Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,821 Year: 3,078/9,624 Month: 923/1,588 Week: 106/223 Day: 4/13 Hour: 0/2


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Safety and Effectiveness of Herbs and Pharmaceuticals
purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3458 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 46 of 209 (447466)
01-09-2008 12:49 PM
Reply to: Message 45 by Percy
01-09-2008 12:26 PM


Re: Banning Herbals
Exactly!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 45 by Percy, posted 01-09-2008 12:26 PM Percy has seen this message but not replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2170 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 47 of 209 (447467)
01-09-2008 12:51 PM
Reply to: Message 44 by purpledawn
01-09-2008 11:53 AM


Re: Banning Herbals
quote:
So you're saying that banning herbal medicines across the board until they are throughly tested would have no impact whatsoever on any society or culture within the United States?
No, and I never said it wouldn't.
The point is, you are making a pretty extreme claim that we would experience Prohibition era-style black markets if this were to happen, and I'd just like you to explain why you think this is likely.
Have we seen such activity when ephedra and kava kava, or any other herbal drugs were banned, for instance?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 44 by purpledawn, posted 01-09-2008 11:53 AM purpledawn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 48 by Percy, posted 01-09-2008 1:09 PM nator has not replied
 Message 49 by macaroniandcheese, posted 01-09-2008 1:26 PM nator has not replied
 Message 53 by purpledawn, posted 01-09-2008 7:36 PM nator has not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22394
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 48 of 209 (447470)
01-09-2008 1:09 PM
Reply to: Message 47 by nator
01-09-2008 12:51 PM


Re: Banning Herbals
nator writes:
Have we seen such activity when ephedra and kava kava, or any other herbal drugs were banned, for instance?
You're closer to Canada then we are down here in southern NH, so I would expect this to be more common up by you, but I have a couple friends who pick up ephedra, or have friends do it for them, if they happen to visit Canada. They don't make special trips, and it isn't a black market but just for personal use. Supposedly ephedra is a prescription drug up there, but Health Canada seems to be weak at enforcement, so ephedra is widely available.
But a ban on herbs pending FDA approval seems extremely unlikely. Even a change allowing FDA regulation of herbs seems extremely unlikely. The US is very libertarian regarding many aspects of health care. Did you know homeopaths in Arizona can perform surgery?
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 47 by nator, posted 01-09-2008 12:51 PM nator has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 51 by Granny Magda, posted 01-09-2008 2:27 PM Percy has seen this message but not replied

  
macaroniandcheese 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3928 days)
Posts: 4258
Joined: 05-24-2004


Message 49 of 209 (447478)
01-09-2008 1:26 PM
Reply to: Message 47 by nator
01-09-2008 12:51 PM


Re: Banning Herbals
Have we seen such activity when ephedra and kava kava, or any other herbal drugs were banned, for instance?
ephedra hasn't been banned as far as i know in general, just in diet supplements. i bought some from drugstore.com last year. it's an otc asthma drug, i think.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 47 by nator, posted 01-09-2008 12:51 PM nator has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 50 by Percy, posted 01-09-2008 1:38 PM macaroniandcheese has not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22394
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 50 of 209 (447479)
01-09-2008 1:38 PM
Reply to: Message 49 by macaroniandcheese
01-09-2008 1:26 PM


Re: Banning Herbals
Yeah, Primatene is one, it also contains guaifenesin, don't know if that matters. Anyone know how the amount of ephedrine in asthma pills like Primatene compares to the amount in the diet pills they used to sell?
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 49 by macaroniandcheese, posted 01-09-2008 1:26 PM macaroniandcheese has not replied

  
Granny Magda
Member
Posts: 2462
From: UK
Joined: 11-12-2007
Member Rating: 4.0


Message 51 of 209 (447490)
01-09-2008 2:27 PM
Reply to: Message 48 by Percy
01-09-2008 1:09 PM


Re: Banning Herbals
Percy writes:
The US is very libertarian regarding many aspects of health care. Did you know homeopaths in Arizona can perform surgery?
No, I didn't know that. That is unbelievably shocking. Homoeopathy is total bunkum. I assume that they don't use homoeopathic anaesthetics.

