Hv, I agree with much of what you write.

You've talked in a few recent posts about old-school herbal formulas and why you think certain herbs such as barberry aren't so great.

So my thought is, to criticize an herb because of one of its chemical components may not be quite fair because it isn't in the plant in isolation, it acts in synergy with all the other components of the plant. And there is much in nature that we don't understand.

Actually knowing the herb's chemistry starts us on the road to understanding the effects the herbs have on the body, good or bad.  And other components in an herb will not necessarily render dangerous components safe.  Take for instance tobacco, which has been used medicinally throughout history.  Just because the tobacco contains some vitamins and minerals does this render the nicotine safe?  Of course not.  The berberine herbs are no different.  Berberine is one of the most active components of these herbs, and it does not discriminate between good microbes, like the gut flora, and pathogens.  And as I pointed out these will drop blood sugar, and raise blood pressure by depleting potassium, which are well known side effects that good herbalists are aware of.  If we do not take a look at the chemistry of these herbs then how are we supposed to know how they are supposed to work in the body or how they can cause harm in high doses or long term?  Not all herbs are relatively safe, and any good herbalist will tell you this.  Any herbalist that knows what they are talking about will be able to tell you why so many of these herbs can be harmful because they know the chemistry of these herbs.  By the way I am not saying anything that has not been known for a long time.  At no point in history have herbs ever been considered benign.  For example, the Chinese have the oldest medical system in the world, about 5,000 years old.  And even they were aware of the potential dangers of natural medicines, which is why they tested everything on thousands of prisoners before they gave these substances to the Emperor for one.  Did they just give Chinese foxglove to the Emperor?  Of course not.  They learned that if they boil the root in 9 changes of water though that they could remove the poisonous compounds from the herb.  And the Native Americans also used many herbs that are considered quite poisonous such as false hellbore and daturas.  But again they knew these plants were poisonous and learned how to use them properly.  So synergy is not going to make a bit of difference if the herb has toxic compounds in it and it is used improperly, which often means in high doses or for extended periods of time.  This includes the berberine herbs.

This is why I have been putting together a list of herbs to avoid altogether or at least use with caution.  This is especially for beginners who simply read in a book that "X" does "Y" and decides to take it without any regard to potential side effects.  Many of these herbs are commonly used herbs such as senna, cascara sagrada, rhubarb root, horsetail grass (shavegrass), tansy, blue cohosh, uva ursi, and of course the berberine herbs.

As you know, we can analyze an apple under a microscope and identify what we call cells and vitamin C etc., however ... no one knows how to put all these parts together and nothing else comes close to the the whole food.

Problem with this is that this is not how research is often done on herbs.  Instead the researchers look at the effects of the herbs first, then they work to identify what the chemistry of the herbs are that allow for these effects.  They don't do something like "X" herb contains "Y" and therefore will cause "Z".  Instead they start by looking at a property.  Such as why has vanilla leaf been used historically to thin the blood?  Then they run an analysis on the herb to determine why the vanilla leaf would have this properly.  And low and behold they discover that vanilla leaf contains blood thinning coumarins.  Same applied to the berberine herbs.  The researchers did not simply discover these herbs contained berberine then decided to see what effects the berberine had on cells.  Instead they were researching the side effects of the berberine herbs that herbalists had been aware of for a very long time and set out to determine what in these herbs were responsible for these side effects.

Unfortunately there are a lot of "herbalists" out there that are what can referred to as "textbook herbalists".  They put together formulas based on what they read in a book somewhere or based on hearsay about an herb instead of basing the formula on the chemistry of the herbs so they understand how they will interact.  This goes back the synergy you mentioned.  But synergy can go both ways, for better or worse.  For example one of the ways I use synergy between herbs is combining pau d' arco with chaparral.  Traditionally pau d' arco is frequently combined with yerba mate' to increase the antiviral properties of pau d' arco.  The reason is because the sulfur compounds in the yerba mate' help convert some of the antiviral napthaquinones in the pau d' arco in to the more powerful antiviral beta-lapachone.  But yerba mate' is also high in caffeine, which of course is hard on the adrenals, which can cause a number of problems including immune suppression.  So I use chaparral instead for the sulfur compounds to increase the production of beta-lapachone, while supporting the adrenals (chaparral raises vitamin C levels in the adrenals).  And unlike the yerba mate' the chaparral is also antiviral, as well as antibacterial, antifungal, and immune supporting.  Of course knowing the chemistry behind this made it possible to know how to combine these herbs for this beneficial synergistic effect.  But as I said synergy can go the other way as well.  For example, taking saponin rich herbs can increase the toxicity of poisonous plants taken with it since the saponins increase the absorption of the toxins.  Again this is why it is so important to understand the chemistry of the herbs and their interactions.  Simply reading that an herb has been used for something historically and throwing it in to a mix based on this information is simply asking for trouble.  For example, a lot of people like lobelia for among other things asthma and quitting smoking.  But we all know that a lot of people have the mindset of if a little is good then more should be better.  But lobelia can be very toxic is too much is taken.  Luckily the lobeline in the lobelia will also make a person vomit if too much lobelia is ingested in most cases.  But let's say that they decide to take it with another more popular herb called ginger, which happens to suppress the vomit centers in the brain.  So this could prevent the person from vomiting up the poisonous amount of lobelia, which could cause the respiratory muscles to shut down leading to suffocation.  Again, not all herbs are relatively safe and combining them without the proper knowledge can also lead to adverse synergies.  And again, this is why it is so important for herbalists to understand the chemistry of these herbs, how they interact positively or negatively and how they affect the body positively or negatively.  Unfortunately this is not the case with most "herbalists".  Most of the herbalists I have met again base their recommendations and formulations on historical uses of herbs with no regard to potential side effects or how things work in the body.

