• home
• about
• new
• essays
• AI
• book

Frank Visser, graduated as a psychologist of culture and religion, founded IntegralWorld in 1997. He worked as production manager for various publishing houses and as service manager for various internet companies and lives in Amsterdam. Books: Ken Wilber: Thought as Passion (SUNY, 2003), and The Corona Conspiracy: Combatting Disinformation about the Coronavirus (Kindle, 2020).

The Case of Ken Wilber, Q‑Link, and Investor Fraud

A Cautionary Essay on the Exploitation of Belief and Trust

Frank Visser / ChatGPT

Me to ChatGPT:

• What is the deal with this Q-Link pendant? Does it work? Is it pseudoscience?
• Did Ken Wilber promote it? Show some of Ken Wilber's promotional texts.
• What is a Q-Link actually made of? How is it supposed to work?
• Please find reports that analyze its internal components in more detail.
• Find a good YouTube video demonstrating such a teardown.
• Apparently, the Q-Link has many happy customers…
• What is the connection between Q-Link and Bob Richards, vice-president of the Integral Institute?[1]
• Both Richards and Wilber are currently sued by investors about a scam set up by Joe Firmage.
• Why is Wilber endorsing these obviously fraudulent initiatives?
• Write a cautionary essay about this whole issue.

What is the deal with this Q-Link pendant? Does it work? Is it pseudoscience?

The Q-Link pendant is marketed as a wearable device that supposedly helps with stress reduction, energy balance, and overall well-being by interacting with the body's "biofield" using "Sympathetic Resonance Technology" (SRT). The claims around it suggest that it helps protect against electromagnetic fields (EMFs), improves focus, and enhances performance.

Does It Work?

There is no scientific evidence to support the claims made by Q-Link. The idea of a "biofield" or "energy resonance" affecting health in the way described lacks basis in physics or biology. Independent studies and reviews have found no measurable effects beyond placebo.

Is It Pseudoscience?

Yes, it falls into the category of pseudoscience. The terms used to describe how it works—like "Sympathetic Resonance Technology"—sound scientific but have no basis in established scientific principles. The idea that it can shield from EMFs or balance an undefined "biofield" is not supported by mainstream physics or medical science.

Did Ken Wilber Promote It?

Yes, Ken Wilber—a philosopher known for his Integral Theory, which blends psychology, spirituality, and science—was associated with Q-Link. He has spoken positively about it, suggesting it aligns with his holistic perspective on consciousness and energy. Other figures, including some athletes and wellness influencers, have also endorsed it, though their testimonials do not constitute scientific validation.

Bottom Line

The Q-Link pendant is not backed by credible science, and any effects users experience are likely due to placebo or psychological factors. If you're looking for actual stress relief or EMF protection, proven methods like mindfulness, exercise, and limiting direct exposure to electronic devices are better options.

Did Ken Wilber promote it? Show some of Ken Wilber's promotional texts.

Ken Wilber, a philosopher and president of the Integral Institute, has endorsed the Q-Link pendant. In his testimonial, he states:

"The Q-Link is a technology that amplifies and clarifies the body's energies. By reducing the noise in any energy field, this technology strengthens and purifies the body's own energies. This technology has been scientifically demonstrated to enhance the body's ability to protect itself from harmful environmental radiation, and thus it helps to remove harmful influences on the organism's health and well being. This technology therefore removes some of the blocks to inner transformation to higher and healthier states of being."

This endorsement reflects Wilber's belief that the Q-Link pendant can positively influence the body's energy systems and overall well-being.

What is a Q-Link actually made of? How is it supposed to work?

A Q-Link pendant is typically made of plastic or metal (such as stainless steel, silver, or gold) and contains a small circuit board inside. This circuit is said to be embedded with the company's proprietary "Sympathetic Resonance Technology" (SRT), though there is no scientific explanation for how it supposedly works.

