Robb Wolf @robbwolf

.This is how he functions. The first pass is absent facts or context. This gets huge views. Then, the half hearted retraction occurs, which tends to garner two orders of magnitude fewer impressions. But net-net, this approach does manage to tick every box for the Lanham Act. So, he’s got that going for him.

@cormachayden_ .Can you define “clean?” Are you the sole arbiter of what that means? I see a lot of fear mongering here, I see zero context.

IDK, I think it's easy to try and stand something up as "different" but my most generous take on that is it was very poorly done. I WILL at least acknowledge that this particular person did not dunk on other products by name as a way of "see, we are better than them..." Using bogus info to promote goods and services is going to land a lot of people in hot water. @oasishealthapp is learning this the hard way.

x.com/i/article/2060…

Classy Colty! You deleted the other conversation, I'll post my reply here: In my original reply I'd assumed we were talking about electrolytes broadly, as they all have remarkably similar ingredients. If you look at any of the other players in this space and search their name and "tooth enamel" you will find largely the same warnings. Not surprisingly, the largest return volumes relate to the largest companies, ourselves and Liquid IV. Do you have data that suggests this is a signal above and beyond what market reach would account for? As to the article, it DID mention titratable acid, it did not mention chelation, as there are no chelating agents in the product that are not already associated with a metal ion. "one second of gbt" search is indeed an impressive effort on your part, but there might be some details you are missing. And it sounds like you are turning over a consumer advocacy leaf, that's fantastic. Is a product like ours or a standard sugar sweetened cola more of an issue for tooth enamel?

@coltybrah @jamestmurphy_ And that was all covered in the article, I'm guessing you did not bother to read. Did you haver more on this?

@Vamzzz93 @jamestmurphy_ @TJ_Bongiorno One is only concerned about this if one has concerns about the discovery process. We don’t have concerns.

@oasishealthapp @TheRoyalMadame Your understanding of basic math and toxicology is, and was non-existent. We tried to help you. Now, things have changed. And please do remember, we have all the comms between us. All of that will see that light of day.

@thomassutherlin @jamestmurphy_ @Cernovich You do not see an issue with misrepresenting basic toxicology? What would oasis need to do for this to be justifiable to you?

@coltybrah @jamestmurphy_ You are suggesting one low pH beverage is somehow unique relative to others? science.drinklmnt.com/did-you-know/h…

Bringing legal action is difficult. But sometimes necessary. Today we sent a letter to Oasis. I’ve attached it below. Read on if you want the background. … I first heard of Oasis in December 2024 when they published false reports about LMNT. I publicly and privately explained to the founder why he was reading lab results wrong. 300x wrong, to be specific. He failed to make corrections. I let it go. But I kept hearing from founders being unfairly treated. Kept seeing these guys put out made up content that would go viral. Striking fear into thoughtful people concerned for their health. 4 other brands (so far) have sent cease and desist letters with him for falsifying test reporting. He’s been mocking them online about it. No rigor. Not recognizing there is a group of people (scientists and brands) who actually operate and know how this stuff works. Like basic math. Like basic testing protocols. Just last week, an Oasis post misrepresenting heavy metal levels in protein went viral. It reached 3.5MM people on twitter that day. They got called on it and retracted it with a public apology – the retraction reached 27k people on twitter. That’s a 100x higher reach on false information than the truth. Blatant errors in reading test results, paired with language like “heavy metals in protein causes neurological impairment and birth defects in kids” strikes terror in people - especially new parents. Many feel that reform is unlikely. I prefer to be optimistic of people. If Oasis wants to stay in this business, I suggest they: - Immediately remove themselves from the App Store. Defamatory damages build every day for each misrepresented brand. - Rebuild the entire framework of their app with a reputable toxicologist and scientist input with a fair framework equitably applied to all brands (no personal bias penalties). - Correct the misinformation, with equitable reach, on each of the brands damaged. - Develop communications guidelines for social media. Context over clickbait. Empowerment over fear. Consumer choice over chaos. Oasis has defamed dozens if not hundreds of brands now and misled millions of people. And I have heard from many other brands and consumers wondering how to help make this stop. This is not just Oasis. There are other offenders too. I’ve never been a fan of litigation. I’m really not thrilled about it. But I am committed to it. If you won’t stand up for your product, who will? And don’t people want to be customers of brands that stand behind what they make? I do. If damages are ultimately awarded, they will go to charity. It’s hard to stand up for what’s true online these days. At some point, when it gets bad enough, some people do.

keyboard_arrow_left Previous keyboard_arrow_right Next

@simonmaechling .An appeal to authority that conveniently avoids the replication crisis! Well done sir.

Pretty cool story!! Sourcing LMNT’s organic black tea youtu.be/NIjJIODHOro?si…

Everyone who supported this is a monster. The Car Kill Switch Is Now Law youtube.com/shorts/ZJ27r6M…

@kermss . And if you are truly curious about this stuff, take a peek at the hormetic considerations in all of this: pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/10513405/ Heavy metals CAN absolutely be a problem. The notion that zero intake is either achievable or even necessary is likely incorrect.

@kermss broccoli, kale and spinach have lead. The question is what parts per billion we are talking. I’d research things a scosh in the future.

@kermss .All legit concerns but the situation is not as dire as you suggest. science.drinklmnt.com/did-you-know/b… science.drinklmnt.com/did-you-know/t… science.drinklmnt.com/did-you-know/h… science.drinklmnt.com/did-you-know/h… science.drinklmnt.com/did-you-know/d… science.drinklmnt.com/did-you-know/d…

This is what is called "too little too late." James bent over backwards trying to save you from your self over a year ago. I get it on the one hand in that the only real accountability thus far has been your clearly lacking sense of both morality and ethics. Pride in doing a job well vs exploitative opportunism. There has been no outside feedback as to your poor decisions. That's going to change.

. @oasishealthapp just posted two redactions Their original protein post got 3.5M views in a day. The redaction, a few thousand. I reached out and spoke with them over a year ago when they were getting going, assuming best intent. (To correct then false reporting as well). It's only gotten worse. Guys, you don't get another pass. You can't make millions of dollars and just say "my bad" for no one to hear and move on. Photo Receipts: - 3.5MM on defamation post (twitter only). - Founder brags “Oasis record day” - 7K views on the redaction. These guys like inflated stats so here’s a few. On this topic, Oasis has a 500x higher reach on misinformation than accurate information. That’s a 10,000x higher ratio than a standard of safety by any reasonable person for trust and credibility. The redaction posts have dozens of people saying “wtf, I threw this in the trash!” That means for every 1 person that saw the redaction, 500 tossed it in the bin and will now go on to spread the false info further. Oasis, you better start spending every last dollar of that defamation-earned money boosting these redaction posts.

I hope to see y'all here! oldsaltco-op.com/pages/old-salt…