Ban on natural remedies in the EU

[Radu]

Even though this concerns only the EU for now be assured that this in turn will have an affect on the whole world if it get through since the EU has such a big influence over the policies of countries from Asia, Africa or the Middle East. Please take some time to see this movie and let your friends know:

http://www.savenaturalhealth.eu/

[greenorelse]

Signed.

[Green Aura]

Signed and shared on Facebook.

[niknik]

signed!

Whatever next........... I guess most foodwill be banned in caseit has any good health effects, fruit, veg, herbs also usewd for culinary purposes, honey. so whatwill we be left with?

Battery farmed meat, processd frozen irradiated mealss only..... or just little pills conatining all the required "nutrients"?

[gregorach]

Has anybody bothered to check that the proposed legislation actually has the claimed effects? From my understanding of it (unless this is talking about a completely different set of rules) it's not a ban at all - just a requirement that people prove that their products are safe and uncontaminated.

[MKG]

Someone put me right, please. As far as I understand it, nothing whatsoever is going to be banned except the unlicensed sale of products designated as pharmaceutical substances - i.e. they come with claims of efficacy. No-one is about to ban anyone from growing herbs for themselves. Anyone can, for instance, grow St. John's Wort and use it as they see fit. What they can't do is prepare it and sell it (without a licence), as they have been accustomed to do, with a long list of the wonders it performs. My particular gripe is that St. John's Wort has been shown to be pharmaceutically inert (independently, I believe, and I also believe the results to be correct) so, in this particular case, I have no objection to anyone not wanting to buy something which can't work as advertised (ref. the Sale of Goods Act, the Consumer Protection Act, the Trades Descriptions Act).

If I want to use a herbal remedy - and I have no doubt that a lot of them are truly efficacious - then I'll grow the herb and prepare it myself, quite legally. So where is the problem? I'm sure someone will scream what all the fuss is about at me - which is why I posted this. The fact is that I really do not understand the argument which says that anyone making a profit from herbalism should not have to substantiate their claims. And I find the argument that the big pharma companies are behind the new EU rules puerile - those companies could buy and sell the whole of the EU tomorrow, and herbalism represents absolutely no threat to their commercial interests.

So what's it all about? The vested interests of huge international companies? The vested interests of professional herbalists? Someone please give me a good reason to oppose the new EU policy - I really am open to new ideas.

Mike

[gregorach]

And I find the argument that the big pharma companies are behind the new EU rules puerile - those companies could buy and sell the whole of the EU tomorrow, and herbalism represents absolutely no threat to their commercial interests.

In a lot of cases, herbal and other "alternative" medicine is one of their commercial interests. All those OTC remedies on the shelves of Boots aren't made by magic elves, you know... They're made by wholly-owned subsidiaries of the very same big pharma companies, and they've got great profit margins. None of that expensive and time-consuming "clinical testing" or "quality control" nonsense...

So what's it all about? The vested interests of huge international companies? The vested interests of professional herbalists? Someone please give me a good reason to oppose the new EU policy - I really am open to new ideas.

Mike

I can't help but suspect that it's a combination of "health paranoia" and good old-fashioned Mailesque europhobia. As you point out, nothing is actually being banned, which puts it in the same category as all those other EU regulations that never actually existed - you know, the ones about being BANNED! from calling sausages "sausages", or how fishermen are going to have to wear hairnets.

Those of you who don't trust "Big Pharma" - why would you trust an equally profit-driven multinational company with substantially less regulation and oversight, bearing in mind that "alternative medicine" is a trillion-dollar international industry, and the companies involved are usually wholly-owned subsidiaries of the very bogeymen you're trying to get away from? Lots of those "alternative remedies" are made under license in China or India, and turn out to be contaminated with heavy metals (or even - shock horror - pharmaceuticals!) whenever anybody bothers to test them. Which the folks making billions from selling them never do, of course...

As far as I understand it, the new EU regs aren't even going to require any evidence of efficacy, just that the box actually contains what it claims to, and that it's merely safe to use as indicated. What's the big problem with that? Does anybody really want an unexpected and unadvertised side order of lead, mercury, and arsenic with their herbal remedies?

Sorry, got on a bit of a rant there...

[Green Aura]

If I want to use a herbal remedy - and I have no doubt that a lot of them are truly efficacious - then I'll grow the herb and prepare it myself, quite legally. So where is the problem?

One of the biggest problems, as far as I'm concerned, is dose, Mike. If you grow e.g. St Johns Wort and want to use it as a medicinal herb how much do you use? Herbal medicine is not without risks, lots of really useful plants can have detrimental effects in large doses. So buying a known dose from a reputable supplier means you can take it and adjust the dose with some degree of accuracy.

Picking your own will have differing amounts of the active ingredient on a daily basis, depending on whether it's a sunny day, time of day picked etc. That's not to say using plants for making teas and suchlike will have harmful doses - they're much more likely to be sub-therapeutic.

I learned my lesson years ago, taking kelp to aid weight loss. Following a blood test I was found to be severely anaemic (almost transfusion-requiring low!) and had to undergo a course of B12 injections as that was found to be the cause. I stopped using kelp after a bit of research showed that kelp is associated with reduced B12 levels and have never had problems since.

The other problem, for me, is why they're doing it. It isn't because these products are killing people all over the place. It's purely because the pharmaceutical lobby have thrown lots of money into lobbying them. There's already sufficient legislation about labelling, recommended dosage etc to ensure safety for all but those who are probably candidates for Darwin Awards anyway.

