Whoever would have looked into the section of the scientific literature on this site and he would have you bothered to read the abstracts of 20 publications listed there (do not do it now!), He would find that most of them reported positive results. A positive result means that something has been found to be effective, a good, positive. Throughout biomedical research, the trend is positive conclusions and neglect negative conclusion. This problem is worst in the so-called. Conventional medicines, but because this site on adaptogens, it is necessary to mention the problems and internal contradictions research adaptogens.
The entire web "Adaptogens" is popularizing
The first is, I must say that this whole web "Adaptogens" is - with the exception of this article - written popularization. It's also a subjective site - contains my personal reflections and conclusions. I do not pay much attention to scientific reports on the effectiveness of natural remedies, and much more frequent explorations of commercial drugs. This is based on the observation that research in general are less and less bound to the public welfare and more to private entities ( Slaughter2003rac ) and on the hypothesis that private market players nadržují patentable commercial drugs. (Efforts to patent plants and their varieties are emerging, but the easier they are facing.) This my intuitive hypothesis formally prove energy instead devote effort to contribute to addressing a conscious bias in favor of natural remedies. This does not mean that you do not realize the problems of research adaptogens.
Unpublished negative results
Bias against negative results, the problem of science itself. It is fortunately a certain part of the academic population recognizes and actively addresses (see reasons eg. The editorial of the magazine for the negative results in biomedicine, http://www.jnrbm.com/ and some general).
For example, the fact that some panaxosidy promote the growth of blood capillaries pokusníci gladly used as an argument in studies on its healing effects, while others with the same joy explain the antitumor effects of ginseng that other panaxosidy growth of capillaries block ... This rift was the expert comments discern, but there are many others, of which so far according to my knowledge nobody talked.
Limiting the growth of blood vessels in tumors
Override: According Wang2015gmc have ginseng metabolites ginsenoside RG3 and compound A significant antitumor effect by inhibiting angiogenesis in tumors of the lung, stomach and ovaries. Compound A inhibits blood vessel growth by inhibiting the p38 MAP kinase ( Jeong2010cib ) and the regulation of sphingosine kinase-1 ( Shin2014gci ). Panaxosid RB 1 also has an inhibitory effect on the growth of capillaries ( Papapetropoulos2007gor , Sengupta2004may ), but its anti-tumor potential below gssd forces. RG3 and comp. K ( Wang2015gmc ).
Personally, I would here like to say that I do not see how the researchers who attribute the antitumor effect of ginseng limit the growth of blood vessels cope with the fact that according to other studies, the total extract panaxosidů on the growth of capillaries activation effect caused by ginsenoside Rg 1 ( Sengupta2004may ). In my opinion, these researchers this controversy rather tactfully bypass. In the research of adaptogens unilateral inspection of researchers interested in general problem ( Paterson2006gtf ).
Subjective wellbeing ... nootropic effects ... misunderstanding of the principle of effectiveness (attempts to measure something other than what the drug does) ( Yan2009sdr )
Unpublished negative results
At this point I would like to quote Russell Paterson, author of the famous statement of lesklokorce shiny ( Paterson2006gtf ) and Cordyceps sinensis ( Paterson2008ctc ). Paterson belong to a variety of scientists who do not deny the traditional medicine deserved respect, but they do not forget the objective view. Paterson efficiency means TCM wrote about nezppochybňuje way, rather vice versa. But it notes that "there is a strange combination of science, pseudoscience and superstition" which is not easy to unravel. This is a bit given the fact that traditional medicine is not a science - not based on the scientific method, but the acceptance of tradition, if possible unchanged.
Negative scientific results as good news
In light of the above said, I welcome negative results on adaptogens which are slowly beginning to emerge. Negative results serve the same purpose as a control for the experiment - an attempt to add credibility itself. For ginseng can find several examples of negative publications:
- Bahrke1994eep : ginseng found ineffective in physical performance.
- Bahrke2000eep : ginseng found ineffective in physical performance.
- Bahrke2009iga : ginseng found ineffective in physical performance.