Science has some answers and I've studied science, but it doesn't have all the answers.

No, science does not have all the answers.  This is why research is an ongoing thing.  But there are things that are accepted as facts.  For example, we know that if the brain is deprived of oxygen for more than a few minutes that brain damage will occur, except in rare cases such as severe hypothermia.  And how did we come to learn this?  Because there was research done on the subject. This was not simply someone's made up claim as we see so often on the internet.  We have also learned a great deal about the effects of herbs on the body, good and bad, and the interactions of the chemicals in the herbs through research.  And if we are not willing to accept real research on herbs then what should we base our use of herbs on?  Mix whatever and hope for the best?  How should we warn people of potential dangers or interactions of what people are taking?  Guess at the possibilities?  How are we supposed to know what is going to help a particular condition?  Again guess?  This last one really requires a good knowledge of not only the chemistry of the herbs but also how the body really works.  Otherwise people are more likely to end up in more trouble.  Take berberine herbs as an example again.  Let's say someone has irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) and the herbalist assumes this is an infectious problem leading to the diarrhea.  So they recommend berberine herbs to kill the pathogen they think exists.  Problem is that IBS results from a lack of flora, and the berberine is going to kill even more of the flora.  And yes, I have seen many "herbalists" make mistakes like this because they do not understand how the body really works.  So they make assumptions as to the cause and recommend herbs simply based on their historical use with no regards as to the real cause of the problem, nor the potential for adverse effects on the body or adverse interactions with the herbs.  Again, understanding the chemistry of the herbs and how the body really works can help avoid these types of situations.

And of course studies can be flawed, so how can we really know the truth about herbs?

Simple.  Again we look at the chemistry of the herbs so we know what the effects on the body may be.  And doing the research on the herbs will often yield other independent studies that can often be used to verify the other research.  For example, if I read that guarana could cause irritability, insomnia and hypoglycemia I could research guarana to find out that it contains about 2.5 times more caffeine than an equivalent amount of coffee.  Knowing this about the chemistry of the guarana combined with the fact that medicine has also confirmed that excess caffeine use can cause irritability, insomnia and hypoglycemia we can conclude that these side effects are due at least in part to the excessive levels of caffeine in the guarana.

I know some people want to claim that research does not really prove anything and that testimonials are the only real proof.  But I have found that the only people who want to rely on this claim are the ones that have no scientific evidence to back their claims, or the scientific studies refute their claims.

There are so many studies out there on various herbs providing evidence that they work.  By the same token there are studies out there that have shown no benefit to certain herbs despite the internet claims being made about them.  So the real question should be what do you choose to accept as proof?  Hearsay testimonials?  Or actual research verifying or denying claims made about the herbs?

Keep in mind that some of the claims made about alternatives are simply sales hype or simply opinions people may write a book on as an ego boost.  Take for instance colloidal silver (CS).  When CS first came out the claims were that it had to be golden in color to be the best quality.  Then there were the claims that these were  no good and you needed the one with gelatin added to act as a chaperone to carry the silver in to the body.  Then the new players on the block said that theirs was the superior colloidal silver because their particles were smaller and therefore left no color. Although it is also not light reactive as true colloidal silver should be.  Then I had someone try to talk me in to joining a multilevel marketing company selling what they claimed, now get this, a silver solution containing silver half the size of normal silver atoms, LOL!!!!!  When I tried to explain that this was impossible they insisted that the guy who invented this found some method to make smaller atoms.  So should we just accept all the sales hype and so-called "testimonials" as evidence or follow the real research including the real research that tells us that you cannot shrink silver atoms down to half their size?

As another example, we had a guy locally that was making what he claimed were colloids of various metals including potassium, germanium, calcium, etc.  Again, according to his claims these were actual colloids of these metals.  To start with metallic germanium, but not organic germanium, will shut the kidneys down really quick, something else research has shown us.  But there was another guy one night trying to sell me on this crap and I kept trying to explain to him why it was so dangerous.  So I told him that it was IMPOSSIBLE to make colloidal solutions out of metallic potassium and calcium.  Why? Because these are alkali metals that react readily with water forming caustic potassium and calcium hydroxides.  Again he insisted that the manufacturer had come up with some new process that allowed these metals to remain in a metallic colloidal solution.  Even when I pulled up evidence from the internet to prove this impossible he still insisted that the "new process" allowed the metals to remain in a metallic state.  Finally he said " and he has the pH way up there around 10" so I replied "yes, that is because the solutions are hydroxides".  That finally halted the debate.  So should I have simply gone with the wild sales hype or did what I did by sticking to the known and proven science?

