide, but they have listed it as a “best” product – grading is an action of a regulator. They have had the manufacturer write many articles about the product that they have posted on their website. They have talked about it and recommended it in multiple videos including Sally’s Nourishing Traditional Diets. They have PUSHED this product more than any other product, perhaps more than all other products combined. I’m having a hard time finding any other product recommendations in their articles. Maybe you can find some.

        But all of that is beside the point. If WAPF is destroyed, it doesn’t stop people from having adverse reactions (potentially life threatening) in the future. If WAPF is guilty of favoritism, if WAPF or Sally is making money from FCLO, if they are all related or if they are all altruistic saints with only one change of clothes who give all of their money to the poor, doesn’t matter. We can argue back and forth all day. We can win points or counterpoints. We can even investigate. But none of that is going to keep anybody any safer. The real question is what can we do to keep more people from being harmed? So I ask you, what can you do, and what can I do, to keep any more people from having adverse reactions to FCLO?

        1. Thanks so much Steve for your replies to Ridley. I admire your strength and level headedness very much. I have been frustrated that people do not seem to see the real issue, people’s well being, safety as you said. And I cannot understand very well why the Pro FCLO people are not worried about all those people who are getting adverse reactions and those who may get them in the future, especially since these same people most probably would be outraged at anyone encouraging people to use GMO foods. Anyway I think you have made a great start to find ways to keep people safe, congratulations! I admire your style in dealing with these people who will not face what is really going on with FCLO.
          For I have found with all my emotional replies to them, that of course I care about their well being as much as I care about the innocents our there who have not been warned about FCLO.

        2. I am from England, where we tend to combine dissent and debate with discretion, avoiding personal attacks where they are unnecessary to making a point. I am inherently turned off, as are many of my fellow countrymen by the very American way of public shouting matches and personalised attacks against people I respect, despite not necessarily agreeing with all they say, but this kind of thing is unique to American news programmes, for example, where people shout over each other. You do not see that on the BBC, where despite often very different points of view, folk tend to be calm and polite. Maybe it is because us Brits live in a crowded island and live cheek to jowl? You never know quite who you will upset if you slag somebody off. Having public arguments and conflating serious issues with personal grudges, as we see here, is known in my country as “airing your dirty linen”. This sort of grotesque, sustained expose is seen by many as being highly dishonerable and unsophisticated.

          Frankly, your tendency as a nation, to converting reasonable questions and debates into public slagging matches where each side sees things very much in black and white, like your insanely divided republican vs democrat politics where there can never be a meeting of minds or compromise, probably explains why your grass roots movements are so fragmented and unstable and so inherently incapable therefore of providing a legitimate challenge to the very organised and stable corporate and governmental organisations that can run roughshod through a divided populace. The FDA and USDA must be delighted that they do not even need to stir discontent amongst their adversaries. Just wait long enough and they will implode from in fighting.

          1. Thank you for sharing that. I know that I’ve met UK citizens that were super polite, but also others that were, uh, less than. I hadn’t actually considered what things were like when you got into an argument. I guess I would have thought that it was more animated and aggressive than you’ve represented based upon the UK Parliament vs the US Congress. I was under the impression that the US Congress “arguments” were much more sedate. But yes, the back and forth is tedious. The personal attacks are unnecessary and not useful. And in this situation, the thing that is most important is making sure that people are safe. Some don’t seem to be at risk, but others are super sensitive. Let’s ignore the other stuff, and see if we can identify who is at risk and keep them safe.

            1. No Ann Marie, it is a scientific term for somebody who acts without conscience in pursuit of revenge. This whole thing has been choreographed from start to end to get at WAPF and various people in the Foundation, for purposes of revenge and in a vain attempt to launch a new Foundation, with the potentially reasonable questioning of one of thousands of the health food products WAPF promotes as satisfying its dietary guidelines becoming “destroy WAPF, join our new club”.

              As an observer, this is what I have seen, and with it, you and your amigos have placed the dread of fear that we are in for a long slog of WAPF bashing, that sufficiently sustained could splinter what is a successful lobbying and educational organisation into nothing, breaking what I see as one of the most hopeful defences against food pyramid, raw milk blockades, etc. I have seen so many people try to be kind and nice in debating you guys, but I don’t think you would be interested even if the evidence shifted the other direction, because this issue and the way it is being handled is really an attempt to take advantage of any possible falling for WAPF and any potential gain for the new group.