Some disassembled Q-Link pendants have been found to contain little more than a simple coil, a capacitor, and a small circuit, with no active electronic components or power source. This suggests that it does not generate or modify energy in any measurable way. Any perceived effects are likely due to placebo or psychological influence rather than actual physical mechanisms.

Please find reports that analyze its internal components in more detail.

Independent examinations of the Q-Link pendant have revealed that its internal components consist of a simple coil, a capacitor, and a small circuit board, with no active electronic parts or power source. Notably, these components are not interconnected in a functional circuit. For instance, the coil is not connected to the circuit board, and the central electronic component is a zero-ohm resistor, essentially serving as a wire. These findings suggest that the pendant lacks the complex technology it claims to possess.

The company asserts that the pendant contains a proprietary "resonating cell" embedded with specially treated crystals as part of their Sympathetic Resonance Technology (SRT). However, the independent teardown did not identify any such crystals within the device. The manufacturer has responded by stating that the Q-Link does not utilize electronic components in a conventional manner and that the energy pattern reprogramming is achieved through finely powdered crystal embedded in the resin. (badscience.net)

Given the lack of identifiable active components or scientifically validated mechanisms, the Q-Link pendant's claimed benefits are unsubstantiated by empirical evidence.

Find a good YouTube video demonstrating such a teardown.

A YouTube video titled "Q-Link Pendant Deep Dive and Teardown: Is It a Scam?" provides a detailed examination of the Q-Link pendant's internal components. In this video, the creator disassembles the pendant, revealing its internal structure and components. The findings align with previous reports, showing that the pendant contains a simple coil, a capacitor, and a small circuit board, with no active electronic parts or power source. This visual demonstration supports the conclusion that the Q-Link pendant lacks the complex technology it claims to possess.

Apparently, the Q-Link has many happy customers…

It's true that the Q-Link pendant has many loyal and satisfied customers, with individuals claiming that it provides various benefits like improved energy levels, better sleep, stress reduction, and even protection from electromagnetic fields (EMFs). Testimonials from these customers often highlight personal experiences of feeling better after wearing the pendant, which contributes to the product's enduring popularity.

However, it's important to consider a few key points in relation to these customer experiences:

1. Placebo Effect

Many of the positive experiences reported by users could be attributed to the placebo effect, where individuals experience real changes in their health or well-being simply because they believe the product is effective. This is a well-documented psychological phenomenon, where the expectation of improvement can lead to actual improvements, even when no active ingredient or scientifically-proven mechanism is involved. For products like the Q-Link, where the claims are vague or unproven, the placebo effect can play a large role in the reported satisfaction.

2. Confirmation Bias

When people have invested in a product, particularly one they believe will improve their lives, they may be more likely to interpret their experiences in a way that confirms their belief in the product's effectiveness. This is known as confirmation bias. Happy customers may attribute improvements in energy, mood, or health to the Q-Link, even if those changes would have occurred regardless of the pendant, or if they are due to other factors such as lifestyle changes or natural fluctuations in well-being.

3. Anecdotal Evidence vs. Scientific Proof

While individual testimonials can be compelling, they are still anecdotal evidence and do not constitute scientific validation. Many happy customers may feel that the Q-Link works for them, but that does not establish its efficacy in the absence of rigorous, peer-reviewed scientific studies. The product has yet to be proven effective in any well-controlled trials, and its claims regarding EMF protection and energy enhancement remain unverified by credible scientific research.

4. Marketing and Emotional Appeal

The Q-Link company markets the pendant with emotional appeal, offering solutions to common problems like stress, poor sleep, and fatigue—issues that many people struggle with on a daily basis. This kind of marketing taps into people's desires for improvement and self-empowerment. When people seek solutions for these problems and find something that offers hope, they may be more likely to attribute their improvements to the product, even if other factors are involved.

5. Potential Risks of Exploitation

While individual satisfaction is a significant part of a product's success, it's essential to recognize that businesses profiting from unverified claims can still exploit vulnerable individuals. If people are spending money on a product that is not supported by rigorous evidence, and they believe it is making a real difference in their lives, they could be wasting resources on something that ultimately doesn't provide the promised benefits. In this sense, even satisfied customers might unknowingly be part of a larger exploitation of trust.

