Thursday 16 January 2014

Shades of Green


From time to time, green issues impact upon natural therapies and stories abound about our natural world and its environment.  It seems an endless treadmill of disaster.  If it’s not one thing, it’s another.  Those old enough to remember the cold winters in Europe of the early 60’s recall experts telling us that we were in a new cycle.  This was leading us inexorably to another Ice Age and that the glaciers were creeping even further south.  Today the experts are telling us the reverse – that we are entering into a hot house and that glaciers are creeping ever further north.  It’s difficult to know what to believe or who to believe.  However confusion or misinformation is not necessarily a reason for complacency.


 
 
Complacency is the enemy of nature and has allowed the altering of our environment to its detriment as well as to the detriment of our own health.  Greed is the basis for the over exploitation of nature but where is the point of greed?  Who is the most greedy or reprehensible? Is it the giant corporation that allows destructive logging?  Is it the communities that subsist by destructive logging?  Is it the importer who manufactures cheap garden furniture or is it the consumer who purchases the product?  These are not simple questions or issues and are not resolved by simplistic boycotts or similar.  After all, we have entered the world of politics and just as many are greedy for power and influence as they are for money. 

In simple terms, people generate life from the soil.  Communities need to be able to make a living from the natural environment – that’s what living is all about.  Society and politics raise issues of sustainability and our natural ecology.  We are part of that ecology and have responsibilities.  Nevertheless we must accept that many journalists, political parties and individuals not only have written agendas but may have hidden agendas.  Green issues are big news.  Green issues are emotive subjects and we, the consumer,  are cynically manipulated as we ever were, despite living in an age of information.  Green politics does not mean purity.  Green journalists may not be more white than any other political colour.

Never before did the world seem to have access to as much information as it does today.  Often this information is presented not for discussion or for debate but rather for persuasion.  Theories are presented as fact, opinions are presented as facts.  We live in a world of hidden persuaders.  Of course we may argue that it is always the other guy who is persuaded, never us – we are never moved by advertising.  If that were true, the western economy would probably collapse!  Green is big business.  Just look at the supermarket shelves and Health Food stores loaded down with “natural” products.  “Natural” is not defined in law which opens us to buying very shoddy products at very expensive prices. 

This is certainly true for essential oils and to a certain extent to other forms of extracted natural goods.  The demand for green and natural products is growing all the time.  The market is fuelled by scare stories about health.  The market is also fuelled by scare stories about shortages or environmental damage.  For example if there is to be a government ban on such and such a wood because of sustainability it soon becomes in short supply, it is hardly surprising that those holding the stocks push them out very rapidly and the consumer, believing that they are not going to be able to get that product any more, buys them just as rapidly – so actually increasing demand.  Cynical?  But that’s the market place. 

Likewise with medicinal or semi medicinal products and plants.  These may be considered food supplements or traditional medicines but you notice how there is a wave of fashion that flows through the industry.  Each year there is a miracle plant, just as there is a miracle drug in the pharmaceutical industry.  We are persuaded to green miracle drugs as to any other.

Leaving aside the vagaries of the industry and just how natural a shampoo or a bubble bath is, issues of ecology and sustainability should affect practitioners.  After all, in complementary and alternative health care as well as the more select therapists in well being and beauty, one would expect to find very caring people.  That self same care can make us more vulnerable to emotive issues perhaps more so than other sections of the community.  It is good, therefore, for practitioners to examine not only what they do but what they use.  After all, why should a consumer come to see a practitioner, other than for counselling, if they can buy the self same value product in a natural health food store or pharmacy.  If the therapist supplies chamomile tea does not the consumer expect that chamomile tea to be better than a supermarket tea bag brand? 

Choices of products are an issue of ethics from the point of view of the prescribing therapist.  It has been my experience over the years that few schools really get to grips with the issues surrounding natural materials and natural products.  That is why Aromacosmetology™ as a course was born.  Those now who have passed through the course agree that it has been quite an eye opener to debate and discuss issues surrounding what we use in practice.  Take the matter of chamomile tea.  Making a direct comparison between freshly dried chamomile flower heads and a tea bag is an experience in itself.  How many therapists, though, go to this sort of trouble?  How many therapists slip into the habit of providing standardised powdered herb, often from an unknown source, in capsule form, rather than advocating tisanes or providing the more difficult to obtain high quality freshly dried flower heads.  At the end of the day, it’s often a question of economics and providing easy to use, perhaps branded goods and a not unprofitable sideline. 