              It is psychopathic behaviour to act in ways that would willingly destroy an organisation or an individual when you are aware of the significant destruction and harm it would cause, without being overly concerned about that harm or empathic about those you attack.

              From Wikipedia:
              Psychopathy (/saɪˈkɒpəθi/), also known as—though sometimes distinguished from—sociopathy (/soʊsiˈɒpəθi/), is traditionally defined as a personality disorder characterized by enduring antisocial behavior, diminished empathy and remorse, and disinhibited or bold behavior.

              1. Fun fact: scientific terms can be used as personal attacks! They can be both scientific terms AND personal attacks . . . AT THE SAME TIME!!! Who knew??? Kinda like legal terms like “criminally negligent” can be used as personal attacks, but it is not very nice. Is this a case of “when in Rome, do as the Romans?” because it certainly doesn’t seem consistent with the UK method of “dissent and debate with discretion” that you mentioned. It also doesn’t get us any closer to ensuring future safety of FCLO users. Still seeking ideas toward that end.

              2. When you engage me and my friends directly, in a clear, co-ordinated attack for ulterior motives, then, despite what I said earlier, the gloves come off.

                1. Well at least that is honest. Do you and your friends have any good ideas on how to help those that have had adverse reactions, or identify the demographic most at risk for adverse reactions to prevent those in the future?

                  1. I am not convinced that FCLO is the issue, but clearly some could be allergic to it. Clearly, those with adverse reactions should stop consuming the product, maybe more research is required, and “buyer beware” but whatever happens, attempts to destroy WAPF and pen this as a the responsibility and fault of WAPF and Sally is intellectually bankrupt and furthermore, the endgame, destruction of WAPF, would only leave millions malnourished who would otherwise benefit from the wonderful knowledge the Foundation provides.

                    That said, I have shared my opinion now, that I think many others share, and I will bow out.

              3. Philip – I agree that the attack on WAPF is unnecessary and I resent that as much as you do, but I think it’s a bit of a stretch to suggest that either Ann Marie or Steve Tallent are “revengeful psychopath[s].” I don’t think that’s the case. I truly believe that they are genuinely concerned, even if I don’t agree with everything they say.

                1. I know you would like to think that, so would I, and you are most likely a wonderful sweetheart, but the fact is that this coincides perfectly with the launch of their new Foundation. This was a coordinated attack and a calculated attempt at herding WAPF fans into their “larger” tent. If so, they likely withheld the information they had on that topic for the opportune moment. They claim that the new event and organisation popped out of nowhere, but knowing how much it takes to set up such a thing, that is pure b.s.

                  1. Wow! “They” are incredibly powerful. I wonder how they got Sally to do all of the things she has done to alienate everybody since this broke. I mean, I suppose it was to be expected that Dr. Daniel would be dismissed from the board. I suppose it wouldn’t take too much imagination to at least consider the possibility that Dr. Ron would get some sanction, but terminating their friendship? Don’t think anybody could have seen that coming. I wonder how “they” got Sally and co to so blatantly (and poorly) bury information, put a gag order on CLs, and distastefully throw Dr. Ron under the bus publicly. “They” are so amazingly clever. So many things had to go just right. If Sally had taken a circumspect approach, stepped back from, or even disavowed GPP, all of “their” planning and preparations to launch a new org would have been for naught. Speaking of planning and prep, in addition to being keen strategists, “they” extend their expertise into infrastructure. First is the name. You don’t want anybody to think that you planned all this from the start so it is important to start out with a horrible name. Then change the name, then change the name again and claim trademark issues. This is a BRILLIANT way to build a strong brand. Oh, another stroke of genius is was to have cheeseslave.com offline for 6 months including the first month after the report came out. This is ideal for building a following and spreading the word. And a website that doesn’t work right so people can’t give you money even when they want to, that is definitely the mark of people that have had months to prepare and test. Pretty sure you’ve found “them” out sir. Pretty sure you also assume that I am part of “them”. Personally, I’m still trying to get my kids and my business registered for this conference. Maybe I can find out who “they” are when I get there. But it will probably involve a blood oath and sacred vow – or maybe they’ll have me sacrifice a bottle of FCLO. Who knows??? Crazy days.