Mutate and Survive

This message is a reply to:
 Message 48 by Percy, posted 01-09-2008 1:09 PM Percy has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 52 by macaroniandcheese, posted 01-09-2008 2:47 PM Granny Magda has not replied

  
macaroniandcheese 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3928 days)
Posts: 4258
Joined: 05-24-2004


Message 52 of 209 (447498)
01-09-2008 2:47 PM
Reply to: Message 51 by Granny Magda
01-09-2008 2:27 PM


Re: Banning Herbals
that may more be a function of having a large indigenous population, than libertarianism, i think. i'd have to look into similar laws in the other southwest and northcentral states. and i'm way too lazy to do that. but it's something to consider.
Edited by brennakimi, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 51 by Granny Magda, posted 01-09-2008 2:27 PM Granny Magda has not replied

  
purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3458 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 53 of 209 (447570)
01-09-2008 7:36 PM
Reply to: Message 47 by nator
01-09-2008 12:51 PM


Re: Banning Herbals
If one takes the position that herbal medicines are to be fully tested before marketing; then the implication is that to fulfill this mission, should the decision come down, all herbal medicines would need to be taken off the market until fully tested.
Prohibition is only an example of a past decision that didn't go as well as planned. We have no idea what would develop if all herbal medicines were banned until fully tested. (That means that those that pass the test get returned according to prescribed protocols.)
Political leaders have to take into account the impact such a decision would have on society, the economy, and their careers.
So my point since Message 21 is that saying all herbal drugs should be tested before marketing is rather a mute point since they are already out. We can say anything new should be tested before marketing, but for herbal drugs that are already out; the government will have to devise a plan with the least impact on society and the economy.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 47 by nator, posted 01-09-2008 12:51 PM nator has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 54 by Granny Magda, posted 01-10-2008 12:27 PM purpledawn has replied

  
Granny Magda
Member
Posts: 2462
From: UK
Joined: 11-12-2007
Member Rating: 4.0


Message 54 of 209 (447681)
01-10-2008 12:27 PM
Reply to: Message 53 by purpledawn
01-09-2008 7:36 PM


Re: Banning Herbals
HI Dawn,
purpledawn writes:
If one takes the position that herbal medicines are to be fully tested before marketing; then the implication is that to fulfill this mission, should the decision come down, all herbal medicines would need to be taken off the market until fully tested.
Not at all. there are other ways than to introduce an overnight ban. The usual solution in these situations, where legitimate businesses must change their practices, is to set a date when the legislation comes into force. A date is announced, say, 4 years on, and the suppliers must comply with the new rules by that date, just as is happening right now with EU legislation against keeping battery chickens. Many herbs have already been tested anyway.
I still think that the comparison with prohibition is ridiculous. Prohibition was inspired by pious moralising as much as public health. If the case is made properly, I think that people will understand that legislation is for their own good.
purpledawn writes:
Political leaders have to take into account the impact such a decision would have on society, the economy, and their careers.
Society - People would be better able to make informed decisions about their healthcare. Good science would be promoted. Disasters where people fail to take real medicines in favour of quack cures might be prevented. All sounds pretty good to me.
Economy - There certainly is a lot of money made out of alternative therapies, but that still only represents a very small percentage of the total economy, in US or Europe. The effect would be minimal. Even if there is a negative economic effect, it would be worth it, in order to prevent unethical people making money by exploiting the desperate and gullible. Besides, I can actually envisage a positive effect on the herbalism sector. Plenty of people avoid herbalists, because they know that many of their claims are unproven. If the whole business became evidence based, it would make a much more attractive proposition.
Politicians Careers - I'm assuming that you don't really believe that a politician should back away from worthwhile legislation for the sake of his career. That would be despicable. Slimy self-serving politicians can be a barrier to effective government of all kinds when they become obsessed with covering their arses. The point is to persuade them that regulation is worthwhile, and that as many people support it as oppose it.
purpledawn writes:
So my point since Message 21 is that saying all herbal drugs should be tested before marketing is rather a mute point since they are already out.
So if a problem already exists, there is no point legislating against it? I fail to see any logic in that.
purpledawn writes:
We can say anything new should be tested before marketing, but for herbal drugs that are already out; the government will have to devise a plan with the least impact on society and the economy.
Agreed. There is no point being overly bullish about this issue. Better that it is handled sensitively, especially since most of the people who sell herbs are well meaning. But the business of selling unproven cures to often very ill people, is immoral. It should be stopped, even if that proves problematic.