Profit is not a dirty word.  All we have to do is consider value for money and in terms of ethics, efficacy.  What is the most efficacious substance?  In Aromatherapy we are constantly faced with a deluge of industrial oils.  Most students start their life with cheap industrials.  Many of the schools, particularly those government subsidised courses or in national education systems, are encouraged to buy the cheapest materials simply because some tutors are themselves unversed in the differences between categories or grades of essential oils.  The drift over the years to chemical analysis and a reliance upon the chemistry of essential oils and their co called active constituents has encouraged this lack of understanding 

Essential oils have become to many a commodity which they are definitely not.  There is a belief in some sectors of the practitioner community that a Lavender is a Lavender and it doesn’t matter where it has come from because they’re all alike, whether from Bulgaria, from France or from Tasmania.  Nothing can be further from the truth.  As more science based courses are introduced into Aromatherapy out goes the old idea of vitality, life force or whatever one may call it.  The therapy, however, was based in the idea that essential oils convey more than chemistry.  Essential oils were themselves part of the foundation of holism which, like synergy, has behind it that “the whole is greater than the sum of its parts”.  In practical terms it would mean that a reconstructed oil, a standardised extract, a blended oil or an extract using certain solvents would have completely different characteristics from its original wild counter type, even if the chemistry looked similar.  After all, in practice it is effect that counts rather than the theory.  For whatever reason if a person’s health or well being has improved using a substance X, then that is what has happened.  This is the reality, not perhaps the theory that substance X should not have behaved in this way! 

We all use medicinal plants.  Government has chosen to tell us or define which are medicinal and which are not.  In the European Union the matter of definition is getting more complicated year by year as bio analysts tell us what our food stuffs contain.  Did you realise that by eating lettuce you are consuming a good deal of sleep inducing components?  Or that by adding Rosemary to your potatoes you are ingesting stimulating drugs that can upset your brain chemistry.  At what point do you draw the line and do you need to draw any lines rather than providing more education.  Is a lettuce a functional food and therefore subject to restrictions?  Ridiculous.  Be sure Big Brother thinks about you!

Heath and safety has become a mantra of green politics too.  However the first point of green politics is to show up the failures of the establishment.  This should generate discontent among the masses and lead to inconvenient demonstrations, bans, campaigns etc.  Good causes are sometimes hijacked for rather different ambitions than from those who started along this course.

Such an instance is the sustainability of medicinal plants.  As the demand for natural products grows, so does pressure on plant material, especially if taken from the wild.  Before criticising or jumping to conclusions, we should remember that the majority of wild collected materials come from very poor communities with financial insecurity and who are often being exploited by companies who do not pay a fair price for these wild harvested materials.  It is not really the best option to stop this collection but rather to ensure that the wild plant community (known as population) is managed or sustained.  This is partly covered by the term wild crafted, which is different from the term collected.  Sustainability requires management and that requires fair pricing.

Saying wild crafted implies (even if not having enforceable status) that the plants have been collected in a sustainable manner.  It is very arrogant of people to assume that collectors are all dastardly people stripping the countryside, ignorant of botany and economics.  Most are not so stupid as to destroy their own eco system.  In fact their forebears had been harvesting these materials, sometimes for centuries.  So they do have some ideas of sustainability without the interference from young, western fresh out of university, government funded experts who are principally there to encourage them into the world wide market. 

This world wide market would often include the introduction of high input agriculture for the production of cash crops.  Or perhaps academic plant hunters – finding a specific species, taking it from the indigenous population (both plant and human) to be transplanted to a more developed country where the farming community can make more money from an alternative crop.  Such ideas would be sold to us as sustainability. One could equally argue that it is a stealth theft from the indigenous population.  Sustainability of community often goes out of the window when cash crops are introduced.  Agriculture is not always a solution to the sustainability of plant population or indigenous community.  Are you prepared to pay the real price of fair trade?

