Is Green Pastures FCLO rancid? Report analysis

Green Pastures fermented cod liver oil (FCLO) has been considered the gold standard amongst cod liver oil supplements for a long time, but independent research by Dr. Kaayla T. Daniel on the...
Green Pastures Report

Green Pastures fermented cod liver oil (FCLO) has been considered the gold standard amongst cod liver oil supplements for a long time, but independent research by Dr. Kaayla T. Daniel on the oil has gotten a lot of heads turning and people thinking. The report has some quite shocking and worrying results and as someone who has been recommending and selling FCLO for years I was understandably very concerned. I’ve given the report plenty of thought and done some additional background reading on the subject to understand what the results mean, and below I’ve expressed my thoughts on these findings. You can read the whole 111 page report here if you like, but I’ve summarised her findings below.


Summary of Dr. Kaayla’s report

  • Cod liver cannot be fermented because fermentation requires carbohydrates.
  • 7 Samples of fermented cod liver oil were sent to 7 different labs to test for:
    • 6 Rancid bio-marker tests (varying results)
    • Biogenic amines – a product of rotting/ fermented foods with in some circumstances can be toxic
    • Vitamin content showing –
      • Moderate levels of vitamin A.
      • Low levels of vitamin D3.
      • Low/ insignificant levels of Co-Q10 and vitamin K.
  • DNA testing which shows the product is 100% Alaska Pollock.
  • Trans-fat content (suggesting heat processing/ vegetable oil).


How are cod livers fermented?

In biology, the fermentation process generally does require carbohydrates for the bacteria to feed on. This is true for milk, which contains lactose, and true for the probiotics in our gut which feed on the fibre we eat from plants. Yet cod livers don’t contain any carbohydrates in any significant quantity, which poses the good question of how can a cod liver ferment to produce oil?

Well, although fermentation usually requires some carbohydrates, there are many circumstances where it doesn’t. In fact, the term ‘fermentation’ is defined as ‘the chemical breakdown of a substance by bacteria, yeasts, or other microorganisms1, and there is no need for carbohydrates, although they are usually involved.

There are many fish products which don’t require carbohydrates to ferment, and fish products have been fermented for  years and years, in many countries without carbohydrates2. A great example is a very old East Asian fish sauce recipe which ferments small fish with sea salt to produce a sauce called ‘nuoc mam’ – which is very similar to how Green Pastures create their oil.

So, cod livers can be fermented.

For the record, Green Pastures state that their oil is made using salt, a fish broth starter, and livers. In industrial fermentation, the most common being yoghurt making, a ‘starter’ is a sample of which contains the bacteria cultures needed to produce the product. Using a starter broth ensures a consistent product is produced, and although we don’t know the specific bacteria Green Pastures use (industry secrets I guess), I am more than satisfied that the livers are indeed fermented.


Is fermented cod liver oil rancid?

A rancid fish oil is bad for you, there is no doubt about that, and there are some simple home tests you can do to check if your oil is rancid, but these tests don’t usually work for fermented cod liver oil. For starters, it’s brown, it’s fermented (so will smell different from other cod liver oils) and the ‘gels’ often have flavours/ scents in which would mask some of the rancid flavours/ tastes.

Besides, lab tests are much more accurate and reliable, so I was glad to see that a number of rancid bio-markers have been checked by Dr. Kaayla:


The peroxide value is a measurement of the amount of harmful lipid peroxides, and is an indicator for rancidity. FCLO scored extremely low for lipid peroxides from all lab tests – which is great. Dr. Kaayla says that this is unsurprising as the oil has been fermenting for so long that the lipid peroxides have probably decomposed into secondary and tertiary oxidation products.


Anisidine is one of the secondary metabolites mentioned above, and as peroxide levels go down, the levels of anisidine should go up (and then break down into tertiary oxidation products). Results from Labs 2, 4 and 7 all reported anisidine levels of 6.8, 13 and 3.44 – all of which is lower than the value Green Pastures shows on their site (which is 16). Lab 5 encountered problems in trying to measure anisidine due to colour of the product.

We don’t know what testing methods each lab used to test anisidine in their samples, but these results look very good and show low levels of anisidine (but Dr. Kaayla questions the reliability of the lab reports).


TOTOX is a measure of the total oxidation, and because the peroxide value and anisidine values are so very low, the TOTOX is also very low. This is good news for FCLO users – it doesn’t contain many oxidative products.

TBA (THIOBARBITURIC ACID)/ malondialdehyde (MDA)

MDA is a toxic product made when an oil by-product reacts with DNA. Dr. Kaayla admits that levels of MDA are not a reliable way to determine if fermented cod liver oil is rancid or not, but she tests for TBA/ MDA anyway. Lab 2 and 4 reported very low levels, whereas Lab 7 reported high levels (no results from other labs). Make of this what you will, but it is inconclusive, and even Dr. Kaayla says it means nothing for fermented cod liver oil (other than TBA/ MDA levels are low in 2/3 samples of course).

Free fatty acids content

There is no doubt that Green Pastures FCLO does contain some free fatty acids. This is something that Dr. Kaayla and Green Pastures agree on, but what they don’t agree on is what it means.

Fats are made up of a fatty acids attached to a glycerol backbone in a shape like an ‘E’ (see image) which is called a triglyceride, and it is in this form that you find fats in your food. In fact, this is the form most fats are found in fermented cod liver oil, and the presence of triglycerides is an indicator of a quality fish oil. In the digestive system they get broken down into glycerol and fatty acids by an enzyme called lipase, which allows them to be absorbed. Once absorbed, they are reassembled into a triglyceride.glycerol

Personally, I see no problem with eating fats as free fatty acids, because fats become free fatty acids in the digestive system anyway (you could even think of this as helping the digestive system).

Dr. Kaayla says that these free fatty acids are toxic to cell membranes, and so the body re-assembles them in the body. This may be true, but only once they have passed through the digestive system where they would have been converted in free fatty acids and glycerol anyway.

The presence of free fatty acids is an indicator that an oil is rancid because it shows the triglycerides have broken down, but by no means is it conclusive. The presence of these fatty acids has lead some marine oil experts to say that ‘FCLO is the most rancid oil they’ve ever tested’ (according to Dr. Kaayla) despite the other indicators of rancidity coming back negative.

Dr. Kaayla assumes that these free fatty acids show the oil is rancid (of which we have seen no real evidence for) and so say they are toxic. Yes, rancid fats are toxic, but we do not know that these fats are rancid.

For me, the presence of free fatty acids isn’t something to worry about, and only means that some of the triglycerides are effectively ‘pre-digested’ in a way my body would have done anyway.


