For the background story on the fall of Ava Anderson Non-Toxic please see my original blog post.

As a female entrepreneur in the health and wellness education industry, I looked up to someone like Ava Anderson. I truly love all my Ava Anderson products, and use them on a daily basis. Ava has so many loyal fans and was doing so much good in the world of organic and non-toxic, as well as creating opportunities within her home state of Rhode Island. Her momentum within the industry is why I didn’t want her to walk away—I desperately wanted her to address the labeling and ingredients issues head on, as the Honest Company did over the summer, so we could all move on keeping the AANT name and reputation in tact. This whole scenario has played out very differently than what anyone could have expected though.

Instigator or Investigator?

Yesterday, blogger Jess Brandt, who is often cited as being the “whistle-blower” for this entire situation, released third-party lab results of Ava Anderson Non-Toxic products. Jess, a self-described “label-reading mama on a mission to find the safest products on the market,” felt so passionately about confirming the actual ingredients, she personally paid for samples of Ava Anderson Non-Toxic products to be tested by a third-party laboratory.

While many have referred to Jess as “a bully” or “crazy,” I have come to realize she is simply doing the necessary investigative work that our unregulated “non-toxic” industry is failing to do. Jess is the very definition of a lobbyist when it comes to influencing others of how cautious we need to be about the self-care products we use on ourselves and our children. The reason I think Jess is getting called a “bully” is because she has taken things a step further than most of us would. Instead of taking labels at face value, she investigates and confirms whether or not the labels match the ingredients. She cares about you as a consumer. Shouldn’t the company you are purchasing from have the same diligence and transparency?

Third-Party Lab Results

On Jess Brandt’s blog, she not only published a summary of the third-party results but she links to the ACTUAL reports that show the name of the scientific laboratory (PhytoChemia), their address, the full results, and the signatures of the chemists. I highly respect this gesture of full disclosure, especially because one of my main complaints about Ava Anderson Non-Toxic has been their complete lack of transparency, communication, and handling of this situation. They still haven’t revealed who conducted their “third-party testing” and haven’t shared any information directly with the public.

Now, I will say that I’m personally not irate by the results; however, it is confirmed that there is a mismatch of what is listed on the AANT labels versus what ingredients are actually in the AANT products. There are some synthetics. In some cases, there are ingredients listed on the label that are not included in the product. Or, a low-quality ingredient is used such as very diluted essential oil (side note: essential oils are another very unregulated industry!)

I’m simply sad and disappointed. I still choose to believe AANT was unknowingly screwed over by their third-party vendors; but their ongoing silence has made them seem guilty and completely at-fault. (Again, this could have been prevented by a crisis PR firm!)

Be Kind to Ava Anderson Consultants & Loyal Customers

I’m not a consultant, but I really love Ava Anderson products. I am hurt enough by all this, but my heart really goes out to the consultants who invested their personal time, money, and reputation into this company. All the consultants I’ve met are passionate about educating consumers on the benefits of high-quality, non-toxic skin care and are sharing a very worthy cause. Not many MLM ambassadors can say they’re doing “life-changing” work as this army of 12,000 consultants can! However, I’ve seen it already (mainly in the comments of my last blog post) that consultants are being called “naive” if they continue to sell these products. I don’t think that is fair. Due to the complexity of this situation, the questions that are still unanswered, and the unknowns of what the new company will be called or what products they will sell, I think it’s respectable for a consultant to stay a consultant for the moment. However, if the new company continues the gross practice of ignoring the issues, or not being transparent about their testing laboratory and results, and then fails to obtain a USDA Organic label, then I would certainly recommend running far away from “the company formerly known as Ava Anderson Non-Toxic LLC.”

Overall: This situation isn’t the fault of the consultants. They were blindsided by all of this. Have compassion for what they’re going through, and please do not use it as an opportunity to sell them on your competing MLM business!

Lack of Chemicals & Integrity

I am still using my current Ava Anderson products. I don’t believe any product is so harmful that it needs to be thrown away; at least not when compared to most products at your local drug store. However, I doubt I will purchase from this company again simply due to the company’s complete mishandling, and continued mishandling, of this situation. I was more forgiving initially when I had high hopes of hearing from the Anderson’s in an exclusive interview, or from the new owners directly—thinking they all just needed more time to pull themselves together. But I have yet to even receive an email from home office acknowledging the situation or providing any sort of explanation. My last order was January 6th. There is no question that I am am active customer in their database.

AANT has put their consultants in the very awkward, and unfair position of “whisper-down-the-lane” in relaying the information of this fallen company. The new company seems to be sweeping everything under the carpet and focusing on the excitement of the re-brand instead; as if a re-brand were the plan all along. Due to the continued mishandling, I can’t believe in the integrity of the new formation of this company because they haven’t shown me a reason to trust them. And, ONCE AGAIN, this all could have be avoided if they had just hired a crisis PR firm. For the love! How have they not?! It’s been two weeks! 

The Importance of the USDA Organic Seal

The greatest lesson I have learned throughout this is to not take labels at face value. Moving forward, if I want a non-toxic or organic product, I will only purchase one that carries the USDA Organic seal, as they are the only products that go through rigorous testing to earn the seal, and periodic testing to maintain the seal. There is no question about the label and ingredients matching, nor is there a need to hire third-party laboratories to conduct testing on those products that maintain their seal. I feel a bit a fool—especially with my gluten issues, I should know better—that I have blindly trusted labels of self-care products all these years.

USDA Organic

My Final Words on Ava Anderson Non-Toxic

Since publishing my original post, I have received many comments and personal emails. I have been so impressed by the well-thought out comments people have written, about their take on the situation and how it impacts them. I have been very conflicted and have had a mixture of emotions. I wrote my original article because I feel it’s a fascinating case study, and there’s a lot that entrepreneurs can learn from it. Since Ava Anderson was the name and face of the company, she is the very heart of the company because they branded it as such. I still wish she had just stepped down from day-to-day activities instead of completely walking away and “closing doors.” 

Even two weeks later, this mishandling of this situation—with no correction in sight—is still bizarre, confusing, and disappointing. Will the silence go on forever? 

What are your thoughts? Please let me know in the comments below or fill out my contact form to reach me directly! 

For more details, see my YouTube video taken from my 2/10/16 broadcast on Periscope and be sure to follow me @belowthefork across all social media

78 Comments

  1. Emma

    You’ve clearly understand how torn the consultants and consumers have been.
    Thank you, I believe you examined the matter at hand in the most objective and fair manner.

