[font color="navy" face="Verdana"]Plants were the source of virtually all pharmaceuticals until the 1950's, when synthesization became commercially feasible, so the concept that herbs are drugs is hardly new.

The skeptic's position that herbs are inherently ineffective is bogus, though, and a basic argument of big pharma, who obviously want us to buy their versions.

Anyone who wants to try natural alternatives before pharmaceuticals needs to research trusted sources and scientific studies. Valid information is out there.

Re milk thistle, a good deal of research has been done and is ongoing, and it has been shown to have efficacy in a variety of ways, if not for all traditional uses. Here's just one study from the National Cancer Institute at the NIH: Milk thistle.

Try again.

Try again.

[font color="navy" face="Verdana"]So I'll leave you to your biases without further comment.

Enjoy.

Logic is your friend. Go with it.

But I don't think many or most believe that herbs are inherently ineffective.

My position as a skeptic is that many plants contain useful drugs, but that scientific studies are needed to determine the efficacy of any drug including one found in plant matter.

Additionally, improvements can often be made over drugs found in plant matter. Willow bark is an effective analgesic, for instance, because it contains the compound salicylic acid, but salicylic acid is hard on the GI tract. Willow bark (salicylic acid) was used for a long time to treat headaches and fevers, but a chemist was able to make it less irritating to the GI tract by acetylating it. The result was the the modern drug aspirin (acetylsalicylic acid).

So basically, when you say "anyone who wants to try natural alternatives before pharmaceuticals needs to research trusted sources and scientific studies", I mostly agree with you. I would just add that chemicals found in plants are not inherently different than those found in a pill bottle, and that they are not necessarily going to have fewer side effects or be safer than "mainstream therapies". Also, the fact that they come in plant matter may make it harder to determine a reasonable dose.

[font color="navy" face="Verdana"]And well stated.

And your post would not be a red herring.

Now, I think you want to be a skeptic, but you're not quite sure how it works.

I hope you will spend time with true skeptics, so you can get to the bottom.

Cheers!

I was responding to a person who made an assertion that "skeptics" hold a position that I personally don't hold. If you want to defend the position he/she posted, or address it differently than I did, then please do.

Telling me I'm not a skeptic doesn't actually make a point about medicinal chemistry or drug regulation (its a red herring, ironically) so feel free to make an argument if you are good for it. Your appraisal of my abilities was good for a laugh. If you decide to get into the nuts and bolts of the drug discovery process with me, you'll see what I know.

Now, you want to try to cover your butt.

Sorry, that's not going to wash. Show some humility or cut out.

I'm a published scientist and some of my work has been in the field of drug discovery. I don't need contributions from CFI to inform my perspective on herbal supplements, and frankly your broken OP did nothing to get me interested. I have no need to play by your rules, and no need to show humility for not doing so. I can respond to people in your thread without reading a full article you linked to if I please.

Honestly with people like you representing the side of "skepticism" its no wonder people are getting the idea that "skepticism" is an alternative religion for boorish nerds.

Also, your first response clearly came after having failed to read the actual link in the OP.

Can you name the logical fallacy you're using here?

So your analysis of my logic is stupid and beside the point. I didn't "fail" to do anything, because there is no "requirement" that I do anything in order to post in this thread. You are not the teacher, and I am not your delinquent student. You don't get to give me reading assignments or tell me what I am to talk about in your thread. I hope that is clear, because its the last time I'm going to write it.

This whole exchange is ironic because I actually did read your OP, and I concluded that it was muddled (the title for instance is false, all herbs are not drugs, and a drug is one or several chemical components of a plant that has biological activity) but that you really just wanted a discussion of the herbal supplement industry anyway ("How does DU respond? I'm curious." - sound familiar?). I still don't know what your problem is, because I've gone back to the article since the tantrum you've thrown all over this thread, and I can't find anything in it that I didn't know or would have contradicted in my responses.