The presence of aldehydes is another indicator that an oil has gone rancid. Dr. Kaayla didn’t test for aldehydes, but the Western A. Price foundation did send some samples to De Montford University for testing, which came back as ‘non-detectable’3. So again, good news for fermented cod liver oil.


Rancidity test summary

So, tests for rancidity are either good (not rancid) or inconclusive – hardly the dig at Green Pastures that Dr. Kaayla set out to do. Dr. Kaayla does say that these results would be expected for a product which has been fermenting for so long though (this does pose the question as to why they were tested for to being with…).


Amine content

Amines are not always bad – they give cheeses/ fish sauces/ wines their characteristics for example, but they do have toxic properties and indicate that proteins have ‘gone bad’ or have started to decompose (no surprise they are found in many fermented foods then).

Lab 4 found no amines, lab 2 found moderate but acceptable levels of amines, and lab 7 showed that the amines were very high (no results from other labs). This doesn’t show us much other than there is some variation in the products, which is to be expected. I wouldn’t want a high amine product, so the one high result is a concern, but these findings are far from being conclusive. I would be interested to know what a larger sample would show, but currently, I’m not too worried.


Vitamin content

Green Pastures say their product contains vitamin A, D and a number of quinones which many people (myself included) assume to mean there is a certain amount of co-enzyme Q10 and vitamin K. Dr. Kaayla tested the presence of all these vitamins.

Vitamin A

Dr. Kaayla’s report showed that vitamin A levels in her samples were 732 IU/ml (roughly 3600 IU per US teaspoon), which is well within what Green Pastures quote on their site4. I feel its worth pointing out here that throughout Dr. Kaayla report she quotes figures from the Green Pastures site, but in this case she incorrectly quotes figures from the Western A. Price site and ones which are “lobbed around the internet”, which are 10,000IU per teaspoon (I think, she gives no units).

In fact, the Western A.Price site quotes vitamin A levels in fermented cod liver oil to be 4,000 – 9,000 IU per teaspoon5. This means that Dr. Kaayla’s findings are a little less that what the Western A. Price foundation quote, but within the values Green Pastures have on their site. I do wonder why she didn’t quote Green Pastures’s figures on this…

Vitamin D

Dr. Kaayla’s report found that the vitamin D content of FCLO was 17.6 IU per gram, which is a lot less than the 310 – 1030 IU per gram Green Pastures state on their website.

There is a catch though – Vitamin D is a very difficult vitamin to detect and measure, and I’m not just saying this because Dr. Kaayla’s results show low vitamin D levels. Accurately measuring vitamin D is a problem laboratories have struggled with for a long time6,7. With this in mind, the very best way to measure the vitamin D content of a product, or rather, the vitamin D value of a product, is to feed it to someone for a fixed period of time, and measure changes in their vitamin D levels. If you control all other variables (food, sun light exposure etc) then the only way vitamin D levels will change is a result of the FCLO.

No one has this kind of data (sadly), but Green Pastures do use a rat bio assay to measure vitamin D, which is essentially the same test, but with rats not humans. Could there be a difference in humans and rats? Sure, what that difference is though, we don’t know. There are also mixed anecdotal reports online about how FCLO has or hasn’t helped individuals vitamin D levels, the scientific value of which is minimal, but could suggest that vitamin D content is very variable (more so than previously thought).

We don’t know what tests the labs did to determine vitamin D levels because the labs wanted this data, along with their identity, to remain anonymous. This makes determining the accuracy of their tests somewhat difficult. It would have been useful if the labs did the same rat bio assay to test for the vitamin D content in the fermented cod liver oil, as this would have shown some useful comparisons between the data Green Pastures gets, and what other labs get.

This being said, I am surprised that the labs came back with such low readings for vitamin D. The reason for this could be the method used to detect the vitamin D but I would like to see some more research into this, including rat bio-assays from different labs (or even human trials) to clear this up.

Vitamin K/ co-Q10

Vitamin K and co-Q10 are similar in their structures and both contain a quinone group. The presence of these nutrients is something that has made Green Pastures FCLO stand out from the crowd for a long time, and has made a good selling point for the products. Many fermented products such as cheese contain valuable amounts of vitamin K, so it would be expected that fermented cod liver oil would also contain reasonable levels too.

Dr. Kaayla sent her samples to lab 6, which is the ‘the world’s leading Vitamin K research centre’, and the quinone results came back pretty much as non-detectable. The quinone count was really very low, and this is very disappointing to hear. Quinones are not like vitamin D in their difficulty to measure, and so these results are worrying. Could it be that Green Pasutres had a bad batch, or are lying about their product? Only further tests can say for sure, but these preliminary results don’t look good.

Vitamin E

Tests for vitamin E are low, and this is to be expected for fish oil products. The vitamin E content of FCLO isn’t a selling point, and there is nothing surprising with these results.


Is FCLO from cod?

Dr. Kaayla noticed that the EPA and DHA ratios in Green Pastures fermented cod liver oil are not consistent with other ratios of cod liver oil. Oil from a cod has an EPA: DHA ratio 0.004: 0.1548) (or 2:77). Samples of Green Pastures cod liver oils come to around 2:1, which is very different.

Further research into the Green Pastures cod livers shows that the liver was from a fish called Alaskan Pollock.

Shock horror! The liver isn’t even from Cod!

Well, actually it is. If you want to get into the details of it, Cod is the name of a genus of fish, which means there are many types of cod, and one of these Cod fish is Alaskan Pollock9, which commonly found in the Northern Pacific Ocean.


Dr. Kaayla dismisses this and strongly implies that it is probably a cheap product imported from China, and not the high quality Cod caught in the Arctic that people think they pay for. This is actually quite unlikely – fish from China will probably be intensively farmed and given antibiotics (which Dr. Kaayla has found to not be present in her samples).

In fact Alaskan Pollock (which remember, is a Cod fish) can very well be fished from Arctic waters, and DNA samples recorded by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) showed that Alaskan Pollock is present in the Arctic waters10.

Green Pastures don’t specify the species of cod they use, and only say that it is Cod from the Arctic, which from the information Dr. Kaayla has provided, looks to be true. There is currently no information to suggest that the livers are sourced from anywhere else other than unscientific speculation by Dr. Kaayla.


Trans-Fat in FCLO

Dr. Kaayla’s report does show that a sample contains 3.22% trans-fat, when you would expect there to be none. Dr. Kaayla says that the only way this could be present in the oil is to add a ‘thermally damaged vegetable oil‘. Yes, that would be one way, but the fermentation process could equally be a cause. It would be interesting to see what Green Pastures response to the presence of trans-fats in their product is, because you wouldn’t expect any, and it is a little concerning.