    I’m glad the blogger has done things correctly by getting a 3rd party analysis. I’m happy to see these reports (it has helped me make my decision), whereas AANT will not produce their chemical analysis reports to the media, but most importantly excluding & not giving the foundation of its company – the customers and the consultants – a copy of what I believe is the most relevant evidence to support the integrity of the company.

    But, I will say several competing MLM companies (including the one the blogger represents) have paraded in a unprofessional manner when the first report came to light. (And some still do)
    We were already sucker punched, then we were kicked even harder by the blogger and other consultants, representing several different MLM companies. I have taken note, and will not be purchasing from any of them. Personally, I will be looking at ways of making safe, chemical free products.

    Thank you for both of your write-ups. You have a true grasp of how many layers of emotions the consultants have gone through/and are still going through.
    All in all, I hope truth and light prevail over all that has occurred.

    Reply
    • Meridith Oram

      EXACTLY!! (I literally said that out loud as I read every sentence of yours haha)

      Reply
      • Anna Olson

        I couldn’t have said it better!!!!!!

        Reply
        • Anna Olson

          I made a comment on Jess Brandt’s blog who is a consultant for a competing company however she never posted it. All I was asking is if she took the time to test some of Poofy Organic products but the lack of response answered my question. She filters her blog so only responses slamming her competitors is posted.

          Reply
          • Meridith Oram

            I had never heard of Poofy Organics before this, but a visit to their website shows they have the USDA Organic label which means they periodically go through rigorous testing to earn that seal. They don’t need to do random third-party testing like AANT because Poofy has already successfully gone through the deepest testing of all. My BIGGEST take away of this entire situation has been to only trust products that carry the USDA Organic seal. That’s why I say that I’ll reconsider AANT 2.0 IF they earn the USDA Organic seal too.

            No idea how Jess regulates her blog comments, but you’re definitely not the first to say this! I allow all comments good & bad unless they have cursing in them (so far I haven’t had any issues though…fingers crossed it stays that way!) Thanks for your comment!

          • Allison

            She did post a sample on her blog of the kind of negative comments she was getting. I think you need to put yourself in her shoes before you point fingers. She has been slammed and blasted and accused of a lot of unfair things, simply for doing the right thing. Even a high up exec from AANT was posting bullying comments about her on Twitter. I follow other blogs who will allow negative comments but also say they will delete them if it gets out of hand. So really, you need to consider if your comment sounds hateful or if it addresses the issue in a way that’s meaningful. Most of the negative comments I’ve seen on all her pages and groups are from reps defending the company. But they are defending the company while accusing her of something awful. Exposing truth. Which is what people like Robyn O’Brien and Food Babe and Erin Brokovich and many others do all the time. And yes, Meredith is correct. This is why I trust USDA certified organics only. They have to prove over and over that their products are what they say they are. Which is why I commented earlier that reps from companies they sell for should indeed do some research to make sure they are delivering proper information.

          • JM

            This is true. So many people have said they have politely asked questions on that blog, but their posts were not approved. I saw several immediately deleted from the FB page. So she’s not allowing an open discussion or including any posts that may prove her information to be inaccurate. I tried to ask for the full conversation between her and Kim, but my post wasn’t approved and I was subsequently blocked from the FB page for pointing out how legitimate questions were deleted. That is the big issue to me. She has no credibility. I was trying not to look at her blog anymore because I find it so irritating, but did after this article popped up in my newsfeed and read how she’s comparing herself to Ghandi and MLK. I’m pretty sure neither filtered conversations to show only one side. In my opinion, she will go to any length to prove she is right, including not providing all relevant information or allowing for an open discussion.

          • Meridith Oram

            Yes, I absolutely see your point, but what credibility does AANT have at this point? Their silence is killing them. Jess Brandt or not, there’s obvious issues with AANT products. I just don’t get why they won’t release their third-party reports to the public. Where’s the integrity? Jess aside, there’s no denying this company is mishandling the situation.

          • Allison

            I also have to add, she has made it clear that her intent for years was never for it to come to this, but AANT refused to answer any questions she asked, she was deleted from their pages and not allowed to ask questions. Had they addressed this years ago, perhaps it wouldn’t have come to this. Regardless of how you feel she’s handled it, she’s human. She’s been attacked countless times. Try to put that aside and see the bigger picture. AANT wronged customers and consultants. Lied for years about their products and made untruthful claims. They abandoned their business, refuse to respond. You don’t have to like Jessica or agree with her or like how she’s handling it or her tone. She didn’t write the reports. An independent, qualified lab did. AANT addressed ‘the blogger’ with their consultants and dismissed her because she isn’t ‘qualified’ to write about the issue. But why won’t they put out their proof? We should blindly believe them but not believe an ‘unqualified’ blogger? What makes them any more qualified when they won’t respond to the information she’s putting out. I don’t really think Jessica cares if you like her. She did what she thought she had to to get truth out. How you choose to respond is up to you.

          • admin

            Very well-said, Allison.

          • Noelle

            They stonewalled their consultants too. Any time the ingredients were questioned, we would get no answers. They profited while not
            doing the right thing. Sounds common enough for a business. Happens all of the time. But when your business is claiming they do it all the right way, and it’s all about the ingredients, and they know how each product is made and “they know where every ingredient comes from” and “you can trust us that you will NEVER find the words fragrance, perfume, or parfum in ANY of our products because we do not use them…” It reeks of stupidity or greed or ignorance or self-righteousness.

          • JM

            I agree, I’d like to see a response.

        • JM

          Allison, I don’t think it’s a question of whether or not anyone likes her, it’s that several of us (that I personally know of, but I’m sure there are more) don’t trust her. Beyond the obvious conflict of interest, many of us have been simply trying to make sense of all of this and have asked legitimate questions that have been deleted, ignored, blocked. That doesn’t speak to someone whom is impartial. If someone like Meredith (who actually does appear to be impartial) was the one commissioning and performing tests, for example, it would be different. I know Jessica is probably reading this and will say there is no conflict of interest since she joined Poofy in June 2014 and has an email from Kim Anderson from April 2013, but looking more into it (again so that I personally can make sense of all this), she says in the “why I joined Poofy” post in 2014 that she has been “an unofficial guide for a year+” at that point. It also looks like the first Poofy review came out in May 2013. And that on the Facebook page Jessica talked in 2013 about how proud she is that Poofy grew as a result of her review, and about the many conversations she’s had with the owner. Then in 2015 she noted in comments on her own blog page that she is “not friends with” the owner of Poofy, they’ve never met, etc. That is what’s not adding up for me. She keeps copying/pasting the same email from Kim Anderson over and over, but it doesn’t mean anything out of context, and she refuses to provide the full conversation. That’s why it’s hard to believe her. In addition, yes, the tone of the posts (and especially the comments and those she shares from her supporters via anonymous email) are quite vindictive and hateful. I see her blog responses about how “great it feels” for people to “jump ship from Ava” and join her Poofy team. Further, I don’t see this same spirit for any of the other companies in her lists, or for Branch Basics who had a similar issue for that matter. Not impartial, not un-biased, not providing full information, not allowing others to ask legitimate questions = mistrust.

