From my Twitter account in paragraphs for easier reading as a blog post. Someone said they like the "activist" in me. I suppose I am one. I support a number of causes on Twitter: anti-human trafficking; no bullying; anti-abuse human, and animal; pro-education, human rights, and equality for all; accessible, affordable food, and medicine for all; and civility in all discussions. I debunk cosmetic, alternative products, food, supplements, and therapy marketing claims, and Tweet current, reputable source information on side effects, and precautions regarding products. I support all indie art forms.
Note: The mention of animals dying is about rhino horn, and other animal parts erroneously used for medical applications, as they are unproven to work for such conditions but are claimed to in marketing. The animals are poached, and game wardens have also been killed in the process. What is relevant here is below, with correct grammar, explanation, and added quotes. To get everything within 140 characters on Twitter sentences get shortened.
Most researchers are cautious in research conclusions because both safety and efficacy are important. A botanical may be safe but it has to work! Ethical researchers use and no doubt peer reviewers demand, use of words like may regarding conclusions for good reasons. Outcomes need to be repeated.
What started the above?
An alternative to statins in some treatments? http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3735284/, 2013 Not yet! "extensive clinical studies are required in larger numbers
Cont: of patients to establish the efficacy and safety of P. emblica in the management of endothelial dysfunction and hyperlipidemia."
From the full text, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3735284/
"Quality control is one of the important factors during evaluation of any herbal product. Care needs to be taken to ensure that the bioactive ingredients of the product are intact. The test product used in the present study comprised a highly standardized ..."
And if botanicals do prove to be alternatives to established drugs, the constituents that are the mechanisms required will become drugs.
"New concerns about the safety and quality of herbal supplements", 2013 http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/new-concerns-about-the-safety-and-quality-of-herbal-supplements/
"number of drugs we use today are derived from, or based on, chemicals originally found in nature. ... The benefit of drug products over herbs is the reproducibility of effects, which starts with isolating and purifying the active ingredient. The next step is manufacturing a dosage that results in consistency in absorption and standard and predictable dosages."
Botanicals can have variances for a number of reasons. If it were as simple as some claim, illnesses and diseases still prevalent would not exist. New research can reveal risks, or side effects in both drugs and botanicals. There is ongoing science to make all proper medication safer, and work better. A number of alternative natural products can and do have serious side effects, and precautions you may not be aware of until it is too late.
I do not endorse any belief system or practice that precludes needed, qualified medical care. I do not support unproven medical claims. I do not support unproven cosmetic new drug claims that violate government marketing regulations, causing people to waste their money.
"Warning Letters, - Health Fraud", 2013
http://www.fda.gov/ForConsumers/ProtectYourself/HealthFraud/ucm255474.htm#.Uqi54qtiDpQ.twitter
"DNA barcoding detects contamination and substitution in North American herbal products", 2013
http://www.biomedcentral.com/1741-7015/11/222
"the industry suffers from unethical activities by some of the manufacturers, which includes false advertising, product substitution, contamination and use of fillers."
I am pro-consumer education, and that comes from reputable sources which I regularly Tweet, that I recommend be discussed with qualified medical doctors. I am disgusted by misinformation on the Internet, and elsewhere that is there only for profit but can harm people too.
People and animals needlessly die, and people can become ill and die, or have conditions worsen because of the greed of others. That is an affront to me. Wanting to believe in a romanticized past that bad marketing promotes does not make products, or systems, or beliefs work. Diseases from the past are still here today.
Reputable science will validate traditional therapies or not. Most are not validated. That does not mean botanicals are not good for some applications. Ironically, the same bad marketers are quick to use unsubstantiated scientific studies to promote their goals, yet rail against scientific study reviews, or better studies, that do not support their claims. You cannot have it both ways!
Many consumers are ignorant about products and therapies. They can be victims of unscrupulous, inaccurate, misleading marketing. I present current, reputable information people can read for themselves.
"Internet Marketing of Herbal Products"
http://jama.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=197309, 2003, and still applicable today
"Consumers may be misled by vendors' claims that herbal products can treat, prevent, diagnose, or cure specific diseases, despite regulations prohibiting such statements."