Preprint
Review

This version is not peer-reviewed.

Two Sides of the Same Coin for Health: Adaptogenic Botanicals as Nutraceuticals for Nutrition and Pharmaceuticals in Medicine

A peer-reviewed version of this preprint was published in:
Pharmaceuticals 2025, 18(9), 1346. https://doi.org/10.3390/ph18091346

Submitted:

23 July 2025

Posted:

24 July 2025

You are already at the latest version

Abstract
Background. The dual-faced nature of some botanicals, which are used both as pharmaceuticals and dietary supplements for nutritional purposes, can lead to inconsistencies and contradictory outcomes from Food and Drug regulatory authorities in various countries. Aims. This overview aimed to identify the sources of inconsistencies in the assessment of evidence, ensure the safety, efficacy, and quality of botanicals, and propose potential solutions to address the issues, particularly in the field of multi-component botanicals, e.g., adaptogens used in prevention and treatment of complex etiology, stress-induced, and aging-related disorders. Overview. This review is focused on: (i) - the differences between the requirements for the quality of pharmaceuticals and dietary supplements of botanical origin, (ii) - progress, trends, pitfalls, and challenges in the adaptogens research, (iii) - Inadequate assignment of some plants to adaptogens, or insufficient scientific data in case of Eurycoma longifolia, (iv) - inconsistencies in botanical risk assessments in the case of Withania somnifera. Proposed solutions include: (i)- establish internationally harmonized guidelines for eval-uating botanicals based on their intended use (e.g., pharmaceutical vs. dietary Supple-ment), incorporating traditional use data alongside modern scientific methods, (ii)- en-courage peer review and transparency in national assessments by mandating public dis-closure of methodologies, data sources, and expert affiliations, (iii) - create a tiered evi-dence framework that allows differentiated standards of proof for traditional botanical supplements versus pharmaceutical candidates, (iv)- promote international scientific dia-logues among regulators, researchers, and industry to develop consensus positions and avoid unilateral bans that may lack scientific rigor. Conclusions. Harmonized standards, transparent methodologies, and a balanced, evidence-informed approach are necessary to ensure consumers receive effective and safe botanicals.
Keywords: 
;  ;  ;  ;  ;  

1. Introduction

Botanical substances occupy a unique and complex position at the intersection of food and pharmaceutical regulation. Their dual-faced nature—as both traditional medicines and modern dietary supplements—creates regulatory ambiguity, particularly in the evaluation of safety, efficacy, and quality across different jurisdictions. This ambiguity can lead to inconsistencies in risk assessments and contradictory outcomes among food and drug regulatory authorities globally [1,2,3,4,5].
The dual-faced nature of some Botanicals used as pharmaceuticals and dietary supplements for
Nutrition can lead to inconsistencies and contradictory outcomes from Food and Drug regulatory authorities in various countries. As a result, they can raise conflicts of interest between the pharmaceutical and food industry and the Food and Drug regulatory authorities. This overview aims to identify the sources of inconsistencies in the assessment of evidence, ensure the safety, efficacy, and quality of botanicals, and propose potential solutions to address the issues, particularly in the field of multi-component Botanicals and Botanical Herbal Products dealing predominantly with complex etiology, e.g. stress-induced and aging related disorders and diseases.
Figure 1. Janus' statue and his two faces: past and future. In Greek mythology, Janus (January) is a god of time and duality, depicted as having two contrasting, duplicitous faces.
Figure 1. Janus' statue and his two faces: past and future. In Greek mythology, Janus (January) is a god of time and duality, depicted as having two contrasting, duplicitous faces.
Preprints 169473 g001

2. Pharmaceuticals vs Nutraceuticals and Dietary Supplements

2.1. What Are the Differences Between the Requirements for the Quality of Pharmaceuticals and Dietary Supplements of Botanical Origin?

The requirements for pharmaceuticals and dietary supplements of botanical origin differ significantly in terms of regulatory oversight, quality standards, safety and efficacy requirements, and manufacturing practices (Table 1). Table 2 shows the key differences in the requirements for botanical-origin pharmaceuticals and dietary supplements under FDA (United States) vs. EMA (European Union) regulations. Table 3 includes selected true adaptogens with Pharmacopeial Recognition and some putative adaptogens, such as Eurycoma and Sideritis, which were claimed as adaptogens in publications [6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15].
The daily dose of a dietary supplement versus a herbal medicine containing the same active ingredient can differ significantly due to regulatory, intended use, and formulation factors.

