There was a comment over a Kyle’s site that I found interesting. The major point, as written, was that pharmaceutical products should be trusted before herbal remedies.
Hmm… I agree mostly with this. I do however have a problem with this persistent notion that herbal remedies are not to be trusted. Clearly, using rose hips to cure cancer is probably a bad thing, but there are plenty of examples of herbal remedies that really do work. Consider if you will the research efforts underway to look at the medicinal benefits of traditional Chinese medicine, which is mostly herbal. The difficulty here is that herbal medicines contain many different molecules, so determining if there is only one active molecule or if the whole mixture is synergistic is going to be a tough nut to crack.
Personally, I would rather use a “natural” medicine rather than a synthetic one. But, if there were no proven remedies for my ailment, then I’ll turn to organic chemistry every time. Pharmaceutical companies, for all their issues, do some effin’ amazing things. And I am happy to use their stuff, if there is no other way.
However, I think that we, as scientists, can be a little arrogant when it comes to herbal (or folk) medicines. Just because it did not come from a lab does not mean it does not work. It just means that we need to study it.
Of course, trying to dupe people into giving up modern medicine for solely natural cures is just plain wrong. People who do this should themselves be barred from all pharmacies, hospitals and modern medical facilities. Eventually, they’ll need some modern medical help and will only have their rose hips to turn to. The name Kevin comes to mind….
TerraSig is a good place to read about natural things and health….
March 10, 2007 at 9:04 am
I completely agree with your statement. I think that being a scientist or doing organic chemistry does not contradict using or believing in Traditional Chinese Medicine, Homeopathy or anything else that is very often considered to be nonsense. There is a nice proverb in German that says: “Wer heilt hat Recht” - I am not sure whether there is the same proverb in English but it means that the one who heals is right…
March 10, 2007 at 10:01 am
Just because something is “modern” doesn’t mean it is correct. The Chinese have been using herbal meds for centuries, and for the most part seem pretty healthy, and most importantly, happy with it. Compared to all the other crap we put on and in our body, a little natural something-or-other (besides arsenic and strychnine) probably will do us little harm.
A good friend of mine during my PostDoc days was Taiwanese, and he and his family were all over the natural remedies. Roots, herbs, fungi, the whole nine yards. They claimed it worked, and that’s all that really matters.
The most disingenuous part of natural remedies is the homeopathy crap. When someone is selling something as a 30X (successive 30 x 1/10th dilutions) solution, there’s a very slim chance that you might just get one molecule in your body (provided stomach and intestinal fluid don’t rip it up first). That’s my beef. The crooked people that are either really dumb and don’t know any better, or really smart and prey upon dumb, but hopeful, people.
The silly thing is, if we do find the “active ingredient” in some herbal med, what’s the first thing we do? Patent it, then make it better, and patent that too. We’re always trying to “make things better.” But I can’t really complain, it pays my bills.
Please forgive any misspellings. I’m really sick. And yes, I do have a box of traditional chinese herbs and fungus that’s supposed to help, but I haven’t taken it yet as I can’t figure out what exactly everything is . I’m chicken. Until I figure it out, I’ll just suffer quietly.
March 10, 2007 at 12:58 pm
Milo,
Thanks for your post. I agree with what you said. I wish I would have been as succinct on Kyle’s blog. You summarized what I was trying to say, better than I did.
My point for the very beginning is essentially “buyer beware.” Since the herbal remedy world is so unregulated, there are major concerns. I AM NOT saying all herbal remedies are crap. For me personally, I prefer the medicine that has been studied and manufactured in a consistent manner. This may be the herbal remedy, but more often than not, herbal remedies cannot give me the guarantee that they are even manufactured (i.e. grown, harvested, processed..whatever) to an industry standard. A few years ago, Consumer Reports did a study on echinacea. The “formulations” varied wildly.
Link
I recently saw an advertisement claiming it’s herbal remedy could treat or cure about 50 ailments. I don’t have it anymore, but it listed all of the ailments it could treat. It sounded great, but one would have to be a fool to believe it. Sadly, many people do.
The problem is the guys named “Kevin” that swing the pendulum too far to one side.
I’m saying, a bit of skepticism may be healthy.
Note: This was edited by Milo. I just formatted a link for easier use.
March 10, 2007 at 3:06 pm
I have nothing against them, but I am concerned about safety in particular the potential for interaction with other drugs. For example St John’s Wort can alter the bioavailability of some drugs.
