We need your help now
Support from readers like you keeps The Journal open.
You are visiting us because we have something you value. Independent, unbiased news that tells the truth. Advertising revenue goes some way to support our mission, but this year it has not been enough.
If you've seen value in our reporting, please contribute what you can, so we can continue to produce accurate and meaningful journalism. For everyone who needs it.
Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
By continuing, you are indicating that you accept our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.
THE IRISH MEDICINES Board has advised against children under 12 using echinacea.
Children’s herbal product containing echinacea will no longer be recommended for use among the under-12s due to the lack of scientific data to support their use, the IMB said.
The advice comes after the IMB’s review of the available date on the safety and effectiveness of echinacea as well as guidance from the European Medicines Agency’s Committee on Herbal Medicinal Products.
The IMB concluded that echinacea can be associated with rare side effects – mainly allergic reactions, which can be severe in some cases.
The organisation says it is contacting retailers “and others within the supply chain” to inform them of its advice and to recommend the withdrawal from sale of children’s products containing echinacea.
Adult echinacea products are not affected by the IMB advice. However, while some adult products contain information on children’s dosages, children should also not use these products. The IMB expects adult product information to change in the coming months to reflect its advice on the use of echinacea among the under-12s.
IMB director of human products authorisation Ann O’Connor said that this is not a serious safety issue and that the advice being issued is “precautionary in nature”:
This is a prudent measure which is being taken following evaluation of data availab.e Our view is that there are potential risks associated with the use of echinacea-containing products in children under 12 years of age and there is limited evidence of benefit in this age group.As a result, we are recommending that they should no longer be used. It is important to carefully check the ingredient list on a herbal product and if it contains echinacea, it should not be given to children.
“As with all medicines, the goal is to maximise the benefits of use and reduce the risks,” she added.
Retailers are being advised to remove stocks of children’s echinacea herbal medicines from sale and return them to the supplier. They are also being advised to inform people buying adult echinacea products of the IMB’s advice concerning their use among children.
Until last year, products of this nature were not fully subject to regulatory requirement. But upon the implementation of the European Health Medicines Directive in Ireland in 2011, the IMB has carried out a review of herbal products on the Irish market.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
So pump them full of vaccines and prescription drugs instead.
I couldnt agree with you more. Im shocked with all the thumbs down. Pharamacetical companies dont want us to use natural products. The governments agree with them. Why? They bring in more revenue and jobs. Obviously they are going to speak out against most natural products. Natural products will do a better job in curing cancer than pharmacetical creations
Prevention is always better than cure.
By the way, pharma companies do want you to use natural products. Many herbal remedies are made by subdivisions of pharmaceutical companies. Don’t be blinded by hippy marketting. There’s profit in the non-licensed market as well.
And how can any medicine be unnatural? We all live on planet earth, every substance is found either growing here, or as a mineral in the earths crust. Unless they get some extraterrestrial ingredients, everything on this planet is natural.
This is from the IMB, a rubber stamp for the pharma industry which allows its most dangerous products on the market for all and sundry, including children.
Examples: Vioxx, Seroxat, and Roaccutane.
Vioxx: killed more people than it cured
Seroxat and other SSRIs: cause suicidal and violent tendencies; implicated in every single mass shooting in the last two decades
Roaccutane: an acne drug ranked in the top ten dangerous drugs as it causes depression, plus suicidal and homicidal “ideation”.
These and more deadly toxins are licensed by the IMB. If they were cars, they’d have been withdrawn from market long ago.
In the case of Vioxx, Merck withdrew it in 2004. No regulator had ever challenged it despite the drug killing thousands worldwide.
The IMB? His Master’s Voice.
Then there’s the thousands and thousands and thousands of highly effective medications and vaccinations without which I wouldn’t still have my Mum, my best friend, myself, my sister etc. etc. etc.
If you’re going to sell something as a medicinal product, why shouldn’t it be held up to safety standards?
@ P Wurple
If as you say the Pharma companies make both regular ”medicines” and herbal remedies.
Its funny how they seem to be doing a better trade with their regular medicines?