2.2. Regulatory Classification, Purpose of Use, Dose and Potency, Labeling and Claims

Even if the active ingredient is identical, herbal medicines generally have higher, standardized, and therapeutically justified doses. In contrast, dietary supplements offer lower doses for general wellness and are not intended to treat diseases.

4. Conclusion

The inconsistencies in risk assessments of Withania somnifera underscore the broader challenge of regulating botanicals that straddle the food-pharma boundary. Without harmonized standards and transparent methodologies, regulatory decisions risk being unscientific, protectionist, or influenced by conflicts of interest. A more balanced, evidence-informed approach is urgently needed to protect consumer safety without stifling access to beneficial botanicals.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, A.P. and T.L.; writing—preparation of original drafts, A.P.; writing—review and editing, A.P. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

No new data were created or analyzed in this study.

Acknowledgments

The authors received no administrative and technical support or donations.

Conflicts of Interest

Alexander Panossian is self-employed at the research and development company Phytomed AB and has no shares or financial interest in any pharmaceutical company. The authors, Alexander Panossian , supported various projects without funding but received funding in previous years to develop herbal medical products from EuropharmaUSA Inc., Green Bay, Wisconsin, USA. The author AP declared that they were editorial board members of Pharmaceuticals at the time of submission. This had no impact on the peer review process and the final decision. The author Terrence Lemerond founded EuropharmaUSA Inc., a company producing herbal dietary supplements. The company had no role in the writing of the manuscript. Both authors, AP, and TL, declare that the research was conducted without any commercial or financial relationships that could potentially create a conflict of interest.

