You state “Insolvent fraud” but verifiably posted an incorrect definition of insolvency.
You state “the touts connected to it continually pass on false information”. Actually any information i have ever posted is publicly verifiable and i have encouraged any to independently check my information. In contrast, let’s examine verifiably false posted information here using a few verifiable examples:
Your post 4477 falsely indicates Sucanon as one of the supplements warned about improper advertising by the FDA when it was not and has not been sold in the US. In fact the referenced Consumer Reports article was modified to delete the subject sentence of the article while repeatedly claiming it as verbatim.
Post 3963 falsely states that Sucanon contains only inactive ingredients despite the active ingredients being publicly stated, in one location directly above the cut and pasted inactive ingredients listed on the healthcanada website.
Multiple posts have misrepresented the contents of the FDA response letter by leaving out their clear statements that Sucanon is a drug per the food and drug act, that Sucanon has undergone "substantial clinical investigations" as they reference the press release announcing presentation of a 12 week study of Sucanon in prediabetics in which 81% showed normalized HbA1C at the conclusion and that the study was presented at the 2013 EASD annual meeting and the abstract included in the EASD journal.
Posts have falsely stated that Canagen (the Sucanon distributor for India, a multinational company) is a fake company and located in a diner.
It was stated falsely that "HSBC has no substantial agreement with these crooks". The agreement with HSBC was announced in a press release 5/3/2016 and finances ongoing Sucanon orders in Mexico.
It has repeatedly been stated that sales in Mexico are down almost 90%. In fact when the posted financials are reviewed, the most recent years sales at that time were up 200% from the prior year.
These provably false statements have been repeatedly challenged. As an example in #1 above the entire Consumer Reports article has been repeatedly posted with a link for verification, but the false claim of "verbatim" and the resulting false conclusion has never been corrected, only repeated in subsequent posts. In fact, post 5014 states that "I stand behind all those statements about this indefensible fraud". Further, the stated purpose of the modification to the Consumer Reports article was for "scaring others away" (post 4550).
All of the above information is publicly available for any to verify
Jacob J. Rosenblum on what every lawyer knows.
“If the facts are against you, hammer the law. If the law is against you, hammer the facts. If the fact and the law are against you, hammer opposing counsel."