For the ethical therapist, this should not be about the politics of the market but should be about the actual material used.  Let us go back for a moment to the principle of life force or vitality.  By ingesting or using a plant that is “vital” we are supposed to heal quicker or find that the constituents of the plant extract simply seem to work better. 

Such effects are hard to pin down but were well understood by ancient people, who although expressing themselves in poetic and fanciful terms were not at all fanciful in their concepts and ideas.  This was made very clear in the seminal work by Fritjoff Capra – the Tao of Physics.  Professor James Lovelock, too, extended these ideas into the Gaia Hypothesis.  On the basis of his hypothesis it is not the eco system that will be destroyed, but rather those of us who are destroying the planet.  In other words, the system will bite back to our total disadvantage.

Ancient people expressed their ideas in different ways.  Gabriel Mojay, when talking about alchemy, draws our attention to the transformative powers of essential oils associated with this so called science in the Mediaeval period.  Combining fire and water had the explosive effect of steam and the equally dubious practice of distillation!  The ethereal or etheric oils that were produced had both a physical form and a non physical form, (aroma) both of which had quite distinct effects. 

We of course are familiar with this today in a different context of science.  We are also at the edge of new sciences and it would be right to call Aromatherapy an energy medicine or a vibrational medicine.  Tricia Davis in her works often uses the term subtle energy in relation to Aromatherapy and essential oils.  All this affects the ethical therapist who wants to work with such vibrational medicine. 

To the dyed in the wool “allopathic or chemical” orthodox practitioner there is no interest or regard for such ideas.  Rather there is a reliance on standardised materials that are often blended, rectified or reconstructed to conform to some industrial norm or standard.  The student is led to believe that such a finger print really exists.  Nature however is far from standard and biodiversity is the name of the species game.  That’s why the term population is used for wild materials.  Within the wild population, a whole gamut of genetic jumps may occur.  That’s why you end up with blue Lavender, purple Lavender, pink Lavender, white Lavender. 

This biodiversity has some interesting characteristics.  For example, if an essential oil has infinite variability, although within some top and bottom parameters, no germ will be able to readily adapt to it.  The first ethical point of contact with plant material for a professional aromatherapist who is working with vital energy or life forces must be the wild population, the species itself.

Sustainability is really not an issue for the practice of the therapy itself.  The impact that a relatively small number of therapists would have on, say, Sandalwood is minute and the therapy itself should take precedence over all other uses for example shampoo, incense etc.  The trouble is, and as we know only too well, oils like Sandalwood, although controlled, are adulterated left, right and centre.  Sandalwood dust is incorporated in much incense (a by product of from the furniture and wood carving trade) but most of what people buy as sacred incense is no more than bamboo powder and synthetic fragrance.  In the UK not so long ago Health Which? identified one well known mail order company selling synthetic Sandalwood fragrance as authentic.  The mail order company promptly blames its supplier who admitted responsibility.  Running tests on Lavende, the magazine found mixed results (Health Which?, February 2001). Currently I am looking at some Frankincense which upon a GLC analysis (a useful tool but not an arbiter of quality) shows that it is largely Turpentine!  If therapists buy, use and sell cheap materials they neither support local communities or sustain ecology.

One could be harsh and say that people deserve what they pay for and an ever increasing demand for lower prices results in more and more junk finding its way onto the market.  Genuine aromatherapists should remember that they should be part of a very selective, traditional and exclusive supply line.  Many of the wild crafters I have met and worked with are very dedicated people, very professional people and additionally well trained in their crafting abilities and techniques.  The essential oils that they produce are often of exceptional quality, sometimes coming from very small stills – specialist stills such as percolation or hydro diffusion stills. 