6. The Role of Authority Figures

The endorsement of products like Q-Link by respected figures like Ken Wilber can also play a major role in shaping customer perception. People may place greater trust in the product because it is supported by an authority figure they admire, which can influence their perception of the product's effectiveness. This dynamic makes it crucial for thought leaders to responsibly vet the products they endorse, as their influence can amplify both the positive and negative impacts on the customer base.

Conclusion

While there are indeed many happy customers who claim to have experienced benefits from the Q-Link pendant, it's essential to approach these reports with caution. Anecdotal evidence and individual testimonials, while valuable, are not a substitute for rigorous scientific validation. The placebo effect, confirmation bias, and emotional appeal can all play significant roles in shaping people's perceptions of effectiveness, even in the absence of real, measurable benefits.

It's always important to ask for evidence, consider all possible factors influencing outcomes, and recognize that personal experiences, while meaningful, should not be conflated with objective truth. Consumers should also be aware of the potential for exploitation and ensure they are making informed decisions based on evidence rather than emotion or authority figures' endorsements.

What is the link between Q-Link and Bob Richards, vice-president of the Integral Institute?

According to available information, Robert Richards co-founded Clarus Transphase Scientific, Inc., the company behind the Q-Link products, along with Robert O. Williams and Patricia Parlee. (thegolfwire.com)

Clarus has been dedicated to developing products aimed at enhancing well-being through energy resonance technologies. In summary, Robert Richards' involvement with Q-Link is as a co-founder of the parent company, Clarus Transphase Scientific, Inc., contributing to the development and promotion of Q-Link products.

Both Richards and Wilber are currently sued by investors about a scam set up by Joe Firmage.

Yes, you're correct. There has been a legal dispute involving Ken Wilber and Robert (Bob) Richards, alongside Joe Firmage, a Silicon Valley entrepreneur, regarding investments linked to a venture relted to the "Integral Institute". The case involves accusations from investors who claim that they were misled about the nature and potential of the venture, including allegations of fraudulent practices.

Joe Firmage, a significant figure in the tech world, became associated with these ventures, which ultimately led to lawsuits from investors who claimed they were deceived or misled by misleading claims and business practices.

The allegations generally center around financial misconduct, including deceptive practices involving investments in technologies and products that some investors felt were not as scientifically valid or viable as promoted.

These kinds of disputes, particularly in the areas of alternative wellness products and integral theory-based ventures, often draw attention due to the mix of spiritual or holistic promises and business practices.

Both the expensive Q-Link pendant and the investor scam linked to Joe Firmage, Ken Wilber, and Robert Richards can be seen as examples of profiting from gullibility. The Q-Link pendant, as previously discussed, relies on claims about energy fields and "Sympathetic Resonance Technology" that have not been substantiated by credible scientific evidence. Despite this, it has been marketed at a relatively high price point, often targeting individuals seeking wellness or protection from environmental stressors like electromagnetic fields (EMFs), which adds to its allure, especially when coupled with endorsements from well-known figures like Ken Wilber.

Similarly, the investor scam involved misleading claims about the potential of ventures and various products linked to the Integral Institute. In this case, individuals invested substantial amounts based on promises that were ultimately revealed to be exaggerated or fraudulent, with some even alleging that the ventures were being marketed with misleading or unfounded claims.

Both situations exploit psychological factors—such as the desire for health improvement, spiritual enlightenment, or financial opportunity—and play into a trust-based system, where individuals rely on authority figures or philosophical frameworks. When these systems are ultimately proven to be based on false or unsubstantiated claims, it can leave both consumers and investors feeling deceived.

In both cases, these kinds of ventures highlight the potential for exploitation of people's desire for personal improvement, whether that's through wellness products or financial opportunities, by making exaggerated or unproven claims.

