To the Editor:
In Monday's Herald, you ran an article ("Local apothecary supplies herbal remedies, legally," March 21) by a student detailing her discovery and later use of herbal remedies from a local supplier. After finishing the article, I lamented at the lack of anything but token skepticism from the author's friends. The author treated the subject with credulity, never mentioning the possible counterpoints to using herbal and alternative medicine. Not once did the author state that herbal remedies such as echinacea and St. John's wort have proven to be ineffective or even dangerous in some cases. While the herbalist herself states that herbs "do not treat disease," a source later in the article specifically calls the herbs "medicines."
My main objection to the author's work is this — herbs are drugs. A substance used to alter the functioning of the body is a drug regardless of its source or character. Natural does not mean safe. The lack of regulations on herbs and herbalists leaves the door wide open for harmful and counterproductive treatment.
The author implies that she will continue to use herbal medicines since they "haven't killed me yet" — the same refrain used by smokers, alcoholics and drug addicts worldwide. Should this sort of sentiment really accompany a supposed system of healing?
Tim Dingman '11
