Archive for February, 2007

Masquerading as science

Friday, February 23rd, 2007

Recently, the news reported that lavender and tea tree oil may cause gynecomastia (breast growth) in young boys.

The underlying study described three young boys. One was exposed to lavender essential oil in a “compounded healing balm” “starting shortly before the visit to the doctor for gynecomastia. The condition resolved within 4 months of discontinuing use of the balm. The second boy used a styling gel on his hair and scalp every morning and regularly used a shampoo. Both the gel & the shampoo listed lavender oil and tea tree oil as ingredients. Nine months after discontinuing use, his gynecomastia was substantially reduced but still present. The third used a “lavender-scented soap” and intermittently a lavender-scented skin lotion. His gynecomastia resolved completely after discontinuing the products. His fraternal twin brother used the lotion but not the soap without any problems.

Based on the researchers’ in vitro studies showing that lavender oil and tea tree oil “possess weak estrogenic and antiandrogenic activities” they “suspect” that these essential oils caused these cases of gynecomastia.

The problems with the study are obvious: There is no convincing correlation between the products and the resolution of gynecomastia, and a rechallenge was not done. The study completely ignored the other ingredients in the various products used. Many body care products, for instance, contain parabens that are strongly estrogenic. And some of the products may not have contained either lavender or tea tree oil. “Lavender scent” usually refers to a synthetic compound, not lavender oil. The news this little “study” generated shows a disturbing bias against natural products.

Henley DV, Lipson N, Korach KS, Bloch CA. Prepubertal gynecomastia linked to lavender and tea tree oils. New England Journal of Medicine 2007; 356:479-485.

Posted in adverse effects, essential oil, pure silliness | 2 Comments »

Baby quit crying

Tuesday, February 13th, 2007

We have all heard of colicky babies but I had no idea how much those babies can cry. It turns out that 15-30% of infants in the Western world have colic which means that they cry for more than 3 hours a day and more than 3 days a week for more than 3 weeks. To be defined as severely colicky, these babies have a history of persistant, full-force crying for no apparent reason several times a day for a duration of more than 4 hours a day for more than 4 days a week. That is a lot of crying. And the solution is so simple:

In a study of healthy, breast fed babies, an herbal tea consisting of chamomile (Matriacaria recutita), fennel (Foeniculum vulgare), and lemon balm (Melissa officinalis) did the trick. They were given small doses of tea (so as not to interfere with their desire to breast feed) twice a day. For the first three days, placebo and herbal tea worked about equally as well. But then: The herbal babies began by crying about 201.2 min/day [The parents must have been counting every second, praying for peace and quiet]. By day 7, the herbal babies were crying about 76.9 min/day. The placebo babies cried 198.7 min/day initially and were crying 169.9 min/day on day 7. Moreover, a reduction in crying was seen in 85.4% of the herbal babies.

The babies were given 2 ml/kg/day of tea in two doses. One at 5 PM and another at 8 PM shortly before feeding. Each dose contained 164 mg fennel, 177 mg chamomile, and 96 mg lemon balm. The effect of the tea lasted for 15 days after treatment.

Of course, you do not need to run out and buy a gram scale to make up the tea but the point made that the babies should not be given a large volume of tea makes good sense. Nor can I see any reason to stop giving the baby a tea that makes them stop crying. Imagine: Those old midwives and wise women were right when they suggested soothing herbal teas for fussy kids.

Savino F, Cresi F, Castagno E, et al. A randomized double-blind placebo-controlled trial of a standardized extract of Matricariae recutita, Foeniculum vulgare and Melissa officinalis (ColiMil) in the treatment of breastfed colicky infants. Phytotherapy Research 2005; 19(4):335-340.

Posted in colic, whole plants | 3 Comments »

Must be expecting things to go wrong

Monday, February 5th, 2007

The Bush administration just put into effect a new law that frees manufacturers from product liability suits for damages caused by vaccines or drugs produced for use in avian flu.

The law, enacted in 2005, gives the Secretary of Health and Human Services the power to grant immunity to companies based on an assessment of risk to public health.  HHS has just invoked that clause “based on a credible risk that an avian virus spreads and evolves into a strain capable of causing a pandemic of human influenza.”

Of course, if the government and manufacturers knew that these products were beneficial and unlikely to cause harm, these measures would be unnecessary.  And of course, if they knew that there was a likelihood of harm, they would make every effort to shield themselves and their profits far in advance of any real threat of a pandemic.  Draw your own conclusions about the benefits and detriments of the treatments they are proposing.

Posted in influenza, pandemic preparedness, prescription medicines | No Comments »