          Reply
          • admin

            JM, I completely get your points about her connection to Poofy, but do you think she manufactured those reports or that PhytoChemia is not reputable? Could they have been wrongly obtained? The transparency of those reports is when I stopped caring what brand she represents or her tone. I just feel like if there were no question about the ingredients in AANT, she’d be a huge fan because otherwise she supports quality, organic companies. What do you think? –Meridith (I’m having issues with my comments sometimes switching to my husband who is also an admin, but it’s me!)

          • Sue Apito

            A week ago I would have contributed a different comment, but now I see things the same way you do. I have been asked for a LOT of free advice as far as understanding certain parts of this, not the least of which was how many years ago I first communicated with Kim and Ava about the fraudulent ingredient lists [2011]. But as a *favor* I did bring some issues to Jess’s attention about how there were labeling issues with Poofy as well, illegal drug claims for a number of the cosmetics, and that as an unbiased “greenwashing” blogger, I had reported them to the FDA before and was going to report them again after a recent product came to my attention. I am not sure her “attack” comment against me on her Facebook page is still there or if it was deleted – but I personally experienced her *tone* change the minute I put Poofy under the same microscope she put Ava under. And that turned my casual observation into a new crusade to me! Jess is correct about Ava, and Branch Basics, but she is also taking a whole lot of credit as if she is the first to expose these brands – mostly because she is basically an outsider in the cosmetics community and has no idea of most of what has happened before she took an interest in these issues.

          • JM

            Oh, Meredith, yes, I was confused by the posts from your husband’s name! I’m sure that it’s a real company and a real report. But the blogger has a habit of purposely leaving out information or providing misinformation to make things look a certain way. So how much weight am I to give these reports? Who knows what she provided the lab, what timeframe, if she used multiple labs until finding one with results she wanted, if there are any conflicts of interest with this particular lab, what their credentials are, how they test, what these results even mean since they are being commissioned and relayed by someone without a background in chemistry, etc. Who knows.

          • Meridith Oram

            Excellent points, JM. So what’s your stance? Trust AANT? Or take the inconsistencies as proof enough there’s something wrong with AANT and move on?

          • JM

            Do you mean the current company/products or the new one? I think they have a lot of work to do to regain people’s trust, and people are watching closely so there is not a whole lot of room for error. There are people who arguably want to see them fail no matter what. I’m watching and waiting. The USDA certification would be a very good thing. If they can manage to learn from their mistakes, like Amy mentioned below, they can potentially do a lot of good in the world. I’d like to see that happen. Time will tell.

          • admin

            I think you brought up an excellent point that I’ve been forgetting about…that there are those who want to see them fail no matter what. That’s definitely true. To me, the USDA certification would be everything!! I really pray that’s how this story ends!

          • Allison

            I’ve been following it but I’m certainly ready to move on. Following not because I want to see them fail, but because it has proved over and over the importance of knowing the industry and the faulty ‘regulations’ in the cosmetic industry. It has also show that you need to know what you as a consumer are willing to use on your family. I hope it has been a lesson for many to do their own research and not trust anyone without doing their own research first. know what your personal guidelines are. And that goes whether you’re buying food, jewelry, or electronics or whatever. I trust the USDA seal for food and cosmetics but that doesn’t mean I’ll buy from anyone. Many organic food companies are owned by larger companies and I don’t want to line their pockets either. So for me, the smaller the company the better. The initial information I saw released for the new company said nothing about USDA certification. Maybe it’s coming, maybe it’s not. If it’s not there from the get-go, I’m convinced the new company will pretty much be like AANT. And if it doesn’t come, I surely feel bad for consultants who have held onto that belief. If it comes, good for them. If not, they were lied to. And truthfully, even if the company makes safe products, for me, it’s heavily tainted. And there are plenty of other places to find great products. Companies who claim natural will not get my support without the proof. That’s where I draw my line in the sand. But that’s just my humble opinion and how I choose to live. I’d rather buy handmade when I can than from a large company anyway. I’m fortunate to work for a certified company, and fortunate to make some of my own things, and fortunate enough to live near others who make their own products by hand. I’m willing to compromise on a lot of things and we certainly don’t eat perfectly all the time. But the knowledge I’ve sought has made me so much more aware, and much more unwilling to compromise when it comes to healthy products.

  2. Noelle

    I stopped selling AANT the moment I found out they put a stop sell on the fragrance oils. It confirmed my suspicions that they had synthetic fragrance in them. A month later, it came out. Then all of this other really creepy behavior from the company began…and they closed. To me, that was admitting guilt. They blamed it on bullying. That is an insult to anyone who has ever been bullied. As they make new formulations, they continue to have their remaining consultants peddle products that are mislabeled and possibly harmful to those with allergy issues. This is wrong on the part of the company AND the consultants. So I’ll be kind to them only because I can’t believe they would knowingly force the sale of these mystery formulas to their family and friends.

    Reply
    • Meridith Oram

      Great points, Noelle. The bullying part has been a sticking point with me the whole time too. Obviously we have no idea if Ava received threatening phone calls, emails, or in-person attacks, so I don’t want to say Ava is lying. But to shut down a company citing bullying as the main reason in the midst of this labeling/ingredient controversy—and then for the new company to STILL remain silent—is exactly what’s making this worse than necessary.

      Reply
  3. Amy

    I think you have several good points here and have presented your perspective on the situation in a constructive manner, but I cannot agree when it comes to Jessica Brandt. I had no knowledge of who she was until this whole thing with AANT came up, and a quick look at her site destroyed any credibility she seemed to have. First, it’s the tone of her posts. The tone is not very objective. She comes off sort of snarky, self-righteous and unprofessional, so I think that’s where the “bully” name-calling probably stemmed from in some instances. Second, the moment I realized that SHE SELLS FOR A COMPETITOR and isn’t shy about trying to make a sale on her blog, I saw a HUGE conflict of interest. And then for her to deem herself a whistleblower and ask for donations? I get it, she’s trying to make money like everyone else- esp. to recover her personal out of pocket costs, but it comes off sending the wrong message to anyone trying to see just the facts and an unbiased opinion on the whole thing. It’s like saying “Hey, everybody! Welcome to my blog! I’m all about shooting down whatever products I can (AANT or otherwise) while self-promoting! Show me the money!” I feel the issues are important and there needs to be more focus on regulating ingredients, informing people (moms included) on how to make safe choices, but if that was her interest than remove the links/references to your own MLM.

