Botanical Medicines — The Need for New Regulations
Top Cited Papers
- 19 December 2002
- journal article
- Published by Massachusetts Medical Society in New England Journal of Medicine
- Vol. 347 (25) , 2073-2076
- https://doi.org/10.1056/nejmsb022858
Abstract
In 2001, $17.8 billion was spent in the United States on dietary supplements, $4.2 billion of it for herbs and other botanical remedies.1 The popularity of these products has increased over the past decade, probably stimulated by sharp increases in prices of prescription drugs, restricted access to physicians imposed by managed care, media reports of adverse effects of prescription drugs, and, most important, the enactment in 1994 of the Dietary Supplement and Health Education Act (DSHEA). By broadly defining herbs and other botanicals as “dietary supplements,” the DSHEA substantially altered the definitions, standards, and mechanisms under which claims about the . . .Keywords
This publication has 22 references indexed in Scilit:
- Herbal RemediesNew England Journal of Medicine, 2002
- Aristolochic acid as a probable human cancer hazard in herbal remedies: a reviewMutagenesis, 2002
- Herbal remedy-associated acute renal failure secondary to Cape aloesAmerican Journal of Kidney Diseases, 2002
- Heavy metals in traditional Indian remediesEuropean Journal of Clinical Pharmacology, 2001
- Herbal Medicines Today and the Roots of Modern PharmacologyAnnals of Internal Medicine, 2001
- Herbal Medicines and Perioperative CareJAMA, 2001
- The Importance of Using Scientific Principles in the Development of Medicinal Agents from PlantsAcademic Medicine, 2001
- Urothelial Carcinoma Associated with the Use of a Chinese Herb (Aristolochia fangchi)New England Journal of Medicine, 2000
- Adulterants in Asian Patent MedicinesNew England Journal of Medicine, 1998
- Harmless Herbs? A Review of the Recent LiteratureThe American Journal of Medicine, 1998