References

  1. Patwardhan, B.; Chaturvedi, S.; Tillu, G.; Deshpande, S.; Hegde, B. M. Danish ban on Ashwagandha: Truth, evidence, ethics, and regulations. Journal of Ayurveda and integrative medicine 2024, 15, 101028. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Ramadoss, M.S.K.; Koumaravelou, K. Regulatory Requirement Sufficiency for Registration of Traditional Herbal Medicine-Based Products in Association of Southeast Asian Nations Regions: A Model Study with Ashwagandha Tablets. https://www.ijpsonline.com/articles/regulatory-requirement-sufficiency-for-registration-of-traditionalherbal- medicine-based-products-in-association-of-southeast-asia-4579.html. Indian J Pharm Sci, 2022; 84, 501–512. [Google Scholar]
  3. Ministry of Ayush, Government of India, New Delhi. Safety of Ashwagandha. (Withania somnifera). Report of the Expert Committee constituted by Ministry of Ayush Govt. of India. Central Council for Research in Ayuredic Sciences, Ministry of Ayush, Government of India, New Delhi, 2020, 1-70. www.ccras.nic.
  4. Danish Technical University (DTU) Food Institute's risk assessments of Withania somnifera (Ashwagandha) root (DTU DOCX No. 19/1030299, 2020.
  5. Danish Technical University (DTU) Food Institute's risk assessments of Withania somnifera (Ashwagandha) root DTU DOCX 25/100205, 2025).
  6. EMA/HMPC/24186/2023. Final assessment report on Rhodiola rosea L., rhizoma et radix - Revision 1. Committee on Herbal Medicinal Products (HMPC). 21/05/2024; https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/documents/herbal-report/final-assessment-report-rhodiola-rosea-l-rhizoma-et-radix-revision-1_en.
  7. EMA/HMPC/27745/2023. Final assessment report on Panax ginseng C.A.Mey., radix - Revision 1. Committee on Herbal Medicinal Products (HMPC). 12/07/2024. https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/documents/herbal-report/final-assessment-report-panax-ginseng-camey-radix-revision-1_en.pdf. (accessed on 22 July 2025).
  8. EMA/HMPC/681519/2012. Final public statement on Withania somnifera (L.) Dunal, radix - First version. Herbal Medicinal Products (HMPC). 03/09/2013; https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/documents/public-statement/final-public-statement-withania-somnifera-l-dunal-radix-first-version_en.
  9. EMA/HMPC/680615/2013.Final assessment report on Eleutherococcus senticosus (Rupr. et Maxim.) Maxim., radix. Committee on Herbal Medicinal Products (HMPC). 06/10/2014 https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/documents/herbal-report/final-assessment-report-eleutherococcus-senticosus-rupr-et-maxim-maxim-radix_en.
  10. EMA/HMPC/39455/2015. Final assessment report on Sideritis scardica Griseb.; Sideritis clandestina (Bory & Chaub.) Hayek; Sideritis raeseri Boiss. & Heldr.; Sideritis syriaca L., herba. Committee on Herbal Medicinal Products (HMPC). 28/10/2016; https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/documents/herbal-report/final-assessment-report-sideritis-scardica-griseb-sideritis-clandestina-bory-chaub-hayek-sideritis-raeseri-boiss-heldr-sideritis-syriaca-l-herba_en.
  11. Ginseng Radix. In: WHO monographs on selected medicinal plants. World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland, 1999; 1:168-182.
  12. Radix Eleutherococci. In: WHO monographs on selected medicinal plants. World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland, 2002; 2: 83-96.
  13. Fructus Schisandrae. In: WHO monographs on selected medicinal plants. World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland, 2007; 3: 296-313.
  14. Radix Withaniae. In: WHO monographs on selected medicinal plants. World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland, 2009; 4: 373-391.
  15. National Pharmacopoeia Committee. Pharmacopoeia of the People’s Republic of China, English ed.; National Pharmacopoeia Committee: Beijing, China, 2010. [Google Scholar]
  16. Panossian, A. Understanding adaptogenic activity: specificity of the pharmacological action of adaptogens and other phytochemicals. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1401. [Google Scholar]
  17. Panossian, A. G. , Efferth, T., Shikov, A. N., Pozharitskaya, O. N., Kuchta, K., Mukherjee, P. K., Banerjee, S., Heinrich, M., Wu, W., Guo, D. A., & Wagner, H. (2021). Evolution of the adaptogenic concept from traditional use to medical systems: Pharmacology of stress- and aging-related diseases. Medicinal research reviews, 41(1), 630–703. [CrossRef]