    Another point is that I don’t see any mention of the credentials of the third-party lab that Jessica used or what makes their testing methods superior or accredited. You can say that she is taking things a step further than most, and doing the necessary investigative work but where are the credentials of the lab, how do we determine their testing methods are industry-best and what qualifies Jessica to say so?

    On the topic of AANT not disclosing their labs name- When a company hires a third-party testing company to test a product, it is illegal to disclose the lab of that lab unless previously agreed upon prior to testing being done. If AANT and the third-party lab that recently showed their products are safe and include what they say they include didn’t agree to release the labs name prior to the testing being done, AANT would be in violation. As a customer, I would appreciate more communication and full transparency on the lab results of AANT products just as much as anyone else, but can appreciate that AANT cannot violate their agreement w/ the lab. They have said that future lab results/names of testing parties will be released when tests are next done under the new brand. Also, if you go to their website there is a pretty clear letter explaining what’s going on, so I don’t think they left things solely up to the consultants to communicate. Could the situation be handled better- sure. So I will wait, like you said, for certified organic certification and when the rebranded company releases their new results with the labs name and such, I will be glad to use their products. The staff that remains found out just hours prior to everyone else that Ava and family were pulling out of the business. They are learning on the fly and in crisis mode having to save their own jobs too, I imagine. This doesn’t mean they are planning to put tons of toxic crap in their rebranded product and try to dupe anyone. They deserve a fresh start and the ability to learn from the past.

    Reply
    • Meridith Oram

      Thank you for your comment! I’m not sure how one vets out the credentials of a laboratory, but it’s enough for me in that PhytoChemia is actually named as the lab and the full reports have been released to the public. AANT has been intentionally obtuse in revealing who their third-party lab is or releasing the actual reports. It makes me wonder what they’re hiding. AANT has had SO much opportunity to make this right; and yet they continue to choose silence. Doesn’t that bother you?

      I agree that Jess could soften her tone, but I’m still not seeing bullying in the two posts of hers that I’ve referenced (I have not read anything beyond 1/27 and 2/9 posts though.) I think she is just looking to recoup a few dollars back for what she paid for the testing, so I don’t see that as being opportunistic.

      I was more forgiving and hopeful two weeks ago because I felt the Anderson’s and new owners needed a moment to regroup, but at this point, it’s wildly unprofessional and disrespectful to their customer base. I’m not seeing any proof of lessons learned at this point; so I truly question the new company’s integrity. If they finally acknowledge recent events and receive USDA Organic labeling, then of course I will reconsider.

      Reply
      • HC

        Hi Meredith! Just to chime in quickly on the lab accreditation. In the US there are certain organizations that vet labs on their testing procedures and they can get accredited for XYZ tests. NELAC is an accreditation we require when we are using labs for water/wastewater testing.

        The lab reports shared by Jess do not include a method number (i.e. 200.8), it just has a written description of what they did – is that a legitimate method? I’m not sure, as I deal with different media in my “day job” – but just from the fact that no method is listed, I am curious. I also have never seen a lab interpret the data – we always receive raw data from our laboratories and it is up to us (or other professionals we hire) to interpret what that data means.

        I absolutely think AANT has handled the whole situation horribly and am cautiously optimistic that PURE haven essentials has learned from all of this and will not make the same mistakes again. (Full disclosure – I am an AANT consultant and plan to stay with PHE to see how things unfold.)

        I do want to also thank you for your posts on the subject. You have evaluated the situation without bias and with class. I truly appreciate that from the bottom of my heart – this has been a roller coaster, so to see that others understand the complexities really helps. Cheers!

        Reply
        • Meridith Oram

          Thank you for your kind words! Great point about method numbers & interpretation.

          Reply
    • Sue Apito

      RE. “Another point is that I don’t see any mention of the credentials of the third-party lab that Jessica used or what makes their testing methods superior or accredited.” Good point. Great question. The lab is very well respected within the aromatherapy community. The method they used to check for essential oil constituents or synthetic fragrance constituents is the industry standard. But a test and a lab are only as good as the data they have to measure against, and while the numbers may be accurate it is a somewhat subjective opinion as far as what the results show. Just like when you go to the doctor and get bloodwork – one doctor may feel your results are within the normal range and another might feel they are indicative of some greater issues. So a second opinion on what the results show might be a good idea. I think it is great there were tests to substantiate what MANY, MANY, MANY experts in the natural and organic and handmade cosmetics industry have been saying about this company since they first launched – their ingredients do not add up. Never have. Never will. From spelling errors on ingredients to listing ingredients which DO NOT EVEN EXIST… many of use did not need scientific tests to call “fraud”… Jess is just the whistleblower of the week…getting her brief moment in the spotlight. She’s not the first to be badmouthed or attacked or bullied or harassed or threatened as the result of speaking up and she won’t be the last. People need to STOP shooting the messenger and start holding EVERYONE affiliate with this and other companies like this accountable…including the consultants who were willfully blind about the products which sounded too good to be true, and looked the other way all the way to the bank.

      Reply
      • Curious Consumer

        Sue –
        I have recently started to choose clean, non-toxic products for myself and my family. I’m curious what product contained a misspelling and what the ingredient was?! Thanks in advance!

        Reply
        • SueA

          Multiple products…multiple ingredients.

          Reply
    • Sue Apito

      Here is a video which explains the standard testing methods for EOs. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LtWq6jkoi9o So a good question to ask the lab is, how long was the run time on the test? “You are only as good as your library.” is the most important thing to learn from this video. But as I have written before…no one need to spend a penny…or even smell a bottle, to know the company was selling synthetic fragrances because their own labels listed ingredients THAT DO NOT EXIST as essential oils.

