Posted by bleauberry on November 6, 2009, at 18:46:28
In reply to Re: You Must Use Caution With St. Johns Wort » bleauberry, posted by SLS on November 5, 2009, at 19:07:59
Scott, you might be missing my point. By focusing on a single tree you are missing the landscape.
I don't recall proposing me to do a study on SJW and cataracts. I got way better things to do with my time thank you though.
I do not in general put a whole lot of credence on most clinical studies, as there are just too many flaws, variables, unknowns, biases, economics, narrow scopes, editing, or politics involved, not to mention the cherrypicked wording of abstracts versus whole documents. I do however put a great deal of credence on experience and results in the real world with real patients.
The words "could" or "should" or "may be" are sure signs that the result of a study are of curious note but not bible.
With that in mind, SJW has done pretty well for a very long time and probably will continue to do so. With the risk of cataracts being extremely low, especially with sunglasses, and the similar potential of SJW working as well as any other AD, I defend it as being a reasonable option for the depressed patient.
> > Not prescribed 6 times more often than SSRIs, but rather, 6 times more often than Prozac. I don't think even Lexapro or Effexor or Zoloft are prescribed 6 times more often than Prozac. So no matter, the point remains the same.
>
> No, it does not. The possibility remains that the usage of SJW remains substantially less than antidepressants in general. A doctor may choose SJW six times more often than Prozac, but he might also choose Zoloft six times more often than SJW. See?
>
> If you can accomplish your proposed study of SJW users and the occurrence of cataracts, please do. But in the absence of such clinical data, I figured it might be important to look at the research data. Better minds than mine have cautioned SJW users to avoid exposing their eyes to sunlight or UV rays. It is just a precaution based upon the observations made in the laboratory.
>
> Personally, I hope that SJW is not cataractogenic. I have no emotional or monetary investment in the belief that it is.
>
> On a positive note, I did come upon one study that reported that the chaperone-like functioning of the lens alpha-crystallins was not significantly altered by hypericin combined with light exposure, despite the observed alteration in protein structure.
>
>
> - Scott
poster:bleauberry
thread:924178
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20091029/msgs/924780.html