|
|
|
Debunking the Debunkers: The True Value of Aromatherapy |
By Tarah Cech A
 Searching for the term 'Aromatherapy' brings up several pages claiming aromatherapy is a fraud of some sort. That essential oil manufacturers and retailers are making 'dubious' claims of the efficacy of essential oils. These folks don't seem to have done their homework, or compared the validity of scientific inquiry to that produced by conventional medicine, which in fact could easily be claimed as 'dubious' using the same criteria. Ok, well actually there are no criteria used, just a few blurbs that present aromatherapy as a soft science, on that should be neglected along with everything else that's every been found under the heading of 'new age'.
We can start by conceding that there is a soft-science side to a portion of aromatherapy's practices. Really pinning-down whether inhaling lavender makes a statistically-significant difference in people's emotional status seems pretty tricky anyway. How about we just leave this part up to the people that are into it? If lavender makes you feel good, whose to tell you differently? Aromatherapists are not out to convince the world inhaling plant scents will make you feel better --
they're just offering it as a possibility. Maybe it'll work for you and maybe it won't. Do try another aroma before you give up, but hey, maybe it won't work for you, no big deal. AT THE SAME TIME, there are A GREAT MANY VALID SCIENTIFIC STUDIES showing statistically significant results regarding the psycho-emotional effects of lavender (and other essential oils). Along with those are even more studies testing essential oils on a wide variety of serious illnesses. Here's a peek into the hard-science aspect of aromatherapy, and why the debunker's of this medicine should really have another look.
The image problem of aromatherapy has everything to do with the prevailing idea that the practice is all about 'smelling things', whereas the science really about 'things that smell'. Smelling things is very subjective, and may have little medical effect at all (though we'll see that it MAY as well). Aromatherapy is defined as the complete practice of the branch of natural medicine using the volatile liquids distilled from plants. Authors of the hard-science aromatherapy texts available today, professionally-trained aromatherapists (one with a PhD in Chemistry) note that the future of aroma medicine is with the treatment of serious infectious illnesses and cancer treatment. You don't even have to smell them for them to work! Other effects of essential oils also being successfully investigated include speeding wound healing, reducing inflammation, and acting as analgesics.
A quick look at the research available on Pub Med, a database of thousands of peer-reviewed life-science and medical journals freely available on-line reveals thousands of citations of research performed using essential oils. Yes, there are in fact some studies that did not result in convincing evidence that hand massages with lavender cream didn't make people feel better than hand massages with unscented lotion. But there is studies that show people sleep better after lavender inhalation. And there's a study that show stress makers of the immune system remained unchanged after inhaling linalool (an isolated constituent of Lavender), but there's also 15 studies (upon last count) showing positive significant results if one searches for 'lavender' and 'axiolytic' (the technical term for stress reducer). The results for 'acetaminophen' and 'pain' MAY be as strong; those for 'minoxidil' and 'hair' are almost certainly not.
So aromatherapists will even cede that there's mix results. While the naysayers use this data to say "aromatherapy doesn't work", the reasonable statement seems to be: "everyone's different. Some people respond and some don't. It may be that they would respond to a different aromatic, or maybe not at all". From Robert T. Carol of skepdic.com: "...I have to conclude that aromatherapy is a mostly a pseudoscientific alternative medical therapy. It is a mixture of folklore, trial and error, anecdote, testimonial, New Age spiritualism and fantasy." Stephen Barrett, M.D. of Quackwatch doesn't really seem to make a point about essential oils, but to just sound disgruntled about the whole idea. Sure, there may be some unsubstantiated claims floating about, but let's play fair. How many deadly drugs have been pulled from the market after drug-manufacturer-paid rigorous scientific investigations claimed them to be "safe and effective"? One chart puts deaths attributed to "properly prescribed and used drugs" between those from alcohol and those from alcohol -- these just above "preventable medical" misshap, and all of these above traffic fatalities. How many died from using essential oils? Can you draw a circle? How about the letter that comes between 'n' and 'p'?
Really, the medical, therapeutic applications of essential oils (repeat: aroma-therapy!) are making huge advances in acceptance in the scientific community -- among the labs and scientists that do independent and educationally funded research. Important studies are released every month showing the strong efficacy of certain essential oils in treating serious bacterial infections. Try a Pub Med search on 'staphylococcus' and 'essential oil' or 'tea tree', or 'mrsa' and 'essential oil'. You'll find pages of results. The big test will be whether these result in protocols for medical use. The most important factor in this may be how much we all demand that natural 'alternatives' are available in the main-stream, as the profit-driven conventional medical system is just not designed to utilize very low cost natural treatments.
There's a huge body of data affirming the strong anti-tumorial effects of essential oils. Linalool has been shown to completely destroy certain liver cancers. Frankincense has other powerful anticancer action -- cellular toxicity that's specific to tumors! (One of the great challenges of chemotherapy is killing the cancer cells without killing the rest of the human). Lemongrass too has "promising anticancer activity". Search for yourself and you'll find more pages than you can get through any time soon.
So why are these criticisms of aromatherapy so popular, at least in Google's eyes? Why do some folks like horror flicks and car crashes -- not sure, really. It might have to do with there being a closer relationship between 'aromatherapy' and 'Glade Plug-in Air Freshener (TM)' in many people's minds than there is between 'aromatherapy' 'frankincense' and 'tumor cell specific cytotoxicity'. One reality is that there's a lot more money pushing the Glad Plug-In concept. Because essential oils cannot be patented as medicines, the amount of money to be made by Really Big Business is negligible. So it's up to small natural health companies, individual practitioners, and the wonderful education and research facilities doing the technical work to get the word out. And particularly to rock the boat a bit when so-called authorities make truly dubious claims about the dubious nature of aromatherapy. Plant medicine has kept human beings alive for millennia -- essential oils are just very active molecules produced by plants, and aromatherapy is so-called as it deals with the therapeutic applications of these aromatic molecules. Aroma-therapy. Get the word out!
For more resources on how to use essential oils and flower essences therapeutically, visit the Ananda Apothecary.
|
|
