[RUSTYME]

comfrey does do exactly what they say.... it does heal broken bones much faster than they would without it's use , and it also heals cuts etc much much faster . Not tried it with the broken bones , mine heal very fast anyway  !! but I have tried it with cuts etc ... and it really works .
 With horses you have to go careful as it can promote to much new skin formation , if used as a poultice on cuts .
 It also works on skin ulcers that have resisted conventional treatment . They have tried comfrey as a last resort and in a very short time , they were completely healed .
 You can read all about comfrey in Lawrence D Hills book  ' Comfrey , past , present and future ' .
 Not sure about the virgin healing bit though  ? 

cheers

Russ

[Hilarysmum]

Comfrey leaves dipped in batter and fried is delicious.

[Fleecewife]

<<Comfrey leaves dipped in batter and fried is delicious>>
Really?  I never would have thought of that - I will be giving it a go  .  I think I do just about everything else with it apart from mending broken bones because, fingers crossed, we haven't had any to treat....yet

[lazybee]

I thought we had just discussed it was poisonous. Why would you want to eat it and another thing how would something applied to the outside of your body fix a bone unless you made it into a plaster cast. Have a word with yourselves

[Mo]

A lot of herbs & plants are poisonous if taken in great quantities, comfrey's on the 'bit more dodgy' side. It's a bit like those 'adverse symptoms' you read on medicines that scare the bejesus out of you before you use them 

I can't hear myself talk 

[Fergie]

Comfrey is an ancient herb, and used to be drunk as a tea or applied externally as a poultice (when it would be absorbed through the skin).  There is plenty of historical lore that indicates that it works well for healing wounds, but it can also cause liver damage if eaten in excess (but so does alcohol).  I've no idea what an excess amount is - I suspect nobody has ever done clinical trials on it.

This thread has some similarities to the rhubard thread - rhubarb would not be licenced as a food product if it was a new product, due to the quantity of oxalic acid in it, but taken in moderation it is fine.

John

[RUSTYME]

Comfrey does contain a poison !! it contains an alkaloid of the pyrrolizidine group. There is however,to date , absolutely no proof that it 'has' caused any death or even severe illness at any time  !! . There is evidence of liver disease in one or two cases of people who took comfrey , but no conclusive proof at all , that this was caused by comfrey .
 Potatoes contain solanine and poppies opium , every bread shop I know sells bread with poppy seeds in or on , and they 'are' the opium type poppy seeds !! . also probably about 90% of the UK eat potatoes in one form or another ...how many of them die ? Tomatoes are of the same family and also contain poison , but as with potatoes it is such small amounts that there is very little to no risk at all , unless you were to eat the leaves of either plant ...that would be a different matter.
 Comfrey is related to Borage , which also contains the same group of alkaloids  , many people still use that !!!
On the subject of poisons , tobacco is poisonous , yet millions of people all over the world smoke it , sniff it and chew it  !! I am not saying that makes it ok , just that many millions do use it even though there is a very real risk of health problems, and tobacco is many many times more dangerous than comfrey !!
 As for the healing of bones , it is fact !!! that comfrey contains certain chemicals that have healing abilities . Now as we all know ? you can get all sorts of creams that we rub on our skin that work on parts of the body that are inside !!! Ibuprofen gel for one . It is an anti inflammatory and it does work . Ibuprofen  can cause serious problems with the stomach , yet we still use it !!! The thing is the amount that is used .
 A calculation was made once regarding the amount of comfrey that  is safe to use . If a 10 stone man was to drink 20+ cups of comfrey tea everyday of his life from birth , it 'could ' cause damage to his liver . This would not have to be fatal damage and the man would be 140 years old before the damage showed  
 There is  'no' proof or any record of anybody being killed of comfrey poisoning , but it is for everyone to make their own mind up whether they want to eat it dipped in batter and fried ... I would suggest that they would be more likely to die of the oil that it was fried in than the comfrey itself !!!
 Tests that show comfrey contains the alkaloid were carried out by the FDA in the USA . They then banned the use of comfrey for internal use ...
 The FDA also 'passed' the use of Aspartame in all foods including children's food . Aspartame IS poisonous and has been proved to be so . Perhaps we should get Donald Rumsfeld to allow comfrey as he did Aspartame . He was CEO of Searle , the company that makes and sells aspartame , the sweetener in Nutrasweet , and also in many 'spring waters' for sale in your local shops NOW !!! The FDA had banned aspartame , but Rumsfeld called in markers to get it passed, even though there was proof that it causes brain tumors and holes in the brain !!! The man in control of the board that passed aspartame was Arthur Hayes Hull jr.
Hull later left the FDA under allegations of impropriety, served briefly as Provost at New York Medical College, and then took a position with Burston-Marsteller, the chief public relations firm for both Monsanto and GD Searle. There we are again 'Monsanto' own G D Searle .. and it would seem the FDA ....so any tests and conclusions that the FDA come to are all but worthless .