- Cupp1999hra : list of side effects and interactions of several herbs, including ginseng (the case described a possible interaction with warfarin).
- Thommessen1996nie : Italian clinical study in which ginseng was found to be ineffective in terms of improving mental abilities of older people.
These publications negative but still not good enough. With the exception of the last is not a research publications, only skeptical reports. Description case 1 patient Cupp1999hra is scarce. I'd much rather see more such studies as the last - Thommessen1996nie . At that, 60 elderly treated with ginseng capsules after 8 weeks without badatelného improvement of mental functions. The dose was low (only 2 capsules per day, or less than 1 gram of ginseng), but more important is that this negative outcome was never published. Do Good news, however, is not the negative publications that are false - which in my opinion is the case Messina2006hsf publications .
Scientific integrity in publications on adaptogens
For most adaptogens, there is a huge amount of scientific publications. There are indications of potential efficacy in dozens of diseases. It would be very good news that - again parafázuji Paterson - "for synthetic products have been remarkable even if paid for only one of these diseases ... It is necessary to verify whether the research is sufficiently rigorous. Extraordinary statements require extraordinary evidence. .. "
Everything Paterson writes about otaznících regarding research lingzhi mushroom is even greater degree of ginseng. Although the basic effectiveness of ginseng everyone can easily and subjectively verified by testing, it does not answer the question to what extent, for example, all of the ginseng research rigorous. Strangely at me also impressed several articles on goji foreign, which are, in my opinion, overly positive. The question is what percentage of pseudo-science research adaptogens have yet unfortunately only one answer: We do not know.
Only in this phase begins with "western" research - G115, Ginsana, ColdFX etc. Western chicken began to poke though some of it flows.
- G115 Double-blind study of a multivitamin complex supplemented with ginseng extract. (Note the pretentious name) 9034759
It makes because it must - because of the allegations.
Here also includes Korean ginseng research, in particular, with whom in the 90 years have proliferated.
Korec realized that it was worthwhile to invest in clinical research of its national product, for which consider ginseng. To their credit it must be said that truly advance scientifically and seriously.
If you expect that this issue which effects are credible publications, and solve it here, so it does not ... but I want to show that aware of these issues
Before proceeding further, I would like to point out that in a relatively primitive industrial medicine, the question of a positive impact on the overall well being has never addressed. Somehow, by default it is considered that the immediate pharmacological effect as it does stand when people want to take, but at a rigorous study would be found that long-term use is harmful.
Effects of herbal combinations ... often contain implicit předpklad about the effects not interfere with each other (and not amplify)
The authors often emphasize the positive implications and ignore the negative ones. Specific example:
- Hooray conclusions at the (otherwise very healthy) goji. The goji is already well know from tradition that is very healthy. However, the writers of scientific surveys sometimes do not realize that it is their duty to use the scientific method and not to seek to interpret the lack of data in favor of goji just because well, we know that it is healthy.
- Positive bias in the immunomodulatory effects of ginseng. Double-acting effect is not problematic, but rather for ginseng typical . Problematic, however, positive interpretation, without mention of the possible negative effects. Maybe switching the immune response of type 1 / type 2 reaction is often predictable given only positive consequences. So it is with immunostimulating / immunosuppressant properties of ginseng - immunosuppressive effects on macrophages / microglia is traditionally is sung as a protection against inflammation and pain, while the immunostimulatory the praises as "strengthening immunity" - namely, the activation effects of ginseng polysaccharides on macrophages ( lim2002aep ) are interpreted only positively against Staphylococcus aureus septicemia. These results still await proper summarization.
- Authors of relevant studies, lim2002aep , unfortunately typical errors committed research adaptogens, which is an effort to build the observed effects at all costs in a positive light .
To properly summarize the effects of ginseng should be treated fairly and with knowledge that a negative outcome is the result. It is necessary to pay attention to the possibility that ginseng in some cases getting worse immunity against infection (how exactly resulted from the traditional contraindications in acute febrile diseases) and the possibility that the activation of NOS2 ženšenovými polysaccharides, as described by lim2002aep had a negative impact on uninfected tissue. Lim2002aep presents its findings explicitly associated only with the positive effect of ginseng - against Staphylococcus aureus septicemia.
