Wednesday
Dec032008
Wed, December 3, 2008 | Lisa Barger Graviola "1000 Times Stronger Than Chemo"
“I read on this one website that there’s this new herb called graviola and it’s 1000 times better than chemo for cancer. Is that true?”
No, it’s not true. Graviola isn’t “new”, hasn’t been studied in real, living humans and even if it had, nothing that we do know about it even remotely suggests that graviola is “1000 times more powerful than chemotherapy”.
What Graviola Really Is
Graviola is a known botanically as Annona muricata and despite claims that it’s found only “deep in the Amazon rain forests”, it’s actually native to both South America and the Carribean.
And graviola isn’t “new”, either. It may have gotten a big boost from a 1998 study from Purdue University but it’s an herb that’s been known and used for both food and medicine for centuries.
Nor is it rare or endangered. In fact, thanks to Spanish explorers, this small tree now grows in temperate areas around the world—including such non-Amazonian areas as the Philippines.
Graviola Does Kill Cancer Cells
In 1998 researchers from Purdue University’s School of Pharmacy and Pharmacal Sciences released findings from a study that isolated cancer-fighting compounds from the leaves of the graviola tree. Two of the compounds showed what scientists called “significant” anti-cancer activities against 6 human cancer cell lines, including cell lines that include prostate and pancreatic cancers.
But these were not studies done on humans with cancer. In fact, these weren’t “clinical studies” at all. They were laboratory experiments done in vitro. As promising as these experiments were, they were just that—experiments.
No Human Studies. None At All.
To date, there have been no scientific studies of graviola done on humans at all. Reports on the internet of “amazing results” are lies spread to sell you an herb that you can purchase at any large health food store for a fraction of what those web sites will charge you.
Legitimate Experts Say “No” To Graviola
In a 2007 Q&A segment on his web site Dr. Andrew Weil was asked about the “1000 times” claims about graviola. His response was quick and to the point, “None of this is true.”
His associate, Dr. Tieraona Low Dog—who is the director of education at the University of Arizona’s Program in Integrative Medicine—doesn’t recommend graviola, either. In fact, Dr. Low Dog goes so far as to say she wouldn’t even take it herself.
Also skeptical of graviola’s miraculous claims is Dr. Ralph Moss, who was a founding advisor to what is now the National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine. In a 2003 article attributed to Dr. Moss, the author expresses skepticism toward most of the ridiculous claims and reminds readers once again that no actual human studies have ever been published on this “miracle cure-all”.
References:
Kim, G., et al. (1998). Muricoreacin and Murihexocin C, Mono-Tetrahydrofuran Acetogenins, from the :eaves of Annona muricata. Phytochemistry.
Republic of the Philippines Department of Agriculture. (2005). Anona Muricata Linn.
Weil, A. (2007). Graviola: A Worthwhile Botanical Against Cancer. Retrieved from www.drweil.com/drw/u/QAA400299/graviola-a-worthwhile-botanical-against-cancer on December 3, 2008.
Moss, R. (2003). Graviola and Cancer. Retrieved from www.denvernaturopathic.com/news/graviola.html on December 3, 2008.
No, it’s not true. Graviola isn’t “new”, hasn’t been studied in real, living humans and even if it had, nothing that we do know about it even remotely suggests that graviola is “1000 times more powerful than chemotherapy”.
What Graviola Really Is
Graviola is a known botanically as Annona muricata and despite claims that it’s found only “deep in the Amazon rain forests”, it’s actually native to both South America and the Carribean.
And graviola isn’t “new”, either. It may have gotten a big boost from a 1998 study from Purdue University but it’s an herb that’s been known and used for both food and medicine for centuries.
Nor is it rare or endangered. In fact, thanks to Spanish explorers, this small tree now grows in temperate areas around the world—including such non-Amazonian areas as the Philippines.
Graviola Does Kill Cancer Cells
In 1998 researchers from Purdue University’s School of Pharmacy and Pharmacal Sciences released findings from a study that isolated cancer-fighting compounds from the leaves of the graviola tree. Two of the compounds showed what scientists called “significant” anti-cancer activities against 6 human cancer cell lines, including cell lines that include prostate and pancreatic cancers.
