Effects of a dragonfly (Anax i.) homeopathic remedy on learning, memory and cell morphology in mice.

BACKGROUND: Homeopathy is a form of alternative medicine in which uses highly diluted preparations that are believed to cause healthy people to exhibit symptoms similar to those exhibited by patients. The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of dragonfly (Anax imperator, Anax i.) on learning and memory in naive mice using the Morris water maze (MWM) test; moreover, the effects of dragonfly on MK-801-induced cognitive dysfunction were evaluated. METHODS: Male balb-c mice were treated with dragonfly (30C and 200C) or MK-801 (0.2 mg/kg) alone or concurrently (n = 10). Dragonfly (D) and MK-801 were administered subchronically for 6 days intraperitoneally 60 min and 30 min, respectively, before the daily performance of the MWM test. RESULTS: This study revealed that in the familiarization session and first session of the MWM test, Anax i. D30 significantly decreased escape latency compared to the control group, although MK-801, D30 and D200 significantly increased escape latency at the end of five acquisition sessions. Anax i. combined with dizocilpine maleate (MK-801) also significantly decreased escape latency in the familiarization session and first session of the MWM test, although this combination increased escape latency compared to the MK-801 alone group at the end of the test. Time spent in escape platform's quadrant in the probe trial significantly decreased while mean distance to platform significantly increased in MK-801, D30 and D200 groups. In the MWM test, Anax i. combined with MK-801 significantly decreased speed of the animals compared to the MK-801 alone group. General cell morphology was disturbed in the MK-801 group while D30 and D200 seemed to improve cell damage in the MK-801 group. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that the homeopathic Anax i. can impair learning acquisition and reference memory, and it has beneficial effects on disturbed cell morphology.

Warfarin and royal jelly interaction.

An 87-year-old African-American man came to the internal medicine clinic for a routine anticoagulation management visit. He had no complaints. His medical history was significant for stage IV-A follicular non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, atrial fibrillation, and hypertension. His long-term drug therapy consisted of warfarin, felodopine, lisinopril-hydrochlorothiazide, controlled-release diltiazem, potassium chloride, and oxycodone. He reported adherence with his prescribed drugs and denied taking any over-the-counter or herbal products. Overall, the patient's drug therapy had been consistent during the preceding 3 months, no significant changes had occurred in his clinical status, and no significant changes had been noted in his diet; his international normalized ratio (INR) had ranged from 1.9-2.4 (therapeutic range 2-3). He denied tobacco use, alcohol consumption, and recent travel. Four weeks later, the patient came to the emergency department with hematuria. He denied dysuria, taking more than the prescribed amount of warfarin, any changes in his diet, taking any over-the-counter or herbal products, and any other bleeding. On admission to the hospital, his INR was 6.88, which increased to 7.29 during his hospital stay. On further investigation, the patient admitted that he had started taking an herbal supplement, royal jelly, 1 week earlier. When asked specifically about the ingredients in the supplement, he stated that royal jelly was the only component. Relative to the patient's denial of any other changes in his condition or drug regimen, the most probable explanation for his elevated INR and subsequent bleeding is a possible interaction between royal jelly and warfarin. To our knowledge, no case reports concerning royal jelly and warfarin taken concomitantly have been reported. Clinicians should be proactive and repeatedly provide education regarding the potential dangers of dietary supplements taken with conventional drugs.

Allergic reactions to honey and royal jelly and their relationship with sensitization to compositae.

Honey and royal jelly are complex etherogeneous mixtures of flowers' nectar, sugars, proteins and bee's glandular secretions. The existence of a type I hypersensitivity to honey is still matter of debate, while an aetiological role of Compositae pollens in the clinical manifestations following honey ingestion has been envisaged. We describe two cases of severe systemic reactions (anaphylaxis and generalized urticaria/angioedema) due to honey and royal jelly ingestion in patients sensitized to compositae (mugwort). Both patients had a skin and RAST positivity to mugwort and a positive prick-by-prick to the offending foods. Moreover, in one of the two patients the RAST-inhibition assay showed the strong cross-reactivity between the proteins of honey and mugwort and the SDS-PAGE analysis showed that the major proteic bands from honey and mugwort extracts are largely superimposable. Both the clinical data and the laboratory analysis support the hypothesis of a strict link between sensitization to compositae and adverse reactions to honey and jelly.