Posted by Larry Hoover on September 5, 2003, at 12:55:20
In reply to Larry Hoover « Larry Hoover, posted by McPac on September 5, 2003, at 11:57:22
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Kira was one of the products mentioned in the newspaper article as having tested well below its claims.It tests low (not well below, IMHO), but it is remarkably consistent, batch-to-batch. That's why I included the article reference (the pdf file).
If you take the Kira product, dosing according to symptoms/response, it is really irrelevant whether you're getting 88% or whatever of the stated ingredients. The 900 mg/day "standard dose" is merely a guideline. The last time I used SJW, I was using 2250 mg/day.
> Looks like you really can't be sure at all what you're getting with these products. For someone who doesn't really NEED the product (milder problems) that's one thing; for someone who has severe problems that desperately must count on the content of these products, that's an entirely different story.
Getting a consistent product is important, but beyond that, you still must titrate the dose.
> At least with meds, you (in the vast majority of cases) know what you're getting. I see why folks with very severe problems shouldn't risk their lives with products whose content is 'anybody's guess'. I've had friends who tried SJW for their very, very mild symptoms or even just for the heck of it...it really didn't matter to them if the product contained NONE of what it stated, they were still fine without it. But to someone that had major depression that desperately was counting on the product...they could be up on a bridge railing if they got a rip-off batch. And although it usually says "for mild to moderate depression", I have read studies where it was used for severe depression. But someone buying it off the store shelf can only hope that the bottle they choose is up to snuff.
I fully recognize your concerns, in this regard. The pharmaceutical industry has actively blocked reasonable and appropriate guidelines for the standardization and testing of herbal products. It's not rocket science. The lack of governmental oversight is intentional.
> Even if one bottle of a particular brand does pass the test, that surely doesn't mean the next bottle by that same company will.
Certainly, that is a risk, but Jarsin 300 (Kira) is a very consistent product, batch-to-batch.
> I have been trying to use SJW and other products of that ilk as an adjunct, in a complementary role to meds; if my problems were only mild ones, or even moderate, I could take more chances with this stuff.
If the stuff you're using is anything like the Sundown product reviewed by the L.A. Times, then you may be wasting time and money. I'm sorry to hear that your product was not identified, but perhaps it was tested by consumerlab, and the results not published in the public part of the site. There is a membership fee to view the full results. I haven't bothered joining (yet). I have other things to spend my money on, right now.
> > Here's a link to a reliability study of these extracts:Here's that link again. Check out the graphs of hyperforin and hypericin content for Jarsin 300 (Kira).
http://www.aphanet.org/JAPhA/julyaug01pdfs/wurglics%20p560_566.pdf
> > > Since I'm already taking the SJW, but still don't feel too good, I guess I'll stay w/ that and raise the dose to 3 a day (1350 mg/day).
> >
> > Or change products?
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Again, one bottle of 'X' brand may contain what it claims but the next bottle may not...that Kira brand was only 81% in one test, something like 90% in another, who knows what in the next (it was in the LA Times article). Kind of like 'Pot Luck' what you're getting.I think the pdf file is a good reference.
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Lar, Ame was telling me that Remeron is blocking the SJW from working for me. I'll post the study with the info. where he deduced that from; please see what you think.
It may be interacting with SJW, but we don't know just what it is about SJW that makes it work, so any interpretation of receptor modulation research is bound to be conditional at best, and pure guesswork at the least.
> > I don't know what contradictory evidence you're referring to. It all makes sense to me. <wink>
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes but you're a scientist/chemist/brainiac Lar! (Can I trade brains with you?)Trust me. You don't want to know what it's like having my brain.
> > Actually, there is active suppression of Hypericum by drug companies. I could give you a very long trashing of the published study that "proved" that SJW doesn't work (the article posted in JAMA). It was biased, selective, used inappropriate statistical measures, and failed to disclose that the researchers, and all funding, were paid for by the manufacturer of sertraline. Moreover, the drug company had bought the herb supplier, and withdrew all Hypericum products at the same time as it released the flawed study.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I said something to this exact same effect before on the Babble board and was called a "conspiracy theorist", lol....as if everybody is a Saint, lol.Like I said, I could give you a major trashing review of that study. I'm not alone in that opinion. There was a massive amount of negative feedback in the "letters to the editor" forum, following publication. There were major flaws in the study, how the data was analysed, conclusions expressed that actually contradict the data, conclusions expressed which were simply restatements of the hypothesis, and on and on.
I can't assure you that a particular product is good, but the evidence points to Kira and Perika having pretty good batch-to-batch consistency. In the end, that factor, and having reasonably good accord between label content and actual content (concentration of active ingredients), are what I would be looking for.
Lar
poster:Larry Hoover
thread:257255
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/alter/20030903/msgs/257297.html