Going natural?

Dr. Steven Novella looks at the attempts to pawn off herbs as the natural and superior opposite of pharmaceuticals. The pure things. I have plenty of issues with the pharmacy industry, but this is ridiculous.

A recent web feature produced by the New York Times tells the story of Chris Kilham, “The Medicine Hunter.” Specifically it recounts his thoughts on the use of maca, a root native to South America, “said to have energy and libido enhancing properties,” according to the piece. The brief piece reflects the current attitudes popular in the public and promoted by mainstream media reflecting a false dichotomy between medicinal plants and pharmaceuticals. This false dichotomy is extremely counterproductive and ultimately harmful to consumers.

Kilham represents this false dichotomy when he says:

“My goal is to have more people using safe, effective, proven, healthful herbs, and fewer people using toxic, overly expensive, marginally effective, potentially lethal pharmaceutical drugs.”

There are many unwarranted assumptions in this statement. It seems to be implying that herbs are inherently more safe, less toxic, and more healthful than pharmaceuticals. It also assumes that there is a real difference between the two. Therefore Kilham seems to be saying something meaningful when he is actually just reflecting biased assumptions. This is made clear if we simply reverse his statement. Most people, for example, would agree if I said that “My goal is to have more people using safe, effective, proven, healthful pharmaceuticals, and fewer people using toxic, overly expensive, marginally effective, potentially lethal herbs.”

The most meaningful statement is also the one that is most obvious and hardly needs to be pointed out. Any rational person would rather use safe and effective treatments of any kind than toxic and marginally effective (or ineffective) treatments of any kind. Because everyone is likely to agree with this, Kilham is creating a forced choice in which any rational person would choose herbs over pharmaceuticals. But Kilham’s unstated assumptions are completely unwarranted.

...

He continues in another post following a question from a reader.

...

This raises several points commonly raised in defense of herbal remedies, and also requires some clarifications. The most relevant is the implication that herbs are probably safe (and may even be effective) because “people have been using (them) for thousands of years.” I file this under: the plural of anecdote is anecdotes - not data. Even a thousand years of anecdotes is not reliable evidence for safety or efficacy, and there are several lines of argument to support this conclusion.

The first is that there are numerous examples of treatments or remedies that cultures have used for thousands of years under the common belief in efficacy without anyone noticing that the treatment was useless or harmful. Blood letting survived for over two thousand years. Tobacco was used by Native Americans for centuries as a medicinal plant. Urine drinking is a traditional Indian remedy.

...