Here is an excerpt from your article: "In reality, herbs often contain multiple active ingredients that potentially have drug-like activity in the body. These drugs are often poorly understood, may not even be identified, and exist in highly variable doses within herbal products (Wurglics et al. 2001). Herbs have drug-drug interactions and the same potential for side effects and toxicity as any drug, mitigated only by the fact that herbal products generally contain low doses of active ingredients."

In the response that you took issue with I wrote: "I would just add that chemicals found in plants are not inherently different than those found in a pill bottle, and that they are not necessarily going to have fewer side effects or be safer than "mainstream therapies". Also, the fact that they come in plant matter may make it harder to determine a reasonable dose."

Does it possibly look like we are driving at a similar point here? Or was I supposed to just quote random passages from the article, like you did, and write fun addenda like "Oh, that's really awesome! I wonder how the DU will respond?" You might notice that I used different wording than the article on CSI. That is because I have my own knowledge base on this subject, and I don't need to quote or paraphrase in order to make a point.

But I've wasted enough time on this already. I'll yield to "real skeptics" who know how to chop up CFI articles in ways that obscure the actual conclusions, and then flame people for not reading them or addressing the conclusions.

You're clearly not very aware of it.

It's a "true skeptic" that decides what is "clear" about an anonymous person based on a couple of lines on an anonymous message board without any concrete evidence at all about what that person's background knowledge might be.

Now, that is just sad.

Nice response showing your failure.

They are powerful compounds and most certainly have pharmacological properties. If you ever doubt this, put your tongue out and place the St. John's Wort flower on it. It will go numb immediately. Even simple celery has some compounds that can do some very strange things. Things like the foxglove contain powerful cardiac glycosides.

However, like most things, people get silly and dangerous. Dosing yourself with backyard tinctures can indeed be very dangerous. The idea that "all natural" is somehow better than a laboratory synthesized, sterilized, and prepared medicine is pretty stupid.

Potentially life threatening illnesses should be treated by physicians, with pharmaceuticals, period. Potentially fatal herbs like foxglove shouldn't be in "supplements" or "herbal remedies" ever. Those are the obvious cases.

But sometimes I get a cold, and I'm not above administering myself peppermint tea to make my throat feel better, and I don't find that silly. I don't think I need to get a purified menthol preparation for that application, and I don't feel bad about not immediately using dextromethorphan HBr even though that is almost certainly more effective (although I will use that if the tea isn't enough to help me sleep).

I do think that the "supplements" and "herbal remedies" industry needs to come under more scrutiny, and I do agree that "natural" isn't really a meaningful term as it is applied to supplements. I personally won't go as far as denouncing the practice of selling or dosing oneself with herbs in order to treat minor ailments.

My post/point was more directed as the people/person who seem to believe that plant "remedies" are nonsensical. Of course nothing could be further from the truth. Plant secondary metabolites tend to be highly bioactive molecules and are very capable of producing physiological responses.

I just wanted to caveat that statement that dosing yourself with extractions done in gallon pickle jars may not be the best way to go, not because they DON'T work, but rather, because they DO work.

Plants too, are the result of billions of years of selection and evolution.

I sometimes have speculated that one reason for our big, expensive brains is to remember what to eat and how to find & prepare it, and to pass that info along to our offspring. If you wander around a lot like we did in the old days, that sort of knowledge becomes very important.

Thankfully this is not pharyngula, and you are not PZ Myers, and I do not need you to approve of my post.

On a separate note, the idea that you would be giving anyone instructions on what to post to other users is mind blowing. Maybe you should read up on how to talk to people before you give advice like that, because you don't seem particularly good at it.

Your response made that clear. Pretending to be high and mighty doesn't change that. It only shows that you are not capable of actual discussion.

because they can patent non-natural substances. For example, they could make far more money from the synthetic hormone progestin than they could from (already available) bio-identical progesterone. The fact that the former has side effects and was part of a halted study (a rare occurrence) is secondary to profits.