@ P Wurple
”And how can any medicine be unnatural? We all live on planet earth, every substance is found either growing here, or as a mineral in the earths crust. Unless they get some extraterrestrial ingredients, everything on this planet is natural”.
Correct
No Doubt.
But the point is that some of these natural substances are not there for human consumption, particularly in some of mixtures and concoctions that the Big Pharma companies produce and push in the name of health.
My daughter got chest infections every winter. She has asthma. Since giving her this over the winter months she has not got a single infection in the last 4 years
…so normal Childrens medicines have NO side effects? Looks like another case of the pharma companies getting their way – this echinacea MUST be good stuff methinks!
Would you care to point out where anyone said that childrens medicine has no effects? They’re simply saying that there is very limited evidence of its efficacy while its side effects are demonstrable. Therefore the risks out weigh the benefits.
People’s Cognitive dissonance in health issues is frightening.
Ps, who do you think makes all the “natural” medicines, wake up.
Following this logic we shouldn’t give children under 12 any medicine at all…or peanuts…or milk…or wheat. Or let them keep cats. Or go outside.
This is just a control/power grab by the med/pharma establishment. Nothing to do with safety at all.
I have to agree – it smacks of big pharma and the medical industry looking after its interests. I have never taken Echinacea – in fact, up until I read this news item I had assumed it to be just another quack medicine but a quick Google search has disabused me of that notion. For example, there seems compelling evidence that it can significantly reduce chances of getting the common cold: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/6231190.stm .
It’s not logic, it’s medicine. All medications carry risks, some more than others. All medical treatments carry risks as well. The risks are weighed against the benefits before deciding whether or not to treat someone. Instead of setting off your ‘big pharma’ alarm, how about you read the part of the article where it says that the risks outweigh the benefits here? Mainly because they can’t prove any benefits.
To all the above posters, can you even spend a little time reading the article and do a little research. The only reason a decision like this could be made is if the risk is greater then the benefit of taking something. The benefit of course being nil if you read any scientific reports and studys on echinacea. And before you question science contemplate your responding using the a computer or phone made possible by millions of hours of research and development of scientists and engineers.
How about letting parents make an informed decision? Herbal remedies have been used long before big pharma started to produce drugs. The nanny state in full swing as usual with one hand firmly in the pocket of the pharmaceuticals. There is a place for medicine and natural remedies to coexist so let people have the right to choose what they put into their own bodies or their childrens themselves. As a general rule the side effects of drugs have the potential to be far worse than the use of a herb most if which have been used for centuries.
Of course. Parents should be free to reject th tyranny of rationalism. Make an informed choice based on the advice of their homeopath or the last article they read by some compromised doctor about autism.
The problem with general rules Heather is that they are general. This is not an approach that we can take when it comes to medicines. If natural remedies work, then it is entirely possible that they could be as harmful as standard medicines.
Would you be ok with parents bypassing the doctor and pharmacist and deciding, on the basis of an informed decision, what prescription drugs to give their children?
I made what I considered to be an informed decision and used a well known branded herbal based cream on my sons ankle when he sprained it last year. I applied the cream as instructed and my some went off out to play. It was early April and mildly sunny. The next morning he was complain that the skin on his ankle was sore. I looked at it and noticed the skin where I had applied the cream looked red and puffy. I immediately got him to soak it in some cool water. As he was soaking it I noticed the beginnings of blisters appearing on the skin. The blisters rapidly got bigger until they joined together to look like two large pillows on his ankle. I rushed him to the hosp, explained what had happened and showed them the cream. They told me that the herb in the cream is known to react to sunlight. He had to go on three courses of antibiotics and several trips to hosp to have dressings, he had the beginnings of scepticemia and was in agony. There is absolutely no warnings on the tube about keeping child out of sun. So be warned, all medicines have potential side effects. I would never use a herbal remedy again.
Good, if I wanted to eat flowers when I get sick, I’d go outside and pick them myself, rather than give money to the very wealthy herbal “medicine” industry. If you want to call something medicine, then in this day and age you need to have well designed studies which establish the risks versus benefits of an intervention so people (or more likely their doctors) can decide if the benefit outweighs the risk for a given illness.
