Sarah Crider English 1102 Professor Campbell 23 February 2014 Healing: Herbal or Conventional What medicine is best for

you? There is a long controversy about what are the best healing methods. In old ages the herbal methods is all that way available; it was developed and shaped by many different cultures. Some argue this is why it is better; there are countries involved in the creation of herbal treatments, where as conventional is limited to areas that have enough money to research. People claim herbal is natural making it easier for the body to handle and will reduce side effects, unlike synthesized drugs that have larger adverse effects than what they are initially treating. But then there is the fact that conventional medicine is newer, thus making it more powerful because stronger, more concentrated ingredients are used. Conventional is research based making it safer and conventional can treat an array of diseases compared to herbal. But which is better? What is healthier? Is there an answer? Currently western doctors are exploring other countries remedies for diseases and studying if they are more effective than our current ones. When exploring how Chinese doctors treat people they came across some effective treatments and some not. Chinese herbal medicine is based off of yin and yang, cooling and stimulating, to balance the qi energy (Zollman, Vickers). The Chinese designed the most effective anti-malarial drug available (Yu). The drug is actually an herbal medicine. They also have a cure for a certain type of leukemia. Finding this more beneficial treatment from ancient medicine gives us hope of being able to develop anticancer drugs, says Dr. Samuel Waxman, a professor of medicine and cancer specialist at Mount Sinai Hospital (Yu). It gives a lot of optimism of seeking other types of cancer medicines in the Chinese pharmacopdia, which many people are looking into, Waxman states. A Chinese doctor
Comment [CA2]: Good intro. I was able to understand where youre going with this paper. Comment [CA1]: Healing methods for what? You could expand a little by saying what theyre better for

gave his patients arsenic trioxide because he did not have access to western medicines (Yu). Waxman states that this doctor kept a journal for ten years documenting the results and the doctor found that arsenic trioxide worked profoundly well (Yu). Also the side effects of this verses chemotherapy were much more tolerable according to patients. This treatment method is much more effective than chemotherapy and with western scientist looking into this new option, they haveow found ways to make it more effective. They have found things to add to the treatment to make is even more successful. When looking at chronic diseases that have no cures yet to date looking into Chinese medicine would do us well. "The advantage you have when you look at some of the Chinese medicine therapies is that by and large, they are safe, as long as what you're getting doesn't have added ingredients," says Brian Berman, a professor of medicine at the University of Maryland who served as the principal investigator of two Chinese medicine research initiatives funded by the National Institutes of Health (Yu). "We need to look at what other cultures have to offer and then we need to put them through a scientifically rigorous test." Not all the techniques the Chinese use were beneficial. Such as their cures for eczema, but still, the knowledge gained by just quickly and superficially studying other cultures medicines resulted in many benefits. Cost is also a major determining factor in anything that people do. I cant go to the movies; I cant go on the school trip, etc: its too expensive. Thats the common thing you hear people say. It is the same for certain countries where they are trying to get treated- it is too expensive. They most recent disagreement over price is happening over the medication for patients with hepatitis C. The drug producer, Gilead Sciences, makes the hepatitis C treatment pills (Knox). Concerned people are currently fighting to make the pills more affordable for
Comment [CA3]: It seems that you could connect these two paragraphs in a smoother way. You could write something about how Chinese techniques are more or less expensive to use and then begin to talk about the costs of medical treatments in general.