March 10, 2007 at 3:57 pm
Well it’s about a bit of informed choice…
I mean - going out an eating red berries is only going to end nasty (formic acid … foaming mouth…. ahhhh).
Most of these remedies have been discovered and used “from natures factory” over thousands of years.
Thats not to believe some of the hype either… people peddling stuff obviously have some thing to gain from you using it.
It’s all about creating personally-made informed choices.
March 10, 2007 at 4:57 pm
Exactly. Informed choice is key. I’m willing to bet that many of the people that use or peddle these herbal remedies are not as informed as they should be. It takes a great deal of effort separate truth from hype. I’m glad I’m a chemist and able to sift through some of this.
March 10, 2007 at 5:38 pm
As a trained medical herbalist I totally agree with the writer. There is another underlying problem with “traditional medicine” The 100 year old formulation may have worked wonders one hundred years ago; before food preservatives, microwaves, acid rain, obesity and out of control diabetes. Our DNA integrity has changed and the plants that were used to make medicine contain extra chemicals that have been dumped into the earth. Research and study is the only answer to find out how effective a herbal remedy may be. There are many variables that are not taken into consideration when research is conducted which leaves all parties, medical and non-medical individuals, out of the loop. I have’t been on a scipt in 20 years and neither has my daughter. Herbal medicine is not a hobby and if you don’t know what you are doing your wasting your money. I hope one day somebody will put the money into research but I’m not holding my breath.
March 10, 2007 at 5:53 pm
1 in 10000:
I did not know that about St. Johns Wart… but that reminds me of the effects of grapefruit juice on CYP 3A4.
March 10, 2007 at 6:01 pm
Geeky Chem,
You are still getting tagged as spam. Sorry your comments take forever to show up. I am working on it.
March 10, 2007 at 7:27 pm
Hey bro, thanks so much for the thoughtful link - I try to be as balanced as possible and greatly appreciate your endorsement.
Re the SJW interaction: it is exactly opposite that of grapefruit juice - hyperforin from SJW is a CYP3A4 inducer, causing reduced blood levels of 3A4 substrates. The dihydroxybergamottin compound from grapefruit juice inhibits 3A4, increasing blood levels and potential toxicity of 3A4 substrates. Since CYP3A4 metabolizes around half of all Rx drugs, you want to be careful with this one.
March 10, 2007 at 7:28 pm
St John’s Wort is a common nice-looking weedy plant that grows on meadows in temperate climate and is supposed to have antidepressant properties (the active substance is known and has a pretty funky structure).
I tried to take it as a natural supplement but I promptly quit after 2 or 3 days because my eyes hurt like Hell from it - it turns out the plant contains another compound that is pretty photo-toxic (so you can get a nasty sunburn and eye damage if using the stuff and then going to the beach).
March 10, 2007 at 9:46 pm
The other unwanted side effect of St Johns Wort concerns women taking the oral contraceptive pill - it can reduce the effectiveness of the pill, resulting in interesting surprises 9 months down the line.
One of the other dangers of herbal remedies and off the shelf drugs is that people often omit them from their medical histories when talking to their doctors. “Oh, its herbal, its not medication attitude” can cost lives.
Nancy Winlove-Smith makes another really great point - many of these herbal remedies have high levels of heavy metal contamination, including some of the chinese herbs.
Personally, I’d like to see more investigations into herbal remedies to assess whether they are single active compounds or synergistic mixtures. Figuring out the mode of action of these products could lead to many new treatments. Then the toxicity and counterindications could also be assessed properly, by standard pharm. sci. methodology. The alternative would be for people taking suppliments to volunteer to take part in long term monitoring of the effects of the products. People data it the ultimate test after all.
March 11, 2007 at 9:31 am
Nancy Winlove-Smith, I’m not to sure with a large portion of what you said above.
I don’t beleive that the overall “DNA integrity has changed” over the past 100 years - and that the cancer rates are a function of improved detection by the introduction of ultrasound, xrays and MRI.
I acknowledge specific intances of chemical exposure and impacts - thats what a large potion of industry is geared towards preventing… or more actually “controlling” - control is key in chemistry. I know of many projects ongoing to determine LCAs of chemicals and eventual remediation or ways to negate the need to do so.
