Herbal remedies

[madderbat]

I personally have doubts about trusting modern pharmaceuticals. It seems to me that drug companies find the 'active ingredient' in a plant, extract it and market it.

Well and good, but for example as with aspirin, there may have been other things in the natural product which would alleviate reactions caused by the active ingredient. It is possible that drinking willow bark tea for headache prevents stomach ulcers, but no research has been done, because it would not ecomonically benefit the drug companies.

It terrifies me when I see all the side effects in some medicines. Also, gps seem to be very willing to get folks onto the latest bandwagon, whether they need it or not. The latest is Statins to lower cholestoral. Because the drug companies have invented statins, gps have been encouraged to lower everyone's cholestoral levels.

When I had my strokes I swear it was because of stress, but the docs would not agree. They tested me for everything and couldn't find anything wrong; my cholesterol level was at 5.1 so they put me on statins - it used to be considered normal, but 'current advice' says anything above 3 needs treatment!! Side effects are: headaches every day, muscle weakness, joint aches, increased arthritis, and depression from the pain. I am still told I 'Must' take them!

[SueA]

Herbal remedies have to be used very carefully & under instruction from a qualified herbalist in lots of cases, just because something is natural doesn't mean it's O.K. for anyone to use 'willy-nilly' especially by pregnant women. I'm all for natural alternatives but under caution as much as prescribed drugs. I agree that G.P.'S seem to prescribe whatever the drug companies are pushing at times Madderbat. My cholesterol level was 5.2 last time I was checked & I was advised to just watch what I ate & take an Omega 3 supplement if I wanted. There is a lot of heart disease & incidence of strokes in my family which is why they keep an eye on me but luckily I have never been offered statins, maybe it's because of you having the strokes that they think something drastic is called for?

[Two_Sheds]

I also disagree with the 'natural' ideal... we live in very synthetic environments, why then choose to use natural products?

Um...why are you growing your own (natural) veg then? What's wrong with (synthetic) McCrap?

[SimonCole]

Um...why are you growing your own (natural) veg then? What's wrong with (synthetic) McCrap?

I grow vegetables because they are very nutritious. For me this is the point to growing... its not whether something is synthetic or not, I consider the nutritional value.

it is useful to be able to share thoughts, suggestions and info with others, which is what this forum is about

I agree entirely!

However, and to further the quote above, I disagree that 'natural' medicines are better because they are safer than 'man-made' ones. We live in an age of unprecedented scientific breakthrough. We can now identify all the molecules found in any plant leaf and extract and replicate those that are safest. To suggest that we live in scientific obscurity simply isn't true.

Madderbat, you would have to consider that only a small proportion of drugs extracted are used... often better molecules are evolved or created from scratch. For example, aspirin was evolved from salicin (that is found in plants).

By the way, I totally agree with you SueA.

[Earthbabe]

However, and to further the quote above, I disagree that 'natural' medicines are better because they are safer than 'man-made' ones. We live in an age of unprecedented scientific breakthrough. We can now identify all the molecules found in any plant leaf and extract and replicate those that are safest. To suggest that we live in scientific obscurity simply isn't true.

I don't actually believe that is what I said SimonCole. Also we may live in an age of unprecedented scientific breakthrough, but your next sentence is incorrect, consider for example that we know there are over 300 chemical constituents to Rose (Rosa Centifolia) essential oil but have only identified about one third, there are some which aren't identified which help to provide the scent and the effects, so science cannot adequately explain these things.

I would never suggest that we live in scientific obscurity, however there are some things science does not yet have the answers to. To write off centuries of knowledge because it has not been subjected to double-blind, placebo controlled studies which have then been rigorously peer reviewed is a dreadful shame, but this happens every day.

[SimonCole]

Also we may live in an age of unprecedented scientific breakthrough, but your next sentence is incorrect, consider for example that we know there are over 300 chemical constituents to Rose (Rosa Centifolia) essential oil but have only identified about one third, there are some which aren't identified which help to provide the scent and the effects, so science cannot adequately explain these things.

Yes it can! If the financial incentive was there, all the molecules in rose essence could be identified. Just at my Uni we can identify all the molecules in a lettuce. It would take further testing to work out the effect of these molecules.

I don't actually believe that is what I said SimonCole

Please understand Earthbabe, I was not quoting you... I was merely stating my opinion

[muckdiva]

I think that growing and gathering beneficial herbs for simple remedies provides a couple of things for people - a sense of empowerment; and a feeling that they can care for themselves a bit without always looking to the pharmaceutical companies for the answers and also that connection with nature which probably provides a 'spiritual' benefit - maybe even a placebo effect of sorts...?

I agree that all herbs must be used with care, just as any other medicines and seeking the advice of a qualified herbalist the best way to do this. I also agree that science has been responsible for some amazing advances that none of us would want to do without, but the problem as I see it, is not the science, but the end product which we buy, which contains the active ingredient brought to us by science, but loaded with fillers, preservatives, emulsifiers, stabilisers etc, put there to maximise profits and give the maximum shelf life.

I am allergic to a substance called Propylene Glycol which is found in a huge number of off the shelf creams and cosmetic products. My daughter is allergic to nuts, which means even the most natural products are out if they contain any nut oils. So I think there can be problems whether a product is 'natural' or not. It's just that if you make your own remedies, you can more easily tailor them for your own use. I've yet to find a suitable moisturiser on sale, or through the doctor, so there is no choice but to 'make my own'.

In many cases science copies natural substances to bring a more stable and cheap version for use in the marketplace, we should remember that without nature, we may not have had the idea.