Raw herbal powders versus standardized extracts

#1

Lurker
0 ₮

Posted 08 February 2007 - 06:46 AM

For things like bacopa, how does the concentration of active ingredients in the raw powder compare to that in concentrated extracts? I have some organic bacopa on hand and take around 1/2 teaspoon in water (taste like pond water) daily, but I'm not sure if that is too little or too much compared to typical doses one takes in concentrated extract form. Anybody have any ideas? Thanks in advance!

#2 Shepard

Member, Director, Moderator
6,360 posts
932 ₮

Location:Auburn, AL

Posted 08 February 2007 - 06:54 AM

It's going to depend on the powder. But, as a general rule, it's usually a better idea to take the extracts that contain what you are looking for.

This isn't the case with some more benign things, but for the most part it's a pretty safe bet.

#3

Lurker
0 ₮

Posted 08 February 2007 - 07:03 AM

> This isn't the case with some more benign things, but for the most part it's a pretty safe bet.

Yes, I think ginkgo, for example, has some not-so-good things in it (ginkgolic acid) which are mostly removed in the extract form. But my impression is that things like bacopa and ashwaghanda are pretty benign and could be taken in non-extract form. The benefit of taking the non-extract form is that I have an certified organic source of said products.

#4 wannafulfill

Guest
275 posts
4 ₮

Posted 08 February 2007 - 01:52 PM

The answer is we have no idea. Bacopa, for instance, contains dozens of unique chemical constituents, most of which have received very little research. Isolating, or refining for bacopaside A might be better, it might not.

Google Sign in options

#1

#2 Shepard

sponsored ad

#3

sponsored ad

#4 wannafulfill

0 user(s) are reading this topic

Ad Notice