An Evidence-Based Systematic Review of Spearmint by the Natural Standard Research Collaboration

Abstract

An evidence-based systematic review of spearmint (Mentha spicata, Mentha viridis) including written and statistical analysis of scientific literature, expert opinion, folkloric precedent, history, pharmacology, kinetics/dynamics, interactions, adverse effects, toxicology, and dosing.

Adverse effects of herbal medicines: an overview of systematic reviews

“…Fifty SRs met our inclusion criteria; 12-61 these originated from Canada, 21,22 Denmark, 26 Germany, 17,46 Italy, 19,20,62 South Africa, 41 the UK 12,18,24,29 and the USA. 13-16,23.25,27,28,30-40,42-45,47,50-61 In these SRs, adverse effects of the following HMs were evaluated: Agave americana, 50 Aloe vera, 52 Boswellia serrata, 15 Calendula officinalis, 16 Camellia sinensis, 28 Capsaicin spp., 44 Cassia senna, 61 Caulophyllum thalictroides, 22 Cimicifuga racemosa, 48 Cinnamomum spp., 21 Cnicus benedictus, 53 Commifora mukul, 36 Crataegus spp., 20 Crocus sativus, 59 Curcuma longa, 43 Echinacea spp., 24 genus Phyllanthus, 26 Ginkgo biloba, 29 Gymnema sylvestre, 60 Harpagophytum procumbens, 17 Herbae pulvis standardisatus, 34 Hippocastanaceae, 32 Hoodia gordonii, 41 Hypericum perforatum, 45 Lagerstroemia speciosa, 38 Larrea tridentate, 33 Lavandula angustifolia Miller, 14 Melissa officinalis, 35 Mentha piperita, 51 Mentha spicata, 57 Mo...…”

“…26 Thirty-one SRs concluded that the HM in question was safe. [13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][23][24][25][26]29,31,32,35,38,39,[42][43][44][45]47,50,53,55,[57][58][59][60] Fifteen SRs reported moderately severe AEs, 12,22,27,28,30,36,40,41,46,48,49,51,52,54,56 and four SRs concluded that the HM in question was not safe (see Supplemental Tables S1 and S2). 33,34,37,…”

“…Forty-two SRs failed to mention conflict of interest of the authors. [13][14][15][16][17][18]22,23,[25][26][27][30][31][32][33][34][35][36][37][38][39][40][41][42][43][44][45][47][48][49][50][51][52][53][54][55][56][57][58][59][60][61] Thirty-two SRs made no mention of any source of funding. [13][14][15][16][17]22,23,27,30,[34]…”

“…[13][14][15][16][17]21,23,27,[32][33][34][35][36][37][38][39][40]45,47,[50][51][52][53][54][55][56][57][58][59][60][61] The number of primary studies included in the SRs ranged from 1 38 to 216. 28 The types of primary reports varied from case studies to epidemiological investigations.…”

Spontaneous regression in advanced non-small cell lung cancer

“…Essiac is a combination product of four herbs (burdock root, sheep sorrel, slippery elm bark and Turkey rhubarb), although the exact formulation is a proprietary secret. Proponents of Essiac claim that it strengthens the immune system, relieves pain and may reduce tumour size and prolong the lives of people with all types of cancer; however, multiple scientific investigations have yet to yield any evidence for any of these effects 18. It should also be noted that this patient had already shown radiological improvement of her tumour at the time of starting this preparation (radiological improvement was first noted June 2009, while she started taking Essiac in September 2009).…”