In science we do not have personality cults. But in the past, companies of all types have had their medical products endorsed by various popular people.
When healers, like physicians, endorse products, my first confusion is why they use a set of multiple herbs, sometimes from one company, while simultaneously using other treatments.
How can one be certain of the significant herbal effect?
Having a new Herx might be evidence, but that may be 1 + 1 = 5 in a high new Herx.
This is soft evidence.
In my 3.8 years of self-funded research so many years ago, I was ethically able to use Houttuynia cordata or Artemisia annua alone at huge doses. I showed that the first has zero effect on Bartonella but is otherwise a good herb, and the latter, Artemisia annua (sweet wormwood), has no effect on Babesia, but seems useful for malaria.
Maybe you feel you can use 3–8 herbs and rule on their combined effect. How? I used elite microbiology serial staining of vast blood smears by an elite physician and lab director. You could see that each month the many smears were about the same or less.
Scientific evidence is weak if it relies only on an impression. You may be correct, but that should objectively generate some type of unbiased measurement of improvement.
