We found this interesting information about retired M.D. Neil Solomon, a paid speaker for TNI. The linked article has mentioned a number of things that makes us wonder how trustworthy this “Noni expert” (the author of “The Noni Solution”) who is often referred to by both fanatical users and distributors of Noni products. While the mentioned sexual misconduct may not have anything to do with the material Mr. Solomon has written it does, rather, cast a very nasty shadow on his reputation and that of the people benefitting from his promotional activities.

The linked article mentions; “Wadsworth shifted the huckstering to Neil Solomon, a retired M.D. who months earlier had written a glowing review of noni in an obscure Canadian health journal. Trained in medicine at Johns Hopkins, he was once Maryland’s secretary of health and was mentioned as a possible gubernatorial candidate. Solomon is now a paid speaker for TNI”. and that “He’s not practicing medicine anymore. In 1993 he surrendered his license after eight women alleged he had improperly used his position as head of a Maryland weight-loss clinic to have sexual relations with them” along with “Solomon filed for bankruptcy to protect his assets, but he later agreed to pay a total of $45,000 and signed a statement admitting unethical behavior. The Maryland Board of Health told Solomon that if he ever denied any deed he had admitted to in his statement, the board would release the sordid details of its own investigation”.

We have found a publication by the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit with regard to Neil Solomon. It certainly does underscore what has been written in the above article given that the court document contains; Dr. Solomon’s only creditors are three former patients (and the spouse of one) who have sued him in tort for alleged sexual misconduct during the course of their treatment as his medical patients.* The plaintiffs claimed compensatory and punitive damages totaling approximately $160 million. Solomon scheduled each plaintiff’s claim as contingent, unliquidated, and disputed and listed the amount of each claim as zero. Although these debts were arguably non-dischargeable under Chapter 7 since they arose from “willful and malicious injury by the debtor,” 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(6), the claims could be discharged under the broader”super-discharge” available to Chapter 13 debtors. 11 U.S.C. § 1328(a).