17
www.thevillagenews.co.za
26 August 2020
MY ENVIRONMENT
The hype about Hoodia By Dr Anina Lee
I
f you look at the shelf-upon-shelf of dietary supplements in your local ‘health-care’ store, you will find many products that claim to promote weight loss.
Obesity has reached epidemic proportions in the Western World. In 2019, 2 billion individuals were overweight, of whom 650 million were obese. Children are of particular concern as 38 million children under the age of five are overweight or obese. Most obese people understand that the extra weight may cause diabetes, heart disease and hypertension – and that obesity is not considered conventionally attractive. So if a pill promises appetite control and weight loss, the product leaps off the shelves. The way to the Promised Land? Enter a plant from Southern Africa – Hoodia gordonii. Desperate dieters looked to Hoodia to open the door to the Promised Land of weight loss. There are several different Hoodia species, but H. gordonii is the best known. Hoodia is a leafless succulent with multiple stems and sharp spines. It grows throughout the north-western, western and southern regions of Namibia and South Africa, where it thrives in marginal, arid conditions, between the interior and the Namib Desert.
tors. The flowers vary between 5 and 15 cm in diameter, are sauceror bell-shaped, and their colours range from red, pink and brown to yellow. Seeds are borne in horned pods that split open when the seeds are ripe. The seeds are attached to a tuft of silky-white hairs which acts as a parachute to aid wind dispersal of the brown seeds. Why the hype about Hoodia? Historically, the San and Nama people chewed the fleshy stems of Hoodia plants to ward off hunger and thirst when they were on long hunts in arid regions. This appetite suppressant benefit to the San was well-documented by the mid-20th century. In 1963, the South African Council for Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR) became aware of the plant’s properties, and in the 1980s isolated its active ingredient, which they called P57. In 1995 they patented this compound. Two years later, the CSIR licensed P57 to a British company, Phytopharm, which launched a series of trials to test its appetite-suppressing qualities. At the end of 2001, the first clinical study was concluded, and the prospects looked good. But these results could not be verified, as the study was never published or subjected to a peerreview process. However, the studies appeared so promising that Pfizer bought the international marketing rights from Phytopharm for US$21 million, with the idea of turning P57 into diet pills. These plans also did not materialise – and in 2002 Pfizer released the rights.
Locally, Hoodia enjoys protection under the Nature Conservation Ordinance of 1975. Internationally, it is listed under Appendix II of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES). But it is a fact of life that protection, unless enforced, is not conservation.
Apparently, P57 had unwanted effects on the liver, caused by components which could not be removed from the supplement. Considering that a large percentage of obese people also have diabetes, anything that switches off the brain’s ability to register hunger and thirst cannot ultimately be of benefit.
The striking flowers of the Hoodia exude a distinctive odour of rotten meat, which attracts flies as pollina-
In 2004 Phytopharm signed an agreement with Unilever to market Hoodia gordonii in the form of
shakes and diet bars. As with Pfizer, their plans did not materialise, and in 2008 Unilever pulled out of their arrangement with Phytopharm. Unilever had reportedly spent R192 million on development, but it had found that Hoodia does not stifle hunger and has serious side effects, including headaches, nausea, increases in blood pressure and liver damage. Recent research on the effects of Hoodia in fat rats has been published in the Journal of Ethnopharmacology. The findings have been described by the head researcher, Prof Carine Smith from the University of Stellenbosch, as “frightening”. Instead of losing fat, the animals lost a considerable amount of muscle mass. They also developed swollen stomachs and their heart muscles thickened. Hoodia in the market Did these negative results stop the marketing of Hoodia products? No. There is very little control over what is sold as dietary supplements or weight-loss products. And Hoodia is big money. Currently, Hoodia is sold in health shops and especially over the internet all over the world. Customers have no way of determining if these products are genuine or even if they contain any Hoodia at all.
goes, is probably the best advice. The absence of clinical trials to test the efficacy of these weight-loss preparations is neatly circumvented: “Only effective as part of a weight management programme when combined with a balanced, energy-restricted diet and regular exercise.” Of course. A more sensible lifestyle alone will have the desired effect even without expensive appetite suppressants.
The Hoodia plant has received significant media attention since patenting of the P57 molecule and the benefit-sharing agreement with the San people. By 2003 Hoodia preparations were pouring into the market. Because CSIR’s patent is on the P57 molecule itself and not the plant, there is little recourse available to both the San people and CSIR to stop the commercialisation of Hoodia products.
Although the CSIR/Unilever exclusive development model meant that the plant material for their purposes was derived solely from their own cultivated plants, it did not prevent the rise of illegal, relentless wild harvesting, resulting in significant conservation concerns around the wild population in Namibia and South Africa, leading to the listing on CITES in 2005.
More often than not, these Hoodia preparations are marketed in an attempt to bypass the P57 patent but, at the same time, capitalise on its success and media exposure. These products have not been clinically tested to be safe and do not use the P57 molecule, but they are using unfair competition tactics and claim the same benefits of P57.
Do the San people benefit? Also, taking into account the massive amounts sold internationally, it’s impossible that all the Hoodia can come from the Kalahari, where it grows naturally. But customers are fooled into believing that because the product is labelled “natural” or “organic”, it must be safe.
And what about the traditional intellectual property of the San? Do they benefit from the millions of dollars and rands generated by the sale of Hoodia products? Again, no. Their original agreement of profit sharing was concluded with the CSIR.
The possibility of severe side effects and the questionable quality of the product cast serious doubt on the safety of taking Hoodia supplements. “Caveat emptor” (let the buyer beware), as the old Latin saying
Neither the CSIR, nor either of the pharmaceutical companies that bought the P57 patent license from the CSIR ever marketed this active ingredient derived from Hoodia. So there is no profit sharing.
Many of these products also claim some relationship to the San people, or quote the use of the plant as an appetite suppressant by the San. The use of the Hoodia name, unauthorised association to the San people, promises of safety and effectiveness, and taking advantage of P57’s media attention confuses and misleads consumers. The companies now peddling this highly questionable, but oh so lucrative product, seem to be pirating the intellectual property of the San, who are losing out – once more.
