Wild Rose College of Natural Healing 2010 Terry Willard Cl.H PhD. v

Transcription

1 Lesson 2 Some Biochemical Mysteries INTRODUCTION In this lesson we will look at some of the different interpretations of modern herbology. Different herbalists have used these theoretical approaches in the past with various fragments being reincorporated into the present day practices. Please take time to review them. You will not be tested on them, or asked to accept them. Our major intention in this lesson is to show that the chemical energy in a botanical is quite different than that of a synthetic chemical and that the chemical properties are not the only aspect of herbal uses. We will be looking briefly at some thoughts that herbalists and natural healers have used to explain, why natural products seem to work a bit different than the sum of their chemicals might dictate. Throughout the nations and cultures of the world, health related models differ; but some aspects remain similar across different systems. Fig 2.0 Kirlian Photograph of a Raw Goji Berry ORGANIC VS. INORGANIC Often herbal medicine is sought because it is believed to be more organic than conventional medicine. As you have seen, the word organic used here is a bit different than the concept of eating organic food. The term organic food is misleading. As a matter of fact, all food is organic in the scientific sense of the word. Any substance that contains carbon and was made in a living system is organic. It has nothing to do with whether pesticides were sprayed on it or not. Many petrochemical-based pesticides are technically organic. These are not the foods that we might want to eat. 1

2 Certified organic foods are established by government or industry and are typically grown without the use of petrochemical pesticides or fertilizers and ensures no genetic modification. Read Chapter 5, Pages (to "Modern Herbology") Here we are looking at the different subtle energies that can be found in botanical chemical compounds, as compared to the subtle energies found in synthetic compounds. The big difference is solar energy, vital Qi, and organization of that energy. Taking herbals rather than drugs is like listening to harmonic music as opposed to discordant sounds. Fig 2.2 Fig 2.1 The major key to solar energy is of course the production of chlorophyll and more specifically magnesium. In fig 2.3 below you can see the difference. The orbital of the outside electron jumps to a higher energy point when in contact with the sunlight. Fig 2.3 This is an electrical charge that is sent on to other chemicals via the photosynthesis process. As the energy is passed on to the other chemicals, the orbital goes back to normal, just to get excited by the sun again. It again passes the energy on, repeating this over and over again, as long as the chlorophyll is exposed to sunlight. When using herbals, we are not only accessing the chemical properties, we are getting biological energy (Qi). This can mean that we actually need fewer active constituents from a botanical to achieve a desired biological effect while lowering the potential for a side effect to occur. Fig 2.4 2

3 THE CHEMICAL COMBINATION Herbal healing models view a botanical s effect as a complex set of interactions in a biological and environmental network. Pharmaceutical models employ a more linear model of healing, by assuming an isolated chemical constituent will eradicate an identified disease symptom. Fig 2.6 Lapacho (Tabebuia avellanedae) In your average pharmaceutical medicine you have one active ingredient. Sometimes there are two or more, but this is quite rare. In pharmaceutical science and the search for active ingredients, they try to settle on the most important one. They synthesize it, hopefully changing it enough to get a Fig 2.5 Lapacho (Tabebuia avellanedae) patent, and send it to market. In a living botanical there are multiple chemicals. It is like a symphony of harmonically interacting parts. Often one chemical component neutralizes or even detoxifies others in the same botanical. How these combinations work on the human system has been carefully worked out over thousands of years by some of the brightest minds of the day. In the Western world we sometimes have an arrogant view of history, where the smartest people of this century were(are) alive only within the modern era. If this were actually true, then why pay attention to the ideas of Newton or Galileo? Who is to say that Western culture was the only one that produced intelligent people? We tend to identify Western culture with scientific achievements. Let s face it, some of the most creative minds throughout history, in all cultures, have focused on their society s most important contribution - Life itself. To be in good health has been highly prized by all people throughout time. Much of the current information on botanicals today is knowledge recorded by people from non-western and non-technological cultures. Because scientific techniques are easily outdated with new advances, or a better mouse trap, it is easy to think all old techniques are inadequate. Many of our top medical minds of the last century were herbalists. This is true in other cultures also. Herbal knowledge has been built by contributions from the entire world s culture. Some of these traditions and practices are alive today existing alongside scientific approaches to health. Back to chemical combinations. Botanicals have many components. Let s take Lapacho (Tabebuia avellanedae, a.k.a. Taheebo, Pau D'Arco) as an example. There are sixteen known quinones in Lapacho. South American folklore says it is useful for cancer management. The National Cancer Institute in the U.S.A. searched for the active ingredient. They settled on 3