Can you prove that the substance you claim to be identical is identical? Can you share the actual history of the development of these drugs? If you can, then we can talk.

Because I am not. So I am not sure what level of "proof" will satisfy you.

However, if you want to do some reading, start here: http://progesteroneresearchnetwork.com/discovery-of-natural-progesterone.html

My request is very specific. If you cannot back up your claim, as I requested, then please retract it. If you are just repeating some mantra you read, then admit it.

Put up, or cut out.

Read the link, or stfu.

So, why do you post at all?

people in this thread.

The supposed "people in this thread" offered jerk responses, knee-jerk at best. Oddly, you attack me for responding to them in kind.

That's odd. And that's being kind.

And how is "herbs are inherently ineffective" the skeptic's position?

If none of that has been said literally (and it certainly hasn't), how do you defend what you're saying as some necessary and/or clever "reading between the lines"?

Many plants have medicinal and curative agents in them, but many are also poisonous and not so good for you if you don't know how much to take.

In the days before big pharma, there were people who studied plant pharma and knew the benefits, harms, and correct processes and doses for turning plants into healing agents.

Nowadays, it's mostly faddism and many people can get taken in by charlatans and profiteers looking to make a buck off people's attraction to natural cures.

I guess it's up to the individual to research and study each plant and natural agent before taking it, to make sure it's both safe and effective at what it's supposed to do.

specifically US Patent #6630507
Cannabinoids as antioxidants and neuroprotectants
(The main ingredient in pot)

Assignee: The United States of America as represented by the Department of Health and Human Services (Washington, DC)

Before you know it, you're strung out on Basil.

every hour from Basil-abuse. But no one wants to talk about it. Thank you for daring to speak frankly on this topic.

Sid

I don't really think you can call something a drug if it does not have much effect. And a lot of herbs just make good tea or seasoning. Potpourri. But others do have some effect, and that makes them drugs. Or that's how I think about it. I think you can argue on that basis that some foods are drugs. Sugar. But it's a messy business, drugs and foods and herbs and chemicals, what to call those things in a particular context.

The problem here, I think, is that the term "drug" implies FDA regulation, or the need of it, which would be a good idea in some cases and a waste of time in others, when considering how to regulate "herbs" properly, and in all cases can be expected to be expensive, and cost/benefit questions about such regulation need to be discussed too.

IMHO.

Come on. I know you can do better.

I get the feeling from you that you posted a *smart sounding* article from some site that you think is all *skeptiky* and stuff, but now that people are actually talking about it you feel its better to be vague and passive aggressive. Otherwise we might figure out that you don't really understand the big words in that article.

Cheers!

Yes, keep pushing the scams on people.

All I see here are knee-jerk nonsense responses, and I respond in kind, and you do the same, and then you attack me with this. Oddly, you didn't read the full OP, but you fail to admit that, even though it's very clear from your original response.


Hmmm.

... in doing so, I'm not sure why you would post what you did.

The piece of this that resonates with me most in your OP is this:

The deception inherent to the herbal product industry, in my opinion, is the notion that herbs are something other than drugs. This is closely tied to the naturalistic fallacy: the idea that a substance that is “natural” (a poorly defined concept) is somehow magically safe and effective.

Because the objection I have to herbal remedies is that people who promote them sometimes don't seem to understand or address how they actually work. Poppy resin is an effective remedy for severe pain. This is because it contains morphine, not because it has some kind of magic aura that heals your pain with the power of Gaia. Raw opium will kill you just as dead as pharmaceutical grade morphine if you take too much, so if I needed a narcotic pain killer, I would prefer to get the stuff that a chemist has purified and sorted into measured amounts. That makes it easier to track dosage.

of me that I have to have a doctor's prescription for simple medications I used to by from a pharmacist (I lived overseas for 10 years).

Instead I have to schedual a 50-100$ doctor's appointment and then pay through the nose for the drugs that cost about 75-90% less overseas.

