The Benefits of Seawater

Well at least her blogs are providing an unbiased assessment of the products. So what is my beef with Quinton's? Below the fold is a list that I will keep updating as I think of more.

1. As Hope correctly notes, my first issue is that Rene Quinton isn't as high in stature in France, or anywhere else, as the Original Quinton would have us believe.  Hope seems to think that I argued that Quinton did not publish on the 'benefits of seawater'.  I admitted in the last post that R. Quinton indeed seems to have published on the topics suggested.  Rather, it is the impact of R. Quinton's work I challenged.  Specifically, how have other scientists viewed his work in the last 100 years.  First, a websearch of R. Quinton produces mainly a variety of webpages related to Original Quintion (the company) and little else.  As I noted before, even the Wikipedia entry was suspect, being flagged as a product endorsement, and has been subsequently removed. Second, A commenter on the last post stated "I'm French and a biologist and I never even heard of him!".  My well educated French neighbors only know of him as a French military hero but not as a biologist.  Third, DSN's whipping boy, Kevin Zelnio, reports to me that a Science Citation Index Search finds four of Quinton's paper with none of them being cited.
   
2. Quinton's Filtering Process removes all the beneficial nutrients.  Several studies show that that several nutrients are depleted during a plankton bloom.  For example, Kudo and Matsunaga (1998, Journal of Oceanography) demonstrate that phosphate, silicate, nitrate, and cadmium either exhibited decreased concentrations or were depleted completely.  Where do the nutrients go? Into the plankton. This is examplifed by the fact that elevated concentrations of these are found in deeper layers after a bloom due to the decomposition of detritial materials produced in the bloom.  Filtering, at any mesh size small enough to be productive, would remove the plankton and the nutrients.  Perhaps Quinton's only harvests at the window at the beginning of the bloom?
   
3. Original Quinton is disingenuous.  This list examplifies only part of this.  The company purports Quinton advanced our understanding of the origins of live.  He did not.  Their website suggests that several doctors support the product.  A simple scroll the "healthcare practitioners" for California produces a list where a majority are not M.D.'s but rather chiropractors, acupunturists, nutritionists, and homeopaths.  Hope noted that I acknowledged previously that research provides evidence that seawater is good for the skin.  Actually, the papers and the Quinton site, and others not there, point to hypersaline solutions, not just seawater, as a irrigant for skin conditions.  The other studies Quintons cite relate to deep-sea water, funded in part by companies promoting the drinking of seawater, and suffer from low sample sizes.  As Quinton's is collected in shallow water, these studies hardly speak to to its benenfit.  Of course none of these studies deal with Quinton's per se, the studies they provide about thier product are not published and thus peer reviewed.
   
4. They charge you for it. I don't mind anybody making a profit.  What I mind, and Hope misses this, is that Quinton's is overpriced.  $60 for 18 vials of seawater that you can go collect for yourself for free is ridiculous.  Moreover, of Quinton's 83 Bioavailable elements, only 16 are found in concentrations that are greater than trace.  My multivitamin that is less than $10 for over 6 month's supply contains near 40 in concentration far greater.  Hope notes that you need a prescription for the product and thus it is regulated by your doctor.  Yet online you can purchase your own, one time only, 18 vial sample pack for $19.95 (+ S&H).