Just because there is not studies done on natural remedies does not mean they don't help some people. There are safe natural remedies and some that are not safe. Each person can google search and decide for their self risk verses benefits whether it's meds or natural remedies. I have been harmed by meds. Others have benefited by meds. You can't tell someone that has been helped by something natural that it doesn't help just because there isn't studies done to back it up although there has been some studies on some natural remedies. I won't even go into the natural remedies that have helped me even though I have documented proof of my physical problems not having taken meds for most of them for many years with my being no worse when it comes to RA and Lupus even without meds for many years but I would never tell anyone to stop taking their meds and neither should others discourage those that want to try natural remedies. I won't go into myself but will use my fur baby for an example. She is 11 years old and only had diarrhea once in her life before she was 11 but when she turned 11 she started having it and a trip home from the vet and the meds she threw up! She had never thrown up in her life but one other time when she got into wild onions :( I threw the med away and went through a few natural remedies and found one that she does not have diarrhea anymore. I told my vet about it and he said what I was giving her was good for that but just to stop if she starts having constipation. I know that's not the same thing as RA but point is natural remedies do help some people and some pets. Scientists have been known to disagree with each other, nutritionists disagree on some things, they will even tell you a food is healthy today but tomorrow it's not, but if something works for someone it works and to ME it's not quackery :) If a natural remedy is not safe it will give those warnings if we search just like it gives us the warnings on meds.

Of course I can [i.e., tell people who think they've been helped by something natural that it doesn't work]. How can I do that? Because unless there's a controlled study to prove that it works, there's no proof that it does.

If something truly, truly worked for a significant number of people, don't you think modern science would be all over it? There would be controlled scientific studies and papers in credible scientific journals touting the benefits. Pharmaceuticals would grab on and promote it like crazy.

I think that too often people are so desperate for ANYthing to work that they fall victim to marketing hype.

By the way, when I said you can't tell someone that natural remedies have not helped and that they don't work I didn't mean you would tell them that californialynn. When I used the word you it was in a general sense as in no one could tell them. People don't need proof when they know it works and has for many years and no I don't think big pharma would be all on top of natural remedies. Just my opinion there :) I have more thoughts on that but I will leave it at that :)

But how do you know it works and you're not in remission?

[Catch you tomorrow.......have to log out.]

I'm not a big conspiracy guy by any means but I look at the dollar signs. If it really helped & was "natural" someone would be making billions because why would any of us want to stay on all this toxic soup mixes if I could eat a bunch of kale or broccoli, or take a garlic pill & cure myself?

Typically when you follow the person making these claims at the end of the rainbow there's a pot of something they want to eventually "sell you". It never fails. Just my 2 cents.

Well, oceans11 I am not saying you were referring to me but just in case anyone thinks you are; I don't sell anything at all, period! I've been on DS for over 6 years and never made any money off of anything here or anywhere else except for our yard sales LOL which I don't try to sell any of that here and my yard sales don't have any natural remedies. Meds don't cure everything, either.

I don't think Oceans meant you, CountryG. I didn't take it that way.

When you look at the real numbers, Rx drugs are your best bet.

It's hard to answer your question californialynn because remission can have a different meaning for different people. All I can tell you is according to my doctors, blood tests, pain, swelling, etc. I am not in remission but I am no worse than years ago unless I stop doing what I am doing then I notice the swelling and pain is worse so that tells me I am not in remission according to the way doctors define remission? (How many swollen joints, how long the pain lasts, blood tests. etc.) Oh, meds might be your and others best bet but it's not mine :)

Hey Countrygal22,

No, no I wasn't referring specifically to you. I'm talking about when someone comes on a board or forum & completely hijacks a thread with a bunch of quotes & links to products or items. It just typically revolves around the "natural hollistic remedy" circle. And the reason for that is that most of the time there's no data to prove otherwise.

Good links, Lynn! I particularly loved the list of quackery foods and supplements. Certainly, people have pressured me over the last 19 years about these things, and nothing worked! Add to the fact, that I was an organic vegetarian in the first place, and grew all my own veggies, but got super severe RA anyway, and you have a real skeptic in me.

So, double blind studies are the key! If these natural food and quack nostrums believers want to show the scientific community, to say nothing of me as an RA patient that these nonsense things work, then let us get some large groups of RA sufferers together, one group is placebo, the second group actually gets the quack nostrum. (Forgive me for using that term, because I do get upset when people claim they are better using these things, when there is NO evidence.)

So once you have tracked this group over a year or more, see if the control group fares any better than the group given the herbal cure or not. Then do a statistical analysis, to see if the group given these herbal products do any better. These groups need at least a 1000 people, and this study needs to be done in a variety of places around the world, figuring local and international variations and exposure to other factors also considered.