Final thoughts on the report

I always try and keep an open mind with reports like this, especially when I can see that a lot of time and effort has gone into them, but this report seemed flawed from the start. Before Dr. Kaayla did any research or saw any results she had decided that fermented cod liver oil was rancid. She says that “common sense says this product’s rancid” but “proving it is rancid, proved surprisingly difficult”. She has gone out to try and prove that she is right, rather than try and find if FCLO is healthy or not, and this typically leads to people finding results that suit their idea of what is right. The most famous example of this is in the Seven Country case study by Ancel Keys who went out to ‘prove’ the link between saturated fat consumption and heart disease – something which isn’t accepted as true today.

Setting out to prove your theory as Dr. Kaayla has done (combined with the unbelievable amount of terrible puns) somewhat diminishes the value and reliability of the research. When you believe you are right, you will find a way to show you are right (and Dr. Kaayla hasn’t even managed to do that conclusively).

My gut feeling is that Dr. Kaayla expected to find some Earth shaking results, but instead found very little, and has tried to dress them up to be more dramatic than they are.



Dr. Kaayla’s report is far from conclusive, and to be fair to Dr. Kaayla, she does say this is a preliminary report and more research is needed. The only concerns that this report has raised for me is the vitamin K, co-Q10 and trans-fat content of fermented cod liver oil, which I would like more answers for. I would also like to see some more research on the vitamin D content of fermented cod liver oil, but due to the complexity of this, I don’t expect to see anything conclusive any time soon.

I’ll keep my eye out for this information, and update this article accordingly if/ when it becomes available.

You might like to read Green Pastures response to Dr. Kaayla’s report here, which interestingly shows that Green Pastures invited Dr. Kaayla to their facility (all expenses paid) but received no reply from her.



1. Oxford dictionary. (2015). Oxford dictionary. Available: Last accessed 10/9/15.

2. G.Mazza. (2008). 1. In: Edward R.(Ted) Farnworth Handbook of Fermented Functional Foods, Second Edition. Florida: Taylor and francis. 21.

3. martin Grootveld. (2014). n/a. Available: Last accessed 10/9/15.

4. Dr. Jie Zhang. Test Data. Available: Last accessed 10/9/15.

5. David Wetzel. (2009). Update on Cod Liver Oil Manufacture. Available: Last accessed 10/9/15.

6. Andrew M Wootton. (2005). Improving the Measurement of 25-hydroxyvitamin D. Clin Biochem Rev. 26 (1), 33-36.

7. Fraser WD. (2013). Vitamin D assays: past and present debates, difficulties, and developments.. Calcif Tissue Int. 92 (2), 118-92.

8. Original Food Guide Pyramid Patterns and Description of USDA Analyses. Available: Last accessed 10/9/15.

9. Mark W. Coulson et al. (2006). Mitochondrial genomics of gadine fishes: implications for taxonomy and biogeographic origins from whole-genome data sets. Genome. 46, 1115-30.

10. CW and TA Mecklenburg. (2012). What we have learned about change in the distribution of fishes from the RUSALCA mission. Available: Last accessed 11/09/15.

I hope you enjoy the site, and like what we have worked hard to create, any feedback is very much welcome, after all this site is for you! Graduate of Nutrition & Food Science (Bsc) at Reading Uni.
  • Kristin

    I really don’t understand the argument against fermenting cod livers when fish sauce, pepperoni, and other glycogen rich foods are traditionally fermented. Others smarter than I am have noted that many cheese score high on the rancidity markers. What I find interesting is that all the information on the Rosita website seems to match what Dr. Kaayla and others are saying. There is something else going on here that the rest of us are not privy to.

    • Its a simple mistake to make if you don’t think about it – but Dr. Kaayla should have given it some thought. Perhaps its an innocent mistake, but perphaps, like you say, there is something else going on here. EVCLO have been known to be involved in underhand marketing against FCLO in the past, so I wouldn’t be suprised if Dr Kaayla’s report is somehow related.

      • Victor Cozzetto

        Great analysis Craig. And great job trying to remain neutral. Sadly, Dr. Kaayla Daniel cannot plead ignorant, as she has been deeply involved in this debate for years, and she is supposed to be an expert in the field. In my opinion, she intentionally tried to create as much FUD (Fear, Uncertainty, Doubt) as possible, as she has a very clear agenda to damage Green Pasture FCLO. A lot of evidence does seem to point to an EVCLO link.

        • Thanks for reading Victor, and I am tempted to agree with you. I wanted to give her the benefit of the doubt (after all, mistakes are made by everyone), but for someone who is so involved in WAPF she should really know the basics.

          It is a sad day when ulterior motives affect scienfitic reporting.

          I was just reading a comment here ( by Carrie Hahn which makes some connections between the 2, which if you haven’t already read, might be worth a read.

          • Victor Cozzetto

            My pleasure Craig. It is a relief to see someone focused on the science, and not afraid to speak openly about it. More people like you need to step forward, as innocent people are being swayed by rhetoric. Very interesting that you mentioned Carrie, as I contacted her directly after seeing that! She is a brave woman, not afraid to put herself out there.

            If you haven’t heard, an ‘agenda’ has been revealed, as Gumpert, Daniel, and Schmid announced the launching of their own ‘organization’ as an supposed alternative to WAPF. A scary thought to say the least.

          • I’d heard those names together a lot and only thought it would be a matter of time. Apparantly Gumpert has been making big changes to his articles/ deleting some articles – all very ‘fishy’.

            Do you have a link or name of their new organisation?

          • Victor Cozzetto

            The announcement is on his latest blog post here:

            “Out of Ongoing WAPF Carnage, a New “Ancestral” Foundation Takes Shape”

            Ironically, the only ‘carnage’ I am seeing is on his website. I would have stopped reading his blog long ago, but it is now part of a little social IT experiment that I am conducting.

  • Truth Seeker

    You conveniently left out the fact that FDA requires vitamin A and D levels to be clearly and accurately listed on the product label. Failure to do so is illegal.

    You also left out the fact that FDA also requires that the common name of a fish species must also be listed on the product label, and FDA considers Pollock and cod to be two different fish. Calling your product Cod, when it is actually Pollock, is illegal as well.

    Even if one ignores all of the other controversies surrounding fermented cod liver oil,

    the simple fact of the matter is that Green Pastures violates multiple FDA regulations and is going to eventually get hammered by FDA anyway. I don’t understand why anyone would trust a company that so clearly has no regard for the law. They’ve shown their true colors all along.