                    1. Steve, from listening to your podcast, you do seem a very sweet man, but frankly, and as with the Amigo’s, not particularly bright, given your responses.

                      Kaayla got fired because she publically sought to humiliate other board members, and bring the name of WAPF into disrepute. I do not know any other organisation that would allow that, and the 1st amendment protects both Kaayla’s free speech and the freedom of the WAPF board to not associate themselves with Kaayla. Free speech runs both ways. Clearly, she could and should have shared the report in advance for their comment, reporting their comment or non comment, and clearly, there was no reason to bring WAPF into it at all, since they do not produce the product.

                      Furthermore, there are clear rules at WAPF, that exhibitors cannot slag off competitors, and WAPF are clearly not convinced by the arguments, considering the claims libelous. This rule would also apply to exhibitors slagging off competitors to Green Pasture, and it is a very sensible rule.

                      That this lot are a rag tag band incapable of organising themselves is why I think they will implode from infighting and ineptitude in very short order.

                    2. So, Steve is allowed to attack Sally Fallon Morell, but I cannot point out the obvious about Steve’s comments?

                    1. @Phillip

                      How is Steve attacking Sally personally?

                      There is a difference between calling someone out on their behavior (i.e. questioning someone’s actions) and calling someone stupid or a psychopath.

                      The latter is a personal attack. One more and you’re done.

          2. I for one think the only people that are destroying WAPF are the people at WAPF that are not forthcoming about the problems with this product. I have lost all respect for this organization and the people running it. I am one of those people that have had ongoing health problems because of the FCLO and they are now completely gone with the removal of FCLO and the Butter Oil. There is no reason not to take people who are experiencing problems and reactions from this product seriously.
            Thank you Ann Marie for all of the time and effort you have put into these videos. I am so thankful for Dr. Kaayla Daniels for bringing the truth out. I might not have stopped taking this product if it wasn’t for her. Thank you Steve Tallent for your decision not to carry this product.

          3. Thank you Phillip. Not all Americans appreciate the way this has been handled. Many are also questioning the motives of the people involved.

            1. I agree Keri. From a Brit’s perspective however, we only started seeing this sort of unnecessary public slagging off when we started having Ricki Lake, etc. on TV, and I have only ever seen shows where people rudely shout over each other and incessantly interrupt on American TV. I am aware that this is a sub-set and a vocal minority, but my point was that this subset of the “real food” movement had succumbed to a Ricky Lake type show. It was certainly not meant to be a comment on all Americans.

  4. I am so glad you are doing these interviews! I really can’t believe that you and David Gumpert seem to be the only ones reporting on all this!

    It’s great to hear all these different voices about this issue. I took FCLO for as long as it has been around, and fed it to my kids all these years – yikes! This whole thing has rocked my world, because although I trusted WAPF about the product, I always felt suspicious about the secrecy around how exactly it is produced, and was uncomfortable with the ads/articles David Wetzel wrote in the journal.

    I’ve always disliked that GPP’s has no competitors. It didn’t seem right that they could be the only ones in the whole world who were making this magical, fabulous product, the only CLO worth taking, apparently. So I have not been exactly surprised by all this – but I have been very disappointed in WAPF’s response.

    One thing I really wish Kaayla Daniels or Dr. Ron would have specifically addressed are the new reports coming from GPP saying that Daniel’s idea about FFA’s was all wrong, and FCLO is safe and good quality. I was hoping to hear what they thought about all that.

    I can’t wait to hear the other interviews. Thanks again for all your time and effort you are putting into this. It makes me laugh when the occasional kid runs through the background – very familiar!

    1. @Angie

      It is strange to me, too that David Gumpert was the only one reporting on this. There was an initial smattering of blog posts when the report came out in late August, but after the official WAPF response came out and Chris Masterjohn said his peace, David was the only one writing about it. Which to me, was bizarre.

      Because there were lots of unanswered questions that WAPF and GPP had not addressed. Like the trans fats in the oil, for example. That just fell by the wayside.

      And then when the Santa Cruz chapter leaders got booted for linking to David Gumpert’s blog, that was just very strange. Definitely makes you think something is being covered up.