Also the point on microwaves is extremely dubious. Debate is ongoing on the impact these are - I believe it is small since the power of the man made-microwaves the environment and humans are exposed to is entirely miniscule to the level of background and more harmful radiations of all types. The low power of the microwaves in current use are insufficient to penetrate the outer epidermis (keratin filled cells) in most cases. In the case of microwave-reactor systems these are highly shielded.
On the last point the “out of control diabetes”… a US phenomenon as much linked to the rediculous diet and enormous chronic obesity rate over there.
I’ve heard numerous tales from over there regarding this obesity being “genetic”. In a small number of cases probable, but in 90% its because of the diet of many americans being calorie packed (I’ve seen fast food dishes advertised with an entire weeks worth of calories!! And it’s not merely fast food - pancakes - high calorie, peanut butter - high calorie - jelly - high calorie etc etc etc), coupled with long periods of inactivity.
Labour saving devices in the home and the fact most strenuous tasks are now done by machine has added to this. I’d say that the majority of Americans now suffering this - literally have it “too easy”, and merely don’t eat correctly.
Then there is the point on if diabetes has a viral component in some cases?
We just have to be careful of making “sweeping judgements” on things - like you did Nancy. I’ve heard plenty of these from ill-informed environmentalists in the past.
I compare the new REACH legislation - that also applies to external (non-EU) suppliers…
In anything like this there needs to be flexibility with pragmatism. In the past far to many “blanket bans” - when “targeted” measures are much more effective.
March 12, 2007 at 7:14 am
Mark,
Since you have now graduated from Green Chemist to epidemiologist, perhaps you can also shed some light on another topic. What’s up with the dentists in the UK?
Check out his NY times story:
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/07/world/europe/07teeth.html?ex=1304654400&en=a066e5f718907b88&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss
I don’t suppose you’ve perused “The Big Book of British Teeth”, have you?
Don’t worry though, I won’t make any “sweeping judgements.”
March 12, 2007 at 7:34 am
The Chinese have also been using Artemisia annua, or Chinese wormwood to treat Malaria (as well as a host of other diseases) for well over a thousand years. In fact, we get Artemisinin, one of the best anti-Malarial drugs out there from this plant. So, herbal remedies aren’t all hogwash…
… I do remember, however, seeing a seminar from an analytical chemist (I don’t recall his name) that assayed a lot of “herbal remedies” for their actual content. He found that most products actually contained what they said they contained, but there were an alarming number that either did not contain any measureable amount of the title extract, or contained it in quantities much less than reported on the bottle.
The part about herbal remedies that scares me is this lack of regulation.
March 12, 2007 at 1:11 pm
Ho Ho Ho …. “A-non-y-mous”… that’s a cheap shot of Austin Powers proportions!!
It’s known in Britain that the costlier dental treatments are not paid for on the NHS, and that it’s a social thing in the US, to have “perfect-bleeched-white teeth”. It’s also known that although “private dentists” are available NHS dentists are in very short supply… I forgot - you people don’t have an NHS… therefore if you don’t have medical insurance you’re screwed… (but let’s not go there… I don’t fancy politics at the moment).
But this “epidemiologist”, is merely quoting some influencial American Medical Journals on the increases of obesity in the US… and the effects it’s having on medicine and medical-provision over there… Go look it up and see for yourself.
Question for you now… does me not being qualified preclude my having an opinion as a scientist (or “a concerned citizen”? - I say NO!).
I don’t know what you’re qualified in… so I can’t comment on you can I?
Qualifications are an indication of experience in a field. Mr Einstein was a worked in a patent office …. did his specialisation in interlectual property prevent him impacting the world of theoretical physics??? NO.
I say stop with the personal references - and stick to the issues. I notice you didn’t debate American obesity. And changed the subject to … British teeth…
How original???
March 12, 2007 at 1:18 pm
And the point is - debating is a life skill… along with developing courtesy… as necessary a skill in chemistry as the intricacies of NMR!!! So lets stick to civilised debate…
If I were American I’d be highly concerned with the obesity rates… Its strain on society will become apparent in the long term… trust me it’s a debate the UK’s having now.
March 12, 2007 at 1:26 pm
Agreed Bink.
Thats why medical trials usually include a “placebo”… to determine any activity by statistics…
If I compare to the fuels sector (ironically) - formulation is important - but in Asia it’s a common practice by some people to deliberately “improve” their fuel by putting lubricating oil in!
At least with licensed medicines - they’re risks are usually measured and known. With unregulated “complementary medicines” - how do you really know whats in them???