    • I haven’t conveniently left anything out – I’ve analysed the report by Dr. Kaayla. Had I gone into the regs for cod liver oils, the article would have been many 1000s more words. I wanted to look at the science that Dr. Kaayla has done, not the laws revolving around cod liver oil.

      Like Dr. Kaayla, you are comparing fermented cod liver oil to regular cod liver oil, which leads to confusion, because they are very different products. You wouldn’t compare cheese to milk for example. Just because they have similar natural origins doesn’t make them the same product.

      Alaskan Pollock is not actually pollock (despite the clear confusion in the name). Pollock belongs to the genus Pollachius, whereas Alaskan Pollock belongs to the genus Gadus (which is the genus for cod).

      I’m not sure what you mean by ‘showed their true colours’ either. As far as I’m concerned, Green Pastures haven’t shown anything here. This is independant work by Dr. Kaayla.

      • Truth Seeker

        Fermented cod liver oil, is, and always has been, a big giant scam. There is no such thing as fermented cod liver oil, because there isn’t enough carbohydrates/glycogen in livers for them to even be fermented. Only the most gullible of people will still fall for it after reading Dr. Kaayla’s report. You can criticize her report all you want, but the fact of the matter is that multiple labs did indeed find fermented cod liver oil to be very rancid in both peroxide and anisidine levels. Sure, some of the samples were in spec, but this just speaks to a lack of consistent quality control more than anything.

        But, back to the topic of FDA regulations, the FDA is very clear on how fish species should be labeled. They clearly state that Alaskan Pollock should be labeled as Pollock, NOT COD, here

        Face it, this is an actual crime that warrants FDA and FTC investigation.

        I am comparing FCLO to regular CLO because they are very much the same as far as the FDA regulations are concerned. FDA does not care if a cod/pollock liver oil is fermented or refined. They are both still dietary supplements in accordance to their regulations, not foods, and are legally required to be labeled the same way. There is no magical exception to FDA laws simply because GP claims that their oil is “fermented”. You may not like this, but FDA doesn’t care what you or I like.

        There is no debating this. Green Pastures have been shown to be criminals who knowingly break the law. They have known this for a long time, as I have directly pointed it out to Dave, and yet they continue to do violate multiple FDA and FTC regulations. That’s what I mean by showing their true colors.

        You may not have wanted to write many thousand more words, but by leaving out the clear illegalities of this situation, you fail to inform your readers of the whole truth. A truth that deserves to be spoken.

        • Again, the article wasn’t looking at FDA regs, it was looking at the validity and accuracy of her report – labelling law is a different topic. Perhaps GP don’t adhere to FDA regs, but what I care about is the quality anbd nutritional value of the product, not how poloticians want a product labelled. I am quite capable of understanding research and making decisions myself.

          Again, this article is not about FDA regs – its about Dr. Kaaylas research in the the authenticity of GP FLCO.

          (FYI – Your link above about labelling law doesn’t work btw, so I can’t read it.)

          I’d direct you to my paragraph about the definition of fermentation – carbohydrates are not always required for this process, and there are many many foods which ferment without carbohydrates present.

          Also, Dr. Kaayla’s report shows very low peroxide levels, and anisidine levels were ‘inconclusive’ (but the results showed they were low). How did you interpret these results as high?

          The fact of the matter is that anyone with a scientific background can see that Dr. Kaayla’s report is largly flawed, both in methodology and interpretation of the data.

          • Truth Seeker

            If you would care to share how lactobacillus or any other bacteria or yeast is capable of fermenting an oil in the absence of sugar, I would love to learn about this process.

            Here is the FDA labeling link once again. Hopefully this time it works.


          • I strongly doubt that a lactobacillus bacteria would fermented cod livers, but I don’t pretend to be an expert in microbiology. However, the fact that there are many many other fermented products which do not require carbohydrates tells me that carbohydrates are not always needed. I would pose the question to you as to how products like nuoc mam is made if fermenteaton cannot occur without carbohydrates?

          • Truth Seeker

            Fish sauce is not really “fermented”. It’s brined for extended periods of time, and the high salt content lyses (breaks open) the fish tissues, which allows the fish to break down and release the various liquids that eventually become the sauce. Microbes cannot survive in the high salt content of the brine (brine salt content is much higher than marine water).

            The use of the term “fermented” is generic in this case, but is not technically accurate.

          • Interesting – could FCLO not be produced in a similar way perhaps? They do say that they use salt water (I don’t known the salt concentration though). It sure would be a very simple way to release the liquids in the livers, a lot of which would be oil.

            The use of the term “fermented” might be used in the same fashion as these fish sauces. It is easier to say ‘fermented’ than ‘brine lysis’ cod liver oil (and I would say most people won’t what lysis means).

            I’m sure you’ll point out the fact that this will be illegal by labeling law, but it is a thought….

            Perhaps there is more to FCLO than this simple method though. They do use a starter broth (and I’m happy for them to keep what this is under wraps, everyone has trade secrets). This broth may well contain carbs and bacteria to ferment in the traditional sense.

            The process is ellusive, I’ll give you that, but I put this down to protection of their process, not being hishonest.

        • Truth Seeker

          Unfortunately the link is still nor working. Try clicking this link and searching for pollock.

        • therealjeaniebeanie

          It’s almost like you didn’t even read the post before you commented. These issues are dealt with already in the post and many previous comments. If your mind is already made up, however, no amount of exposure to evidence can help.

  • janie inMN

    gadus / species just means they have similar characteristics, that they’re closely related – it’s the scientific name. it does NOT mean they are the same. it’s also of note, that it’s only the alaskan pollock (AKA walleye pollock) that was reclassified into the gadus genus. but it’s still “pollock”, a separate species.

    According to the FDA, and the NOAA, pollock (alaskan, pacific, pollock) is STILL pollock and can NOT be marketed as ‘cod’, PERIOD. it’s misbranding and also violates the food allergen labeling requirements as well (all types of fish must be listed by their acceptable market names).

    Pollock is still Pollock and must be labeled as such — it is illegal to list pollock as cod.