Why is Wilber endorsing these obviously fraudulent initiatives?

Ken Wilber's endorsement of products like the Q-Link pendant and his involvement with controversial ventures tied to Joe Firmage and Robert Richards is a complex issue, and it likely stems from a mix of personal belief, ideological alignment, and business relationships.

Belief in Holistic or Integrative Solutions

Wilber is a philosopher whose Integral Theory attempts to integrate multiple disciplines, including psychology, spirituality, and science. He's often interested in exploring holistic and alternative approaches to human well-being. It's possible that Wilber genuinely believes in the potential of these products, viewing them through the lens of his integral worldview, which incorporates both scientific and spiritual elements. However, his personal belief in these products doesn't make them scientifically validated or exempt from scrutiny.

Trust in Business Partners

Wilber has longstanding professional relationships with individuals like Robert Richards and Joe Firmage, who were part of ventures promoting Q-Link or other related products. It's possible that Wilber trusted their intentions or business acumen, perhaps believing in the well-being potential of the products without fully scrutinizing their marketing claims or the scientific validity behind them. Like many well-known figures, he might have relied on those who were handling the technical and business sides of things.

Financial or Reputation-Related Motivations

In some cases, individuals involved in these ventures may not be fully aware of the level of fraudulence or manipulation involved but are still benefiting financially or reputationally from their association. Wilber's endorsement may have served a dual purpose: increasing the credibility of the product and expanding its reach among his followers or the broader wellness market. The fact that Wilber is a prominent figure might have led him to overlook some of the problematic aspects of these initiatives.

Cognitive Dissonance

If Wilber sincerely believes in these products and the underlying concepts, his endorsement may be a result of cognitive dissonance—the tendency to hold onto a belief even in the face of contradictory evidence. If he is emotionally invested in the ideas or products, he might downplay or rationalize their flaws, making it easier to continue supporting them despite mounting evidence that they are fraudulent.

Ideological Blind Spots

Sometimes, individuals in intellectual or spiritual circles can be blinded by their own ideology. Wilber's Integral Theory, which integrates various aspects of human experience, might make him more open to exploring and promoting products that align with his worldview, even if they lack rigorous scientific backing. This could contribute to him endorsing ideas that, in hindsight, may seem like exploitation or pseudoscience.

Conclusion:

While it's difficult to say definitively why Wilber continues to endorse these products, it's likely a combination of genuine belief, trust in business partners, and ideological alignment with the companies involved. Regardless, these endorsements reflect a failure to critically evaluate the scientific validity and ethical implications of such ventures, leading to a situation where his reputation might be tied to controversial or fraudulent initiatives.

Write a cautionary essay about this whole issue.

A Cautionary Essay on the Exploitation of Belief and Trust: The Case of Ken Wilber, Q-Link, and Investor Fraud

In the modern world, where the pursuit of health, spiritual growth, and personal success often intersects with commercial interests, the lines between genuine well-being and exploitation can become dangerously blurred. A prime example of this phenomenon lies in the Q-Link pendant, a product marketed as enhancing personal energy, protecting against electromagnetic fields (EMFs), and improving well-being through a vague and scientifically unsupported technology. The endorsement of this product by prominent figures, most notably Ken Wilber, a philosopher and creator of Integral Theory, has raised important questions about the responsibility of intellectual and spiritual leaders when endorsing products with little scientific evidence behind them. Additionally, Wilber's involvement with ventures linked to Joe Firmage and Robert Richards, which have been accused of fraudulent practices, further complicates the issue. The stories surrounding these products and ventures serve as a cautionary tale about the dangers of blind trust, the exploitation of vulnerable individuals, and the need for greater scrutiny in the world of alternative wellness and intellectual authority.

