Herb Popularity Outpacing Research

Dear Dr. Blonz: I am concerned about herbs. Not because I fear them, but because I don’t know how to deal with them. They seem to be cropping up everywhere--even in my local supermarket and drugstore. Why is this happening, and how do I know which ones do what they say they’ll do? My doctor knows little if anything about herbs, but when I go into a natural-foods store, I get this attitude of incredulity--to think that I would question their effectiveness! I would just as soon ignore them all, but all my friends rave about how I am missing out on all these potential benefits. What is the history behind herbs and all these health claims?

--HERBALLY CURIOUS

Independence, Mo.

*

Dear Curious: I like your image of herbs “cropping up everywhere,” for that’s precisely what they do. Regarding your confusion and concerns about herbs, though, you are not alone.

The use of herbs has skyrocketed and the penetration of herbal products into the marketplace continues to expand at an amazing rate. Whether it’s bred from a dissatisfaction with the current climate of managed health care or a burgeoning appreciation for the powers present in natural products, the role of herbs in our health culture is definitely in a state of transition.

It helps to appreciate that for a long time Western medicine viewed herbal medicine with a disapproving eye. Although the use of herbs existed as a parallel healing system with folkloric underpinnings, it remained outside the aegis of parochial science.

Without respectable research to substantiate its claims, scientists branded herbalism as “speculative and unproven” despite its having a centuries-old healing tradition. Note that being “speculative and unproven” does not mean something is unworthy or false; it just indicates that no one has done the appropriate research study to find out one way or another. Often, though, the mainstream spin on herbs was that they were somewhere between worthless and potentially harmful.

The lack of substantiation has been an ongoing problem with herbs. With pharmaceutical drugs, there is the potential for profit after proprietary formulations are developed, patented and verified as being safe and effective. Herb manufacturers complain that naturally occurring substances cannot be patented. This leaves little economic incentive for any one company to put up the considerable funds needed for research, because once done, the results could be used by anyone.

Despite this argument, it seems reasonable that the burden of testing would fall on the industry that stands to profit from supplement sales. Perhaps an industry-sponsored “seal of approval” might be instituted to help consumers identify and patronize the companies that conduct research to support the efficacy of their products. Then, as a consumer-protection measure, there might be an approved series of warning labels or inserts to inform consumers about side effects, minimum toxic doses and potentially dangerous interactions with foods, medications, preexisting health conditions or other herbs.

Herbs aren’t as controversial in other parts of the world. Germany, for example, has a system by which herbs are evaluated for safety and efficacy before they can be sold. In the United States, the Food and Drug Administration is responsible for oversight. For a long time, herbal products could make no claims whatsoever, lest they be branded as unapproved drugs and removed from the marketplace.

Why are all these herbs showing up now?

It has to do with how the regulatory climate changed following the passage of the Dietary Supplement and Health Education Act of 1994. This new law allowed herbal products, for the first time, to make certain types of claims. Even though herbal products still couldn’t claim that they could treat, diagnose, cure or prevent a disease, they could, for the first time, claim an ability to affect the structure or functioning of the body.

For example, a medical claim such as “prevents cancer” remained off-limits, but a non-disease-related statement such as “supports the immune system” was now permissible. You still couldn’t state “lowers cholesterol,” but it became legal to state “helps maintain cardiovascular function.” Also on the label would be the qualifying wording: “This statement has not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration. This product is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure or prevent any disease.” It came across as a slippery distinction, and for the past four years it succeeded in opening up the door to a world of marketing possibilities for herbal products. A positive sign, though, is that scientists at academic institutions began investigating herbs and the active compounds they contain.

In April, the FDA issued a set of rules that would further delineate the types of statements that could be made. If you would like to check out or comment on these rules, they can be found online at https://vm.cfsan.fda.gov. Don’t wait too long, though, because the comment period expires Aug. 27.

*

* Ed Blonz is the author of the “Your Personal Nutritionist” book series (Signet, 1996). Send questions to: “On Nutrition,” Ed Blonz, c/o Newspaper Enterprise Assn., 200 Madison Ave., New York, NY 10016 or e-mail to: ed@blonz.com. Personal replies cannot be provided.