    Illegal species substitution and economic fraud: specifically lists that it is illegal to market “Alaskan Pollock” as “Cod”

    FDA principles in labeling and acceptable market names: note the paragraph on “species”
    Principle 2:
    -A name that is false or misleading is not an acceptable market name.
    -A food is deemed to be misbranded under section 403(a)(1) of the
    FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 343(a)(1)) if “…its labeling is false or
    misleading in any particular…” Some examples of how a market name may be
    false or misleading to a consumer are:
    -The name is not the name required by law or regulation.
    -The name is the same as the name of another species or is
    confusingly similar to the name of another species and it is not
    reasonably encompassed within a group of species so named.

    another example – wolves & domestic dogs are in the same genus and species – but they are quite different… we do not call wolves dogs, nor dogs wolves. they are in the same scientific species, but they are NOT the same! pollock and cod are different species within the same genus – even more different.

    AND green pastures marketed pollock as cod, LONG before alaskan pollock was scientifically reclassified to the same genus as cod. and now, even with them being in the same genus, again – it bears repeating because of your replies to some comments here – Alaskan Pollock (or ANY pollock) is NOT Cod, and it is illegal to market it as such. ILLEGAL means ILLEGAL, and it’s punishable by law.

    • I was under the impression that NOAA classified it as cod.

      At any rate, lets say you are right – a product labelled as cod but contains Alaskan pollock should be labelled pollock. Lets look at Kaaylas results again:

      1 liver was tested (not from fermented cod liver oil product) by an unnamed lab which was shown to be Alaskan Pollock. Considering that GP probably goes through 100,000’s of fish livers, I wouldn’t be suprise to find the odd Alaskan Pollock here and there (and other species too).

      If you were to say to a court that an unnamed lab was comissioned by an individual with a clear ulterior motive found that one liver from GP was found to be Alaskan Pollock, and so their FCLO is fake, you wouldn’t have much of a case.

      At best, it would call for a more thourough investigation, but in reality, there isn’t much information here. The lab cannot be verified, their methodology cannot be verified, and even the chain of custody for the tested liver cannot be verified. In addition to this, there is a strong case for reporting bias….

      It is far from conclusive that GP cod liver oil is actually Alaskan Pollock (although these dubious results do suggest it is)

      Yes, it would be great if GP had all the livers they used tested, but what other cod liver oil manufacturer does this??? I can imagine that there are many manufacturers of cod liver oil that use far worse ingredients than a different species of cod….

      You seem to be making a big deal out of a small problem – nutritionally the product seems very sound (although a little less nutritional than beleived by many). Nutrition is by far the most important thing here for everyone.

      If their product is Atlantic cod or Alaskan Pollock – I don’t really care. Sure, slap them on the wrist for mislabelling their product if you can prove all the livers they use are Alaskan Pollock and so by law it should be labelled as Pollock.

      What concerns me is the nutrition, namly the lack of quinones and presence of trans-fats, both of which have gone unanswered (although other independant testing has shown no trans-fats).

      I find it odd that critics of GP FCLO have focused so much on labelling law (which this article is not about) when there are more important nutritional queries being raised.

      • janie inMN

        have you forgotten that GP themselves have admitted to using pollock and selling it as cod and used a scientist to claim that it was the ‘same as cod’?
        YET, they only did this AFTER they were caught!

        however, this scientist is obviously not aware of the strict laws in place regarding fish labeling and why these laws are in place — fyi, the NOAA is the organization that has fought the hardest to prevent illegal fish substitution and fish ‘fraud’. and they enforce the seafood list as published by the FDA (which states that Alaskan Pollock is a common ILLEGAL substitute for Cod).

        YES, the other things are of concern — nutrition, rancidity, trans fats, etc.

        But, at the same time, you can’t argue against DNA … what DOES matter is what is disclosed to the public via required labeling (that’s in place to PROTECT the public). you simply cannot call one fish by another fish’s name. if it contains pollock, label must state it contains pollcok, if cod – then cod, if shrimp – then shrimp… if both cod & pollock, the label must list that it contains BOTH cod & pollock. It’s a matter of different species, different DNA, different proteins, different allergens — the health & safety of food…. and any substance containing food ingredients must list on the label not only its ingredients, but which of the common allergens it contains — and it must list ALL — n the case of nuts, it must list each specific nut; in the case of fish, it must list EACH SPECIFIC fish… EVEN IF it’s only processed in a facility that processes any of the allergens.

        • This really seems to be a conflic between scientific definition vs political definition. Alaskan Pollock is a cod fish. There is no single fish which is called ‘cod’, but many people mistakingly call the Atlantic cod THE cod fish because it is the more common of cod fish. You still seem to think of Alaskan Pollock as a Pollock, which it isn’t (despite its name). Its like a tomato being called a vegetable, when its really a fruit.

          Cod is a genus, not a species. Either the FDA is misinformed (which, lets be honest, it wouldn’t be the first time), or they need to change their regs.

          Again though, this whole article isn’t about legalities in labeling law, its about determining if the product is rancid or not. That is what Dr. Kaayla reported on, and so thats what I’ve looked at.

          • janie inMN

            Dr Kaayla ALSO reported on lab results of DNA… Atlantic Cod and Alaskan Pollock are in the same family and genus, but are classified as DIFFERENT species with different DNA, different nutritional value and different characteristics. they are classified in the same genus because of similarities, NOT sameness. that’s SCIENCE. and at this point, FDA (political) is in agreement with science. you cannot substitute one for the other and still call it the other.

            “a rose called by any other name is still a rose”…

          • janie inMN

            in reference to your tomato comment — it is in the SAME family and genus as potato and other nightshades, it is quite DIFFERENT. you do not call a tomato a potato and visa-versa. species are like that, you know… “different”

          • Yes, but I specify that I want a tomato, notnot something from the Solanum genus. My comment was jus to explain how the common name for plants/ animals can cause confusion – and it really seems to. You seem to have misinterpreted it all.

          • janie inMN

            you stated, “Yes, but I specify that I want a tomato, notnot something from the Solanum genus.”

            EXACTLY. you want tomato, not just anything from that genus. well, i want Atlantic COD, not just anything from that genus (ie Alaskan Pollock, same genus, different species).

          • Ok, so go find a brand which can prove it only uses Atlantic cod – you won’t be able to. I am more than happy to have a proven Allaskan Pollock product oil which is nutritionally sound, than some off the shelf unknown oil.

            Your vendeta against FCLO seems unfounded. You have set the bar higher than other cod liver oils abide by, and attack them for not sticking to a single species (when I don’t think they have ever claimed they stick to a single species). Why do you have such a problem with Allaskan Pollock oil?