      Reply
  4. Allison

    I am someone who sells for another company, certified-organic, but I won’t name the company simply because I’m not trying to recruit. I never thought I’d find a company who stands for everything I believe in which is why choosing to sell for them was a huge decision. I would NEVER sell products to anyone and ask them to simply just trust me blinds and trust a company blindly that doesn’t back up what they say. I’ve learned over the past year of my own research never to trust any company who simply says they are organic or nontoxic or natural without the backup of USDA certification. Why? Because you can label a product that way and have it not be true. If I buy a product that is not certified organic, I now assume that it might be true, but it’s likely not. Unless I can physically talk to the creator of the formula who makes it with their own hands (and there are plenty of them around), I assume the label might be wrong. This fiasco with AANT has proven that and should make everyone question their labels. And while yes, I feel bad for the many consultants who were lied to and stuck with merchandise, I also realize that perhaps they hadn’t done their homework either. Perhaps they blindly accepted what they were told about the company. Reps from many companies like AANT spout how great and natural their products are and looking at ingredients lists proves otherwise. For those who choose to remain consultants, please do diligent research for yourself and don’t blindly trust what you are told. For those consultants who have stepped down, I applaud your bravery to do what must be hard but what sends a message that you won’t be lied to. I can only speak for myself, but if I discovered I had been selling products that’s weren’t what they said they were, I would immediately be apologizing to all who bought from me. I couldn’t oersonally represent a company or a spin-off of a company that has demonstrated such a deep level of fraud and lies. It really puts a bad taste in everyone’s mouth with true companies out there who really are safe and accurately labeled. Do your own research, friends, don’t blindly trust any one consultant. I tell this to everyone who I sell products to. Everyone should gain an understanding for themselves so they truly can have peace when they are buying products.

    Reply
    • Meridith Oram

      Very wise words, Allison! I have learned SO much from this whole thing, and will only be using USDA certified organic products moving forward. It’s a sad fact of our unregulated “non-toxic” industry and one that desperately needs to be changed. Thank you so much for your thoughtful comment.

      Reply
  5. Jess Brandt

    Hi all! I want to respond to the comments about my harsh tone. I would urge you to please come to my blog & read the other 195 posts I’ve shared over the course of the years, those don’t include my numerous, extensive made in USA resources. You will find some others that may have a bit of a harsh tone regarding other companies I believe are engaging in Greenwashing. It’s something I’ve very passionate about & yes, outspoken against. I fully believe the reason for my harsh tone is completely justified. I’m sorry, but I cannot sugarcoat what I feel is rampant fraud that is endangering the health of innocent people at this very moment. This is a VERY, VERY serious issue, and I have no apologies about my harsh tone on this subject. Again, come read everything else I’ve written & you’ll see it is not my general tone, I reserve it for cases of extremely serious wrongdoing, which I believe this matter deserves. Here’s a fact: this company’s new Chief Chemist has a Master’s degree in Biology, and is so brazen as to dismiss the findings of 2 separate, highly accredited labs run by experts with PhD’s in their fields as unscientific. Yet we’re supposed to take her word that she viewed all reports conducted on the AANT products & they passed with flying colors yet the will not release a single report, tell us which methods their experts used, what they tested for & what they did not. Again, we’re supposed to take her word for this… Right now, as I write this, they have further discounted product that was shown in the signed, legally valid scientific reports I have shared with everyone to contain synthetic fragrance oils, their AvaKid’s lotion. Right now, there are hundreds-thousands of families putting that on their child thinking it contains what is on the label & nothing more, they certainly would never in their wildest dreams imagine the organic essential oils listed the label could possibly be anything other that that. But the scientific evidence shows that in fact that are synthetic fragrances which can be comprised of hundreds of chemicals, many of them potentially hazardous to our health. How is that possibly ok with anyone? It certainly is not with me. In my opinion they are engaging in criminal fraud on a daily basis by selling these products while completely ignoring the evidence I have presented that I guarantee will be shown by any other lab that tests them. Meredith, I appreciate the fairness & levelheadedness you’ve shown in this & your earlier piece, it’s very refreshing. Thank you.

    Reply
    • Meridith Oram

      Thank you for your comment & support, Jess! I’m confused why people continue to believe a non-descript, anonymous “third party lab” that AANT referenced in an email to consultants and now an AANT employee, and yet think you’ve somehow made up these transparent lab reports. I think the most striking point I’ve heard in all of this is when one of my readers asked if this would all seem as “harsh” or like “bullying” if the CEO was a 50 year old man instead of a 22 year old girl. I’m pretty sure you would have significantly less hate mail if the former were true. I think there was bound to be more emotion anyway when it’s an MLM where people have literally invested in the business, but people need to take a giant step away from the human Ava for a moment and try to just focus on the company Ava. When you look purely at the company, you’ll see it was poorly managed, lacked proper quality control, and was entirely too reliant on third-party vendors, which were all likely direct effects of growing too rapidly in size. No one has said the Anderson’s set out to create bad products, but it obviously got away from them as they found success. The main component continues to be how they mishandled and ignored the situation. I still don’t get it. There’s such a deep desire to want all of this to not be true, but whether people want to believe you (Jess) or not, there is no denying that something majorly went wrong with this company. And due to the deafening silence, it is my opinion that there continues to be something majorly wrong with this company.

      Reply
      • Jill

        I was concerned when I read above there is synthetic fragrance in kids lotion, so I looked at the report. I wanted to know more about ethyl vanillin and found this. Is it basically vanilla extract? Isn’t vanilla one of the ingredients? I’m confused. From Essential Oil University’s Facebook page: The Abounding Hypocrisy Over Ethyl Vanillin https://m.facebook.com/notes/essential-oil-university/the-abounding-hypocrisy-over-ethyl-vanillin/10153410172988083/#!/notes/essential-oil-university/the-abounding-hypocrisy-over-ethyl-vanillin/10153410172988083/

        Reply
        • Sue Apito

          No – a product which contains vanilla absolute [extracted with the use of solvents like hexane] or vanilla extract [extracted with the use of alcohol] will show the chemical vanillin. There is no such thing as vanilla essential oil [extracted by steam distillation without the use of any chemical solvents]. The test results as run, did not show vanillin, which they would if an actual vanilla absolute or extract was used.

          Ethyl vanillin does not occur in nature – it is created synthetically in a lab.

          To learn more: http://www.soapqueen.com/bath-and-body-tutorials/tips-and-tricks/the-truth-about-vanilla-essential-oil/

          Reply
      • Jill

        Jessica, I hope you’ll take these questions with the spirit in which they are intended:

        1. I’m curious about the lab. Are they Canadian? If so, I’m just curious as to why you chose a foreign lab (understanding this comes from someone who knows very little about the essential oil industry)? What is your prior relationship with the lab? How were you referred to them?

        2. Which products did you test? Old formulas that were from a third party, or those that were made in house?

        3. Can you speak to the results interpretation (that may vary) per Sue, above?

        4. How common is it for pure essential oils to contain another ingredient? Based on the link I posted above, I’m inclined to truthfully not trust any essential oil company. It looks like the Essential Oil page I referenced also conducts tests with disparate results on things such as certain essential oils containing ethyl vanillin. So this may of may not be accurate depending on who is testing?

        And I have a headache. It’s honestly so hard as it is trying to make the best decisions for my family. This just muddles it up even more. I’d like to make my own products, but after a brief scan there is no way to know which essential oil brand to trust. Apparently even those certified USDA organic may not be 100%. So it’s a matter of choosing the least amount of risk for our family, not eliminating it completely.