Compare this to herbal medicine, where companies have no idea what their product does, or at best some very poorly designed studies, and are willing to continue selling the product regardless of any subsequent studies which prove it has no apparent benefit. Best case scenario, it does nothing and you’re wasting your money, worst case is something like Aristolochia (which is herbal medicine for weight loss) which was eventually shown to be both a potent carcinogen and kidney toxin and is the cause of a very high rate of cancer in Taiwan. Herbal medicine are drugs, which can have effects, we just have no idea what their effects, beneficial or harmful, could be.
Thats why you go to a medical herbalist who is trained as highly as a regular Dr. Also any herbal products sold in health shops have trained staff and herbalists on hand to help and guide people which herbal supplement to buy.
You cannot just go out side a pick a flower as the flower maybe toxic and you need to eat the root but to cook it a certain way first!!!!! thats just a silly statement and not well informed!!
The Herbal industry is wealthy but no way as wealthy as Pharmaceutical companies – this is through informed choice, people are more aware of what they are putting into their bodies and do not always want some laboratory tablet tested on animals to be in their system
Also the pharmaceutical companies makes billions on the backs of just ramming a pill down your throat
. Thats why despite apparently brilliant scientists trying to find a cure for cancer’s they just keep on researching it as they don’t want to find a pill that cures as then they will be out of money.
A family member of mine has high blood pressure and cholesterol, the DR’s verdict take these pills and you will be fine – the GP gets a lot of money to give statin drugs so he is happy to prescribe away – despite the horrendous side effects it gives. Why wasn’t this family members exercise plan and diet looked at?
Consequently he refused the statin drug developed his own exercise plan and eat more sensibly – voila!! blood pressure down and cholesterol tabs not needed.
St Johns Wort a herb used to help people with depression – has no side effects and works. SSRI’s on the other hand lead to many cases of suicide, and further depression.
Therefore a medical herbalist is a great port of call if you are not happy with what your GP has prescribed, GP’s are not trained in nutrition – only in diagnoses and using pharmaceutical drugs.
I think my GP is a fabulous DR but if i wasn’t happy with his diagnosis and the pills he wanted to give me i’d be straight to the medical herbalist.
@Rachel Are you really saying a “Medical Herbalist” is as highly train as an M.D? pmsl
A medical herbalist is not as highly trained as a doctor. It’s not a protected term. I could wake up tomorrow and call myself a “medial herbalist” with zero training. Health shops have staff that are given a chat about the herbs they’re selling, they’re not pharmacists and they haven’t studied physiology, they know nothing about the intricacies of human chemistry or about the interactions between medications or the basis of allergies or the various conditions they are treating. They’re given the company line and have no reductive reasoning they can use to determine if something is right for a customer. Also – there is no obligation for them to have any of these things. Some of them might, there might be a few nutritionists working in health shops around the country but there is no guarantee that the person you are dealing with has this training.
Also your understanding of the way medical research is conducted is very poor. Brilliant scientists work for non-profits and academic institutions, not just pharmaceutical companies. Look at Irish universities and the treatments they’re producing every day. The ‘cure for cancer’ phrase is incredibly generic. It completely ignores the huge number of cancers, the changes in treatment method as the disease progresses and the massive variation in how they work. Leukemia is completely different to skin cancer, and we’re doing extremely well with treating skin cancer.
GP’s do not get money to prescribe certain medications. That is against medical council guidelines. I will grant you that the pharmaceutical companies wine and dine and bribe them in just about any way they can legally do so but to claim that all GPs are in on some massive conspiracy to defraud the patients in their care is a terrible thing to do. And statins have very mild side effects considering the effects that high blood pressure has. You also don’t know the physiological reason for why your family member had high blood pressure, it may not have had anything to do with diet or level of fitness (though that is probably the reason and it should have been looked at if so).
St. John’s Wart does have side effects. GP’s are trained in nutrition but not to the same extent that a nutritionist is, but certainly more than a till operator in your local herb shop.
