They are much more predictable, well understood and easier to dose than the chemical cocktail of natural compounds. Please note that I am not saying that there aren’t any useful natural medicines. I am stating that it is better to isolate the active components.

  • @nebulaoneOP
    link
    English
    2
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    If you are talking about enzyme inhibition in the liver, that is just another advantage of isolated chemicals. The metabolization is far more predictable.

    • HubertManne
      link
      fedilink
      13 months ago

      no im talking about our knowledge of substances tends to be very narrow and we don’t necessarily put the right combination together. A better example would be vitamin D and calcium. People are told to get vitamin D and they know they need to get calcium and they may see milk is supplemented with it. This is because we know vitamin D helps absorption of calcium which pretty much means getting it into our blood. That info was not known all at once and now we also know vitamin K is needed to get calcium into bone but we did not before 1974 and vitamin D started getting added before ww2. As far as I know we still don’t add vitamin K. If for some reason you got your vitamins from a pill like that guy who ate almost nothing it would not be as good as eating a cron diet.

      • @nebulaoneOP
        link
        English
        03 months ago

        This only applies to anything taken orally and absorbed by the intestine. Also this can both be positive or negative since it increases or decreases absorption of the active agent, which makes it less predictable. Most “ingredients” dont cross the blood-brain barrier.

        • HubertManne
          link
          fedilink
          13 months ago

          I can’t think of a natural remedy over a synthetic/isolated that would not be oral. My point though is that I think the synthetic/isolated is superior if we actually know everything about the thing and can make that perfect concoction but most of the time we only really understand one dimension of how a natural thing works so the natural can be superior. Also though if the intervention need is high I will go for the man made thing. So prediabetic I will add barberries to my diet maybe but if I pass into diabetese I will likely take the metformin or whatever the doctor suggests.

          • @angrystego
            link
            English
            13 months ago

            We also don’t know how the natural remedy works. It’s dangerous to think something natural is automatically safer, nature is a bitch.

            • HubertManne
              link
              fedilink
              13 months ago

              We by and large eat anything edible that is not posionous so its as safe as eating any food. granted though supplementing with it is not necessarily good if its being purified. Thats like just a half measure of purification but adding foods to the diet you otherwise don’t eat is not dangerous.

              • @angrystego
                link
                English
                13 months ago

                In general I agree with you, but I’m going to play the devil’s advocate. I think it’s fair to mention that not everything we eat and consider edible is not poisonous. Especially when it comes to food that contains chemicals which kill you slowly, like carcinogens. It’s beneficial to check what our food items do to us long-term, just like it is beneficial to check our medicinal remedies.

                • HubertManne
                  link
                  fedilink
                  13 months ago

                  fair enough but I don’t think it invalidates the technically part of my initial response which I think is what we are talking about.