  18. Canguilhem, G. Essai sur quelques problèmes concernant le normal et le pathologique. In The Normal and the Pathological; Fawcett, C.R., Cohen, R.S., Translators, *!!! REPLACE !!!*, Eds.; Zone Books: New York, NY, USA, 1991; Available online: https://www.undergroundbooks.net/pages/books/11553/georges-canguilhem-michel-foucault-intro/the-normal-and-the-pathological (accessed on 10 February 2025).
  19. Panossian, A.; Lemerond, T.; Efferth, T. Adaptogens in Long-Lasting Brain Fatigue: An Insight from Systems Biology and Network Pharmacology. Pharmaceuticals 2025, 18, 261. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  20. Wagner, H.; Nörr, H.; Winterhoff, H. Plant adaptogens. Phytomedicine 1994, 1, 63–76. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  21. Panossian, A. , Wikman, G., & Wagner, H. (1999). Plant adaptogens. III. Earlier and more recent aspects and concepts on their mode of action. Phytomedicine : international journal of phytotherapy and phytopharmacology, 6(4), 287–300. [CrossRef]
  22. Panossian, A.G. Adaptogens: Tonic herbs for fatigue and stress. Altern. Compliment. Ther. 2003, 9, 327–332. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Panossian, A.; Wagner, H. Stimulating effect of adaptogens: an overview with particular reference to their efficacy following single dose administration. Phytother Res. 2005, 19, 819–838. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Panossian, A.; Wikman, G. Pharmacology of Schisandra chinensis Bail.: An overview of Russian research and uses in medicine. J. Ethnopharmacol. 2008, 118, 183–212. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. Panossian, A.; Wikman, G.; Sarris, J. Rosenroot (Rhodiola rosea): Traditional use, chemical composition, pharmacology and clinical efficacy. Phytomedicine 2010, 17, 481–493. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. Panossian, A.; Wikman, G.; Kaur, P.; Asea, A. Adaptogens exert a stress-protective effect by modulation of expression of molecular chaperones. Phytomedicine 2009, 16, 617–622. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  27. Panossian, A.; Wikman, G.; Kaur, P.; Asea, A. Adaptogens stimulate neuropeptide y and hsp72 expression and release in neuroglia cells. Front. Neurosci. 2012, 6, 6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  28. Anderson, E. M. , Gomez, D., Caccamise, A., McPhail, D., & Hearing, M. (2019). Chronic unpredictable stress promotes cell-specific plasticity in prefrontal cortex D1 and D2 pyramidal neurons. Neurobiology of stress, 10, 100152. [CrossRef]
  29. Panossian, A. , Seo, E. J., & Efferth, T. (2018). Novel molecular mechanisms for the adaptogenic effects of herbal extracts on isolated brain cells using systems biology. Phytomedicine : international journal of phytotherapy and phytopharmacology, 50, 257–284. [CrossRef]
  30. Panossian, A. , & Efferth, T. (2022). Network Pharmacology of Adaptogens in the Assessment of Their Pleiotropic Therapeutic Activity. Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland), 15(9), 1051. [CrossRef]
  31. Panossian, A. , Lemerond, T., & Efferth, T. (2024). State-of-the-Art Review on Botanical Hybrid Preparations in Phytomedicine and Phytotherapy Research: Background and Perspectives. Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland), 17(4), 483. [CrossRef]
  32. Panossian, A. (2025). Trends and Pitfalls in the Progress of Network Pharmacology Research on Natural Products. Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland), 18(4), 538. [CrossRef]
  33. Panossian, A. (2023). Challenges in phytotherapy research. Frontiers in pharmacology, 14, 1199516. [CrossRef]
  34. Tambi, M. I. (2006). Eurycoma longifolia jack: a potent adaptogen in the form of water-soluble extract with the effects of maintaining men's health. Asian J Androl, 8(Suppl 1):49–50.
  35. George A, Liske E, Chen CK, and Ismail SB. (2013). J Sports Med Doping Stud, 2: Water Extract-Physta Does not Change Normal Ratios of Testosterone to Epitestosterone in Healthy Males, J Sports Med Doping Stud, 3:2.
  36. George, A. , & Henkel, R. (2014). Phytoandrogenic properties of Eurycoma longifolia as natural alternative to testosterone replacement therapy. Andrologia 46(7), 708–721. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  37. Talbott, S. M. , Talbott, J. A., George, A., & Pugh, M. (2013). Effect of Tongkat Ali on stress hormones and psychological mood state in moderately stressed subjects. Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition 10(1), 28. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  38. Thu, H. E. , Mohamed, I. N., Hussain, Z., Jayusman, P. A., & Shuid, A. N. (2017). Eurycoma Longifolia as a potential adoptogen of male sexual health: a systematic review on clinical studies. Chinese journal of natural medicines. [CrossRef]