March 12, 2007 at 2:10 pm
Mark,
It was a serious question, that’s why I referenced a serious news article: The NY times. British teeth has been a source of humor for american TV and movies (like the Austin Power movie you referenced, but I’ve never seen), but it seems that there is some truth to it. Since you live in the UK, you have first hand knowledge, and I thought you might like to share.
No one will argue a climbing obesity rate in the US. My wife treats these people every day (this is her specialty), along with their associated risks of coronary heart disease, diabetes, stroke, impotence, etc, etc.
And no, you don’t have to be an expert to have an opinion. Like the saying goes . . . “opinions are like . . . everyone has one.” But you really should respect others opinions if you want them to respect yours, and to take you seriously. Just think about it. Please.
March 12, 2007 at 3:29 pm
Anon,
Firstly I wouldn’t say I have been either rude nor, not listened to other people’s points at all here or anywhere else.
Indeed I quote your good self on the previous thread on two separate occasions:
“…Also, green “chemists” typically go to academic jobs. I wonder why?”
AND, the rather personal comments:
“Wow. That was . . . interesting to say the least. I have a crystal clear understanding of what you are.
Sorry Milo, I wasn’t trying to provoke the lad, just trying to voice a different opinion. A logical debate will be pointless. My mistake. Where’s Milkshake when you need him?”
Firstly I wouldn’t say I have been either rude by innuendo or otherwise, or having not observed other people’s points here or anywhere else. I’ve merely corrected some misunderstandings on “green chemistry” - which have then further been (deliberately) taken incorrectly. I think from a viewpoint you and Milkshake share for instance that of “green chemistry” being some sort of political activism - which it most definitly is not. On this subject I can indeed be called somewhat something of the term “expert”.
You must realise there relationships between toxicology and epidemiology? And some relationships between environmental impact assessment (via Green Chemistry) and toxicology…?
On the issue of British teeth. I admit there is an issue. It’s been covered extensively by the media. I’m not a Guardian reader but it offers some basic commentary.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/notesandqueries/query/0,5753,-22429,00.html
On one point - fluoride within the water supplies
- in the US you have had this for a long time and it covers more than 50% of the population.
http://observer.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,6903,1504672,00.html
In the UK 80% of population are not covered and this was only started in the early 2000’s. Mine weren’t a teenager for instance…
On this “first hand insight”… I shall finish.
“you really should respect others opinions if you want them to respect yours, and to take you seriously. Just think about it. Please.”
I have no idea what you’re trying to say there. Given your previous statements.
The “dilution is the solution” statement in the last thread, you have to admit was misguided to say the least.
That and the “academics phrase” … well… I think you need to practice what you preach.
March 12, 2007 at 4:34 pm
Your reading comprehension is very low. The “dilution is the solution to pollution” is a direct quote form Trost, not me.
Green chemists do tend to go to academics. It is true. Why? Pharma does not have a huge need for them yet. When Green catches up, they will. Enough said.
If someone has a differing viewpoint than yours, it’s not an attack on you. If others wish to express their opinion on green chemistry or any subject, whatever their motivation, be it me or Milkshake, that is our right unless Milo says otherwise. It is his blog by the way, and he can delete threads or comments, as can Milkshake on his blog. You don’t have to do a point-counterpoint running commentary. You come off as a tool.
I have two final words for you, take it however you want, because I won’t fall into your little game anymore: You’re NUTS!
March 12, 2007 at 5:26 pm
Ok….
March 12, 2007 at 5:51 pm
Words fail me on reading Anon’s tirade… tantrum… or whatever you want to call it.
You’re wrong about Green Chemistry and industry.
http://pubs.acs.org/cen/employment/84/8414employbox2.html
http://pubs.acs.org/cen/employment/84/8414biotech.html
and more ….
And chemistry is not just pharma. - It encompasses other areas too.
I say again practice what you preach. If you can’t debate with out name calling don’t debate at all!
Deleting comments simply to reenforce your own arguements at the apparent-visual expense of the others, al la milkshake… has the offical title of CENSORSHIP.
Diametric to the view of what you’re claiming above.
Anyway - I see now where all this stems from….