The biggest issue is the power of the placebo effect. A placebo is anything you give in place of the real drug/herb/etc, to make both the researcher and the patient think they are getting the real thing, so that no one knows, and no one is influenced to think it works, because they know they got it or not. So from a sugar pill to some kind of green plant or fake garlic.

But then, you have to consider placebo effect even more. I've told this story before, but it bears repeating. I heard it from the head of rheumatology at the University of Alberta, which is a big research hospital. I was in a long term study of RA and the heart and I was the ONLY person in this large, longitudinal study that did not have heart involvement. I had a long talk with the head of the study, a rheumatologist and we decided that:
a) my heart had not been attacked by RA
b) my lifetime of good eating, and 10 years of hard exercise on my bicycle contributed to no plaque build up, also

But I digress - the study!

This was when Remicade first came out. They had a huge year long double blind study. So neither the patients, doctors nurses or technicians knew who got the actual biologic. As a control for all the patients in the study, they xrayed the hands and feet of all the participants in the study.

After a year, 52% of the patients in the study who did NOT get Remicade, but a placebo, thought the drug had helped them significantly. So, they did not get the biologic, but thought they did, and they thought it helped them a lot. In a control group of 500 people, that would be 260 people felt better, even though they did not get Remicade

And if it did help them and stop the progression of the disease, that would be the story. Except for those xrays. They re-did everyone after a year. Those who actually got Remicade showed almost no progression of the disease. Those who did not get Remicade, showed significant deterioration of their hands and feet.

In other words, they convinced themselves they were better. They felt better! But in fact, they were much worse, and their hands and feet, and probably other joints were getting more and more deformed.

Usually in the placebo group of any study, a few people feel better. But the power of suggestion had 52% of a group that got nothing, thought they were better, when the physical evidence showed the contrary.

That is the same with all these herbal and quack remedies. People think they feel better and suddenly they are - except they aren't! That is Placebo Effect, and too many people with RA are being deceived by their own minds that taking some herb, or eliminating some food is making them better. I will bet that pretty much any of these "cures" which Lynn posted in the link above, were subject to a rigourous double blind study procedure, they would find that subjectively the people were feeling a bit bettter, but physically they were incurring more damage daily

I just hate to see people prayed upon, come up with this nonsense about "Big" Pharma, when in fact, these pharmaceutical companies DO have to go through all this rigourous testing, report every side effect, and then balance whether the results jusitify the risks.

People NEED to learn more about the scientific method and stop dissing the companies who put millions of dollars into each drug they come up with in R & D, and then the huge testing procedures, to say nothing of getting it FDA or Health Canada approved.

Ok, that really was a rant. But one based on the truth!

Jumping in with a question about vitamins. Mind you, right now I am not on any medications for RA because the rheumatologist is still at the 'wait and see' stage for dx. I take a bunch of citations for anemia, iron of course and then a bunch of Bs and D and C for absorption if the iron. I notice nothing when I take them, but if I miss them 2 days in a row, seems like I battle the fatigue hugely. It could be too that my symptoms and the fatigue is just so poorly controlled. I've started tracking and I have more badetails days than good so far. I just wonder how much the anemia contributes.

Can we go back to the "wait and see" thing with the rheumatologist. WHY?

Californialynn, that's a very good question. I don't know why I get 'wait and see' either.

Then you need to ask at your next appt. And if the answer isn't clear, maybe it's time to doc-shop.

Wow, a lot of negative opinions about natural remedies here. About the whole I think I am better but I really am not LOL well, I have had vets and doctors both tell me to keep on doing whatever I am doing so I will :) The only thing that doctors have told me I was worse on or other physical problems from that has nothing to do with my RA. I've never suggested anyone here on DS worked for Big Pharma when meds are promoted but I sure wonder why people would go out of their way to try to convince others that natural remedies don't work when there is a lot of people that say they do work. People should not be discouraged if they want to try natural meds. People believe in God people believe in natural remedies people believe in meds and who are we to imply that they shouldn't? If someone can show me through research that something natural is harmful (not just an opinion they don't work) then I want to know that the same as I would think people taking meds would want to know the risks before deciding to take them or not :) My two cents worth and definitely see why I don't fit on some of these boards (with brain fog lol that makes it hard for me to remember what everyone says to reply to) that whether intentional or not would make someone feel out of place if they aren't part of the same mind set as most everyone else is. Hope everyone is doing as good as possible and if your physical problems are better and no serious side effects I am happy for you whether it was meds or natural remedies that improved them for you :)