Sorry, but I have a brain and can do without the added BS.

Rant off...

Errr...

a major portion of the world doesn't need a doctor's prescription for most medication...

Why pretend so much?

I used to be in the camp of herbs = money down the drain, but I'm finding that sometimes they work and other times they don't -- just like prescription meds.

And yes, Big Pharma is pushing the natural = poison where they are just as bad, if not worse. The problem is, vitamin makers are getting on the band-wagon and charging through the roof for stuff that should not be that expensive.

And as with big Pharma, you need to know what you get and how much to take, and what's in it. I trust vitamin manufacturers as much as I trust big pharma. For me, consumerlabs.com ($12/yr subscription) has saved me lots of money and explained the interaction between various natural herbs/supplements and other stuff. You can't get that info from the guys at GNC or Vitaminshoppe that tomorrow will be selling shoes.

So "trust but verify" for everything out there. There's great research but also lots of junk.

People have attempted to respond and then you respond with ridicule.
Why post this in the first place.

This person vaguely identifies with skepticism, but doesn't actually know anything specific about drugs or medicine. Ridicule is safe because you can employ it without having to expose your own knowledge base to scrutiny.

We know your purpose, btw. You push every medical scam in existence, so what is your purpose in attacking me?

The white foxglove plant yields digoxin, the purple digitalis and both are too complex to be made in a lab. Garnish somebody's soup with a handful of leaves and you'll kill him. Pound those leaves into a paste and weigh micrograms out and you end up with a drug that saves lives.

I also defy you to eat a senna leaf and not shit your brains out the next day.

However, most of the herbs in the herbalist guide books haven't survived double blind tests. They're not drugs and they don't taste good.

They also aren't present in a lot of herbal capsules at the health food store. More than one company has been found to cut down on the herb to the extent that all that's found in the capsules are weeds and grass clippings.

Caveat emptor until the industry faces some regulation.

This matter requires the Double Blind for sure.

And there's the problem with lack of FDA regulation. A recent study of contents of herbal remedies shows that what's on the label isn't necessarily what you actually get -- and sometimes it's contaminated with insect parts." Natural food remedies" are often just filler, and not the effective herb at all.

One has no idea what (and in what concentrations) are actually in the bottle.

False claims are also, right up there.

Hemlock is a plant. Many People still have a belief that herbs don't have side effects because they are natural.

This is far too common at DU, these days. This was not the case in the past.

and why. As more and ore people realize the Harms from many, many of Pharma's chemical cocktails, people are becoming more informed and are weighing Harm VS Benefit. Many are choosing PBM's (plant based medicine) as an alternative.

It's all about the money.

Those who are going with "plant based medicine" are not doing a great of assessing harms vs. benefits based on the plethora of research available, so....

I don't see where the term "drug" is actually defined nor how that term transfers the same consideration for PBM's.
They synthesize compounds from plants to create "drugs". There are particular properties/qualities in Many plants that offer an infinite amount of benefit to us-but if we going to call PBM's drugs we need to define exactly what that means.

I only ask because when Dr Gupta began his research into whether or not Cannabis has medicinal value - he contacted the DEA to ask for the evidence they used to determine it's placement as a Fed Sched I Drug under the CSA...they could not submit that information to him because it doesn't exist. He had based his 2009 Opposition toward MedCanna based on the raw fact of the DEA's position without first asking Why and How.
We can call literally Anything a "drug" (or whatever) but We must also understand that this does not, in and of itself, demonstrate reality based "fact" that depends upon credible unbiased scientific findings.
I view articles like this with great skepticism because there is a Multi-Billion dollar industry out there that does Not want the notion of "returning to natural" might be safer And in many cases, More effective to get out there amongst the masses. Fear and uncertainty of those GRAS products is best tool.
I see the bashing of this industry not as a "safety warning" but as a reactionary effort to preserve profit margins.

Can we please have some intellectual honesty here?

If you want to go off on a separate tangent, great, but you really should start an OP about it.

