Aromatherapy in the United States really suffers from an image problem, and a few highly visable '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.

Aromatherapy's image problem is this: Most people hear the word, and believe it has really to do with 'the smell of things' rather than with 'things that smell'. Its a small but very important distinction. Aromatherapy is really the complete branch of medicine that uses the chemically-volatile (easily evaporated) constituents of plants for treatment of a wide variety of ailments. IT DOES NOT only have to do with the effects these plant chemicals have on people that smell them. Virtually every professional aromatherapist will tell you that the great medicinal promise of aromatherapy does not reside in their pleasing aromas, but rather in their abilities to successfully treat a wide range of infectious illnesses (like MRSA, the 'Superbug'), their action as chemotherapy agents, anti-inflammatory agents, wound-healing agents, and other 'hard' medical applications.

You can read these research abstracts yourself by Googling 'Pub Med', and searching for 'essential oil' and things like 'cancer' or 'staphylococcus' or 'axiolytic'. You'll find a few studies too that were inconclusive, like inhalation of a certain oil did not change the immune system stress marker researchers use. But there's also another showing that EVERY OTHER marker of stress WAS changed. It may be the study chose the right oil, or the study population was better treated with the selected oil in some studies and not in others (one showed a stress reduction in women from lavender essential oil, but not in men). You'll find a full page of results showing a statistically significant effect on stress from lavender and linalool. Try other combinations of pharmaceutical preparations and see if there are more significant results than that!

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.

There's a huge body of data affirming the strong anti-tumorial effects of essential oils. Linalool has been shown to completely destroy certain liver cancers. Frankincense has other powerful anticancer action -- cellular toxicity that's specific to tumors! (One of the great challenges of chemotherapy is killing the cancer cells without killing the rest of the human). Lemongrass too has "promising anticancer activity". Search for yourself and you'll find more pages than you can get through any time soon.

So why are these criticisms of aromatherapy so popular, at least in Google's eyes? Why do some folks like horror flicks and car crashes -- not sure, really. It might have to do with there being a closer relationship between 'aromatherapy' and 'Glade Plug-in Air Freshener (TM)' in many people's minds than there is between 'aromatherapy' 'frankincense' and 'tumor cell specific cytotoxicity'. One reality is that there's a lot more money pushing the Glad Plug-In concept. Because essential oils cannot be patented as medicines, the amount of money to be made by Really Big Business is negligible. So it's up to small natural health companies, individual practitioners, and the wonderful education and research facilities doing the technical work to get the word out. And particularly to rock the boat a bit when so-called authorities make truly dubious claims about the dubious nature of aromatherapy. Plant medicine has kept human beings alive for millennia -- essential oils are just very active molecules produced by plants, and aromatherapy is so-called as it deals with the therapeutic applications of these aromatic molecules. Aroma-therapy. Get the word out!