          • janie inMN

            and WAPF’s only rebuttal re the DNA being found to be “Alaskan Pollock was this… … trying to justify, like you are, that the a.p. and a.c. are the same.

            while the liver oil comes from the same genus (gadus), it comes from different species… and for health & safety reasons those “species” MUST be specified (per your analogy of %, it would need to list BOTH the atlantic cod and alaskan pollock).

            where FOOD is concerned, you cannot lump species together and sell them as the family and/or genus. this is not minor, it is major and it’s not a double-standard. try justifying your reasoning to someone who goes into anaphylaxtic shock because a known allergen wasn’t specified, or someone who gets a parasitic infection because of UNlawful labeling.

            how do you justify GP selling their product as “Cod Liver Oil” for the many years that they’ve done so, when Alaskan Pollock was only ‘recently’ added to the Gadus Genus (Jan 2014, updated on FDA in 2015). based on your % analogy, does that mean someone can market a product as 100% nightshade extract, without specifying the species source? (tomato, potato, eggplant). absolutely NOT!

            from the FDA – The Seafood List — “To the extent possible, market names should provide a clear distinction
            between species that have different qualities and value to consumers
            (e.g., “pollock” and “cod” are distinct names for distinct species and
            consumers generally associate higher quality and value with “cod”).” They are very clear, in fact, couldn’t be clearer, that it is illegal to market “Alaskan Pollock” as Atlantic Cod, or any other “Cod”.

            and here re allergen labeling (8 major food allergens, fish is one) —
            “Does FALCPA provide any specific direction for declaring the presence of ingredients from the three food groups that are designated as “major food allergens (i.e., tree nuts, fish, and Crustacean shellfish?”)
            Yes. FALCPA requires that in the case of tree nuts, the specific type of nut must be declared (e.g., almonds,
            pecans, or walnuts). The species must be declared for fish (e.g., bass, flounder, or cod) and Crustacean shellfish (crab, lobster, or shrimp). (note: SPECIES of fish, not family or genus).

            I am not on a vendetta against FCLO in and of itself. However, I am extremely disgusted by GP’s deception and marketing of their “cod liver oil” products. I would expect ANY fish liver oil to declare their sources and follow labeling laws – and to not market it under the name of a different fish. This dialogue has been about GP’s product solely because of the attention brought to it’s deceptive marketing from the DNA testing (which is the portion I and many other focused on from Dr Kaayla’s report). Just like I wouldn’t purchase a product known to not contain what it’s supposed to (ie studies that revealed vegetable oils to be adulterated; or a nutritional supplement that’s supposed to contain certain nutrients and it’s discovered they don’t), I won’t purchase a product known to contain something that it’s not declaring / including on their label. In this case, GP’s FCLO containing Allaskan Pollock liver oil, and not being listed on their label.

          • You seem to still be missing the point. There isn’t a single cod fish. I’ve agreed that it is mislabeling in the eyes of the FDA, but not in scientific terms. As someone with a scientific background, I find very little wrong with calling a cod fish cod… Might seem strange, but that is what GP have done.

            If I bought Solanum extract, then what can I really expect? I’d be a fool to think its only tomato extract. This is because its is only identifiable by the genus. If I bought tomato extract, I would expect tomoato, becuase its names after the species.

            Fermented cod liver oil is named after the genus, so you can’t really complain when it contains a different species to what you expected. To me, thats just logic and common sense.

            If you can find me a CLO producer that can genetically verify the origins of all their oil to be 100% atlantic cod, then I will be very very suprised. Alaskan Pollock has been used for cod liver oil for many years. Yes, perhaps it is illegal to do so in the eyes of the FDA, but you know what – I’d much rather alaskan pollock oil, than sunflower oil when I buy cod liver oil, but thats just me.

            Now, I’m not saying that every CLO manufacturer uses sunflower oil, I’m just saying that with most, you don’t even know its cod liver oil, let alone Atlantic cod liver oil.

            This is a labelling issue, not a quality issue. I am sorry that you feel so strongly about this, but I really see it as nothing more than a labelling issue. Had the quality of the oil been proved to be dubious, then sure, I’d be very annoyed at the false information.

          • You seem to have missed my point. There is no single fish called cod, the term ‘cod’ refers to a genus of fish. There are many SPECIES of cod. GP do not say their product is ‘Atlantic cod liver oil’. That my friend is science. Look again at the taxonomy image on this page.FDA is not in agreement with science (no surprise there).

            Just to be clear – Alaskan Pollock is not in fact a Pollock, but is a cod. Atlantic cod is also a type of cod, as is Pacific cod. A product containing cod can contain any of the above fish species, and still be 100% cod. It could be 99% Alaskan Pollock, and 1% Atlantic cod, but still 100% cod.

            Green Pastures say their product is made from cod, and, as far as science is concerned, it is. This is irrifutable if you beleive Dr. Kaayla’s report. They do not specify the species of cod, and nor do ANY OTHER cod liver oil producer, because they all use blends.

            You are setting double standards here and nit picking, and what is at worst nothing more than a minor fault.

            From a scientific stand point, the product is labelled correctly, from a political stand point it may not be.

            If you want to use your rose analogy – Rosa blanda and Rosa bridgesii are both species of roses. But you still call them roses, because they belong to the rose (Rosa) genus.

  • Elizabeth Jensen

    I have comments on two things.

    1) Atlantic Cod and Pollock are not the same thing. This has been beaten to death, but it is the same thing as saying that a horse and a donkey are the same. They are not. Period. Different species. Same genus, but different species. Generally if different species from the same genus interbreed, their offspring are sterile. Hence why they generally don’t interbreed in nature. Alaskan Cod and Pollock don’t appear to interbreed, otherwise there would be some cod/pollock hybrid out there that would be caught on a regular basis. This is BASIC biology. The DNA came back as 100% Pollock. Not a mix. 100%. You don’t get that if you have a mix of two species. They have differentiating genes. BECAUSE THEY ARE DIFFERENT SPECIES. Pollock is much less expensive. Just say it contains Pollock and don’t charge me the same price as if it were 100% Atlantic Cod.

    2) Trans fatty acids are not a byproduct of fermentation. 3.2% is a significant level. Trans fatty acid formation requires a very specific environment. The Weston A Price Foundation even has an article published in 2004 that talks about this and was written by Mary Enig. “I knew that there were several things that were necessary for the formation of the trans
    fatty acids. One was a tank of hydrogen; second was a closed container,
    which allowed an adequate vacuum to form; third, an appropriate
    catalyst was needed; and last, the heat that would allow the chemical
    changes to occur had to be sufficiently high in conjunction with the
    other components” Are these the conditions under which FCLO is being made? If so, there is a huge problem. If not, then there is contamination, which is also a problem.