"To make matters worse, in the United States herbal drugs were essentially deregulated in 1994 by the Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act (DSHEA). Herbs are now regulated more like food rather than drugs. Further, a special category of health claims, so-called structure function claims, was carved out for supplements. Companies can market herbs without any prior approval from the FDA or need to provide evidence of safety or effectiveness. They can even claim that their product supports the structure or function of the body in some way, as long as they don’t mention a specific disease by name. This amounts to a massive loophole easily exploited by any savvy marketer."

Plants can be wonderful medicine if used correctly. Marijuana being an excellent example.

Julie

A good cliche is fine, but, come on. Read.

Not only did I read the article I also read the comments in this thread. I not at all impressed with the extremely biased article that seems designed to scare the shit out of people who might consider herbal remedies.

I know folks who grow plants for the purpose of making medicine. I wouldn't buy such things at a store which sort of makes your article rather irrelevant to me.

But yeah, clearly the author of the article wants people to stick to nice, "safe" drugs from big pharma, just like any who work in the medical field. I don't blame you though. Can't blame someone for knowing what side their bread is buttered on.

Any other demands for this discussion?


Julie

Your cliches in your original post make that very clear. Further, your lack of an open mind to a science based article on this issue is VERY CLEAR. Thus, you continue to offer nothing but meaningless cliches because you have a world view that you refuse to challenge. It's nice to have beliefs, but they're meaningless when you can't support them and fail to challenge them yourself. The scientific consensus is there to help. Crying "Big Pharma" doesn't change the fact that "Big Supplement" is scamming everyone every day.

I thought the article was full of them.

I have to say I never really noticed you before (I often don't notice who's who 'round here) but this redundant nonsense has got you on my radar. I realize you aren't particularly very agreeable, in fact rather snide and obnoxious, toward those who don't see things your way. And your reading comprehension leaves much to be desired. I noted I have no use for what is sold in stores as herbal remedies~~that's mostly for suckers. (Like the many millions Big Pharma has convinced they can't possibly live without their prescriptions. Ugh.) Guess you missed that....

Oh and for a "science based article" I sure noticed plenty 'o hot button phrases. I found that rather disappointing actually, like this exchange with you...yeah you can take your superiority complex and ...well guess the rest.

Always sad to discover such souls here. Always good to recognized who not to bother with though. Go make your silly demands that people see things your way elsewhere on the thread or whatever. There are plenty of DUers who LOVE those endless back and forths, I'm not one of them. They are as boring as self proclaimed "intellectuals". *yawn*

Julie

The continuous and kind of weird but amusing barrage of supplement attacking makes me wonder if the TPP has a super sekrit section on prohibiting supplements. Unless, of course, supplements come from Big Pharma and cost 10 times as much and are available only with a prescription so that a big profit is made......

Still don't know why the ongoing and relentless vehemence; won't change anyone's mind, really. Almost rote at this point.
Just noting it as curious indeed.

Just an FYI.

It's a woo site.

But still, of it's a woo site then surely they are way off the mark and deaths from pharmaceuticals are surely nothing to be concerned with. It probably doesn't even exist!1!

Julie

When my Rottweiler had tumors on her liver, the vet prescribed a liver support supplement with milk thistle. It shrunk some of the tumors, but the cancer had advanced too far for the supplement to do much good. But her cancer was inoperable and I think if it had been caught earlier, it may have helped.

Maybe you can spread some around, might mellow some of the utter nastiness in the thread!!

in white coats in laboratories that sometimes have attitudes.

Herbs grow naturally and usually without any human intervention at all.

"Herb is not a drug"-- The Honourable Robert Nesta Marley O.M.

Right now I don't take pills.

I take a plant based product, natural willow bark capsules, in place
of aspirin, occasionally when needed, and that's about it.

However, that might change if I develop a hypothyroid condition.
In that case, I would probably take the pills, though I'm hoping
I won't have to.