  39. 2Chan, K (2021). Effects of Eurycoma longifolia supplementation: An evaluation of cell growth, exercise performance, and well-being in adult males. Doctoral thesis, Liverpool John Moores University. https://researchonline.ljmu.ac.uk/id/eprint/15104/ ; https://researchonline.ljmu.ac.uk/id/eprint/15104/1/2021kaiquinphd.
  40. Chinnappan, S.M. , George, A., Pandey, P., Narke, G., Choudhary, Y.K. Food & Nutrition Research, 5: aqueous root extract–Physta® on testosterone levels and quality of life in ageing male subjects: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled multicentre studyFood & Nutrition Research 2021, 65, 2021. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Bhat, R. , & Karim, A. A. (2010). Tongkat Ali (Eurycoma longifolia Jack): a review on its ethnobotany and pharmacological importance. Fitoterapia, 81(7), 669–679. [CrossRef]
  42. Rehman, S. U. , Choe, K., & Yoo, H. H. (2016). Review on a Traditional Herbal Medicine, Eurycoma longifolia Jack (Tongkat Ali): Its Traditional Uses, Chemistry, Evidence-Based Pharmacology and Toxicology. Molecules (Basel, Switzerland). [CrossRef]
  43. Low, B. S. , Das, P. K., & Chan, K. L. (2013). Standardized quassinoid-rich Eurycoma longifolia extract improved spermatogenesis and fertility in male rats via the hypothalamic-pituitary-gonadal axis. Journal of ethnopharmacology, 145(3), 706–714. [CrossRef]
  44. Leisegang, K. , Finelli, R., Sikka, S. C., & Panner Selvam, M. K. (2022). Eurycoma longifolia (Jack) Improves Serum Total Testosterone in Men: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Clinical Trials. Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania). [CrossRef]
  45. Henkel, R. R. , Wang, R., Bassett, S. H., Chen, T., Liu, N., Zhu, Y., & Tambi, M. I. (2014). Tongkat Ali as a potential herbal supplement for physically active male and female seniors--a pilot study. Phytotherapy research : PTR. [CrossRef]
  46. Khanijo, T. , & Jiraungkoorskul, W. (2016). Review Ergogenic Effect of Long Jack, Eurycoma Longifolia. Pharmacognosy reviews 10(20), 139–142. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  47. George, A. , Udani, J., Abidin, N. Z., & Yusof, A. (2018). Efficacy and safety of Eurycoma longifolia(Physta®) water extract plus multivitamins on quality of life, mood and stress: a randomized placebo-controlled and parallel study. Food & nutrition research, 1374. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Insanu M, Pratiwi S N E​, Fidrianny I. A review of the phytochemical compounds and pharmacological activities of Eurycoma longifolia. International Journal of Research in Pharmaceutical Sciences. (IJRPS), 1949.
  49. Mohamed, A. Farag, Abiodun O. Ajayi, Mohammed Taleb, KaiWang, and Iriny M. Ayoub. A Multifaceted Review of Eurycoma longifolia Nutraceutical Bioactives: Production, Extraction, and Analysis in Drugs and Biofluids. ACS Omega. 2023, 8, 1838−1850. [Google Scholar]
  50. Lee EL and Barnes, J. Tongkat Ali/Long Jack. https://www.publish.csiro.au/hc/pdf/HC22143. Journal of Primary Health Care. [CrossRef]
  51. Muniandy, S. , Yahya, H. M., Shahar, S., Kamisan Atan, I., Mahdy, Z. A., Rajab, N. F., George, A., & Chinnappan, S. M. (2023). Effects of Eurycoma longifolia Jack standardised water extract (Physta) on well-being of perimenopausal and postmenopausal women: protocol for a randomised, double-blinded, placebo-controlled, parallel group study. BMJ open. [CrossRef]
  52. Niamh Michail. 'Incorrect and misleading': Industry defends ashwagandha root extract safety amid Danish assessment. , 2023, https://www.vitafoodsinsights.com/botanicals-herbs/-incorrect-andmisleading- industry-defends-ashwagandha-root-extract-safety-amid-danish-assessment. 25 May.
  53. Indian Express. (2024). Denmark's ban on Ashwagandha lacks scientific rigor. Retrieved from https://indianexpress.com/article/cities/pune/denmarks-ban-on-ashwagandha-ban-based-on-2020-reportthat- lacks-scientific-rigor-says-ayush-ministry-9435664/. 2020.
  54. The Indian Herbal Pharmacopeia. Revised new edition 2002. Indian Drug manufacturers' association, Mumbai, pp. 467-478.
  55. Amritha, N. , Bhooma, V., & Parani, M. (2020). Authentication of the market samples of Ashwagandha by DNA barcoding reveals that powders are significantly more adulterated than roots. Journal of ethnopharmacology 256, 112725. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  56. Balkrishna, A. , Mehta, A., & Yadav, D. (2024). Botanical risk misclassifications: Withania somnifera case review. Journal of Restorative and Alternative Medicine, Advance online publication.