people who need them. In the United States 3 million or more people are infected with the virus, in the world there is around 150 million people with hepatitis C (Knox). The most common people who have the disease are people incarcerated or those in poverty. In Egypt, over 22% of the country has hepatitis C (Knox). The reason people are in programs such as Doctors Without Borders are trying hard to get the price reduced for curing patents. Currently in the US one pill is $1,000 and the three month treatment plan costs around $84,000 (Knox). How are the poor supposed to get cured and keep from transmitting hepatitis when they cannot even begin to afford one pill of treatment? The people who are infected typically do not even have health insurance. The drug company has said they are being very generous to third world countries by saying they will reduce the price to $2,000 for an entire treatment (Knox). Since the countries they will be reducing the prices for are countries that are currently using inferior, less effective alternatives because Gilead Sciences prices are so high. Doctors are still arguing that is still too expensive for these people who need it. They say that the best thing to do is make it under $500 (Knox). But it all comes back to how much it takes to manufacture the drug. The drug company has not released the information, but it can be assumed it does not take that much to produce compared to the selling price (Knox). This opens a whole new argument about how much drugs should be, the reason most of them cost so high is not because of the manufacturing costs but because of the ridiculous amounts of money that went into the research of the drug. The idea of delinkage is strongly supported by law professor Brook Baker at Northeastern University in Boston, an adviser to Health Global Access Project (Knox). Delinkage is where it is the governments responsibility to take care of the people by funding research and development of pharmaceutical drugs. Then the responsibility of manufacturing and selling of the drugs is on the drug makers.
Comment [CA4]: This is a very informative paragraph. I think you could tie in something about the costs of herbal medicines, that way it doesnt stray away from your main topic of both medical methods.

Costs greatly affect the market for anything; medicine is one that hurts society the most. If drugs are too expensive and people become in debt just trying to become a healthy functioning citizen there is something wrong. But then there is the argument that medicine isnt certain. There is no 100% assuredness in the medical world. Patients are treated on a case by case basis. What might work best for one person, wont for the nextother. Another major thing that helped prove the uncertainty is the recent disagreement over what experts label as high blood pressure. They have showed that they are unsure what exactly the ideal blood pressure is for people. This uncertainty secret has been revealed in a very public disagreement among experts about who should be treated for high blood pressure. The controversy hinges on the level of blood pressure that should serve as a trigger for treatment, states Yale cardiologist, Harlan Krumholz (Krumholz). Experts recently published that the systolic blood pressure should be 150 or less, were previously it had been 140 or less (Krumholz). Some of the experts who worked on article do not abide by its content. With their names still on the publication they are resorting to the old guidelines, the target should be 140 or less on the top blood pressure number (Krumholz). Krumholz says Although it's uncomfortable to be made aware of disagreements in medicine, patients should know that differences of opinion in medicine are common. What is rare is to have these differences explicitly acknowledged (Krumholz). The way to overcome this he goes on to say is for doctors to have a level of comfort in the uncertainty of medicines, also, for doctors to help guide patients to find the best option for them. Options and opinions are a part of everything. There are always positives and negatives to be evaluated. When looking at herbal medicine it is different from traditional in the fact that herbalists use the entire plant in their remedies: traditional will extract only the potent active
Comment [CA6]: How does this information relate to the questions from the beginning? You could write about how certain treatments have aided this type of disease Comment [CA7]: A part of what? Comment [CA5]: This paragraph needs a little bit more information of how this relates to the conventional medicines vs. herbal medicines.

ingredient (Zollman, Vickers). The herbalists feel like synergy is always the best, the whole ist greater than the sum of the parts. Herbalists claim by only extracting the active portion of plants, it is much harder on the body (Zollman, Vickers). The down fall with using the whole plant is the fact that remedies will have different strengths, because whole plant potency can vary; however, the differentials are harmless to the patient (Zollman, Vickers). Another major difference is that herbalists will use a combination of ingredients. Herbalists say this is due to the fact that it will help with adverse effects and again synergy is better than isolation (Zollman, Vickers). Traditional doctors do what they can to avoid poly-pharmacy, and only give one medicine if possible (Zollman, Vickers). The third major difference between the practices is that herbal medicine is very patient specific (Zollman, Vickers). Observing the standard herbalist procedure, they will take a patient and do a thorough exam. They will then prescribe a personal mixture to that patient and after a few weeks they will reexamine and carefully document everything, depending on the examination they will adjust the patients medicine (Zollman, Vickers). In a traditional setting, when a sick patient goes to the doctor they will ask what are your symptoms and only check for things related to those symptoms. They will then prescribe what is best and tell you to call if things do not improve or there are complications. Herbalists are required to take detailed accounts of every treatment and every ill effect on patients to go into the records (Zollman, Vickers). There are regulations on what the herbal society deems are acceptable and safe. Safety is a major concern when dealing with medicines, whether well known or not. Side effects and consequences are shared to patients before they start any treatment or procedure. There is a fear with herbal medicines that toxic plants or harmful doses and concoctions will be administered, but the majority of any mishaps in the herbal world have been because the patient

