A newly published review has gone into great detail and examined
dozens of clinical trials of the herb Hawthorn to determine if
traditional use of this herb for heart health can be validated. The
way that this review was managed, and how others are reacting to it,
is a great study in the ongoing debate from medical doctors allied to
the pharmaceutical industry.

This new article, a review of existing research, suggests that
hawthorn extract "significantly" improves symptoms. That's good news
for anyone with heart failure, a common condition that is both
debilitating and deadly. Dick Cheney is a well-known example of this
heart condition . . . an estimated five million Americans suffer from
the same problem, which is often the result of clogged arteries that
put stress on the heart by forcing it to work harder.

This review co-author, Dr. Max Pittler, deputy director of
complementary medicine at Peninsula Medical School in Exeter, England,
tells reporters that he would certainly take hawthorn extract if he
had heart issues. According to his report, the hawthorn bush produces
one of the most commonly used herbal medicines in the United States.
Many believe that hawthorn extract improves heart health, lowers
cholesterol and boosts antioxidant levels.

To determine whether hawthorn is actually an effective treatment,
Pittler and colleagues searched the medical literature for high-
quality studies into the use of the herb in chronic heart failure
patients. Their review appears in the current issue of "The Cochrane
Library," a publication of The Cochrane Collaboration, an
international organization that evaluates medical research. Systematic
reviews like this one draw evidence-based conclusions about medical
practice after considering both the content and quality of existing
medical trials on a topic.

Decisions about the research considered for inclusion in a review
include whether or not the trial was double-blinded, or whether it was
placebo controlled, and whether or not it was published. The new
hawthorn review does NOT include the results of one large study --
unpublished to date -- that suggested hawthorn has only a limited
affect on lifespan.

It is in the way that other doctors treat this other, unpublished
study that shows us exactly the problem with certain doctors and their
strong allegiance to the pharmaceutical industry. Despite the evidence
in this new review that hawthorn "improved" or "improved
significantly" various elements of heart failure, some doctors remain
unconvinced.

Dr. Gregg Fonarow, director of the Heart Failure Program at the
University of California at Los Angeles, said the larger hawthorn
study whose results were released last year impressed him more. The
study, which was not included in the review because it thus far
remains unpublished, found only limited benefit.

Why would a doctor such as Fonarow look at the proof in these 14
analyzed trials and STILL suggest that the one trial that really
matters is the unpublished one? Research that goes unpublished has a
problem. It usually remains unpublished because it doesn't pass muster
for one reason or another. By allying himself with the unpublished
data, this doctor is stubbornly refusing to recognize the potential
importance of this herb.

"It's naturally attractive to think there is something over the
counter or naturally occurring that may help improve outcome.
Unfortunately, we've not been able to identify that so far," Fonarow
was quoted as saying. This new review will provide greater
understanding of a valuable herbal supplement to open-minded doctors
all over the world. To doctors like this one, nothing will move them
from the pharmaceutical world to consider the potential of plants and
natural products.

Dave

Full text above extracted from http://shamvswham.blogspot.com/