  57. Anupama, N. , Rathi, P. Journal of Ayurveda and Integrative Medicine 14(1), 100420.
  58. Kalaivani, P. , Siva, R., Gayathri, V., & Langade, D. (2023). Ninety-day repeated dose toxicity of Ashwagandha (Withania somnifera) root extract in Wistar rats. Toxicology reports. [CrossRef]
  59. Tandon, N. , & Yadav, S. S. (2020). Safety and clinical effectiveness of Withania Somnifera (Linn.) Dunal root in human ailments. Journal of ethnopharmacology 255, 112768. [CrossRef]
  60. Verma, N. , Gupta, S. K., Tiwari, S., & Mishra, A. K. (2021). Safety of Ashwagandha Root Extract: A Randomized, Placebo-Controlled, study in Healthy Volunteers. Complementary therapies in medicine. [CrossRef]
  61. Vaidya, V. G. Gothwad, A., Ganu, G., Girme, A., Modi, S. J., & Hingorani, L. (2024). Clinical safety and tolerability evaluation of Withania somnifera (L.) Dunal (Ashwagandha) root extract in healthy human volunteers. Journal of Ayurveda and integrative medicine 15(1), 100859. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  62. Mandlik Ingawale, D. S. , & Namdeo, A. G. (2021). Pharmacological evaluation of Ashwagandha highlighting its healthcare claims, safety, and toxicity aspects. Journal of dietary supplements 18(2), 183–226. [CrossRef]
  63. Paul, S. , Chakraborty, S., Anand, U., Dey, S., Nandy, S., Ghorai, M., Saha, S. C., Patil, M. T., Kandimalla, R., Proćków, J., & Dey, A. (2021). Withania somnifera (L.) Dunal (Ashwagandha): A comprehensive review on ethnopharmacology, pharmacotherapeutics, biomedicinal and toxicological aspects. Biomedicine & pharmacotherapy = Biomedecine & pharmacotherapie, 143, 112175. [CrossRef]
  64. Mukherjee, P. K. , Banerjee, S., Biswas, S., Das, B., Kar, A., & Katiyar, C. K. (2021). Withania somnifera (L.) Dunal - Modern perspectives of an ancient Rasayana from Ayurveda. Journal of ethnopharmacology. [CrossRef]
  65. Mikulska, P. , Malinowska, M., Ignacyk, M., Szustowski, P., Nowak, J., Pesta, K., Szeląg, M., Szklanny, D., Judasz, E., Kaczmarek, G., Ejiohuo, O. P., Paczkowska-Walendowska, M., Gościniak, A., & Cielecka-Piontek, J. (2023). Ashwagandha (Withania somnifera)-Current Research on the Health-Promoting Activities: A Narrative Review. Pharmaceutics. [CrossRef]
  66. Khalid, M. U. , Sultan, M. T., Baig, I., Abbas, A., Noman, A. M., Zinedine, A., Bartkiene, E., & Rocha, J. M. (2025). A comprehensive review on the bioactivity and pharmacological attributes of Withania somnifera. Natural product research, 1–15. Advance online publication. [CrossRef]
  67. HMPC. EMA/HMPC/24186/2023. Assessment Report on Rhodiola rosea L., Rhizoma et Radix. Draft–Revision 1; Committee on Herbal Medicinal Products (HMPC): Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2023; pp. 1–50. [Google Scholar]
  68. Punja, S. , Shamseer, L., Olson, K., & Vohra, S. (2014). Rhodiola rosea for mental and physical fatigue in nursing students: a randomized controlled trial. PloS one, 9(9), e108416. [CrossRef]
  69. Schröter, H.-B. , Neumann, D., Katritzky, A.R.; Swinbourne, F.J. Withasomnine. A pyrazole alkaloid from Withania somnifera Dun. Tetrahedron, 2895. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Rath, S. N. , Jena, L., Bhuyan, R., Mahanandia, N. C., & Patri, M. (2021). In silico discovery and evaluation of phytochemicals binding mechanism against human catechol-O-methyltransferase as a putative bioenhancer of L-DOPA therapy in Parkinson disease. Genomics & informatics, 19(1), e7. [CrossRef]
  71. Panossian A, Amaterdam J. 2017. Adaptogens in Psychiatric Practice. Chapter 8, Pp 155-181 in: Complementary and Integrative Treatments. Eds. PL. Gerbarg, PR. Muskin, RP. Brown, American Psychiatric Association Publishing. Arlington, 2018, 425 pages. https://www.appi.org/Complementary_and_Integrative_Treatments_in_Psychiatric_Practice.
  72. Akgul, Y. , Ferreira, D., Abourashed, E. A., & Khan, I. A. (2004). Lotaustralin from Rhodiola rosea roots. Fitoterapia, 75(6), 612–614. [CrossRef]
  73. Langeder, J. , Grienke, U., Döring, K., Jafari, M., Ehrhardt, C., Schmidtke, M., & Rollinger, J. M. (2021). High-performance Countercurrent Chromatography to Access Rhodiola rosea Influenza Virus Inhibiting Constituents. Planta medica, 87(10-11), 818–826. [CrossRef]
