Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Item: Mona Vie Acai Juice

Price: $120/case (4 x 750ml bottles)

Location: Will ship anywhere in Aus for $16.50

Contact: Via PM or email

Comments: Super-tasty fruit juice with Acai berries in it (among other things) to keep you healthy. It's also very tasty! :dry: Check out this link for the Florida University study on what Acai is capable of, (in the lab anyway).

monavie03.jpg

Nutritionally support your body's antioxidant capacity with MonaVie. Taking a Balance-Variety-Moderation approach to nutrition, this premier formula delivers powerful antioxidants and phytonutrients to maintain your body's overall health.

Support and maintain healthy joints with MonaVie Active. This advanced formula features the added benefit of plant-derived glucosamine. Designed to support joint health, this vital formula delivers the resources your body needs to maintain a healthy and active lifestyle.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/240258-acai-juice-by-the-case/
Share on other sites

Aren't the directors of Monavie being sued for false advertising?

Anyhow.. antioxidants can't be bad for you I suppose :dry:

Couldn't care less about outlandish and unproven claims anyone makes, including the manufacturer but the independent testing is pretty amazing.

Good luck getting the Merc smile.gif

+1 on the taste

Can't see it happening and equally un-fussed. It does taste bloody great though!

Aren't the directors of Monavie being sued for false advertising?
On May 15, 2008, Mona Vie, LLC, a Utah based multi-level marketing supplier of wellness products and the Registrant entered into the following agreements:

• Purchase and Supply Agreement, and

• Settlement Agreement and General Release of Claims.

As a result of the above agreements, on May 16, 2008, the Registrant dismissed with prejudice a lawsuit it had filed on May 5, 2008 against Mona Vie.

Looks like they once made mention of their product containing a trademarked product and didn't pay for it but it was quickly settled. Interesting reading though.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • For once a good news  It needed to be adjusted by that one nut and it is ok  At least something was easy But thank you very much for help. But a small issue is now(gearbox) that when the car is stationary you can hear "clinking" from gearbox so some of the bearing is 100% not that happy... It goes away once you push clutch so it is 100% gearbox. Just if you know...what that bearing could be? It sounding like "spun bearing" but it is louder.
    • Yeah, that's fine**. But the numbers you came up with are just wrong. Try it for yourself. Put in any voltage from the possible range and see what result you get. You get nonsense. ** When I say "fine", I mean, it's still shit. The very simple linear formula (slope & intercept) is shit for a sensor with a non-linear response. This is the curve, from your data above. Look at the CURVE! It's only really linear between about 30 and 90 °C. And if you used only that range to define a curve, it would be great. But you would go more and more wrong as you went to higher temps. And that is why the slope & intercept found when you use 50 and 150 as the end points is so bad halfway between those points. The real curve is a long way below the linear curve which just zips straight between the end points, like this one. You could probably use the same slope and a lower intercept, to move that straight line down, and spread the error out. But you would 5-10°C off in a lot of places. You'd need to say what temperature range you really wanted to be most right - say, 100 to 130, and plop the line closest to teh real curve in that region, which would make it quite wrong down at the lower temperatures. Let me just say that HPTuners are not being realistic in only allowing for a simple linear curve. 
    • I feel I should re-iterate. The above picture is the only option available in the software and the blurb from HP Tuners I quoted earlier is the only way to add data to it and that's the description they offer as to how to figure it out. The only fields available is the blank box after (Input/ ) and the box right before = Output. Those are the only numbers that can be entered.
    • No, your formula is arse backwards. Mine is totally different to yours, and is the one I said was bang on at 50 and 150. I'll put your data into Excel (actually it already is, chart it and fit a linear fit to it, aiming to make it evenly wrong across the whole span. But not now. Other things to do first.
    • God damnit. The only option I actually have in the software is the one that is screenshotted. I am glad that I at least got it right... for those two points. Would it actually change anything if I chose/used 80C and 120C as the two points instead? My brain wants to imagine the formula put into HPtuners would be the same equation, otherwise none of this makes sense to me, unless: 1) The formula you put into VCM Scanner/HPTuners is always linear 2) The two points/input pairs are only arbitrary to choose (as the documentation implies) IF the actual scaling of the sensor is linear. then 3) If the scaling is not linear, the two points you choose matter a great deal, because the formula will draw a line between those two points only.
×
×
  • Create New...