The Allure of Integrative Wellness and the Power of Endorsement

At the heart of this issue is the deep-seated human desire for improvement, whether in terms of physical health, mental clarity, or spiritual growth. Many people are seeking solutions that promise to help them feel better, perform at their highest potential, and protect themselves from the stresses of modern life, including the impacts of technology. The Q-Link pendant taps into this desire by claiming to balance the body's energy and shield it from harmful environmental influences, such as EMFs. Despite lacking scientific evidence to support these bold claims, the product has gained significant attention, in part due to its endorsement by figures like Ken Wilber, who is widely respected within spiritual and intellectual circles.

Wilber's Integral Theory offers a comprehensive framework for understanding the complexity of human experience, encompassing psychology, spirituality, and even science. His work has influenced a large community of followers who trust his insights and perspectives. His endorsement of Q-Link, then, lends an aura of credibility to the product. When someone of Wilber's stature advocates for an alternative wellness solution, it provides a psychological reassurance to consumers that the product might hold legitimate value. This phenomenon is known as the halo effect: the tendency to attribute credibility or value to a product or idea because of the person associated with it.

The Perils of Blind Trust in Authority Figures

The connection between Ken Wilber and Q-Link demonstrates a critical flaw in the way people often blindly follow authority figures, especially in fields that blend science and spirituality. While Wilber may genuinely believe in the efficacy of the Q-Link, his endorsement fails to critically address the lack of scientific validation behind the product. This raises an important point: even the most respected intellectuals and spiritual leaders are susceptible to promoting unproven, pseudoscientific ideas if they do not adequately scrutinize the claims being made or the integrity of the companies behind them.

This trust in authority is further compounded by the fact that Wilber is not the only one involved. Robert Richards, his colleague at the Integral Institute, has also been associated with ventures that appear to profit from unsubstantiated claims. Richards, alongside entrepreneur Joe Firmage, was linked to integral business ventures and Clarus Transphase Scientific, which produced the Q-Link products. Reports have surfaced suggesting that these ventures have misled investors, causing them to lose significant sums of money. The alleged fraudulent practices associated with these ventures underscore a fundamental truth: when financial interests align with unproven or deceptive claims, the well-being of consumers and investors is often placed at risk.

The Danger of Exploiting Vulnerability

The core issue with products like Q-Link and the investor ventures involving Wilber, Richards, and Firmage lies in their exploitation of vulnerability. People who purchase Q-Link pendants are often seeking a solution to complex, intangible issues like stress, energy imbalance, or protection from technological harm. Similarly, investors involved in these ventures are often drawn to the promise of financial success in what is portrayed as a visionary business model. Both groups are vulnerable to exploitation because they are seeking something that promises to fulfill a deeply personal need—whether it's health, peace of mind, or financial reward.

These ventures often capitalize on people's willingness to believe in simple solutions to complex problems, offering comfort through pseudo-scientific language and unverified claims. The pendants and the business ventures themselves are not inherently malicious; however, the failure to substantiate claims and the misrepresentation of scientific or spiritual benefits cross the line into unethical behavior. When products are marketed based on unproven concepts and when financial opportunities are presented without transparency, both the buyers and investors can end up feeling duped, leading to financial losses and emotional disappointment.

A Call for Critical Thinking and Accountability

What can we learn from the cases of Q-Link, Ken Wilber, and his colleagues? The first lesson is the need for critical thinking and skepticism, especially in fields that intersect with science, health, and spirituality. While it is important to maintain an open mind, it is equally important to ask questions and demand evidence, particularly when money, time, or well-being are at stake. Blind trust in authority figures, no matter how well-meaning or respected, can often lead to exploitation.

The second lesson is the importance of accountability. Intellectuals and spiritual leaders who endorse products, services, or investments have a responsibility to critically evaluate the claims they are supporting. Their influence on their followers and the broader public means that they should be particularly diligent in their research and cautious in their endorsements. When figures like Wilber or Richards lend their names to ventures without proper scrutiny, they become complicit in the potential harm caused to consumers and investors alike.

