Aromatherapy in the United States really suffers from an image problem, and a few degreed 'debunkers' are not really helping the matter. Googling 'aromatherapy' returns thousands of results, and in the top 15 are sites belonging to allopathic medical professionals who seem to only have given a cursory glance at the practice, and chalked it up to New Age, feel-good balderdash. Horse manure. Bull -hockey. The trouble with their analysis is that they're based on a very limited investigation, lumping all of aroma medicine in with every claim about the 'softer science' of psycho-emotional aromatherapy healing. The result is that many folks whom may benefit from aroma medicine may not get it, and many physicians investigating alternative medicine modalities may overlook the true potentials of essential oils. What can be done to change aromatherapy's touchy-feely image?
How about we'll start be agreeing on this: That SOME of aromatherapy is in-fact a 'soft science'? That SOME people may feel more relaxed when inhaling Lavender, for example, and some will not? Aromatherapists will not disagree on this point -- they will however put up a defense when the medical applications of essential oils are thrown out with the soft side of 'aroma' therapy. Science IS BACKING UP many of aromatherapy's claims with valid data, even on the 'soft-science' of the practice. Here's a look at the science behind aromatherapy, the holes in arguments of the popular debunkers, and why aroma-medicine has it's place in today's medical practices.
The image problem of aromatherapy has everything to do with the prevailing idea that the practice is all about 'smelling things', whereas the science really about 'things that smell'. Smelling things is very subjective, and may have little medical effect at all (though we'll see that it MAY as well). Aromatherapy is defined as the complete practice of the branch of natural medicine using the volatile liquids distilled from plants. Authors of the hard-science aromatherapy texts available today, professionally-trained aromatherapists (one with a PhD in Chemistry) note that the future of aroma medicine is with the treatment of serious infectious illnesses and cancer treatment. You don't even have to smell them for them to work! Other effects of essential oils also being successfully investigated include speeding wound healing, reducing inflammation, and acting as analgesics.
A quick look at the research available on Pub Med, a database of thousands of peer-reviewed life-science and medical journals freely available on-line reveals thousands of citations of research performed using essential oils. Yes, there are in fact some studies that did not result in convincing evidence that hand massages with lavender cream didn't make people feel better than hand massages with unscented lotion. But there is studies that show people sleep better after lavender inhalation. And there's a study that show stress makers of the immune system remained unchanged after inhaling linalool (an isolated constituent of Lavender), but there's also 15 studies (upon last count) showing positive significant results if one searches for 'lavender' and 'axiolytic' (the technical term for stress reducer). The results for 'acetaminophen' and 'pain' MAY be as strong; those for 'minoxidil' and 'hair' are almost certainly not.
Many practitioners of conventional medicine have decided that natural medicines in general are ineffective at best, and at worst they are considered a cruel hoax. What seems to be the challenge is the availability of well educated natural therapists -- our medical system is not set up to give these practitioners the respect (and payment) they deserve. So most folks go at it themselves, valiantly attempting self-diagnosis and treatment., while FDA demands the instructions for these treatments be in the most vague form possible! The result is comments like "It (aromatherapy) is a mixture of folklore, trial and error, anecdote, testimonial, New Age spiritualism and fantasy" (Stephen Barrett, M.D. of Quackwatch). Another popular site points to a few inconclusive studies and claims all of aromatherapy to be dubious. What if we used these same guidelines investigating conventional medicine? How many deaths occur each year from properly prescribed and used drugs? From medical mistakes? The combined total makes these about the third leading cause of death in America (after heart disease and cancer, but before auto fatalities and cigarette use -- See Mercola.com, 'Death by Medicine'). Guess the number caused by mis-use (or any use for that matter) of essential oils. What's the smallest non-negative number you can think of? That's the currently accepted statistic.
Really, the medical, therapeutic applications of essential oils (repeat: aroma-therapy!) are making huge advances in acceptance in the scientific community -- among the labs and scientists that do independent and educationally funded research. Important studies are released every month showing the strong efficacy of certain essential oils in treating serious bacterial infections. Try a Pub Med search on 'staphylococcus' and 'essential oil' or 'tea tree', or 'mrsa' and 'essential oil'. You'll find pages of results. The big test will be whether these result in protocols for medical use. The most important factor in this may be how much we all demand that natural 'alternatives' are available in the main-stream, as the profit-driven conventional medical system is just not designed to utilize very low cost natural treatments.
Then there's the myriad of studies showing essential oils' efficacy in destroying cancers. A recent study in the journal of "Chemico-Biological Interactions" noted that linalool, a common essential oil constituent, completely eradicated a particular liver cancer cell line at very, very small concentrations. Try 'essential oil' and 'cancer' in Pub Med and you'll get results like "Frankincense oil derived from Boswellia carteri induces tumor cell specific cytotoxicity"(perhaps this is terminology of "New Age spiritualism" I'm yet unaware of). Another result is "Anticancer activity of an essential oil from Cymbopogon flexuosus" (Lemongrass essential oil) with a conclusion of "Our results indicate that the oil has a promising anticancer activity and causes loss in tumor cell viability by activating the apoptotic process as identified by electron microscopy." The list, of course, goes on (there are in fact 388 results today for this search).
So what makes aromatherapy the bearer of such nonchalant, baseless accusations of lack of efficacy? It may really all lay in the name. Aromatherapy does have a very 'new-age' ring to it. The trick of changing this perception from 'smell good, feel good' to 'potent aromatic medicine' will be presentation of hard data at every opportunity. Educate yourself on these studies and therapeutic use of essential oils in general. Make waves wherever possible for the acceptance of natural medicine in the big leagues of Western medicine. It's up to the users and the therapeutic grade essential oil suppliers to make an effort and bringing about this change in perception. Nearly everyone uses Tea Tree or has experienced 'Vicks Vapor Rub' -- these ARE aromatherapy, and so are all the studies using essential oils in cases of serious illness and disease. Using these examples as a segue can change someone's mind about essential oils and the real medicine of their wonderful aromas.
The author has made available much information about aromatherapy, such as using Immortelle, Everlasting and other therapeutic essential oils.