        Reply
        • Sue Apito

          The chances that an essential oil from a USDA or Soil Association or EcoCert essential oil will be adulturated are slim because there is a paper trail from the final packager who seals that EO into the bottle all the way back to the farm which grew the raw material and every handler in between. Can it happen? Sure. But these facilities are inspected and if there was a concern that a conventional product entered the supply chain, the Certifying Agent might test for pesticides or herbacide residue. But organic certification is just that – certification of growing practices. It is not a guarantee of good quality. I can grow lavender in my yard here in CT and get it certified organic. It will be a terrible, USDA certified organic lavender because I do not live in the right altitude, I am growing landscape lavender in my yard not the kinds of lavender which produce the best essential oil and I am a terrible cook so chances are I would be a terrible distiller in spite of taking in-person distillation courses with the leading aromatherapy educator in the world. There ARE wonderful, trustworthy companies to purchase essential oils from – but it takes research and thanks to the internet, that process is easy.

          Reply
          • Jill

            Thank you, Sue! I’m actually having a hard time figuring out which essential oil brand to trust and to know the oils are good quality and worth the cost. Only got into this recently and like do-terra, but know there is a lot of negativity or controversy between them and Young Living, and I’m still left wondering, how do you really know? I’ve heard Plant Therapy is good from a friend who makes natural products, but I’m not sure what that’s based on.

            On the tests, though, honestly I’m wondering if some other brands were tested (even the USDA ones because I haven’t seen a line that is 100% certified, I don’t think) would compare, in a blind test. According to that essential oil guy, who is supposedly an expert, he has tested several with disparate results of including things like ethyl vanillin. So it seems like a common issue. And I’m not clear on how accurate the tests are.

            Sue, do you have a recommendation of where I can search?

          • Meridith Oram

            I’m all about PlantTherapy.com! Just got another order in the mail today 🙂

        • Jill

          Interesting I just found out the essential oil guy I mentioned (looks like his name is Dr. Pappas, do you know of him?) runs a consumer reports group for essential oils. So I’ll try there. 🙂 Thanks for your help, Sue!

          And thank you for this blog, Meredith!

          Reply
          • Jill

            Ok, cool. Thank you, Meridith!!

          • Jill

            P.S. I apologize for the misspelling of your name.

          • Meridith Oram

            Haha no worries! Happens all the time but I totally appreciate that you noticed 🙂

          • Sue Apito

            Dr. P is *the* essential oil expert as far as chemistry goes. He used to sell EOs via his company Essential Oil University but he no longer sells them (his brother does, but only wholesale, that company is The Perfumery). He is the first one to “expose” adulturation within the aromatherapy community, back when he worked for Lebermuth – back in the 90’s.

            One of the constant issues when subjects like this come up is that many labs test and offer opinions on the test results based on ISO standards which are NOT always the standards used by the aromatherapy industry. They are a basic guideline for the INDUSTRIAL use of essential oils. So something like too much of one constituent or too little of another is not ALWAYS an indication of adulteration. BUT… when you see the complete absence of something that everyone agrees should be in there – or something so out of range that it HAS to be synthetic – as these test results document, then the subtle differences from lab to lab really don’t matter. As I have written before – AANT lists ingredients that do not exist. You can search the world and you will never find coconut essential oil. You can search the WORLD and you will never find lily of the valley essential oil. No expensive or inexpensive lab tests needed – 5 minutes, five hours or five days on Google – these ingredients DO NOT EXIST.

  6. Jill

    Wow, this is very interesting, and point 3 completely contradicts the reports the blogger provided on the diaper cream. Personally, I feel safe still using it with everything I’ve read now. Glad I took the time to research!

    http://www.weedemandreap.com/essential-oil-myths-dr-pappas/

    Reply
    • Jill

      By the way, I tried to include this comment on the blog test results page for others who are researching. We will see if Jessica decides to include it. I’m guessing probably not. According to this essential oil expert, who is a PhD, camphor at the level reported does NOT mean the Lavendar in the diaper cream has been adulterated. Nor is the other lavendar component Jessica pointed out dangerous for children.

      Reply
      • Sue Apito

        Again, that level of camphor in a single essential oil being tested for adulturation – depending upon what botanical species was claimed on the label – it might be in the normal range. But in a combination product with other ingredients – that much could not come from a pure, natural essential oil alone.

        You will also notice that the girl challenging the test results based on calling a competitors lab and trying to understand what is a sometimes complex issue, has not offered to pay for her favorite lab to test the same product.

        AANT claims their products were tested and found to be nontoxic – or whatever – so what? THEY are the ones who claim many ingredients are “toxic” – a cosmetic chemist who comes from the corporate world laughs at those accusations. They think EVERY ingredient in EVERY cosmetic is safe…because that is the world THEY come from. Ava tested for 73 chemicals… so what does that mean? That the other 1,300+ she has been screaming at the top of her lungs about because they are banned by the EU Cosmetics Directive but only 11 are banned here…are suddenly safe? Was she testing for DEP…but not for evidence that the fragrances she used were synthetic? Because not all synthetics have DEP added…and they are STILL hazardous.

        Reply
        • Jill

          Huh. I went back and looked at the report, and that wasn’t clearly stated anywhere. The method portion said they extracted a small portion to test–they didn’t test the whole cream, according to the report, anyway. Even as a novice user of natural products, I know sometimes oils separate and there is no guarantee it is spread evenly throughout. Isn’t that why you knead natural sunscreen? This got me thinking more, and again wanting to be sure I’m comfortable so wound up researching the lab a bit. Saw some photos online and it looks quite run down in the background with yellow staining all over ceilings/walls. Not exactly a sterile environment or what I’d expect to see in a high quality lab. It looks like they are new and their main business is testing medical marijuana for “quality,” according to a recent article. I actually read these tests cost thousands usually (or I would totally do my own, but I can’t afford it, and frankly shouldn’t even have to), but on the Eco friendly Facebook page she said she paid $50 each. I guess I’m really questioning the validity now.

          Reply
          • Noelle

            I totally see your point. I just can’t trust the company anymore based on the fact that they admitted not testing their products themselves ever. They had no in-house quality control. And the synthetic fragrance issue was admitted to. That’s enough evidence for me not to trust their other products. The essential oil debate and details are lost on me. Again, baking soda, vinegar, EVCO, lemon, salt, and Dr. Bronners. As natural and time-tested as I can get without having to do much research.

          • Jill

            Noelle, I was wondering about the baking soda. You don’t find it irritating to your skin? I have rosacea and very sensitive skin. Thanks!!

