Aromatherapy - Efficacy

Efficacy

There is little evidence to date about the efficacy of aromatherapy.

Martin et al. (1996) concluded that most of the clinical trials suffered from various confounding factors, such as a lack of adequate control, small sample sizes, and lack of repetition by independent researchers. As well, many are served in conjunction with other possible influencers. One example being Kuritama et al.’s (2005) experiment where the psychological benefits of aromatherapy massage was compared to massage alone. Once the tests and questionnaire measures were evaluated there showed a significant reduction in anxiety and self-ranked depression, though there was no difference between the two groups.

Aromatherapists tend to back up their belief in their practice by saying that one cannot confirm or reject their methods by using scientific approaches, because science is reductionist and that aromatherapy depends on a holistic method (Schnaubelt 1998).

Some benefits that have been linked to aromatherapy, such as relaxation and clarity of mind, may arise from the placebo effect rather than from any actual physiological effect. The consensus among most medical professionals is that while some aromas have demonstrated effects on mood and relaxation and may have related benefits for patients, there is currently insufficient evidence to support the claims made for aromatherapy. Scientific research on the cause and effects of aromatherapy is limited, although in vitro testing has revealed some antibacterial and antiviral effects. There is no evidence of any long-term results from an aromatherapy massage other than the pleasure achieved from a pleasant-smelling massage. A few double blind studies in the field of clinical psychology relating to the treatment of severe dementia have been published. Essential oils have a demonstrated efficacy in dental mouthwash products.

Mainstream literature suggests that aromatherapy is based on the anecdotal evidence of its benefits rather than proof that aromatherapy can cure diseases. Scientists and medical professionals acknowledge that aromatherapy has limited scientific support, but critics argue that the claims of most aromatherapy practitioners go beyond the data, and/or that the studies are neither adequately controlled nor peer reviewed.

Some proponents of aromatherapy believe that the claimed effect of each type of oil is not caused by the chemicals in the oil interacting with the senses, but because the oil contains a distillation of the "life force" of the plant from which it is derived that will "balance the energies" of the body and promote healing or well-being by "purging negative vibrations" from the body's "energy field". Arguing that there is no scientific evidence that healing can be achieved or that the claimed "energies" even exist, many skeptics reject this form of aromatherapy as pseudoscience.