But these were not studies done on humans with cancer. In fact, these weren’t “clinical studies” at all. They were laboratory experiments done in vitro. As promising as these experiments were, they were just that—experiments.
No Human Studies. None At All.
To date, there have been no scientific studies of graviola done on humans at all. Reports on the internet of “amazing results” are lies spread to sell you an herb that you can purchase at any large health food store for a fraction of what those web sites will charge you.
Legitimate Experts Say “No” To Graviola
In a 2007 Q&A segment on his web site Dr. Andrew Weil was asked about the “1000 times” claims about graviola. His response was quick and to the point, “None of this is true.”
His associate, Dr. Tieraona Low Dog—who is the director of education at the University of Arizona’s Program in Integrative Medicine—doesn’t recommend graviola, either. In fact, Dr. Low Dog goes so far as to say she wouldn’t even take it herself.
Also skeptical of graviola’s miraculous claims is Dr. Ralph Moss, who was a founding advisor to what is now the National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine. In a 2003 article attributed to Dr. Moss, the author expresses skepticism toward most of the ridiculous claims and reminds readers once again that no actual human studies have ever been published on this “miracle cure-all”.
References:
Kim, G., et al. (1998). Muricoreacin and Murihexocin C, Mono-Tetrahydrofuran Acetogenins, from the :eaves of Annona muricata. Phytochemistry.
Republic of the Philippines Department of Agriculture. (2005). Anona Muricata Linn.
Weil, A. (2007). Graviola: A Worthwhile Botanical Against Cancer. Retrieved from www.drweil.com/drw/u/QAA400299/graviola-a-worthwhile-botanical-against-cancer on December 3, 2008.
Moss, R. (2003). Graviola and Cancer. Retrieved from www.denvernaturopathic.com/news/graviola.html on December 3, 2008.
This is a "retired" article; it may not reflect current scientific thinking or current research. No new comments are being accepted at this time.
Reader Comments (13)
What makes lisa barger an authority?
prcsr49, you must be a blithering idiot. lisa barger is not asserting herself as an expert, she's simply relaying information she's obtained from doctors (actual experts). get a clue.
effective or not, natural elements are not patenteable, thus few studies are ever done. in the other hand, syntethic drugs are patenteable and as a reward, patients get hit with thousands of different side effects.
thankfully no natural treatment need to be acompanied by scary warnings such as those in syntethic drugs commercials!
Well, fortunately for me, that's not true and you need only look at our "Health News" section for proof that herbal remedies ARE being studied and documented. There's hardly a day go by that some study on some "natural" treatment doesn't cross my desk. :-)
if the study in vitro by the purdue university is true, then it is a better choice for cancer patient to eat graviola than not at all.
Also, if the study in vitro by the Purdue University is true, then why not persue it further and in humans? It would make sense, would not?
why isn't somebody doing other test on this?
Dont believe everything scientists tell you is a good thing to live by. Some scientists also sell you toothpaste and some wierd shampoo! Do we believe all that good stuff too? If MLisa'a sole argument is some randoms scientists refuting studies in multiple universities (which there always will be some to do).. doesn't convince me very much.
I hardly think you can call Ralph Moss a "random scientist".
Dave, unfortunately, "RH" is absolutely typical of that reader who comes here armed not with facts and ready to engage in an intelligent debate but someone who comes here looking for an argument. We saw this years ago when we wrote about oil pulling and most recently with our article on TriVita.
The reason no one has cited any studies proving graviola actually kills cancer in humans is that--at least to my knowledge--there are none. There are none in mainstream medical journals and none in "alternative" medical journals. Just none. If there were, I would publish their findings. I've nothing against graviola--I simply think people should be told the truth about it.
Is there any harm in using Graviola if you are also on Chemo or if you have had a liver transplant? Does anyone know?
Maria, I'm not aware of any issues between graviola and chemo drugs or transplant meds but there just isn't a lot of safety info on graviola right now. I wish I could give you a definitive answer but "I don't know", is all I can say.
We are closing the comment section of the graviola article until the spammer posting as "Jads" and "Ron" finds a new playground. We apologize for the inconvenience.