4 one of the important chemicals, Lapachol. Even though in their own studies, they found that it had over 90% effectiveness against several cancer models, they stopped studying it. Lapachol was considered quite safe in moderate dosages, but had negative vitamin K activity in the higher cancer dosages. The analog (or chemical that was synthesized to be similar) was toxic and had less activity than the natural plant source. All studies stopped. There was no money in it to attract pharmaceutical research. In reality, even though the one chemical had negative vitamin K activity, five other chemicals in the herb showed positive vitamin K activity, more than compensating for lapachol s shortcomings. But you can't patent a natural botanical. Even though the sum of the whole is often better than the sum of its parts. If we were going to look for just one chemical, it would be like having only one instrument in a symphony, instead of a whole orchestra. Often chemicals work in harmony with each other creating a new and desired effect. Another important difference between chemicals is that of isomers, or shape. Vitamin E can have 12 different shapes, or isomers. One of these shapes is considered the best, D-alpha tocopherol. This is the one you will often see in the vitamin department of natural food stores. Chemicals often come in right handed (D-isomers) and left handed (L-isomers) shapes. In vitamin E, there are six of each. When making vitamin E synthetically you get both right and left handed isomers (D & L). Synthetic vitamin E is therefore called DL-tocopherol. Since our body can only use the D- tocopherols, at first glance this product seems to be half as strong. The price of buying DL-tocopherol is usually a bit less than half the price of D- alpha tocopherol. On the surface, it looks like a good buy. But since D- alpha tocopherol is only 1/12th of the DL-tocopherol (1 out of the 12 possible isomers), DL is not as good a buy, because we are looking for the D-alpha tocopherol action. The shape in complex chemicals is very important. It is often like a key and a lock. It doesn't matter how many keys you have in your pocket, if you don't have the right one. Read pages Botanicals have evolved over the same time lines that we have. Our digestive tracts and internal mechanisms have somewhat similar blueprints. To make a key without knowing the specific lock would be a problem. Pharmaceutical chemists are trying to make chemicals without always knowing the specific mechanism behind them. They still don't have a definitive explanation for how aspirin works on the human body. If a botanical has worked a certain way for the last few thousand years, on a couple of billion people, the key probably fits. Often it is best to let Nature work out the details, it s had lots of practice. Let s turn our attention to the range of modern herbalists in North America -- their backgrounds, training, the clinical models they use and the systems they employ. 4

5 THE MODERN HERBALIST Modern herbalism is practiced by an array of diverse and eclectic figures. When we look at the more prominent figures in North American Herbology, we see that most have chosen to specialize in a particular discipline of herbology, but haven't stopped there. Maturity as clinicians, educators and authors has urged them to delve into additional areas of herbal study. We find most of these herbalists have adopted one or more form of energetics to help them understand the personality of the botanicals. They have all adopted the Western scientific model to some degree in order to explain herbal activity to Western minds. If we are to use these modern herbalists as a model for our own education and development we see four common elements: 1. Dedication 2. Use of the scientific model 3. Use of some a form of Energetics 4. Open-mindedness to other healing modalities/cultural traditions Besides the models in your text and the combination of models seen among prominent herbalists there are two other significant models in modern Western Herbology. 1. Modern North American naturopathy 2. European phyto-pharmaceuticals To make generalizations about either tradition risks overlooking possible exceptions, but an obvious trend in modern naturopathy includes certain uses of botanical medicine. Only a small part of most modern naturopaths' practices center around herbology. The use of many other therapies, such as homeopathy, manipulation, high-tech natural supplements, electronic devices and counseling also form a part of their practice. Naturopaths tend toward standardized extracts of botanicals, working from a detailed scientific and somewhat pharmaceutical knowledge of plants. Naturopaths tend to use medicines as natural pharmaceuticals. Plant energetics are not necessarily considered. The old naturopaths were all Vitalists, however not all modern naturopaths follow that path. European phyto-pharmaceuticals are based on specific knowledge of a chemical or a group of chemicals. Two recent examples of this are ginkgo and milk thistle extracts. The active ingredients of these herbs are further concentrated to obtain pure active ingredients. These become 5

6 strong chemicals that are derived from natural sources. They really cannot be considered herbs anymore. However, I do use some European phytopharmaceuticals in my practice. Why? Because they work! But I can't kid myself into considering these as some form of advanced herbology. Over time you will develop you own blend of herbology, whether as a clinician, educator, author, wildcrafter or manufacturer. It is good to know what others are doing, but it is important for you to keep your eye on the ball -- your basic and solid education. With a solid foundation you can make informed decisions about what type of herbology is right for you. 6