Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Microcap & Penny Stocks : Amazon Natural (AZNT) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: bmart who wrote (187)	8/16/1998 3:22:00 PM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 26163

Bmart, So you believe everything the company tells you, eh? Well we both have our own personal stories with how that can deleteriously impact our financial well-being from past experiences. Did you read that article on Stevita and their troubles with the FDA?? They ALSO claim to sell an ALL-NATURAL sweetener derived from S. American plants. However, they are a private concern, not public, thus don't have to meet the strict disclosure requirements that AZNT does. If you won't read the article, then I will post several excerpts that may be pertinent. I don't want to linger on this thread. I just wish you to acknowledge that the matter is something that needs to be brought their attention in order to PROTECT YOUR INVESTMENT as a shareholder. Here are a few excerpts: "This controversial herb is stevia which, according to its many proponents, is "controversial" only because it is the base for a harmless, natural sweetener, 200 to 300 times more intense than sugar. And, unlike its synthetic counterpart, aspartame, stevia has been proven through numerous scientific trials* (not to mention a couple hundred years of use) to be not only harmless, but beneficial to the health. The Stevita Company, marketer of the "controversial" herbal extract from stevia, has apparently been the target of FDA administrative firepower for some time, according to the company's president, Oscar Rodes. The books at the center of this regulatory maelstrom are The Stevia Story - A Tale of Incredible Sweetness & Intrigue by Linda Bonvie, et al., David Richard's Stevia Rebaudiana: Nature's Sweet Secret, and the main target by the FDA, Cooking with Stevia: The Naturally Sweet & Calorie-Free Herb by James Kirkland. Does it seem a stretch of credibility to think it is mere coincidence the FDA is going after a publication (Bonvie's book) that contains a chapter entitled, "What's Wrong with the FDA?" And this one.... "The FDA makes a sharp legal distinction between a "food supplement" such as vitamins and for which stevia is approved, and a "food additive" for which it is not approved. The FDA's contention is that the sale of the books and literature by the Stevita Company "adulterated" the product by implying it can be used in other than "approved" applications. This strange logic of how something can be safe when used as a "food supplement" and unsafe when used as a "food additive," apparently lies within the federal agency's convoluted thinking processes. (Is this any different than the claims made by AZNT in their press release? "Note by me") The FDA, according to Rodes, seized all Stevita's product shipments at the port of entry simply because the agency insists that no reference to the herb's property as a sweetener can be listed or even implied in its labeling" And this one....... The attempted reach of the Food and Drug Administration did not stop with just Stevita's warehouse, Oscar Rodes said. The company was even required to remove everything from their Internet web site. "Even the links. We had links to scientific studies* and many sites that wrote about stevia. We even had links to our competitors we were required to remove. They said we had to sever all the links." The agents returned on May 22nd Rodes said, "just 'to look around' as if they thought I were hiding books or something." The Stevita Company was then informed that they must recall every book from every retailer AND consumer--approximately 4,000 of them--even ones they had given away. Meanwhile, all of Stevita's product, which is necessary for them to conduct business, remains impounded by the government on the pretense of mislabeling--a problem which, if the FDA allowed it, could be solved by new labels from the corner print shop." ******************************* Again, the link to this article can be found at: thewinds.org It is a fine article and displays how certain Federal agencies can miscontrue their authority. Personally, I see no problem if the product is all-natural and has had a reasonable history of safety and edibility. However, gov't regulators often see things differently, and for YOU or the company's management to ignore the warning IMPLICIT in STEVITA'S experience is foolish and an unwarranted risk I won't be willing to take a position in AZNT should there, in fact, be an actual short squeeze about to break. That squeeze would turn into a rout should a gov't agency commence an inquiry referencing AZNT's advertising and labeling policies, as well as there news releases. Do yourself a favor and quit jawboning the issue. I offered the information. If you choose to ignore the potential repercussions, so be it. I personally sympathize with companies offering non-sugar substitutes as I have stopped using Nutrasweet and returned to using "rat poison" (sacharrin), based upon preliminary evidence that Aspartame may result in learning disorders and brain tumours. (what I was researching when I discovered the Stevita article). Don't take this offensively. But I do encourage you to be proactive and prevent anything that could harm your investment. That means YOU contacting the company and expressing your concerns. Regards, Ron