had self diagnosed and self treated (Zollman, Vickers). Another safety precaution that herbalist warn and are warned of is contamination of the herb itself, but they have proven that herbs received from Europe and North America have the lowest risk (Zollman, Vickers). There is a system in place to judge if an herbal treatment is approved and can be used. The National Institute of Medicinal Herbalists and the University of Exeter collect and collate adverse events reported by herbalists to ensure all licensed herbalists are up to date (Zollman, Vickers). When looking at what is deemed as safe and not there is a division within the herbal community. The opinions about what should be accepted and on were basis for the logic are split. One group believes that scientific back up is vital to society acceptance while the other is based off of knowledge. There had been very little support for herbal medicine by the general public, until around 1970s- 1980s (Evans). The UK herbal leaders gave the huge boost to the approval by making it clear that herbal medicine needed to be based off science and become scientific herbal medicine (Evans). This bold statement gained citizen support, but it also caused a split in herbalists: traditional herbalists and scientific herbalists. The scientific can be labeled as EBM which stands for Evidence Based Medicine - a way to evaluate and generate biomedical knowledge and link research to clinical application (Evans). EBM ranks treatments on a preset scale that judges off of reliability. Randomized trials are the highest level and most trusted on the scale (Evans). EBM is focused on measurable clinical results. With being scientifically based EBM is very expensive because full out trails trails are expensive and time consuming having a negative connotation. The money for the trials relies on the manufacturer, which inflates the herbal medicine greatly. The EBM ranking method is now a standard for judging the efficacy of biomedical treatments (Evans).
Comment [CA9]: Shouldnt this be in regular font? Comment [CA8]: What about when it comes to conventional medicines? Include a little bit about safety with conventional medicines.

Traditional knowledge (TK) herbalists are those who believe knowledge developed by indigenous and traditional cultures with regard to their environments are the better way. TKs gained attention from Rio Earth Summit in 1992 the aim was to better the public with contribution of indigenous peoples ecological experience (Evans). Traditional knowledge comes from being passed down, from spiritual figures of the locations and the biggest is through observations not trials (Evans). It can be classified as the ancient way of herbal medicine. EBM encourages clinical accountability and address risks while TK address for inclusion of cultural associations and environmental considerations (Evans). Both herbal divisions are firmly based on what they believe is the most effective way to look at herbal. But there is little evidence that points to which have been the most beneficial. Since the scientific based herbal medicine is relatively recent only time will show. When looking at these things it leads to more questions, more things to learn about what the future of medicine could hold. And even what exactly is the better option. Both pharmaceuticals and natural medications have their ups and downs. Costs depend on many variables and everything regarding the medicine world is not concrete. So in the end, medicine and herbs are both methods that can help cure illness; however, nothing is a guarantee, its all relative to the patient and what works for them.
Comment [CA10]: How does this information compare/contrast with conventional medicines?

Works Cited Evans, Susan. "Changing the knowledge base in Western herbal medicine." Social Science & Medicine. 67.12 (2008): n. page. Web. 11 Mar. 2014. Knox, Richard. "NPR." Maker Of $1,000 Hepatitis C Pill Looks To Cut Its Cost Overseas. N.p., 07 Feb 2014. Web. 12 Feb 2014. Krumholz, Harlan. "Blood Pressure Ruckus Reveals Big Secret In Medicine." NPR. NPR, 15 Janurary 2014. Web. 12 Feb 2014. Yu, Alan. "Western Scientists Look To Chinese Medicine For Fresh Leads." NPR. N.p., 18 Janurary 2014. Web. 12 Feb 2014. Zollman, Catherine, and Andrew Vickers. "ABC of Complementary Medicine: Herbal Medicine." British Medical Journal. 319. (1999): n. page. Web. 11 Mar. 2014.

Comment [CA11]: Works cited should be centered at the top and the citations should be double spaced.

Peer Review: Cassandra Avila I think its a really interesting topic. While you have strong paragraphs, there are some weak ones that could use a little bit more information. In your next draft, you could tie in a little bit more to these paragraphs concerning the other types of medicines (conventional medicines) in order to explain the topic more. Its important to keep up with the main topic and sometimes its hard to.