Why shouldn't "dietary supplements" have to support their claims, & will they ever?

[elelle]

[quote=“Jackmannii, post:19, topic:492546”]

This is a classic argument used by alt med advocates, and it is dead wrong.

First off, lots of research is done in the U.S. on plant-based medicinal substances, including herbs. One example is the hundreds of millions of dollars spent every year on government-sponsored research through the National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine ((NCCAM) under the auspices of the National Institutes of Health (more on that later). There is also lots of university and drug-company based research involved. Just do a Pub Med search on various herbs and other plants and you’ll be startled at the volume of U.S.-based research.

No, not startled at all. I do know that there many studies in the US. The Natural Products Center at The University of Mississippi is one I’m familiar with, and they are doing good work, but, it is geared towards patenting extracts, and not telling how a plant can be used as a medicinal in it’s own right. That, to me, would be a very valuable scientific endeavor, in showing how a medicinal plant was effective, and could be used by anyone who could grow it. To show the true effective properties, without any need of ownership or patent, would help to advance the use of medicinal herbs. And, yes, there needs to be real scientific information, and proper botanical ID of a plant. The active components of medicinal herbs, as shown by Dr. Duke’s very comprehensive site linked, are complex. I take an optomistic view that good science will ultimately understand that wonderful complexity, and better medicine will be had.

There is a tremendous capacity to patent and profit from plant-derived and other “natural” medicines through purification and tweaking of active principles in such drugs, and many have come down the pipeline to be accepted prescription meds (Taxol is one major recent example, but just one of many).

The problem with this is the gross lack of evidence that “culinary” products can compete with pharmaceuticals. I love the implication that herbal drugs are 1) not actually drugs at all, but “foods”, implying they’re just ever so safe and natural, while at the same time 2) they are as powerful as or more powerful than prescription drugs. Sorry Dr. Jim, you can’t have it both ways. That there is known as magical thinking.

No , culinary medicinals aren’t a powerful target bomb like pharmaceuticals, but, as a component of everyday diet, can aid to good health as a preventative measure, nothing wrong with that. Most of them taste pretty good , too. I’m going to stick up for Dr. Duke, again, as a well admired, well credentialed scientist. He is The Guy that NCCAM goes to for medicinal herb chemistry, and was in on the early years. Yet, in his elder years, he speaks out as I’ve quoted here. He is not at all a 'magical thinker", but a well-honed scientist with a lifetime of USDA botanical career, so I take his words as quite valuable, and honorable.

Supplement dealers (and increasingly “Big Pharma”, which is finding the “nutritional supplement” market to be quite profitable) are getting away with murder (sometimes pretty much literally) in slyly and often quite openly promoting their unproven products as effective and safe for various medical conditions, while tossing in the disclaimer that well, they’re not actually claiming that their potions are intended to treat or cure any disease. The line, such as it is, gets crossed with relative impunity (the FDA doesn’t have the policing manpower it needs or the authority to crack down on offenders).

I totally agree with having good regulation on medicinal herbals. A lot of stuff out there is crap. But, there are also good companies that do have good products. The main problem is that the double blind placebo method trials are still a huge hurdle because you can’t recoup those costs in patenting the product. A whole herb cannot be patented, so your efforts in research are nil for the expense. The answer is to have “pure” research into a plant’s effectiveness, sans any patentable extract, but, that research is kinda behind the curtain.

[Jackmannii]

@elelle

I do know that there many studies in the US. The Natural Products Center at The University of Mississippi is one I’m familiar with, and they are doing good work, but, it is geared towards patenting extracts, and not telling how a plant can be used as a medicinal in it’s own right.

Let me introduce you to the Pub Med database of research publications, that can be searched for medicinal herbs. You will find plenty of work on simple herb preparations as well as individual chemical components, ranging from test tube-type analyses to animal research to human clinical studies. There is no exclusive focus on “patenting extracts”.

There is also a willingness among physicians to recommend herbal therapies that have been shown to work. An example is the American College of Gynecology and Obstetrics, which has suggested black cohosh as an alternative treatment for menopausal symptoms (though they need to update their site to reflect a recent large-scale study which found it to be ineffective).

Remember that the goal of medical research is to find effective, evidence-based treatments, not to promote a particular system like herbalism.

No , culinary medicinals aren’t a powerful target bomb like pharmaceuticals, but, as a component of everyday diet, can aid to good health as a preventative measure, nothing wrong with that.

I’m not sure what you’re getting at here. How exactly are we to expect that “culinary” herbs are going to be as powerful or more so than pharmaceuticals, yet harmless as opposed to being a “target bomb”, whatever that is?

I totally agree with having good regulation on medicinal herbals. A lot of stuff out there is crap. But, there are also good companies that do have good products. The main problem is that the double blind placebo method trials are still a huge hurdle because you can’t recoup those costs in patenting the product.

Again, see Pub Med for a lot of double blind trials that have been done on herbal drugs. The big problem is not that a $23 billion industry can’t afford to bankroll more research, but that supplement marketers are unwilling to cut into their profits when the current system works great for them and they don’t have to back up their claims with anything more than testimonials. Besides, honest research might show their products are crap, so why take the risk?