          • Noelle

            I’m not sure how it would work for everyone of course…I originally started to use it because in the winter my skin would get super dry…especially on my legs. Someone suggested that it could be the sulfates in the soap I was using…and my dad just bought me a huge bag of baking soda for whatever reason…and I just tried it and it worked. No more dry skin on my legs or body. No more itchiness. So for me, it worked beautifully….maybe do a patch test?

    • meridith oram

      Love that you’re researching for yourself, Jill! It’s an important lesson we all have learned in this instead of trusting labels. Someone referenced an Essential Oil University FB post, from this same guy, earlier in the thread too…I found it pretty ironic that Dr Pappas takes a similar, if not worse, tone as Jess, yet he’s considered respectable because he’s a doctor (one quick search showed him as a psychiatrist, a better search shows he’s a chemist with a PhD)? Why? Regardless, like I said in my article…I’m not irate by the findings of PhytoChemia, nor do I think AANT products need to be thrown out. My change of tune comes from poor management and shady business practices by a company who should know better. I think the reason I’m able to be so neutral, and respect both sides, is because I’m not a 100%-organic-all-the-time person. I can’t afford to be! There are companies who have amazing products and complete transparency in how they do things, and understand customer service (Zappos, Plant Therapy, Amazon.) There are companies who have terrible customer service and amazing products or ones who run a monopoly (cable & cell phone.) And there are companies who overall just suck. This all boils down to where you want to spend your dollars and who you want to support. Smaller businesses have to work harder to earn trust, and I’m seeing no attempt by AANT to tell their side of the story. I have come to realize that moving forward, to justify the costs of my skin products & bring peace of mind, I will only use certified USDA Organic products. Then we won’t have to go back and forth with who’s lab is more credible, and who’s website looks more professional.

      Reply
      • Sue Apito

        “I found it pretty ironic that Dr Pappas takes a similar, if not worse, tone as Jess, yet he’s considered respectable because he’s a doctor (a psychiatrist by the way)?” LOL!! Dr. Pappas is NOT a psychiatrist! He is Ph.D. chemist, whose “tone” is legendary!! He has earned the right to it and MOST of us who have known him for decades, either give it right back to him or choose to ignore it. You can hear him in person – in many YouTube videos where he generously offers his essential oil chemistry lectures FOR FREE because he cares so much about consumers and people in the business of selling products with essential oils – to KNOW what they are talking about. He does not get a “free pass” for his often snarkey tone, but if anyone in this industry deserved it – it would be him.

        Reply
        • Meridith Oram

          I did a quick search on him and up came psychiatrist…VERY happy to see he’s a chemist. I’ll edit my previous comment. But more importantly, that’s such a double-standard to say he has earned the right to be snarky. Most are using that as a baseline to discredit Jess because it sounds unprofessional. There’s a gray area between snark and passion, but there are better ways to argue your point without bashing everyone else. That’s how you earn respect. Promote what you love; not what you hate.

          Reply
          • Sue Apito

            I think we’ll just have to agree to disagree. Because I find the tone of your posts to be passive aggressive and superior and judgemental – but I am not willing to dismiss your contribution just because that is how I find your writing style. What a sad and boring world if we all had the exact same personality, communication style, or “tone”!

          • Jill

            Good to know about Dr. Pappas. I appreciate more info to know he’s a good source. I disagree on Meridith, however. I think she’s doing a good job of being objective. I quite like her tone.

      • Lorrie

        I really want to point something you say here which is what I think lots boils down to why many consultants remain and others won’t. Meridith, you hit right on it and if consultants read this, the shoe will either fit well or not. Its this “I think the reason I’m able to be so neutral, and respect both sides, is because I’m not a 100%-organic-all-the-time person.” So when you add the not so organic conscious consultants, who aren’t necessarily “gung hole” like other consultants about healthy and organic living in their own lives with the $ coming from aant, this driving force makes it much easier to stand nonchalantly and ignore everything that has come to light face value. And thats ok, biz is biz, its life, its $. The “casual” nontoxic life is what makes it easy for many consultants to teeter to the pro side or even remain neutrally accepting of the situation. I think this entire aant scandal has separated the genuinely “passionate” to the T healthy organic nontoxic consultants from the ones who just mean business. Boy have true colors come to light on every side with this whole situation, its a very good thing!

        Reply
        • Meridith Oram

          Good point, and while it may have some impact I don’t think it’s quite as black and white as that. When I purchase a product (food, skin care, etc.) that says non-toxic or organic, I expect it to be. I pick and choose, based on my budget, what I can make an exception for. If I’m paying more money, I expect the quality promised. There are fierce loyalists of Ava Anderson. I believe one of the main reasons the company was so successful was people fell in love with Ava and her story. That’s the part I think consultants/customers don’t want to leave. Perhaps it’s the optimists who are staying; hoping for that USDA seal. Now that they’ve announced their new generic name (Pure Haven Essentials) I really don’t see they’ll see the same kind of growth (scandal aside) because there’s no meaning or connection to the name or good background story.

          Reply
          • Sue Apito

            “When I purchase a product (food, skin care, etc.) that says non-toxic or organic, I expect it to be.” And that is part of the problem – people who believe the marketing and never look past that to see that the actual ingredients are not non-toxic {or are no less toxic than the ingredients in the competitors brand} or are not actually organic. It’s a sad reality that people say whatever they can get away with in the pursuit of sales. Consumers need to move past the marketing and the front label and turn the product over and look at the actual ingredients. A soap with no actual soap ingredients listed? Red Flag. “Organic” ingredients but no certifications…who says they really are organic…the person selling it? How to we know their supplier was telling the truth without third party certification. Because organic ingredient suppliers lie too! That is what organic certification is all about…the paper trail back to the source.

            “Now that they’ve announced their new generic name (Pure Haven Essentials) I really don’t see they’ll see the same kind of growth” Not only is it generic – it reflects on the company. There are articles about Ava meeting with investors from Shark Tank and the title of the article is how they don’t need any money – they had a fifty MILLION dollar year last year. But when they rebrand they use a $10 iStock graphic and throw some text below it? They spend {if they even paid for it and the required extended license to use it for commercial purposes} next to nothing on their new identity …how can we expect any more from the company than the same old shortcuts we’ve seen since day one.

          • Lorrie

            yes I totally agree with every word, I too pay for max value. I do think the “gung hole” consultants(or ex-consultants) live different organic lives than the loyalists. Sure it may not be B or W, but it sure is their foundation. And I am not just saying that, I’m speaking from what I’ve seen and known. And for this “Now that they’ve announced their new generic name (Pure Haven Essentials) I really don’t see they’ll see the same kind of growth (scandal aside) because there’s no meaning or connection to the name or good background story.” is why I think for the future of PHE, the public should know its history very well so that they have background info to make a decision whether to use their products or not. There should be as many links connecting Pure Haven Essentials online with their former Ava Anderson Non Toxic.

