

The King of Kombucha - fraqed
http://www.inc.com/magazine/201503/tom-foster/the-king-of-kombucha.html

======
jnella102
This article is praising a man who is very apt at selling lies. Not only is
Kombucha (another bullshit health brand) ineffective in curing his mother's
"so-called cancer" but even worse, causes serious side effects and occasional
deaths which have been linked with drinking Kombucha.* Why would someone
believe it is curing them of cancer if the mother who has sold this product
was just as good as a snake oil salesman? I agree that the article has
identified some faults of his in his industry, but praising him isn't doing
any justice.

*[http://www.cancer.org/treatment/treatmentsandsideeffects/com...](http://www.cancer.org/treatment/treatmentsandsideeffects/complementaryandalternativemedicine/dietandnutrition/kombucha-tea)

~~~
feld
Whoa whoa let's slow down here. Kombucha is tasty (IMO) and the probiotics are
great -- I enjoy kombucha and kefir regularly. But I'm not going to tell
anyone it's magical or guaranteed to not cause them harm. There's simply not
enough research either way. Correlation does not imply causation.

    
    
      In April 1995, two women who had been drinking the tea daily for 
      2 months were hospitalized with severe acidosis -- an abnormal 
      increase of acid levels in body fluids. Both had high levels of 
      lactic acid upon hospitalization. One woman died of cardiac 
      arrest 2 days after admission
    

I think that it's more likely those two women had underlying health issues
they were trying to cure with kombucha instead of getting proper treatment; I
find it plausible that it can cause harm to some people with preexisting
conditions we have not yet identified.

You can die from drinking too much water too, you know...

------
fenomas
As a long-term resident of Japan, this confused the hell out of me. Over here
"konbucha" is tea made from dried seaweed, bearing no resemblance to what's
described in the article.

With that said, I found it hard to tell if the article's author took the guy
seriously or was inviting the reader to conclude that he was a charlatan. It
almost seemed like both, if that's possible.