March 12, 2007 at 6:01 pm
“Chemistry’s evolution”
Nature 440, 378-379 (March 2006) | doi:10.1038/nj7082-378a
http://www.nature.com/naturejobs/2006/060316/full/nj7082-378a.html
Another good example - specifically mentioning:
Two of the largest drug companies, Pfizer and GlaxoSmithKline…
“The first generation of green chemists are busily training the next generation, says Collins, and students are getting snapped up. “Of the 100 students to pass through my research lab, none has ever gone longer than three weeks looking for a job,” says Warner. One graduate, Amy Cannon — now a consultant for the materials company Rohm and Haas — says that although her title of ‘green chemist’ raises initial scepticism from those in industry, those same industry leaders inevitably seek her advice.”
“Worldwide, chemistry has not been a popular career choice in recent years. Indeed, a steady decline of chemistry students in Europe has prompted concern. With 1.7 million people employed in the chemical industry in the 25 countries of the European Union, the industry is fighting to remain a competitive employer.
One programme, the European Technology Platform for Sustainable Chemistry, or SusChem, is promoting a research agenda emphasizing cleaner industrial technologies. “If we don’t do something, there will be radical decline in industry employment,” says Russell Mills of Dow Chemical, who sits on SusChem’s board. Expertise in biocatalysis, process design and nanotechnology are some of the future skills that will be critical. To increase work in these areas, SusChem hopes to boost the European Union’s funding of training and research in chemistry by 75%, to 5.5 billion (US$6.6 billion) by 2013.
V.G.”
March 12, 2007 at 6:02 pm
“Chemistry’s evolution”
Nature 440, 378-379 (March 2006) | doi:10.1038/nj7082-378a
http://www.nature.com/naturejobs/2006/060316/full/nj7082-378a.html
Another good example - specifically mentioning:
Two of the largest drug companies, Pfizer and GlaxoSmithKline…
“The first generation of green chemists are busily training the next generation, says Collins, and students are getting snapped up. “Of the 100 students to pass through my research lab, none has ever gone longer than three weeks looking for a job,” says Warner. One graduate, Amy Cannon — now a consultant for the materials company Rohm and Haas — says that although her title of ‘green chemist’ raises initial scepticism from those in industry, those same industry leaders inevitably seek her advice.”
“Worldwide, chemistry has not been a popular career choice in recent years. Indeed, a steady decline of chemistry students in Europe has prompted concern. With 1.7 million people employed in the chemical industry in the 25 countries of the European Union, the industry is fighting to remain a competitive employer.
One programme, the European Technology Platform for Sustainable Chemistry, or SusChem, is promoting a research agenda emphasizing cleaner industrial technologies. “If we don’t do something, there will be radical decline in industry employment,” says Russell Mills of Dow Chemical, who sits on SusChem’s board. Expertise in biocatalysis, process design and nanotechnology are some of the future skills that will be critical. To increase work in these areas, SusChem hopes to boost the European Union’s funding of training and research in chemistry by 75%, to 5.5 billion (US$6.6 billion) by 2013.
V.G.”
March 14, 2007 at 11:01 am
The difference between herbals and pharmaceuticals is huge, but it’s 100% regulatory, not chemical. In the US, herbals are sold under DSHEA: they’re required to be natural products, with traditional uses, but they aren’t required to prove efficacy. (Nor are they allowed to claim it, which is why St John’s Wort packages can’t say “for treatment of depression” on them.) Drugs are required to prove efficacy, and can say so on the package. Proving efficacy is what costs the big bucks. As a result, drugs are patented, proprietary compounds, backed by giant companies with excellent quality control and clinical trials. Herbals are by regulatory definition non-proprietary, often sold by tiny fly-by-night companies with no research budget and as little quality control as they can get away with. This is not to say the chemicals in herbs don’t work, but just that the business cultures are so different that it’s easy to believe that there’s a fundamental difference.
March 14, 2007 at 1:25 pm
But TFox… we have a herbal remedy “shop” in the local city (here in the UK)… and they have on a billboard outside - “treatment for depression”… “treatment for x” “treatments for y”….
Hmm… Not that I am anti herbal - but I agree “trading standards” have to enforce on some the language used.
I mean it would be even worse if the cost of these was larger … as in some pharmaceuticals.
December 30, 2007 at 11:41 pm
[...] have been discussing the merits of folk remedies versus pharma developed drugs: @The Chem Blog, @Chemical Musings). Anyway, this compound has saved countless lives, although now other remedies (e.g., [...]
February 27, 2008 at 7:44 am
Agree with you.
I would rather use a “natural” medicine rather than a synthetic one.
But, if there were no proven remedies for my ailment, then I’ll turn to organic chemistry every time.