It happens quite often in science that the various publications contradict its conclusions, and so, even ginseng.
Perhaps Jiang1996mag and Liu1995egr measured the effect of ginsenosides Rb 1 and Rg 1 mA reduce the concentration of Ca 2+ ions in rat neurons, which explain the activation of Na / K-ATPase. However Cao1990ieg just outside ginsenosides Rb 1 and Rg 1 has an inhibitory effect on the same Na / K-ATPase.
Furthermore, the effect of ginseng reported increased aggression in mice, other publications, however, reported a decrease aggression.
While ginseng is well known and undoubted strong effect against radiation damage , publications Chae2009ecm ascribes compound K (the active substance of ginseng) strong cytotoxic effect on γ irradiated cells. According to it, thus in irradiated tumor cells could ginseng promote apoptosis, while minimally Kim2001mrr and Lee2006ivr find that other content substances of ginseng protects cells from apoptosis. Why are these Korean colleagues do not quote each other? Why Chae2009ecm talking about anti-tumor effects and Kim2001mrr and Lee2006ivr only radioprotective? I have also read the full text Chae2009ecm how, I wonder if I just did not mention. Or even know each other? What it is, research to order? So doing good science. Ordinary scientist is to ask how it is that the effect in the end prevail. And if there is indeed a selective effect against cancer cells, how the phytocomplex ginseng distinguish them from healthy ones? Koreans must learn not to avoid difficult questions in science.
There is experimental and clinical studies even claiming that ginseng increases resistance to influenza vaccination improves efficiency and effective also in the treatment of influenza and other viral diseases. These studies are but one serious weakness - mostly funded by manufacturers of ginseng products. Often even these manufacturers only accentuate their own business name and the fact that their product is based on ginseng, almost no answer. <- In trouble
It is seen that even a single scientific publication is not always to be taken literally or easily interpreted. Summarizing the actual effects of the plants-which requires careful study, unbiased attitude and often hidden motivations and understanding of groups that in publishing activities of adaptogens bring their own interests.
Overview Wong1998hrp is mostly based on outdated data, cp. Must cChen2008cpe . Lieberman2001ege says one thing right - the word energy in terms of "mental energy", "natural energy" and energy-containing drink should not be used.
Inhibition of angiogenesis in hailing
Vitaferin A, which is the main active ingredient hailing snodárné , is an inhibitor of angiogenesis, which explains the potential suitability hailing cancer (). But hailing traditionally been considered as a classic adaptogen (it is called Indian ginseng , and even in scientific literature) and unilateral effects, therefore, have not. For ginseng scientists underline its balanced effect on the growth of blood vessels, in hailing but nobody minds that its effect on the growth of blood vessels is only inhibitory. Ginsenoside (find that) improves blood vessel growth, and this explains the positive effect of ginseng on the regeneration means unilateral hailing inhibitory effect on the growth of blood vessels that this plant slows wound healing? This troublesome issue is not paying any publication, although they must inevitably exist plants which such a negative effect in the repertoire they have. If it turned out that hailing such a negative effect, it would be appropriate to reconsider its inclusion among adaptogens. (My personal opinion is that hailing it is completely safe and harmless, but science should not rely on tradition, their mission is to inspire tradition and even uncomfortable questions to explore!)
The same plant, another effect of the same problem - a publication Rasool2006irw found hailing immunosuppressive effect. Ginseng are immunostimulatory and immunosuppressive effects in balance, so do hailing? Or is it just hailing a tonic and adaptogen not?
Specificity anticancer effects Reishi
Publications showing various aspects of antitumor effect of Reishi are hundreds. But before I start quoting them, I do not conceal that there is a question of their specificity. It shows that even ordinary edible mushrooms have a certain anti-cancer effect. It is appropriate to ask whether the same effect as the Reishi not get much cheaper eg. Of oyster mushrooms. Scientifically based answer to this question is not available. My personal opinion is that although the common edible mushrooms deserve attention, Reishi over them for their anticancer effect excels. This opinion I formed partly on the basis of their (selective) respect for TCM, partly by studying literature and knowledge polysaccharide and triterpenoid substances contained in Reishi.