The impression that is sometimes created is that wild crafted material comes from environmental rapists.  This is far from the truth. Doubtless there are rogues and poachers and there are shortages but often this results from the poorest communities being exploited by the richest countries and that includes people like you and me who are not prepared to pay the price for properly and carefully produced materials.  What is a tragedy is that in the demand for say a  boycotting, ethical communities and ethical companies can be put out of business.  The classical example is the issue over Brazilian Rosewood.  Arguments rage backwards and forwards as to whether the tree is really under pressure or not.  This is not the point at all.  First the therapist should decide whether they want to work with vibration, energy medicine, homeopathy, Aromatherapy etc.  They have to decide whether they want to work with the energy of the plant, and the species in a natural environment certainly provides the best materials.  No one can argue with that.  Once that’s established, the next consideration is the source material that comes form crafted sources, from sustainable sources.  They do exist – there are small specialist suppliers, there are conservation bodies that are encouraging re-forestation, there are all manner of activities that make really good news.  Good news does not make good journalism.  Good news does not sell books or papers and when blanket bans occur, small ethical communities go out of business.  Sure, their products were high priced in the first place and the smell alone said it was different from the industrial product which probably used pirated raw materials to add that little extra to their chemical compound.  Remember one of the big issues over Rosewood was the Communist Party attacking the use of Rosewood in Chanel perfume – decadence versus deprivation, not just sustainability.

Such issues can be raised time and time again.  At the time of writing this article I’m reviewing correspondence with my colleagues in Madagascar over the subject of Ravensara (Ravintsara).  Fragrant Earth was one of the very first companies to promote this into ethical health care and to encourage communities to traditionally harvest (wild craft) the necessary leaves.  My colleague writes “There is now little production but high demand.  Just a few years ago the oil was only known by Aromatherapists and the quantity available was enough to serve everybody.  Now lots of people ask for it but the actual quantity available has decreased, both of organic and non organic type.  ECOCERT does not want to certify any more the leaves from so called urban trees because of the possible pollution so this quantity of raw material is missing from the market, so there is extra pressure on the collector and the price increases.”  Have you noticed price increases?  I do not see it in the market so what may you be really buying?

Now where is the extra demand coming from?  It is not really coming from Aromatherapy as we know it but from the mass market who see Ravensara as a fashion.  From producers who have some international funding with some academics thrown in for good measure.  The first end result is a standardised product.  One of the justifications put forward for this standardised product is the issue of sustainability.  As I hope you can see, the issue becomes quite complex.  The driving force, however, is the large producer with the standardised material, which in the guise of green issues seeks to promote its own self interest.  This is clearly the case with many materials coming from the Chinese Republic, which is not well known for its policies on conservation.  Similar comments could be made about eastern and central Europe, Second World economies rather than Third World but where traditional values still apply and many medicines are coming from herbal sources.

So if the therapist is looking for vitality what are the alternatives if they cannot find the appropriate wild crafted material?  The secondary course is to go to organic material.  Again in the terms of green politics it has become a little bit fashionable to knock organic standards and societies.  I got into organics in my early teens.  In truth, I suppose it had always been with me – through my mother and grandparents who had encouraged my love of the soil and its natural cycles.  Also being brought up thinking that homeopathy was normal I was a prime candidate for following the trail of vitality and so was into organics early on! 

The average person, when they talk about organics, will define organically grown as being grown without pesticides, herbicides etc.  This is actually a secondary issue.  The primary aim of organics is to increase the vitality and natural strength of the plant via soil fertility.  Soil fertility includes microbial activity as well as mineral content so from the point of the ethical therapist, the professional therapist trying to give their client, patient or customer something different from what can be found in the supermarket.  The aim is to produce a healthy vital plant from a living soil.  Organically grown material is probably the best or second option if the wild material can’t be found. 

You should, however, remember the nature of the plant itself.  Earlier I had referred to wild plants as the species, the gene pool of all the varieties we would know as cultivars or things that we grow in agriculture or even in the garden.  These cultivars are often no more than slips or cuttings that have been taken from the original species.  As any gardener knows, you keep taking cuttings, and cuttings from cuttings, and cuttings from cuttings and eventually a clone - because that’s what it is – breaks down, deteriorates, has less vitality or life force.  That should tell us something.  Nature has its own way of explaining that the variety one grows is as important as anything else.  We can all probably appreciate this by thinking about tomatoes.  Tomatoes used to have taste and aroma.  These days they seem to be pretty cold, perhaps a little bitter and they have lost that warm almost musty aromatics of the old “Worthing” tomatoes. 