There are also old methods and old doctors' books that have good information in them too, IMO.

They also contain a lot of old time remedies such as arsenic, mercury, alcohol, etc.  Luckily we are not still back in the "old days" and modern research has brought us up to date on a lot of remedies including what really does or does not work and what is safe.  This is why herbalism, like science, needs to constantly update and keep consistent with new findings rather than stay stuck with the same old same old from back in the days when they did not really understand the interactions or side effects.  Should we go back and start using mercury and cocaine as cure alls simply because they were once used and thought to be successful cures?  Or should we rely on modern research, which can tell us how herbs really work and how they can present problems such as side effects or adverse interactions with other herbs?

I often think of the story of Harry Hoxsey and the horse that healed itself by eating certain herbs in the field. It didn't have book-education but just knew what would heal it.

First of all it was not Harry Hoxsey that came up with the formula, but rather his great grandfather.  John Hoxsey if I recall right.  Secondly, the formula DID NOT consist entirely of herbs, so it was not entirely based on what the horses sought out.  

I have done a lot of research and writing on Hoxsey and even have a copy of the book he wrote and transcripts of the Texas hearing before he closed his doors here in the US. But the basic formula was devised on observation of what a sick horse sought out.

Much of what we currently know about herbs was originally discovered based on observation of what animals used.  On the other hand there are a lot of things that animals can eat that humans cannot and vice versa. So this is not a good way to decide what to take and again knowing the chemistry can prevent poisoning.  If we simply ate whatever a horse ate in an attempt to heal ourselves we would likely end up dead.  Keep in mind that horses have been poisoned by grazing on plants such as fresh horsetail grass, which is poisonous, and lupines that are also poisonous.  So would you rather base your intake of herbs on what a horse grazes on or based on the chemistry and the known effects of the chemicals in the plants on the human body?

Of course I can't come close to your level of scientific knowledge and the years of study you've put into health and herbs. I mainly use my intuition when deciding which herbs to use.

If intuition served us that well then we would all be playing and winning the lottery!!!

What do you recommend as the best way to learn more about herbs?

I have had a number of people ask about apprenticing under me.  And I always tell them the same thing that I would give you here as advice.  First thing to do is learn some basic chemistry so you understand the various plant compounds such as saponins, glycosides, cardiac glycosides, alkaloids, aglycones, anthraquinones, napthaquinones, tannins, etc.  This will go such a long way in helping to keep you safe from adverse interactions or toxins, and will help you learn to avoid neutralizing other herbs in formulas and how to use herbs for a positive synergy.

Next, learn as much as you can about how the body really works.  Again, this will take you so much further.  It is like I have told people so many times.  If you go to an herbalist with hypothyroidism and they simply tell you to take an iodine source you need to run!!!  There are many causes of hypothyroidism and not all involve a lack of iodine.  Furthermore, taking too much iodine in the case of hypothyroidism from Hashimoto's thyroidosis will make matters worse.  Ever hear the old phrase about a little knowledge being a dangerous thing?  This really applies when it comes to herbalism and other alternatives.  

Granted it is not an easy thing to do, which is probably why nobody ever asks me twice about apprenticing under me after I tell them that.  But if people are not willing to put in the commitment to learning these things then they really should not be fooling with people's health in my opinion.  It is not like forgetting to attach a hose in a car when working on an engine.  If you make mistakes when dealing with people's healthy people can get hurt or even die.   I have 32 years in to this and am still on a path of learning and constantly updating my knowledge based on new findings and research.  It has not been easy by any means, which means I had to be committed to what I have been doing.

My next piece of advice is forget the herb schools.  First of all most of them are again stuck in the old school mentality.  Secondly, I knew someone that went this route and I would go over her homework before she submitted it, and I actually found mistakes made by the school on her assignments.  And lastly, most of these schools charge around $5,000-7,000 and what you end up with is a certificate that really has no legal standing.  With that kind of money you can set yourself up with a really nice library full of so much more information than you could ever obtain from an herb school.  You will also find all sorts of information that you will never find on the internet.

Some sources I suggest purchasing for your library are The Encyclopedia of Natural Medicine by Murray/Pizzorno or any other books by Michael Murray.  The Little Herb Encyclopedia by Jack Ritchason.  The Herb Book by John Lust.  The Herbal PDR and the German E-Commission Monographs. Get all the back copies of Herbalgram from the American Botanical Council and also go through their book lists.  

There is a really good starter list.  There are a number of other books I have in my library that I would recommend if I could remember their titles and authors, but a number of them are rather obscure.  The ones above are much easier to obtain and great for starting up.  Depending on where you live there may also be great herbal guides for the plants that grow in your region.  Field guides are also great for this such as Peterson's Guide to Edible and Medicinal Plants.  You can also find regional plant guides that often mention medicinal properties of the plants in the Visitor's Centers at National Parks.

Don't forget some basic chemistry, preferably organic chemistry, books and anatomy and physiology books.

Online, PubMed is a great source for studies conducted on herbs and other alternatives and is free.