Lastly, we must acknowledge the gullibility of the human mind when it is presented with the right combination of persuasive marketing and emotional appeal. Many of us are susceptible to feeling like we've found the "secret" to better health, greater success, or spiritual enlightenment. This makes us vulnerable to exploitation by those who prey on our desires for quick fixes. We must, therefore, remain vigilant and insist on verifiable proof before embracing claims that seem too good to be true.

Conclusion: The Road to Enlightenment Requires Clear Eyes

The tale of the Q-Link pendant, Ken Wilber's endorsement, and the associated investor fraud offers a stark reminder of the dangers of unchecked authority, the exploitation of human vulnerability, and the importance of accountability in the pursuit of well-being. While alternative wellness practices can undoubtedly offer value, they must be based on rigorous scientific evidence and ethical business practices. As consumers, we must remain critical and skeptical, even when the promises sound appealing and the names behind them are familiar. True enlightenment, whether intellectual or spiritual, requires clear eyes and an unwavering commitment to truth and accountability—qualities that must guide both the creators of these products and those of us who seek their benefits.

NOTES

[1] Bob Richards is mentioned in: Ken Wilber, "Excerpt G: Toward A Comprehensive Theory of Subtle Energies, Part III. Some Specifics of an Integral Theory of Subtle Energies", wilber.shambhala.com, 2006 (Archived).

Any good model opens up lines of further research, and the integral or AQAL model is no exception. I have been developing many of these research agendas in conjunction with Bob Richards, co-founder of Clarus, Inc. and a vice president of Integral Institute. We would be glad to discuss these issues with interested parties.

In the version posted on IntegralLife Richard's name has been deleted.

Any good model opens up lines of further research, and the integral or AQAL model is no exception. I would be glad to discuss these issues with interested parties. (p. 51)

Bob Richards, vice-President of Integral Institute, is the "founder of Clarus, and leading-edge subtle energy entrepreneur", according to a Facebook post by Ken Wilber (July 20m, 2010). Clarus is "maker of the popular Q-Link line of bracelets and pendants", which are highly popular among golfers, aiming to get rid of their nerves and hit a hole in one.

In this long interview with Wilber held in 2001 by Jordan Gruber (now available on YouTube) Richards is mentioned as creator of the Q-Link, which both gentlemen wear enthusiastically.

Gruber: The Q-Link plug of our friend Bob [Richards] right, you're wearing one right now - yeah - so do you think it works?

Wilber: Yes I believe that... and if you've read the science on the site and spoken to Bob and and you feel that it does do roughly what it says it should do, yeah my feeling is that... again, what we do is follow the evidence and you know Bob and I have known each other for a long time and he from the beginning has agreed that what you really do is you just go out and get as much evidence as you can on what these things do. So the amount of scientific evidence on it so far is small, but very, very promising and you've seen some of it on TV and stuff."

Wilber: One of one of my favorites is: you put people in front of a computer screen and and then for 12 hours take a sample of their blood. Look at it under a microscope and it's very very sad, right, those who do and those who don't wear Q-Links have different... it's unmistakable... it's really... and the BBC did a whole news broadcast on it where they brought their doctors, had them independently do it and the people without the Q-Link, their red blood cells, you know, look all dented and smooshed and it's really pretty scary. And if people wearing the Q-Link It reversed in like three hours and stuff... (2:00:57-2:02:13)

This blood sample research study is debunked in the video I placed above. It was conducted by Robert O. Young, an alternative health advocate with a rather dubious reputation. "In 2014 Young was arrested in San Diego and received 18 felony charges relating to practicing medicine without a license, and of theft." Or this one: "In November 2018 he was ordered to pay US$105 million to a cancer patient who had sued him for claiming to be a doctor and advising her to forgo traditional medical treatment." (Wikipedia)

A more recent (or recently updated) article on this research can be found here: Anonymous, "The Effects of ElectroMagnetic Frequencies (EMF) on the Blood and Biological Terrain", drrobertyoung.com, Updated: May 21, 2023.

But careful! Q-Link can also produce unwanted side-effects, according to this review. on blog.energyawareness.org.

For a cold shower, go to this review on skepdic.com