[oldjerry]

Who gives a flying 'bout what the EU says?.........only the silly buggers in the UK. I dont trust any of the pharmaceutical companies,mainstream,alternative,holistic,or whatever.
Think I'm with Mike,if you want it ,grow it.

[MKG]

I completely agree with you, GA - dosage is a pretty important thing. So if it's important, I'd rather do the research myself (because I trust NO-ONE with an inkling of a commercial interest) and act accordingly. And if dosage is so important, how does anyone who is in the process of buying herbal products know, with any degree of confidence, that the product they're buying actually is what it says on the tin? Regulation would appear to be the answer because not everyone is prepared to do the basic research (I'll take a bet right now - I bet YOU do the research rather than trust anyone else's word).

I'm trying not to be obstructive here - I'm really not. But I fail to see what is wrong with applying the same regulations to herbalism as those that apply to any other food/medicine product. Gregorach, I think, hit the nail on the head ... "I can't help but suspect that it's a combination of "health paranoia" and good old-fashioned Mailesque europhobia".

Is this just a knee-jerk "I like this lifestyle and you leave it alone" reaction - which leaves the field open for some real scoundrels who'd happily sell you any old s**t - or are those people who make a living (or part of a living) from a herbalism based on nothing more complicated than personal belief (or incredible cynicism) crying into their milk because they've been challenged? I really don't know, and I don't know how to find out - hence the questions.

Over to you

Mike

[Green Aura]

No Europhobia on my part - nor Canadaphobia either, where they've already brought in this legislation, again due to massive lobbying by the pharmaceutical companies. It would be interesting to get some info from Keith to see if it has had any impact.

As for paranoia - absolutely! Having lost their battle to win property rights over plants they now want to remove them from our domain altogether - then they'll be able to try again without demur from populations who are so far distanced from any form of herbal medicine they can't see what's happening.

I don't have any problems with growing and using your own herbs - I do it all the time. And, at this point in time at least, aromatherapy doesn't seem to be included so I'm OK. Most people have very little knowledge, of herbalism etc - buying OTC herbal medication gives them a bit more control over their own treatment, with some information and safety checks.

[greenorelse]

It's purely because the pharmaceutical lobby have thrown lots of money into lobbying them.

+1

Lots of smoke usually means fire.

[MKG]

Well, after a few hours research, I have reached the conclusion that ...

Herbalists will continue to be able to treat people.

Herbalists will continue to be able to make up their own herbal treatments and prescribe them for people who agree to the treatment.

What they will NOT be able to do (without licensing) is formulate herbal remedies for general resale, nor will they be able to access processed herbal material manufactured by an unlicensed third party. Which is a bit like saying that amateur chemists (even well-qualified ones) are not allowed to make up their own paracetamol tablets in their kitchens and flog them to the public. I can't object to that.

So, I can do all of my research (and even gain some qualifications, although that isn't really necessary), set myself up in my own home or in other premises as a herbalist, invite patients to visit me, grow all of my source material in my own garden or allotment or piece of land purchased for that purpose, prepare remedies, prescribe remedies, and then charge the patient for the consultation and the remedies. Well, that doesn't sound so bad.

I will not be able to get hold of a number of preparations which, for whatever reason, I cannot manufacture myself. These may be from far-flung regions of the globe or from next door but I will not be able to use them unless they have been manufactured under strictly controlled conditions. As I can have no idea under what conditions they were manufactured without this kind of control, I feel I cannot object to this either.

As far as I can ascertain, what I've written above describes the true state of affairs even after the EU directive takes effect. Yes, there's a way in there for the pharmaceutical companies to gain a big share of the market in those pre-prepared ingredients but if they're not allowed into the market than that market will be controlled by others who will want to see a profit on their efforts.

I still fail to see anything wrong.

Mike

[Radu]

The main issue with this ban, and indeed is a ban, is that it's been applied before with the same effects that this intended to have as well. Legislation will favor those who have the money power and influence and won't affect those who can grow their own of course. But in between there are people who can't grow their own either because of climate, time, tradition any other reason. Bans are not named as such just because of the popular effect such a mistake would have but create loop holes for those who want to see them can use to push the little grower that on top of growing for himself also wants to grow for sale. These people don't have the money power or the time to invest in superfluous, expensive procedures so while I do agree that people should indeed take the time to look up the origins of the alternative medicine they are using I don't agree with expensive procedures that the ones who sell herbal remedies as well as the ones who use them don't need, having the experience of either tradition or personal experience. If I was to grow garlic for personal treatment and consumption and also to sell as garlic powder for it's antibacterial properties in what way would a certificate aid me in doing so?

And if you take the time to look into similar procedures (but hard to do if you don't have the local insight), as for example the seed market which is now being controlled and manipulated through gmo, hybrids and intellectual property patents by more than 67% of multinationals in Europe with the tendency of growth than you have a precedent on which to base your observations.

Whenever limitations, regulations and so on come into play, the little people are pushed out into bankruptcy and despair, they migrate towards the cities increasing to an ever growing global crisis that is now after years of campaigning and protests being recognized as such. And this is the world in which this regulation comes into effect. I am not a law expert but I can see trends in the places I live and lived around Europe and the insights I've gained from my peasant grandparents in Romania who have no place to mill their own grains anymore because of EU regulations to the farmers of Italy and the eco village inhabitants of Scandinavia who always get grief from anything related to this huge system that is not aiding local communities. How are expensive research, accreditation and a hired regulating body going to help these small communities into being better consumers of chamomile for example?

[greenorelse]

Well said Radu.