I recently received an e-mail, asking about a herbal preparation that the reader had found on the Internet. Paraphrased, it read:
"I recently read an ad for a new herbal treatment for type 2 diabetes called [name deleted]. Has anyone researched this or had any experience with it? It appears to be very promising, but of course it was an ad."
My reply was as follows:
"I have no experience with this product other than reviewing its website just now.
I might point out that the supposed clinical trial report that they use in support of their claims is certainly not in the format of CSRs (Clinical Study Reports) nor drafts for publication that I am used to, and seems targeted to the non-science reader. The conclusion is laughable:
"Based on these clinical comparisons and the complete lack of known adverse side effects, interactions, or contra-indications from the herbal ingredients in the test product, we conclude that [name deleted] was shown to be a safe and highly effective means of promoting healthy blood sugar balance naturally in the body."
First of all, there were indeed "adverse events" (AE) in these study: unexpected weight loss sounds like a "good" AE, but none-the-less, it is an AE: "this weight loss was measured, it was in no way anticipated or expected in this study group as participants were instructed to maintain their previous eating and drinking habits from pre-study."
Second, "promoting healthy blood sugar balance naturally" is a marketing pitch, not a scientific conclusion.
In short, I strongly suspect this is merely another in a long string of over-hyped minimally-helpful herbal products that come and go. I won't waste my money on it."
Published On: May 10, 2010