 The truth is out there ... you just need to look !!!

cheers

Russ

[Mo]

snip
 The truth is out there ... you just need to look !!!

cheers

Russ

And if you don't want to know the answer, don't ask 
Phew! That took some reading but was well worth it - thanks Russ!

[lazybee]

Oh wow. three cheers for Google the font of all knowledge (and half baked nonsense "fact")  cut and paste all the bits you like the sound of

[RUSTYME]

google isn't the font of 'all ' knowledge as far as I know !!! and I have never said it was . It does however , make knowledge available to the ordinary person such as myself .
 This 'knowledge' is independent of google, and in no way owned or controlled by google. Some people ,such as myself , have to rely on information available to us via internet or libraries or other archive sources . Because an article is accessed by google ,is it made  invalid ?  I didn't cut and paste any information in the post I wrote , although I did use one sentence almost verbatim , from an independent article accessed through google. 
Most of the information I used on comfrey was from the book on Comfrey by Lawrence D Hills ( do a google on his name , but no doubt that will make the mans lifetime work invalid also...) .
The information about Donald Rumsfeld , Monsanto , G D Searle and Aspartame , is available from many many different places on the internet . Because that is available on the internet is that also invalid ? I did mention the fact that the FDA had banned aspartame prior to 1985 , but changed their mind after D Rumsfeld called in his markers . The man is corrupt , as is Monsanto as is GD Searle by proxy at least . The FDA is as corrupt as DR and the rest , just look into the history of the companies and their management and then cross reference how many of them went to work for the FDA , and then back to the companies again  !!! The information IS there  , google just makes it easy for me to access it . Sadly I can't afford to fly out to the USA and delve into the records of all the companies or the FDA .
 I did also say that comfrey DOES contain poison , how is that just using the bits I like the sound of ? As for the 'fact' bit ... comfrey DOES contain healing chemicals according to various independent tests carried out over the last 100 years or so .
 I am not a chemist nor a biological expert or an expert on poisons . I therefore have to find information from somewhere. Perhaps in future I should ask you ? it may save me many hours of searching and reading test results for AND against things such as comfrey .
Although I have a fairly extensive library of over 2000 books ( real paper ones ) , I also have about that amount gleaned from the internet via various routes , one of them being google . This does not make my view the right one , it makes it MY one. As I am entitled to my view ,  you are entitled to yours , how do you come by yours ....?  Would it be that you read as much information as you can , both for and against , and then form an educated judgement from that information  ? , the way everyone does  !!!! everyone including me.  As I say , I may be wrong , if I am ?,  and you know I am , then please tell me what you know , that I don't !!! I am open to all proof/information both for and against 

cheers

Russ
 

[Fergie]

Oh wow. three cheers for Google the font of all knowledge (and half baked nonsense "fact")  cut and paste all the bits you like the sound of

Your comment is somewhat unfair - after all, you asked the question in the first place!

[Mo]

Blinking 'eck! I've not been here 2 minutes and two threads I've posted in have started bickering 

[lazybee]

Hey, you can't beat a good healthy debate The bits that I reacted to really was was this statement: "As for the healing of bones , it is fact !!!" and because one person writes a book, it doesn't make it true. Out of all the hospitals in the world how many of them use Comfrey? At least my bees like it.

Give me strength.

[smallholder in the city]

As a doctor (although not an orthopaedic surgeon- I don't play enough rugby) I can confirm the absence of Comfrey from the hospital prescribing formulary.   

[RUSTYME]

 as for the healing of bones , it is fact !!! that comfrey contains certain chemicals that have healing abilities .
now it may be my lack of education , and almost certainly my diabolical punctuation , but, I have read the sentence again and again and I still read it as I wrote it ...."as for the healing of bones  " , (notice the comma)  "  it is fact !!! that comfrey contains certain chemicals that have healing abilities ".  I was stating that comfrey has healing chemicals in its make up. 
 Also, although it may not be used in hospitals , does that mean it doesn't work ? ( would these be the same hospitals that don't even wash their hands between treating patients ? , or leave bags of medical waste in the wards and corridors ? ).  How many hospitals go out and cut down willow and strip the bark off , dry it out and then grind it up , to be taken instead of the artificial aspirin we take for things such as blood thinning , to avoid strokes and heart attacks ?. None as far as I know !! but it would work just as well . 
  The same goes for fox gloves , digitalin is used in certain heart conditions.
 The 'one person' who wrote 'a book' just happens to be Lawrence D Hills :
 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawrence_D._Hills
Founder of the Henry Doubleday Research Association .
 Now I know that doesn't make him incapable of being wrong , but he uses the work of many people within the book, both for and against the use of comfrey. 
To be so dismissive of the book , and what information it contains , I can only assume that you have the book , have read it , and know all this anyway  ? , and have come to the conclusion that he is wrong !! The reason I assume that , is that it is impossible to base any statement , view or argument ,  on the validity of a written work , without actually having read said work !!, somewhat like building a house on shifting sand !! or even more like , pissing in the wind !!! 
Oh and it is definitely debate !!! not bickering 

cheers

Russ