You’re entitled to ignore your GP’s advise but try to remember that being treated by a medial professional is not like going to McDonald’s, you can’t decide what treatment you’re getting beforehand, you present a problem to the professional and they offer you a solution. It is up to you to accept that solution or not but your decision is not supported by years of vigorous training and constant monitoring.
@Stephanie Without wanting to be pedantic, “nutritionist” isn’t a protected term either (Gillian McKeith anyone?)
The medical experts in food and nutrition are Dietitians. Anyone can call themselves a nutritionist, must CAM practioners like to use sciency sounding names to a pretense of legitimacy to they drivel
“Informed choice” implies that the information that you are basing your choice upon is valid, which when it comes to herbalism may not be the case. The point of lab tests of animals, though a unfortunate necessity, is to try and establish the safety and effectiveness of drugs before going on to test them on humans, establishing more safety and effectiveness before selling them to the public, then ongoing monitoring to watch for rare side effects. This isn’t something herbal medicines are required to do. They can pick them and sell them with little to no oversight or tests at all, nothing more than a marketing strategy. Luckily most of them do nothing, just scams for the misinformed, but occasionally you get drugs like Ephedra, which can actually kill people. That’s the product cycle for these things, they sell them to you with no tests or proof of effectiveness, and if it doesn’t seriously harm enough people to get noticed then they can just keep on selling it.
As for claiming that a medical herbalist is as trained as a regular doctor is absolutely laughable, and probably a little insulting to the regular doctors out there. It really doesn’t matter how much training they get if their training is based on nonsense, which is absolutely the case. Until they have some shred of scientific evidence to back up the large number of wide reaching claims they make, they shouldn’t be taken seriously by any adult who has grown out of a belief in magic.
Sorry, Killian’s right, I was thinking of the nutrition and dietetics experts in hospitals. Wasn’t sure what their title is.
It’s hard to trust guys who write bogus sick notes for €50 a pop.
http://www.newstalk.ie/2012/news/sunday-times-investigation-into-doctors-sick-notes/
Oh right, I forgot about that rule where if one person in a profession does something it must mean everyone is doing it and we should discount the profession as a whole.
I’ve been using this stuff since I was about ten, absolutely brilliant stuff never had any problems with it.. as with everything it will not agree with everyone. no need to ban something so effective!
It hasn’t been banned. They’ve stopped recommending it for use in children under 12. Ceasing to recommend something doesn’t equate to a ban!
Herbal medicine is a very large and extremely profitable business. Far greater profit margins than big pharma, as they don’t do any R&D or have to jump through the testing hoops that Pharma companies do. So the ‘big business wins’ argument is utter rubbish.
The simple fact of the matter is that if echinechea has a real medical effect, then it needs to be reviewed and assessed by the IMB. Ditto any other active substances. And I say this as a parent who always dosed my child with the stuff.
My daughter got chest infections every winter. She has asthma. Since giving her this over the winter months she has not got a single infection in the last 4 years
I have been using children’s echinechea for years with my own children and always found it beneficial. I would like to see a published report on their findings and how many children were accessed that resulted in this decision. They banned st John wart which many found great for depression. Can’t understand the logic. Pump children full of unnecessary antibiotics instead. Reduce their immune systems.
Anne the depression comment is a bit wide of the mark. It has some benefits in mild depression but the problem is with serious depression it has no affect. This can be dangerous to be fair.
Guys, it’s St. John’s Wort, not Wart.
St johns wort/hypericum is not banned. It is a schedule 1b prescription only medicine. You can get a prescription from your GP for it and it can be obtained from your local pharmacy. It can be helpful for mild depression but is ineffective in moderate to severe cases. There are also recorded cases of interactions with other prescribed medicines, most notably the oral contraceptive pill and more seriously with the anti-rejection drug cyclosporin.
Just because something is herbal does not mean that it is safe and sometimes these need to be regulated.
For all those knocking the IMB AND BIG PHARMA, remember that earlier this year the IMB stopped pharmacist from selling a lot of medicines to children under six for coughs and colds. Big pharma companies like Wyeth, Novartis and Pfizer make these medicines but the evidence that the benefit outweighs the risk was unproven, hence the ban.