Figure 3. Chronic stress-induced symptoms and the effect of adaptogens on key mediators and effectors of the adaptive stress response result in neuroprotection, leading to increased cognitive function and enhanced mental and physical performance. Brain cells respond adaptively by enhancing their ability to function and resist stress, as demonstrated by an update from the authors' free-access publication and their accompanying drawings. Simplified overview of the stress system (central nervous system, CNS, and peripheral tissues/organs in the periphery) and reciprocal connections of elements of the neuroendocrine-immune complex to mobilize an adaptive response against the stressor [19].
Figure 3. Chronic stress-induced symptoms and the effect of adaptogens on key mediators and effectors of the adaptive stress response result in neuroprotection, leading to increased cognitive function and enhanced mental and physical performance. Brain cells respond adaptively by enhancing their ability to function and resist stress, as demonstrated by an update from the authors' free-access publication and their accompanying drawings. Simplified overview of the stress system (central nervous system, CNS, and peripheral tissues/organs in the periphery) and reciprocal connections of elements of the neuroendocrine-immune complex to mobilize an adaptive response against the stressor [19].
Preprints 169473 g003
Figure 4. The hypothetical molecular mechanisms and modes of pharmacological action of adaptogens on key mediators of the neuroendocrine-immune complex, cardiovascular, and detoxifying systems that regulate the adaptive stress response to stressors/pathogens in stress- and aging-induced diseases and disorders [19].
Figure 4. The hypothetical molecular mechanisms and modes of pharmacological action of adaptogens on key mediators of the neuroendocrine-immune complex, cardiovascular, and detoxifying systems that regulate the adaptive stress response to stressors/pathogens in stress- and aging-induced diseases and disorders [19].
Preprints 169473 g004
Table 1. The comparison of differences in requirements for pharmaceuticals and dietary supplements of botanical origin.
Table 1. The comparison of differences in requirements for pharmaceuticals and dietary supplements of botanical origin.
Category Pharmaceuticals Dietary Supplements
RegulatoryOversight Very strict Lenient
Regulated by Strictly regulated by drug authorities (e.g., FDA, EMA) Loosely regulated; treated as a food category in many countries
Pre-market approval Required (clinical trials, IND, NDA, etc.) Not required; must follow labeling and safety guidelines.
Evidence of Safety and Efficacy Required clinical + preclinical Not required; General safety only
Efficacy Must be proven through rigorous clinical trials No requirement to prove efficacy before marketing
Safety Extensive safety data required (nonclinical + clinical) Only required to ensure general safety; no clinical trials mandated
Quality Standards High Moderate
Identity and purity Must meet strict pharmacopoeial standards (e.g., USP, EP) Less stringent, basic identity and purity testing is often enough
Standardization Active ingredients must be quantified and consistent Often contains a range of components; standardization is not always required
Contaminants (e.g., heavy metals, microbes) Tightly controlled with established limits Limits exist, but are less strictly enforced
Batch-to-batch consistency Mandatory and validated Expected but not strictly enforced
Manufacturing Requirements Pharmaceutical grade, GMP Food GMP
GMP Standards Must follow pharmaceutical GMP (e.g., ICH Q7, EU GMP) Must follow food-grade GMP (less stringent)
Process validation Mandatory for all critical manufacturing steps Not required for all processes
Change control & documentation. Detailed documentation and validation are required. Documentation is required, but it is generally simpler.
Consistencyof Botanical Source Specifics Standardized Variable
Botanical identity Must be rigorously confirmed and controlled Often confirmed, but methods may vary in rigor
Extraction process Fully validated and standardized May vary; often not standardized
Complex mixtures Defined active constituents or fractions used Often, a whole plant/extract with variable composition
Labeling Claims and Doses Indications for use in diseases Health supporting claims
Health claims Medicine list "Dosage" based on age, weight, or condition.Can make therapeutic claims (e.g., "treats depression") Supplements list "Suggested use" or "Serving size".Cannot make disease claims; only "structure/function" claims (e.g., "supports mood")
Labeling accuracy Must match approved documentation Must be truthful and not misleading, but with less scrutiny
Regulatory Classification
o 
Regulated as a medicine or therapeutic product.
o 
It can be used for specific health conditions with evidence to support it.
o 
Subject to stricter quality, efficacy, and safety controls.
