The Real Story Behind the War on Natural Healing
You’ve probably seen the headlines…
The New York Post went with “Most Herbal Supplements Aren’t What You Think They Are.” Mysterious…
Forbes decided on “Herbal Supplements are a Ticking Time Bomb…And the Ticking is Getting Louder.” Menacing…
Then there’s The Washington Post…
They ran “Americans are Ignoring the Science and Spending Billions on Dietary Supplements.”
And they’re partially right. Americans are ignoring the science. Just not in the way the mainstream is claiming. You’ll be shocked at what we uncovered about their assault on supplements… And how it could be putting you and your family’s health at risk.
This all started a little over a week ago… That’s when New York attorney general (AG) Eric Schneiderman’s office sent cease and desist letters to some of the biggest supplement retailers in the state. GNC… Target… Walmart… Even Walgreens.
He accuses them of selling fraudulent—even dangerous—herbal supplements. And he demanded they pull them off the shelves…or else.
The letters come after an investigator hired by the AG’s office examined echinacea, garlic, ginseng, gingko biloba, saw palmetto, St. John’s wort, and valerian root supplements. The samples came from stores across New York… from Brooklyn to Syracuse.
Testing revealed about 80% of these samples didn’t contain any of the herbs on their label. Not one. In fact, they found 35% of these products were made of things not listed on the label. Mostly cheap fillers. Everything from powdered rice to common houseplants. Even allergens like wheat.
It seems like a home run for the anti-supplement crowd.
The AG’s office certainly thought so. Mr. Schneiderman wasted no time on weighing in…even before these retailers had time to respond:
“The old adage ‘buyer beware’ may be especially true for consumers of herbal supplements . . . Results seem to confirm long-standing questions about the herbal supplement industry. Mislabeling, contamination, and false advertising are illegal. They also pose unacceptable risks to New York families—especially those with allergies to hidden ingredients.”
They sound like the words of someone with your best interest in mind. Someone you can trust to do the right thing. Too bad that’s not the case… And there are a few reasons why.
First, you have to look at who conducted the study… And how he got his results.
The AG hired Dr. James A. Schlute. He’s an associate professor of biology at Clarkson University in Potsdam, New York. And he’s an expert in DNA. Reptile DNA. He works with lizards.
It’s an odd choice of experts for an herbal supplement study.
That’s not to pick on Dr. Schlute. He does work with DNA barcoding technology. It’s what they used to analyze the products. But that’s another problem…
According to the American Botanical Council (ABC), it’s a limited technology. It can’t identify complex herbal extracts. And even if it could, little or no DNA is preserved in the extraction process. Their results are premature at best.
For example… This test will identify garlic. But it won’t identify garlic extract. That’s because processing changes the DNA makeup of plant matter. It gets crushed, heated, dried, filtered… That one tiny fragment of DNA they’re looking for may be broken. Or gone.
But it doesn’t mean the product is mislabeled. It doesn’t even make the product less potent. Extracts are more concentrated than whole herbs. And they provide you with guaranteed amounts of active ingredients. A missing DNA fragment does not mean a missing herb. Or health benefit.
At least that’s what Dr. Pieter Cohen says. He’s a researcher at Harvard Medical School. Supplements are his area of expertise. He says the results are hard to accept… Calls them “too extreme.” He believes the testing method—not manufacturing practices—is to blame.
It makes sense when you consider its limitations. But there’s another problem here… The AG’s investigation only used one testing method. From just one laboratory. There has to be additional testing…ideally with the correct tests. Like microscopic analysis and chromatography. And they should both done by an independent lab.
Without that, the AG’s results are just preliminary. They need validation.
Only one method used…and not the best one. By one man…and not the right one. In one laboratory…and no outside testing. But there’s still another question we had…