While I agree with some comments about drug companies I think we need to be careful here about dismissing medical advice about children. We had the same reaction about vaccines & autism & the confusion it caused & we have yet to see the final outcome of people not getting children vaccinated.
Can the people using the evils of big pharma to tout the benefits of alternative medicine please start calling for tighter regulation of the pharmaceutical industry instead? The fact that these companies have little ethical incentive doesn’t mean that herbal medicine works. It means that these companies have little ethical incentive.
To think pharma corporations are your friend and are out for your best interest, you would want to get off the fluoridated water, clean out your pineal gland, wake up and smell the echinacea . Profit is their only concern and the sicker people are the more they make.
Yeah! Lose your teeth at twenty! Die of measles! Suffer your arthritis! Don’t give aspirin to people having heart attacks!
Yes T.P.O.I.
Its hard to trust big organisations these days.
I’ve seen very few arms dealers lobbying for peace.
And I’ve seen very few herbal medicine specialists arguing for more research funding.
I think they know what they are talking about, all conspiracy theories aside they will have enough done studies backed by real science before simply banning the stuff, someone mentioned st Johns wort, well speaking from personal experience I took it myself and I had hallucinagenic trips on it a really unpleasant evening I spent I can tell ya. Before any drug is put on the market there are rigorous trails so I don’t see why all this so called natural medicine should be exempt.
@ Stephanie , firstly the term “alternative medicine” should be reserved for the treatment GP’s , Psychiatrists & Psychologists so freely prescribe to trusting and unsuspecting members of the public . Herbal remedied have been around since the dawn of time , long before physicians were swearing their Hippocratic oath to Apollo, Asclepius or anyother of the ancient Greek Demi-Gods they so fervently put their faith in .
The cost of putting natural remedies through the approval process which the FDA requires can run into millions of dollars, no problem what so ever for Glaxo or Merck .
Also your previous comment about losing your teeth ?.. i fail to understand.
Case in point , Marajuana…… , hundreds of millions been spent on criminalising a herb that is well known for it’s medical benifits from aleviating MS sufferers, stopping and reversing all kinds of cancers, even cancer of the brain , yet all the government think tanks come to the same conclusion , they say Marajuana has no benifits whatsoever , interesting then that both the US and UK governments have given a sizeable budget for production of Marajuana.
Finally Echinacea which is indigenous to North America was used for millenia by the native peoples to cure many types of common cold and everyday illness. The Sioux, Cheyenne & Pawnee nations of North America to the best of my knowledge , never speculated on the stock exchange which is where Big Pharma conduct their buisiness….., with that in mind i think i will bypass the GP’s surgery for another year and take my chances with the wealth of natural herbs and medicines that nature provides
+1
Keep wasting your money!
The comment about losing your teeth is about flouridation of water. If you’d like to research dental care prior to water treatment I’ll just wait here.
Your point on marijuana – “yet all the government think tanks come to the same conclusion”. No, no they don’t. Which is why there are campaigns for its medical use in Ireland, which is why it is legal in many places in the US for medicinal purposes, why it’s legal in the Netherlands, its also legal in Canada, Finland and Israel. Also what budget for marijuana production are you talking about?
“Herbal remedied have been around since the dawn of time , long before physicians were swearing their Hippocratic oath to Apollo, Asclepius or anyother of the ancient Greek Demi-Gods they so fervently put their faith in” – that’s nice. The 80 year life expectancy has been around for about a century. Thanks to modern medicine. The fact that people don’t die of a kidney infection is thanks to modern medicine. We eradicated small pox thanks to vaccines. We’ve nearly eradicated polio thanks to modern medicine. You only need look at the differences in life expectancy, infant mortality and quality of life between countries with varying levels of access to modern medicine to see its benefits.
Just because something has been around for ages doesn’t make it good. They thought the earth was flat for ages but it turned out they were wrong. They thought the humunculus was how a baby started but they were wrong. They thought blood letting was a suitable treatment for just about everything. They were wrong.
“The cost of putting natural remedies through the approval process which the FDA requires can run into millions of dollars, no problem what so ever for Glaxo or Merck” – so because they can’t afford it we should give them a break and just try it out? That’s great. I can’t afford to get the airplane I made in my garage tested for safety but hey, I guess I’ll start an airline and people can just trust to the fact that people have been trying to fly for thousands of years. It must be ok.
