Recently I had the opportunity to attend the American Association of
Naturopathic Physicians National Meeting (AANP) which was held at the
rather unfortunate location of Palm Springs in August. (You could
literally not leave the convention center because of the oppressive
heat outside--my car thermometer read 134 degrees). I had plenty of
time over three days to view the products offered to these doctors by
exhibitors from all over the world.

I am a strong supporter of holistic medicine. I wouldn't take my
family to any other type of doctor, whether it is a holistic MD,
Naturopath, or Chiropractor. But my belief in this holistic approach
is somewhat shaken after seeing how little regard the exhibitors have
for presenting factual data to support the science behind their
products.

The exhibitors (there were about 130 or so as I recall) seemed to be
divided into "science based" and "tradition based" companies. In other
words, a certain percentage of companies sell products that are backed
by clinical trials and very solid science. The remainder sell products
that have traditionally been used in some part of the world for a
certain condition, or for overall healthy lifestyle benefits. I'm OK
with both of those, although I far prefer to see the science behind
something. Most importantly, whether it is science-based or not, I
need it to work for me. That's the ultimate buying decision.

However, it wasn't these "traditional" remedies that I had a problem
with, it was a few of the "science-based" companies which really
angered me. I found they employ a practice I call "stolen science" and
they use that stolen material to sell their products as if there was
truly some value in doing this.

There were dozens of examples of companies selling products by using
the clinical trials or research data of OTHER COMPANIES to sell their
goods. For example, BioGenesis was pitching a Rhodiola rosea product,
and the first three clinical trials they list were for an extract
called SHR-5 Rhodiola, which is a totally different type of
biochemical, one that is produced via a special process by Swedish
Herbal Institute for their product called Arctic Root. How is it that
this extract somehow supports the BioGenesis product, which is
entirely different? It doesn't, but it is there to hopefully sell some
product.

Other companies with larger names were doing the same thing. This
practice hurts the smaller companies who are dedicated to doing their
job with integrity, to selling products that have been tested in
humans. If the marketplace -- in this case the naturopath, but it
means consumers as well -- doesn't support the original products
tested in these trials, or allows suppliers to trick them in this way,
those small companies who spend money and time doing research will go
away.

Is this something we want to see happen? Is this good for the holistic
practitioner? Is it good for the public?

Dave

Editorial above extracted in full from http://shamvswham.blogspot.com/