    • HI Elizabeth,

      You are right atlantic cod and pollock are not the same thing. I really think there is some confusion here, which hasn’t helped with the common name for Alaskan Pollock..
      Thegenus Gadus has the common name Cod. A Cod liver oil can contain Alaskan pollock, Pacific cod or Alaskan Pollock. Why? Because GP has only specified its GENUS, not its SPECIES. A COD liver oil is the same as saying a GADUS liver oil. Except most people don’t know what Gadus is.

      If we look at your donkey/ horse analogy – if I bought a horse and you gave me a donkey, I would be annoyed. If I bought an EQUUS (genus for hourse/ donkey) then I can’t complain if you give me a hourse or a donkey.

      That is basic biology.

      Alaskan Pollock is NOT A POLLOCK. I’ve been over this before, and there is a picture in the article explaining exactly this. Alaskan Pollock is a cod fish (despite its common name containing the word pollock, which is causing so much confusion).

      I can guarantee that people wouldn’t care if GP contained Pacific Cod rather than Alaskan Pollock even though Alaskan Pollock is more closly related to Atlantic cod than Pacific Cod is!

      You need to ignore the common name.

      You will also find that pretty much every cod lvier oil manufacturer will use Alaskan pollock and other cod fish in their product (still 100% cod though).

      Finally, it was only 1 liver that was DNA tested, not a batch. It could well be a blend of cod fish – we don’t know.

      You are right though, the trans-fat content is a concern for me. Its worth noting that other tests have shown FCLO to have no trans-fats in though. There are many explainations for the presence of the trans-fats in this product which are 100% innocent (on Green Pastures aprt at least). It calls for more reserach, but it isn’t conclusive.

      • janie inMN

        And therein lies the PROBLEM. Green Pasture is marketing their product using the genus, when they are SUPPOSED to use the SPECIES name. Also basic biology. There is no confusion there. By the way, Alaskan Pollock is not the “common” name, that would be “Walleye Pollock”. Pollock or Alaska Pollock is the “marketing” name. and THAT is the name required to be on product labels for seafood, food, or dietary supplements containing it. GP is not innocent in this fact. Even the letter they posted on their website regarding what does a scientist say, recommended at the end that they label with the “species” to avoid confusion. What was pointedly ignored was that it was a legal requirement to label via the SPECIES. Although, a ‘scientist’ wouldn’t be expected to know that. However, GP has no excuse – if they claim to be ignorant of that fact, then they have absolutely NO BUSINESS being in the supplement business.

        Labeling Alaska Pollock as Cod is “species substitution and economic FRAUD”. No matter how much you try to convince people otherwise.

        • Janie – Pretty much every CLO manufacture markets their product as ‘cod liver oil’ not ‘atlantic cod liver oil’. Most will use a blend of different cod species, some claim they use specific species, but there isn’t any DNA testing to support their claims.

          The common name is Walleye Pollock and Alaskan Pollock.

          They admit their product contains Alaskan Pollock, which is a cod fish. They don’t seem to hide this fact. If you thought you were getting 100% Atlantic cod liver oil, then I’m sorry – they have never claimed this.

          I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again – It looks like GP haven’t abided by the politicians rules, but have stuck the the scientists rules when labelling their product. Slap them on the wrist maybe, but what manufacturer calls their product ‘Atlantic cod liver oil’? If GP has broken the law, then virtually all manufacturers have.

          I don’t see why so many people are hung up about the technicality of the labelling and quote the FDA on all this. It is a nutritious poroduct (even the bias report by Dr. Kaayla has shown that), and thats what I care about.

          Focusing on the labelling issue is making a mountain out of a mole hill IMO, and it only seems to be an issue with people who have some sort of preset bias against FCLO.

          • janie inMN

            craig – just fyi, no ‘presets’ here. never even heard of FCLO until Dr Daniel’s report came out. my issue with the labeling is not the name of the product, it’s the UN-declared ingredients and incomplete contains statements, where species are not listed.

            my position puts me in a place of making nutrition/health recommendations and supplement recommendations (when can’t get what’s needed through whole food sources), and i have to trust manufacturer’s and rely on their integrity — not just for the contents, but also the actual manufacturing end. for me, and some of my clients, it can be life-threatening if they give me incorrect information. THAT’s what made this topic ‘so close to home’, so to speak. That’s what’s made me jump onto this particular band wagon.

            It’s those very labeling laws that help people make informed “SAFE” choices about their foods, dietary supplements, etc. Whether it’s the colorings, preservatives, additives, or main ingredients. The FDA finally got something right when they made it mandatory to list the 8 most common allergens, and required specifics (ie nuts, fish — have to list the exact ones … ie walnut, peanut, pecan… cod, alaskan pollock, trout, crab, shrimp, lobster, etc)… using not just the ingredients list, but also a ‘contains’ statement — including a notice statement if the product is manufactured in a facility where those allergens have been (even if the allergens aren’t present in that specific product!).

            MANY people rely on accurate labeling. Food allergens are a very serious thing, and can be life-threatening… as are health conditions – FDA does have Q&A on their website about labeling and also list the reasons for these labeling rules under their sections on principles.

          • I appreciate the importance of allergen informaiton. I also accept that from a legal stand point GP are labelling their product wrong (for what ever reason). However, I have yet to see a CLO manufacturer which actually prints the species of cod used in the oil. This is an inudstry wide problem, not just a GP problem. I think people should stop acting like its a problem with just GP and attacking GP, when most other CLO manufactureres are much less transparant than they are.

        • therealjeaniebeanie

          All cod liver oil manufacturers, to my knowledge, use the genus, not the species, on their labels. They all just say “cod liver oil,” and that can mean oil from the liver of Pacific cod, Atlantic cod, Greenland cod, or Alaskan pollock, which are all species of cod. I don’t know why this is so hard to understand once it is explained. The common names of various plants and animals don’t always make sense because things were named in many or most cases before the connections between species were well understood (that is, before genetics and DNA analysis were invented). People are getting hung up on the wrong details. Want to bet some surprising things would come to light if every manufacturer of CLO fell under this much scrutiny?

          I’d also like to see evidence that pure Alaskan pollock cod liver oil is harmful or nutritionally inferior to oil derived from the livers of the other three species in the genus cod. Perhaps it is, perhaps it isn’t. No one has cited any evidence one way or another. It may well be that there is a difference from an allergen standpoint, and maybe it would be better for GP to label their FCLO more specifically for those who know they have an Alaskan pollock allergy. Does anyone test for that? And if so, it would behoove other CLO manufacturers to label their oil with greater specificity. They should all be held to the same standard. The anti-FCLO crowd is singling out one maker but the same questions could (and perhaps should) be asked of all the other makers.

