Herbal medicinal products - evidence and tradition from a historical perspective

  • Background: Aside from the fully licensed herbal medicines there are products on the European pharmaceutical market which are registered by virtue of their longstanding traditional use. The normal registration procedure does not apply to them because presently they do not meet the legal requirements for a full license as set out in the relevant European Union Directive. One of these requirements, “proof of tradition”, has so far been dealt with in different ways and fails to meet the criteria of good practice. Method: This analysis is based on a selective literature search in PubMed and in databases of medical and pharmaceutical history, interviews with licensing experts, a consensus meeting attended by researchers with a background in general medicine, phytotherapy, medical and pharmaceutical history, biometry, ethnopharmacology, pharmacognosy and the pharmaceutical industry. Results and discussion: The 2004 EU Directive, which governs the registration of Traditional Herbal Medicinal Products and demands proof of tradition, is a regulatory construct and, above all, the outcome of a political process that has ended in a pragmatic compromise. The concept of tradition applied in the Directive does not sufficiently reflect the semantic breadth of the term. The only condition defined is that a specific commercial preparation needs to have been on the market for 30 years (15 of them inside the EU). Such an approach does not make full scientific use of the evidence available because the information excerpted from historical sources, if adequately processed, may yield valuable insights. This applies to indications, modes of application, efficacy and product safety (innocuousness). Such criteria should enter in full into the benefit-risk-analysis of applied preparations, in the registration process as well as in the therapeutic practice. Conclusion: When registering Traditional Herbal Medicinal Products the criterion of evidence-based medicine will only be met if all the facts available are assessed and evaluated, over and above the formally stipulated regulatory provisions (30 years, product reference). To this end, the scientific methods (from among the natural, life or cultural sciences), which are recognized as authoritative in each case, must be applied.

Download full text files

Export metadata

Metadaten
Author:Robert Jütte, Michael Heinrich, Axel HelmstädterORCiDGND, Jost Langhorst, Günter Menge, Wilhelm Niebling, Tanja Pommerening, Hans Joachim TrampischORCiDGND
URN:urn:nbn:de:hebis:30:3-456134
DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jep.2017.06.047
ISSN:1872-7573
ISSN:0378-8741
Pubmed Id:https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28668645
Parent Title (English):Journal of ethnopharmacology
Publisher:Elsevier
Place of publication:New York, NY [u. a.]
Document Type:Article
Language:English
Year of Completion:2017
Date of first Publication:2017/06/29
Publishing Institution:Universitätsbibliothek Johann Christian Senckenberg
Release Date:2018/02/06
Volume:207
Page Number:6
First Page:220
Last Page:225
Note:
© 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ireland Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/BY/4.0/)
HeBIS-PPN:42797030X
Institutes:Biochemie, Chemie und Pharmazie / Pharmazie
Dewey Decimal Classification:6 Technik, Medizin, angewandte Wissenschaften / 61 Medizin und Gesundheit / 610 Medizin und Gesundheit
Sammlungen:Universitätspublikationen
Licence (German):License LogoCreative Commons - Namensnennung 4.0