@Roisin
“so freely prescribe to trusting and unsuspecting members of the public”
No idea what you point is here, so we should be distrusting and suspicious, or how about we as patients make informed decisions based on the best scientific knowledge available, that would be weird right?
“Herbal remedied have been around since the dawn of time”
Logical fallacy – Argument from antiquity
“Swearing their Hippocratic oath to ….. ancient Greek Demi-Gods they so fervently put their faith in ”
Logical fallacy- Ad hominem attack, also, does this imply that the herbalist practitioners at the time were atheist? And what were the ‘doctors’ at the time using as drugs? Funny how medicine has moved on and accepted new ideas as our knowledge grew.
“The cost of putting natural remedies through the approval process…”
It is expensive to prove something is safe and works, but these costs are recouped as you can then sell something that has been tested and safe and effective. Herbal remedies are an industry as well, so its not valid to assume a dichotomy in their business practice.
Echinacea w….. was used for millenia by the native peoples to cure many types of….. everyday illness”
Logical fallacy – Argument from antiquity
“The Sioux, Cheyenne & Pawnee nations of North America to the best of my knowledge , never speculated on the stock exchange”
Logical fallacy – Reductio ad absurdum, Indian cultures have large casinos that generate huge profit, sometimes at the expense of those with gambling problems, but so what, you are against something cause people are making money from it. What did you think the real world would look like?
Sorry if I come across as being very blunt but I really hope you at least give a small thought to the above.
http://drugs.about.com/od/medicationabcs/a/BlackBoxWarning.htm
These are drugs that are regularly prescribed here and some of the side effects. The ban on children’s echinacea doesn’t actually state any specific danger rather a possibility of a reaction. It is based more on supposedly not having any effect, although after nearly a decade working in IAHS accredited health stores the amount of positive feedback about this product I have received has left me in no doubt as to its efficacy. It seems strange that not one concrete reason has been given for its withdrawal however highly expensive drugs with lethal side effects continue to be administered. As I said before leave it up to parents and adults to choose the health care option that works best for them. If people want the drugs so be it, but equally if others want to take a herb we find effective then we should have that choice and not be dictated too by a nanny state. Why not put a warning label on the bottle that it may cause an adverse reaction (as yet unsubstantiated) as in the case of pregnancy? Or as in the case of prescription medicines when you read the lengthy list of proven side effects usually inside the box. Ultimately we all have responsibility for our own health and whether you believe in herbal medicine or not surely our right to freedom of choice in how we individually care for ourselves and our families should be our decision and not that of a group of strangers.
“after nearly a decade working in IAHS accredited health stores the amount of positive feedback about this product I have received has left me in no doubt as to its efficacy.”
Do you have any idea why your experience is at odds with the test data?
If the so called test data listed an actual side effect then I’d be in a position to refute however no actual problem has been listed only posed as possible so I can only go on the thousands of bottles sold every year and the fact that no one has ever had come back reporting a problem of any sort whilst receiving positive feed back time and time again. There is simply no empirical data proving an outright danger.
All medical herbal products should be banned unless they have rigorous scientific studies that back up any medical claims they made. Otherwise it is, at the very least, false advertising and, at most,it could be considered irresponsible and dangerous.
If echinacea could be shown to strengthen the immune system and help to prevent colds it would be far more lucrative to sell it to the public en masse on a continuous basis as a preventative measure than to only sell people cold medicine when they get sick. Pharmaceutical companies aren’t against herbal remedies; If they worked they’d be the first people trying to sell them to you!
Also, people claiming how herbal products have benefited them need to realise that correlation does not equal causation and that individual isolated cases are very poor scientific evidence. The placebo effect is also very powerful.
Are you against them being sold solely as herbs without a medicinal label? Surely I should have the right to buy any herb I want as long as the toxicity is not at a dangerous level.
