I just came across an article on LinkedIn regarding the marketing of herbal supplements and potentially evidence-based drugs. It seemed to concentrate specifically on the marketing of each group, which I didn’t have enough time even to get into before it disappeared.
Regardless, I think I know what it is trying to say: there are these 2 groups of products – one is just herbs, whatever they are is immaterial, because you just have to do your best to market and sell them; the other eventually will be destined to be scientific and evidence-based drugs. I think the people involved in either group know what they can do. One thing this article has done for me is that it has given me the reason why there are no standards of identity and quality for commercial herbal supplements, about which I have often complained. Now, there would be no need to worry about what you sell, because the goods are not important. The main objective of their existence is just being ‘health’ goods, especially the DSHEA does not allow specific claims. The other kind of supplements (herbal or chemical), according to those dealing in them, is one step closer to ‘scientific’ or ‘evidence-based’ drugs, eventually with Big Pharma behind it. Even with this group, I don’t think the players have any clue what they are dealing with – herb or chemical? Especially they are not scientifically trained and don’t recognize that there is no science in drug therapy once a chemical gets into our complex multichemical body. Or they are so intimidated by ‘science’ that they simply go along. I have numerous posts on LinkedIn and on my blog discussing this chemical vs. herb issue, especially the last one uploaded a day ago.