          As to trans fats, we really don’t know what to make of this until we see more tests of not only FCLO but other brands of CLO, and ideally all from the same lab for consistency, or send all samples to several labs for comparison. It is completely ridiculous and unfounded for Dr. Daniels to conclude that the presence of trans fats in SOME samples of FCLO mean GP adulterated the product with vegetable oil. That is an assumption but is far from proven. I think naturally occurring trans fats haven’t been researched in great depth. Most people don’t realize that they can occur naturally in wholesome foods. CLA, conjugated linoleic acid, is a naturally occurring trans fat found in beef, especially grass-fed beef, and it is very good for us. Yes, CLA is a trans fat. I do not know what it means for trans fats to be detected in FCLO; it could be something very bad, it could be positive, and it could be benign but meaningless — no one knows at this point, or they haven’t shared it with the world if they do.

          People are jumping to conclusions — aided by Dr. Daniels’ report — without having the patience to look for and in some cases wait for all the evidence.

          It’s clear that *some* people are sensitive to FCLO and don’t do well with it; it’s equally clear that many people *do* do well with it. Because it’s wrong for me doesn’t mean it’s wrong for everyone.

          Thanks for a great post!

  • El’

    Great article – thank you for your time in presenting this to us

    As someone who is just new and interested in Cod liver oil products, this was quite startling at first. I haven’t read Dr. Kaayla’s book in full, but what I have read I do think some of it is quite bias – the ‘rancidity’ issue described I would think would be the ‘general feel’ to any fermented products. However, I do think she has raised some interesting points as you have covered – The Vitamin K, co-Q10 and trans-fat content of FCLO – I will wait until this is further revealed before I consider buying any Green Pasture’s products. I am more particularly interested in the Skate liver oil of theirs. I also feel Green Pastures should be more transparent and update their product labels.

    For now I have gone with Nordic Naturals Cod Liver Oil as my first product – they label theirs as ‘Skrei’ for the species of Cod.

    • Hi El’

      A refreshingly level headed response! I’m doing my best to find the answer to why the trans-fats are in the oil. Its worth noting that other tests haven’t found any trans-fats in the oil at all.

      • El’

        This is a good point – Dr Kaayla only conduced three tests I believe, in which one of these showed up positive in trans-fats.
        It is highly possible that this lab could have contaminated the samples in some way – otherwise the other two tested in other laboratories would have found the same result. 1/3 is not conclusive enough to back up the claim.
        Dr Kaayla also mentioned that she did not take up Dave Wetzel’s offer to visit his company because she felt the trip would be a ‘pay off’ as some of the large corporations are reputed to do. Rather she would bear costs by her own means, but she had already stretched her budget conducting the testing.
        If she was on a tight budget for testing already, what if this 3rd laboratory wasn’t a ‘top end’ one? Let’s face it, every profession including laboratories has its low-end and high-end.
        I personally find it dubious that she is not releasing the laboratory details due to signing a ‘non-disclosure agreement’. The only reason I could think of for a laboratory to do this is due to the threat of legal action due to the affects of the test results found. I personally do not think this says much about a laboratories credibility if they are not legally willing to stand behind the results they have found.
        The Alaskan Pollock / Cod issue – Although Alaskan Pollack is technically classified under the ‘Cod’ family, I do think Dave Wetzel should have been more transparent in making consumers aware of this – it is a cheaper substitute as opposed to Atlantic Cod in which consumers are paying the same price. This is not very ethical really.
        There is also a claim of Dr Ron that it caused him to contract heart disease – aside from apparently overtaking excessive amounts from 1979-2006 ‘not missing a day – well according to the Green Pastures website, Dave Wetzel only opened his company in 2000?
        On a side note as well Craig, can I ask if you use Green Pasture’s products yourself?
        What are your thoughts of fermented Cod liver oil as opposed to other methods such as ‘cold pressed’?
        As Dr Daniel Kaayla more specifically deals with Green Pastures products, there are still plenty more Cod liver oil products out there – Carlson’s, Nordic Naturals, Moller, Red Seal…

        • The Joint Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations and World Health Organization defines Cod liver oil as: Cod liver oil is derived from the liver of wild cod, Gadus morhua L and other species of Gadidae (family of cod). Alaskan Pollock fits well within this remit. In fact, you will be very hard pushed to find a cod liver oil which uses just one species of cod. Many will use a large blend of the Gadidae family. It might seem a bit off that GP use Alaskan Pollock, but at least it is a cod fish. There isn’t really an idustry definition of cod liver oil (I beleive the FDA only define cod, and have no definition for cod liver oil). This had lead to a very broad interpretation of the product amongst manufacturers. Some people might feel a bit let down by GP because their product is so expensive, but they haven’t done anything wrong. Perhaps they could have been more transparat though, which would have avoided this mess.

          I’m not sure why Dr. Kaayla was worried about being paid off! Just turn down the payment and include it in her report! That excuse is very poor IMO…

          The DR Ron thing is also a bit of a joke. He was taking large amount of regular CLO for a long time, then moved onto FCLO. He even admits that taking large amount of any cod liver oil would result in the heart problems he had, but for some reason he singles out FCLO as the only cause, and implies that othger CLO wouldn’t have the same effect. I would ignore his attack of FCLO. Just don’t take stupidly high dosages of anything (which is common sense for most people).

          Yes, I do use GP products. I’m currently using the butter oil/ cod liver oil blend, but as you say, they are not the only brand. Carlson’s is a good one for starters, but you have no idea what cod they use! In fact, GPFCLO is the most heavily researched product now, and I still think of them as being very trustworthy with regards to quality, which is my number 1 concern.

          There is a lot to thing about when buying a CLO product (which many people don’t realise). I’ve compiled an overview of a number of brand here – it include Carlson’s and the key faeatures you want to be looking out for.

          Hope this helps!

  • janie inMN
  • Dave Art

    On Green Pasture’s web site they detail the species of fish they use in their FCLO products. Alaskan Pollock is a type of cod specifically of a family of cod called Gadus Macrocephalus found in NorthWestern Pacific and Bering Sea. See this link for an exhaustive explanation titled “Cod” taxonomy: Understanding scientific and common names.” For a shorter explanation here is Wikipedia’s version:

The Health Cloud was created in December 2011 by Craig and Morg who have been friends since high school. Our focus is to educate our readers with unbiased health articles and on the side we run our own online health shop. This website is for you, so drop us a comment or send us a tweet, we always take the time to reply!