Clinical trials are scarce, firstly cancer difficult to carry out, second, they have no one to finance. We will still use patients as guinea pigs to test Reishi without cytostatics when cytostatics apparently kill cancer cells.
The effects of ginseng are not particularly miraculous, there are some aglycones ... Cancer and ginseng dedicated exaggerated scientific attention ... (but which does not reach the proportions of research around the common synthetic drugs) ... plus specific polysaccharides ... Ginseng is not a panacea for treatment and prevention of colorectal cancer, but certainly this is an appropriate adjuvant. ... Ginseng therapy also belongs to these severe cases in the hands of TCM doctors, because in terms of scientific medicine ginseng despite all experimental studies "clinically unremarkable" ... TCM doctor can blend ... although on TCM can also view as to trading game in which doctor and patient facing each other.
Links and references
-> Allergies: http://zdravi.doktorka.cz/cim-vice-cistoty-tim-vice-alergii/
Clusia grandiflora - https://www.researchgate.net/publication/240359469_Antibacterial_function_in_the_sexually_dimorphic_pollinator_rewards_of_Clusia_grandiflora_Clusiaceae
coffee substitutes: 1. GM coffee with low caffeine content (nothing fancy coffee substitute) žaludovka 2nd, 3rd cereal coffee, roasted seeds ibiškovce fourth edible (fringes. anecdotal allegations of carcinogenicity), 5th chicory (chicory miracle plant which in its zadubenosti and lack of opportunities and I do not collect, I try to rectify
example, medical schools teaching medical botany - http://fab.zshk.cz/vyuka/sterculiaceae.aspx
Institute exp. Botany, eg. http://www.ueb.cas.cz/cs/users/vanek
Zdenek Navratilova http://casopis-zsfju.zsf.jcu.cz/kontakt/administrace/clankyfile/20130321150451918944.pdf
Natural remedies are preferable to self-regulatory treatment ... It is based on the breakthrough discovery that sometimes the patient himself knows best what helps him. Not because the natural medicines have some magic vis vitae, but because we are their instinctive assessment and management of metabolic evolutionarily accustomed. ... (See Duke) ...
That common medicines have the potential to cause addiction, it is the observation that I have not read the books or articles, but has made virtually on their loved ones. ...
... Adaptogens just try - without prejudices, without unrealistic expectations ... call for expressions or nonmanifested their effectiveness longer time ...
remember that ... drugs purely natural, non-patentable, gets less publicity ... even antireklamy ...
- cacao (Theobroma cacao) - eg. http://www.salviaparadise.cz/herbar-rostlin-kakaove-boby-theobroma-cacao-c-736_847.html
- grandis cacao (Theobroma grandiflorum) - taste very interesting relative of cacao from freakish family lejnicovitých (Sterculiaceae), whether wheel cuspidate, now ranked in the taxon Malvaceae (Malvaceae), which include durian (attention - like fruit breadfruit Cempedak belongs to the mulberry)
- check baobab fruit is edible - http://www.lideazeme.cz/clanek/opici-chleb-miri-do-evropy
- Banana pointed - ie. ordinary bananas
For example, in the model adaptogen ginseng you could say that its more than 180 panaxosidů actually originated only from three main aglycones: protopanaxadiol (PPD) protopanaxatriol (PPT) and acid, oleanolic and they are effective only these aglycones and a small amount of at least glycosylated forms . It is not possible for one plant to improve the adaptation of several physiological systems and had indications in several different unrelated diseases. That without having to look at any of the thousands of experimental study, this reasoning in itself shows that it is a shamanic panacea. We would have přihmouřit over his eyes nesaponinovými components (polysaccharides, specifically alcohol ...), but this could be somehow denigrate adaptogens.