Mutate and Survive

This message is a reply to:
 Message 53 by purpledawn, posted 01-09-2008 7:36 PM purpledawn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 55 by purpledawn, posted 01-10-2008 4:35 PM Granny Magda has replied

  
purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3458 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 55 of 209 (447727)
01-10-2008 4:35 PM
Reply to: Message 54 by Granny Magda
01-10-2008 12:27 PM


Re: Banning Herbals
quote:
So if a problem already exists, there is no point legislating against it? I fail to see any logic in that.
This is like playing a game of telephone, but on the computer.
How in the world do you come up with that question relative to everything I've said in this thread since Message 17?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 54 by Granny Magda, posted 01-10-2008 12:27 PM Granny Magda has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 56 by Granny Magda, posted 01-11-2008 10:25 AM purpledawn has replied

  
Granny Magda
Member
Posts: 2462
From: UK
Joined: 11-12-2007
Member Rating: 4.0


Message 56 of 209 (447881)
01-11-2008 10:25 AM
Reply to: Message 55 by purpledawn
01-10-2008 4:35 PM


Re: Banning Herbals
purpledawn writes:
This is like playing a game of telephone, but on the computer.
Got to admit, I had to look that one up. We call that game "Chinese whispers" on this side of the pond.
I apologise if I took your comment out of context, but I am a little perplexed as to why, if you support regulation of herbals, you keep stressing potential problems with it.
Just to be clear, I'm not advocating banning herbals, only regulating them. I would only ban herbs that prove to be dangerous, and outlaw the sale of herbs by means of unsubstantiated therapeutic claims.

Mutate and Survive

This message is a reply to:
 Message 55 by purpledawn, posted 01-10-2008 4:35 PM purpledawn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 57 by purpledawn, posted 01-11-2008 11:58 AM Granny Magda has not replied

  
purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3458 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 57 of 209 (447912)
01-11-2008 11:58 AM
Reply to: Message 56 by Granny Magda
01-11-2008 10:25 AM


Re: Banning Herbals
Then we are not in disagreement concerning regulation of herbal medicines. Good to know.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 56 by Granny Magda, posted 01-11-2008 10:25 AM Granny Magda has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 58 by nator, posted 01-12-2008 5:45 PM purpledawn has replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2170 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 58 of 209 (448242)
01-12-2008 5:45 PM
Reply to: Message 57 by purpledawn
01-11-2008 11:58 AM


Re: Banning Herbals
Do you agree that the only way we can actually know if any drug or treatment or therapy is safe and effective is through scientific, controlled double-blind testing?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 57 by purpledawn, posted 01-11-2008 11:58 AM purpledawn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 59 by purpledawn, posted 01-12-2008 7:04 PM nator has not replied

  
purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3458 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 59 of 209 (448260)
01-12-2008 7:04 PM
Reply to: Message 58 by nator
01-12-2008 5:45 PM


Re: Banning Herbals
I agree that any product made available to the general public for consumption should be tested and shown safe and effective for its proposed use. Safe meaning that the benefits, when used properly, outweigh the risks.
To the best of my knowledge the randomized controlled trials are the best system we have for this task. The double-blind trials are better for avoiding bias, but whether double-blind is the only way, I don't know.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 58 by nator, posted 01-12-2008 5:45 PM nator has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 60 by subbie, posted 01-12-2008 7:26 PM purpledawn has not replied

  
subbie
Member (Idle past 1255 days)
Posts: 3509
Joined: 02-26-2006


Message 60 of 209 (448266)
01-12-2008 7:26 PM
Reply to: Message 59 by purpledawn
01-12-2008 7:04 PM


Re: Banning Herbals
I agree that any product made available to the general public for consumption should be tested and shown safe and effective for its proposed use.
I don't think it's any legitimate use of governmental power to prevent anyone from taking anything for their health, welfare and happiness that they wish to. Caveat emptor!
A fool and his money will soon be parted, and no effort on the part of the government will stop this law of nature. Let it be so.

Those who would sacrifice an essential liberty for a temporary security will lose both, and deserve neither. -- Benjamin Franklin
We see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- Phat

This message is a reply to:
 Message 59 by purpledawn, posted 01-12-2008 7:04 PM purpledawn has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 61 by Granny Magda, posted 01-12-2008 10:12 PM subbie has replied
 Message 66 by nator, posted 01-13-2008 7:52 AM subbie has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024