      “One thing I really wish Kaayla Daniels or Dr. Ron would have specifically addressed are the new reports coming from GPP saying that Daniel’s idea about FFA’s was all wrong, and FCLO is safe and good quality. I was hoping to hear what they thought about all that.”

      Can you elaborate on this? Which reports?

    2. Angie, Kaayla presented a number of hypotheses about why people might be having adverse reactions (sometimes quite serious) from FCLO. These were based upon her research, her talks with professionals in the field, and I would imagine that some differential diagnosis was used as well. Unfortunately, a lot of us, and I include myself, have gotten caught up in debating the merits and accuracy of each of these hypotheses. But when you step back and look at it, that’s silly. The truth is, at least a certain section of the population is reacting badly to this product and all of the testing “proving” that the product isn’t rancid, isn’t getting us any closer to identifying what people are reacting to or identifying who makes up this demographic that is at risk, and preventing future harm. Hopefully the interviews that Ann-Marie is doing and will be doing, will reveal more and more information that may help us to prevent future harm by identifying the cause, or identifying who is at risk.

      1. Steve – you are right, it is silly. Stuff is obviously going on.

        Ann Marie – The one GPP posted up about how FFA’s are not a good marker for rancidity, and now there is the newer report by Dr. Jacob Friest they put up. I was hoping to see what Kaayla said about that, but I see the newest interview is with a fish oil expert, and I can’t wait to watch it. I’m sure it will answer a lot of questions I have.

        This issue has a personal level for me – my mom has sold FCLO for many years, and was really pushy about getting her friends and family to take it. She has been really upset by all this, because she is afraid she has harmed people she cares about. She thinks David Wetzel is way too nice of a guy to have a bad product. She trusted WAPF and thought she knew what was best.

        When I first told her about all this (she has been busy lately and hadn’t heard about it), she felt attacked by the information. Now she is listening to my updates about what’s going, and she is on the fence about ordering more. Her customers are asking her to, but they haven’t heard about the controversy. They trusted her about it (I should mention she is a Nutritional Therapist as well as sells supplements). So whenever GPP’s posts something positive, she emails it to me as a kind of, “See, it’s fine!” To summarize what Steve said, I know there’s more to it than that, and I was hoping Kaayla would have addressed GPP’s response, but it sounds like it is addressed in the newest interview. Thanks again for making these!

        1. Angie, I’m not Dr. Daniel and don’t have a PhD in Nutrition, but Friest’s analysis had some problems so obvious that I was able to see them in spite of that. I posted a review of his analysis here: https://articles.beeyoutiful.com/2015/10/22/beeyoutifuls-second-response-to-the-controversy-the-weston-a-price-foundation-green-pasture-fermented-cod-liver-oil/comment-page-1/#comment-3785

          I haven’t had a chance to see the newest interview yet. Looking forward to it. I might have to go back and modify some things that I’ve written depending on what I learn.

  5. I found an old email between me and David Wetzel from 2011 when i asked him how long i could store FCLO:

    David Wetzel
    03/08/11 at 2:22 PM



    we date for 2 years… i’m not sure if it can go bad?


    On Mar 7, 2011, at 5:32 PM, *******@yahoo.com wrote:

    > Contact Us Email
    > Name: Anna
    > Email: *******@yahoo.com

    > Lead Source: Contact Us
    > Other Information:
    > Hi!
    > I was wondering how long the fermented cod liver oil can be stored in the refrigerator before it expires or loses potency?
    > Thank you,
    > Anna

  6. As the producer saying something like “I’m not sure it can go bad” is scary on several levels. The words chosen either speak to the very person making it not knowing enough about the product he is selling or is intentionally using misleading words to leave it up to the consumer to choose their own expiration date. Neither scenario does not sit well with me.

  7. Two points of correction that I need to make:

    1) In the interview I said that aborted fetuses are use in anti-aging products, and that is not quite accurate. Tissue cloned from an aborted fetus is used. Also foreskins.

    2) We informed the Wise Tradition conference organizers weeks before THE REPORT dropped that we wouldn’t be attending Anaheim and requesting a refund. So we didn’t do it in response to the report. It took them weeks to get hold of Sally and get permission to refund most of our sponsorship. Now a conspiracy theorist might think we knew it was coming ahead of time. But we didn’t.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Recent Posts