          • Noelle

            Hi! I don’t want to be the one to tell you this, but it’s “gung ho”, not “gung hole”. This made my day though because it sounded funny to me and I actually had to double check for myself!

    • Jill

      I didn’t see anything about the tone, but only read that one article so far, trying to figure out if it is ok to still use my products. I’m the one who posted his Facebook page about ethyl vanillin. Since these are products I use on my kids, I wanted to be sure for myself I still feel comfortable using them. And I believe I do, especially compared to the alternative (petroleum/Aquaphor, etc.). It’s helped their skin a lot, anyway. Don’t know yet what I’ll purchase going forward. I haven’t found anything else that works as well. I’d definitely like to see the USDA certification and agree that the company made mistakes. This whole thing is actually completely disheartening to me. And I agree, it goes to show how unregulated the industry is–to me, though, the cosmetics industry as a whole.

      Reply
      • Meridith Oram

        Completely disheartening! I also have no idea what products to turn to next 🙁

        To clarify a bit, I just didn’t appreciate him repeatedly referring to people as “brainwashed” and the “ha ha see! I’m right!?” sort of phrasing as he built up his case. It’s the exact same kind of phrasing people are calling Jess out on, and why I initially questioned her intentions, too.

        PS: I think we figured out why it my comments were being associated with my husband/admin. But just in case it’s not fixed, confirming this is Meridith typing 🙂

        Reply
        • admin

          Ironically just saw this on Food Babe’s page. Not a lot of info but still calling vanillin bad. Who knows.
          https://www.facebook.com/thefoodbabe/posts/1126471127387597:0

          Reply
          • Sue Apito

            Vanillin is the constituent in REAL vanilla extract which give it the smell and taste of vanilla.

            Ethylvanillin {aka Ethyl vanillin} is a synthetic.

            Vanillin is also extracted from “true” vanilla extract and sold and used as a single ingredient. Ethylvanillin will show a different “peak” in a GCMS than vanillin because they are chemically different.

        • Noelle

          I’ve since turned to dr bronners for nearly everything…shampoo, dish soap, toothpaste, hand soap, laundry…And I use baking soda to clean my body and face. It gently exfoliates. Vinegar for cleaning house…EVCO for moisturizing face and body. Going to try aloe Vera straight up for hair styling gel. I’ll let you know how that one goes. I need to step away from the controversy and get back to basics. In every way!

          Reply
          • Meridith Oram

            That sounds like an AWESOME plan! Back to basics for sure. Love it!

      • Sue Apito

        Rob is a chemist – he does not line up safe versus hazardous based on whether a substance is natural or synthetic. We EAT this synthetic vanilla smelling chemical in foods. If we are people who want to eat real foods without synthetic ingredients, then we may feel it is unsafe. If we are soda drinking, fast food eating, big box shoppers who are fine with processed foods full of man made ingredients – then we are already eating it.

        Reply
        • Jill

          Ok. I feel better to know, though, that my son was likely more exposed to synthetic vanilla with the vanilla ice cream he had for his bday dessert than the cream I rubbed on his legs, regardless (if this test is even valid). I’m not all about fast food and big box stores. We do those things sometimes, but it seems unrealistic to completely get away from it unless I have my own cows and vanilla fields. Again, it seems like we can’t completely eliminate risks, only reduce them.

          Reply
    • Sue Apito

      “If you do your research you will find that the ISO spec for lavender lists the acceptable camphor range as 0-0.5% and the British Pharmacopoeia lists camphor at max 1.2%. My standard at Essential Oil University is that camphor, 1,8-cineole and borneol should all be about 1% or less in true lavender essential oil. My standard is based on samples taken from all over the world as well as from many distillations that I have personally done on many different varieties of Lavandula.” Dr. Robert Pappas

      The test results are for the entire DIAPER CREAM – with all the other ingredients in there. If this was a a GC/MS of just a lavender essential oil THEN a 1.01% would be fine…but NOT in this quantity of a combined product with all those other ingredients!

      Reply
      • Jill

        Please see my comment, above. I had meant to respond to this regarding the diaper cream. I thought at first that was a good point, but I’m not convinced this is the case because that’s not how the test was performed, according to the report. The lab actually looks kind of shady the more I look into it.

        Reply
  7. Meridith Oram

    UPDATE: Ava Anderson Non-Toxic announces new name is Pure Haven Essentials.

    Reply
    • Sue Apito

      I wanted to follow up on this topic because a lot of consultants and consumers have been led to believe, based on the things posted and from interviews with the Andersons, that they were shutting the doors o Ava Anderson, LLC [aka Ava Anderson, aka Ava Anderson Nontoxic, aka AA Holdings, LLC] and that the management team from that company was launching a brand NEW company without the Andersons. Not true. All Kim Anderson did, in her legal role as manager, was change the name. She filed the appropriate name change forms with the state and amended the company bylaws to reflect the new name. At the time of filing, she was also still the manager and there have been no filings processed putting anyone else in charge.

      Reply
  8. Caron

    I’m still sick over this…the consultants aren’t even given full information (comments are deleted from team facebook groups) and I realized this week that they haven’t disclosed all the mislabeled products! I was looking at the kid’s and baby wash this week…the old ones….there is no soap in them. Nothing that would make them foam so nicely as they do. Yet, the new versions do have a soap in them. So, these were mislabeled but because a blogger didn’t happen to call them on it, they haven’t shared the information with consultants. How can they continue to keep things secret and have the consultants follow along as if nothing is wrong and things are better than ever!?!?

    Reply
    • Meridith Oram

      It’s been well over a month now and I still haven’t received any communication from home office, and my questions are still pretty much the same. The new company looks super low-budget and they’re pretending everything is “so exciting!” with the rebranding. Pure Haven Essentials officially launches tomorrow so I’d give it another month or two, but anything I’ve seen so far are the red flags I was warning consultants about.

      Reply
      • Caron

        Oy…they’ve announced mislabeled masks and bacteria in the shave gel within the past week or so. The company is struggling.

        Reply
  9. Taylor

    The arrogance and the greed here is beyond the pale. Knowingly putting people at risk for the sake of a dollar when you spout wellness. This makes you worse than Avon or Mary Kaye because they aren’t claiming their products are healthy…

    The weight of the lies, omissions and greed should make this new venture crumble. I’m sure Karma is working

    Reply

leave a comment