Saturday Quack - Indiscriminate Use of Herbal Supplements

The use of herbal supplements has mushroomed (?) in recent years. Traditional medicine methods have been used to demonstrate efficacy and safety of some of these supplements in selected clinical indications. For instance, St John’s wort in depression and saw palmetto in prostatic hypertrophy have shown effectiveness comparable to approved drugs.

Unfortunately, the switch rush move to alternative medicine has led to indiscriminate use of herbs for indications where they may not be (or probably are not) effective. This was shown in a study done by Mayo Clinic researchers, and published in the Mayo Clinic Proceedings. A survey conducted by the 2002 National Health Interview Survey found that, of 30,000+ adults surveyed, 5,700 (19%) had consumed herbs in the previous 12 months. Women, older people, non-Hispanic whites, and the college-educated were more likely to consume herbal supplements.

Of those who used only one herb, about a third used it for ‘evidence-based’ indications. But this means that two-thirds of them used more than one herbal supplements, and it’s logical to assume that the majority of them were taking them for conditions for which there was no evidence of effectiveness.

Are you one of those who take an herbal supplement without knowing for sure if it’s likely to work? Well, it’s your money – and money in the pocket of the manufacturers. Remember that supplement manufacturers don’t have to demonstrate all aspects of quality (e.g. purity, potency, and batch-to-batch consistency) in the same way as drug manufacturers do.