So sometimes it doesn’t matter how a material is grown if the variety or cultivar is poor in the first place.  Many varieties are grown for yield only and as a result have become pretty tasteless.  The same would apply to the fashion in roses which once went well away from fragrance.  The type of clone is as important as anything else.  When we buy essential oils very rarely is the term clone mentioned.  For example, if you buy High Altitude Lavender, is it from a species, a population or is it from a clone?  These are questions that professional therapists should be asking themselves.  They should be asking themselves what they really believe in, what they really want their clients and customers to have.

Another problem associated with organics is that people like to have them certified as organic.  Presumably this is because they don’t trust their supplier or really don’t know the pathways their oils have taken.  Many years ago now I had the privilege of being at the origin of what is called the Soil Association’s Symbol Scheme, a mark of quality.  So I know a little of how the system works.   Understandably it is very difficult to get an oil certified in the middle of the Brazilian rain forest!  You may actually have to put someone on a plane to get there, verify the whole system and then pay them to come back.  Now if the total production is 25 – 50 kilos, then I don’t think that is an option.  There is no way that people will pay that sort of price.  There is actually a lot of good organic material about that is uncertified.  This is often sold as pure and natural but you have to buy on trust.  Pure and natural, too, has become a meaningless phrase so again the supply line should be known and considered.  As for the rest of the crops, wild or cultivated, there is a world of technology, greed and profit between the growing community and the end user.  What Chanel uses or Avon specifies will more often determine a fashion or create a demand. 

The health food shops sell as many poor quality products as they do good quality products, especially in the toiletries sector.  Many professional therapists in medicine, health, well being and beauty want a more defined position.  They aim to maximise quality and look for efficacy not price.  Effectiveness is why people keep coming back.  If you are a manufacturer of cheap toiletries or cosmetics, that simply doesn’t apply or perhaps even matter.  It does, however, if someone has called upon us for a professionalism that cannot be found in a supermarket.  Green issues are all well and good and have their place but there should be a good deal of education and a clear understanding of the complex issues that surround each case, each country, each community, each growing method, each distillation method.  No one in their right minds wants to pick the last primrose but health professionals should be able to utilise what naturally grows in the wild.  Management and fair trade are the key.

Small time bans by therapists may well do more harm than good, especially to the small, specialist producer who is trying to keep traditional medicine along the traditional pathway.  Such ideas only suit big producers and plays directly into the hands of those who want a standardised product coming from large scale commercial agriculture or indeed into the hands of the pharmaceutical industry who is keen on restricting sales of naturals.  Very few therapists have the luxury of time to investigate the materials that we use, any more than the shopper has the time to investigate whether the organic produce they have just bought meets a specific type of organic standard.  Unfortunately at the end of the time, a certain amount of trust is involved. 

Such an idea turns green politicians red with fury.  After all we are not supposed to trust any body unless they have been blessed by those who claim authority in these matters.  Some of the people in Strasbourg who were voting for green ideas over the banning of allergens have no idea of the impact that such a simple move could make.  Incredibly some of them had no idea that essential oils were contained in citrus fruit peel, which presumably opens up the possibility that each orange or lemon should be labelled with its chemical allergen constituents! 

Few writers or journalists have really stood with wild crafters, worked with wild crafters and understood where they are coming at life from.  Few of us in the west have lived and perhaps watched the dying in Third World countries.  We need to support those who are working actively to improve matters.  We do need to consider what essential oils we buy or what herbs we buy or what herbal teas we buy.  We do need to think about organics, fair trade, wild crafting, sustainability.  That is the objective word – we need to think.  Perhaps above all we need to pay the price of supporting those communities, but then that’s another story.  Paying the price actually costs us something.  Supporting the ban and buying a cheaper alternative actually costs us nothing – it just makes us feel good.  It is enough to make Gaia die of laughter, but then as she shakes we could be thrown off the planet!

© Jan Kusmirek 2014

No comments:

Post a Comment