Pharmaceutical companies do sometimes try and sell you herbal remedies after they’ve extracted the molecule they’re looking for so they can patent it and therefor justifying the massive money it takes do to try and prove their magic formula works. Too bad by this process many medicines become way more addictive and cause dangerous “side” effects than they would in their natural states.
This is definitely not a placebo… http://cannabisscience.com/download/patientthree_july302012_update8.pdf
I have not taken any form of medicine in 20 years.
It is hard to trust a medical system that allows (unchecked) for a toxic poison to be placed in peoples mouths as dental fillings.
I’m with mother nature on this one.
“The dose makes the poison”.
Calpol also produces rare and dangerous allergic reactions as well as the possibility of liver damage, and yet everyone pumps it into their kids like sweets despite the fact it’s now being linked to asthma… no one’s banned it yet…
What link to asthma? Is there a reputable source for this comment.
Paracetamol in high doses can harm the liver -true- very rare in children as they metabolize it differently to adults.
Is it safer than herbal remedies? Probably as it has been properly studied
Calpol also carries this information on the box and on the leaflet. They also know that it can cause this because they’ve done some research. As for the link to asthma I’d be inclined to think that’s a correlation not causation type situation. I do think people overmedicate their kids but because someone uses something in a stupid way doesn’t mean it should be banned.
The wonderful IMB – aka big pharma
Here’s some serious herbal medicine/vegetable working for this MD’s daughter…
I see Stephanie you are well informed on fluoridation. Did you enjoy the x-factor on Saturday.
I don’t watch it, what has that got to do with anything?
Lots of kids today are allergic to penicillin. Two of my children had severe reactions. One had a very serious one. Ended up in hospital. Are we banning penicillin.
People are willing to put their faith in any herbal remedy in the mistaken belief that if it comes from a plant, then it must be natural and therefore good!
Better still if you get some hear say from a few dope smoking herbal gurus to promote a fictional effect !
Easy money from very gullible people!
Stephanie has made some absolutely brilliant points on this thread GSM . Everything she has said makes total sense to any sensible person.
Oops.
Sceptically speaking I can base my comments on term years worth of feedback based on a product that is sold in thousands every year. In that time not one complaint but endless positive feedback. If the test data presents it’s data transparently and provides an actual proven medical hazard then I can answer your question until then all im seeing is a product being banned for the possibility that a child may have a reaction at some time in the future. Something that can also occur with any food a person eats by the way. Present me with some real empirical data please thats been done by am independent research facility with no affiliations to either side proving it’s supposed dangers if you want me to change my opinion.
@Heather, do you have any data showing echinacea actually works? (beyond anecdotal, which can’t count in evaluating a medicine)
The IMB’s stance is that since the trials show that Echinacea has been shown to have no benefit beyond placebo (see below) then they recommend that it not be taken by children as the possible danger posed by allergic reaction outweighs the benefits (which are 0)
“This is not a serious safety issue and the measures being taken are precautionary in nature. It was a prudent measure based on a scientific evaluation”.
Trial studying echinacea’s use in treating colds – no benefit shown
http://annals.org/article.aspx?volume=153&issue=12&page=769
2006 Cochrane review findings – there are further well-controlled clinical trials since this review that are also negative.
“Sixteen trials including a total of 22 comparisons of Echinacea preparations and a control group (19 placebo, 2 no treatment, 1 another herbal preparation) met the inclusion criteria. All trials except one were double-blinded. The majority had reasonable to good methodological quality. Three comparisons investigated prevention; 19 comparisons investigated treatment of colds. A variety of different Echinacea preparations were used. None of the prevention trials showed an effect over placebo. Comparing an Echinacea preparation with placebo as treatment, a significant effect was reported in nine comparisons, a trend in one, and no difference in six. Evidence from more than one trial was available only for preparations based on the aerial parts of Echinacea purpurea (E. purpurea).
Authors’ conclusions
Echinacea preparations tested in clinical trials differ greatly. There is some evidence that preparations based on the aerial parts of E. purpurea might be effective for the early treatment of colds in adults but the results are not fully consistent. Beneficial effects of other Echinacea preparations, and Echinacea used for preventative purposes might exist but have not been shown in independently replicated, rigorous RCTs.”
have your say