Posted by saint james on October 30, 1999, at 2:40:32
In general I feel that many assume "natural" is something special. Natural meds are better is the general party line. To the chemist, there is no difference between a synthetic drug and the same drug produced in the body. Atoms are atoms, regardless of how you go about producing an end product. When you buy meletonin in the store you are buying a synthetic product; to make these drugs in the same way the body does would be very difficult and expensive. The end result is the same, the chemists know there is no difference so they go with the cheap route.
So to me now the playing field is level; drugs are drugs. here is the states "natural" products don't have to prove they do anything because they are supplements. One pill claims to so lots of things. To me, extraordinary claims always need extraordinary proof. Double blind studies using est. protocols and controls.
I like natural products (cleaners, household products, pet products, ect) because they usually are less toxic as nature has provided for a way to break these compounds. I like herbs, but I hold them to the same standard used on the meds I get at the Rx. I want to see dosage and bioavalibility info so I know what the effective dose is and what it will do in my body.
I take Ginkgo because I live at 5,500 ft and often travel to areas above 9,000 ft. It works. I'm taking blue cone (or corn) flower (Echinacea) right now because I am a little sick. herbs don't have side effects because they are generally dilute so they work best for life's minor problems. nature is the ultimate biochemist, she has been cooking away long b4 we crawled out of the ocean so I'm really glad science is going back to nature. She has many compounds that we are just beginning to find out about. Ginkgo is a good example as there is nothing like it in the PDR. Call me a pagan scientist.j
poster:saint james
thread:14220
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/19991028/msgs/14220.html