Anti-viral Activity of Anise Extract

In summary: However, given the lack of such studies on anise extract, it is difficult to say definitively whether or not it has antiviral activity.In summary, anise extracts contain Lignin-Carbohydrate complexes, which have been found to have anti-viral effects. However, from what was understood by going quickly through the article, the scientists applied the extract directly onto the cell culture, rather than letting it diffuse into the cells. So, I was wondering if this is also true in vivo. So, if anyone here is an expert on the topic or knows about this stuff. Could you please explain to me how do LCs confer antiviral activity in vivo? what is the mechanism by which it occurs?I know at least three
  • #1
Cha0t1c
15
5
Anise extracts contain Lignin-Carbohydrate complexes (LCs), which have been found to have anti-viral effects according to this article (DOI: 10.1271/bbb.100645 ). However, from what I understood by going quickly through the article, the scientists applied the extract directly onto the cell culture.

So, I was wondering if this is also true in vivo. So, if anyone here is an expert on the topic or knows about this stuff. Could you please explain to me how do LCs confer antiviral activity in vivo? what is the mechanism by which it occurs?
 
Biology news on Phys.org
  • #2
I know at least three European cultures where one of the favorite drinks is anise liquor. However, I did not have heard that those have any immunity against viruses.
 
  • #3
fresh_42 said:
I know at least three European cultures where one of the favorite drinks is anise liquor. However, I did not have heard that those have any immunity against viruses.

I think such posts should be reviewed by people who specialize in Biological sciences so misunderstandings never occur.
 
  • #4
The paper you quoted was hopefully peer reviewed. That does not mean I have to trust the process they used. The fact that people in 3 different countries consume anise on a regular basis is just evidence for the absurdity of the claim. It would have been recognized as beneficial since centuries! The fact that it was not is strong evidence. You don't need to be doctor to observe this.
 
  • #5
fresh_42 said:
The paper you quoted was hopefully peer reviewed. That does not mean I have to trust the process they used. The fact that people in 3 different countries consume anise on a regular basis is just evidence for the absurdity of the claim. It would have been recognized as beneficial since centuries! The fact that it was not is strong evidence. You don't need to be doctor to observe this.
Phytotherapy is not a replacement for medicine. However, some herbs have been proved to exert certain therapeutic effects because of phytochemicals found in them.
Anise, when boiled, releases a class of organic compounds known as Lignin-Carbohydrate complexes and these complexes have been found to prevent or fight viral infections according to research. My question was whether it can exert the same effect when taken as drink. It does not need to be 100% effective. Again, I repeat, it is not a replacement for medicine, but an aid to supply the body with certain nutrients it needs, and which happens to carry certain therapeutic benefits...
 
  • Like
Likes symbolipoint
  • #6
I think you are correct to be skeptical of the conclusions of that paper. Many compounds can appear to have some effect when applied to cultured cells but be completely ineffective when studied in other situations. Studies with cultured human cells can be useful for preliminary studies and to try to address questions about mechanism, but they aren't good predictors of in vivo efficacy.

Rather, if you are interested in whether particular components of anise extract have antiviral activity, I would look to either 1) observational studies in humans that correlate consumption of anise extract with health outcomes or 2) animal studies in which the test compounds are given to animals and the animals are challenged with various viruses. While not perfect (correlation does not always imply causation for observational studies, and animals can sometimes be poor models for humans, especially when dealing with infectious diseases that can differ between mice and humans), these would be better indicators of any in vivo effect than studies in cultured cells.

The gold standard for evidence would be a randomized controlled trial (such as those required for approval of new drugs by the FDA).
 
  • Like
Likes Laroxe, lavinia, symbolipoint and 2 others

Similar threads

Replies
14
Views
3K
  • Sticky
Replies
2
Views
498K
Back
Top