o 
May contain higher or more standardized doses.
o 
Regulated as food in most countries (e.g., by the FDA in the U.S.).
o 
Intended for general health support (e.g., to "maintain" or "support" function).
o 
Cannot claim to treat, prevent, or cure diseases.
o 
Doses are often lower to avoid therapeutic claims or side effects.
Purpose of Use Medicines are designed for therapeutic effect and are often used for shorter-term or targeted purposes. Supplements aim to provide nutritional support and are typically used on a long-term basis.
Table 2. FDA (United States) vs. EMA (European Union) regulations.
Table 2. FDA (United States) vs. EMA (European Union) regulations.
Aspect FDA (U.S.) EMA (EU)
Governing Bodies - Pharmaceuticals: Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER) - Supplements: Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition (CFSAN) - Pharmaceuticals: European Medicines Agency (EMA) - Supplements: Regulated at member state level (e.g., Germany: BfArM, France: ANSM)
Applicable Legal Frameworks - Drugs: FD&C Act, 21 CFR- Supplements: Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act (DSHEA, 1994) - Drugs: Directive 2001/83/EC- Supplements: Food Supplements Directive (2002/46/EC), national laws
Botanical Drugs Defined as botanical drug products, subject to full NDA or IND path (e.g., Veregen®, Mytesi®) Herbal medicinal products (HMPs), classified into: - Well-established use (WEU) - Traditional use (THMP) - Full marketing authorization
Supplements (Botanical) Treated as foods, not drugs. No pre-market approval. No efficacy proof required. Also treated as foods, but the EU is more restrictive on claims. Heavily influenced by EFSA assessments.
Quality Standards for Botanicals Encourages use of USP monographs and FDA Botanical Drug Guidance (2004). Must define active constituents or marker compounds. Uses European Pharmacopoeia (Ph. Eur.) monographs. Strict on identity, purity, and standardization. The Herbal Medicinal Products Committee (HMPC) oversees scientific guidelines.
Clinical Evidence (Botanical Drugs) IND → NDA process: requires full clinical trials unless eligible for accelerated approval. WEU: requires published literature and some clinical data. THMP: based on 30 years of traditional use (15 in the EU), with nonclinical safety evidence only
Labeling (Supplements) Structure/function claims allowed: "supports immune health." Must carry a disclaimer: "This product is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure, or prevent any disease." Health claims reviewed and authorized by EFSA; therapeutic claims prohibited on supplements. Stricter than the FDA.
GMP - Drugs: 21 CFR Part 210/211- Supplements: 21 CFR Part 111 - Drugs: EU GMP (Annexes)- Supplements: Food GMP (varies by country); less
Unique Points Allows botanical drug development via standard drug approval paths.
Dietary supplements are widely available with relatively light regulation, provided safety is ensured.
Botanical Drug Development Guidance has been available since 2004.
Provides a specific regulatory framework for traditional herbal medicinal products (THMPs) via simplified registration.
More centralized regulation of herbal drugs via EMA's HMPC.
Supplements are subject to tighter control over labeling and claims, often stricter than in the U.S.
Example
Echinacea supplement Dietary Supplement, no pre-market approval Food supplement; cannot claim therapeutic effects
Echinacea extract as a medicine Must go through the full IND/NDA process Can qualify as THMP or WEU based on evidence and monograph
Table 3. Countries with Pharmacopeial recognition of selected adaptogens and some putative adaptogens, such as Eurycoma and Sideritis, and their official regulatory status: ✅ - Official monograph; ⚠️ - Dietary supplement use.
Table 3. Countries with Pharmacopeial recognition of selected adaptogens and some putative adaptogens, such as Eurycoma and Sideritis, and their official regulatory status: ✅ - Official monograph; ⚠️ - Dietary supplement use.
Country PharmacopoeiaMonographs Rhodiola Ginseng Withania Eleuthero-coccus Schisandra Eurycoma Sideritis
Russia State Pharmacopoeia
China Pharmacopoeia of PRC
European Union European Pharmacopoeia/EMA/HMPC Union herbal monograph
United States USP, USP Herbal Compendium monograph, AHP ⚠️ ⚠️ ⚠️
Germany Commission E ⚠️
UK ⚠️
Mongolia Mongolian Pharmacopoeia
India Indian Herbal Pharmacopeia
Pakistan Unani/Ayurvedic Pharmacopoeia
Bangladesh Unani Pharmacopoeia
Sri Lanka Ayurvedic Pharmacopoeia
South Korea Korean Herbal Pharmacopoeia
Japan Japanese Pharmacopoeia ⚠️
Vietnam Vietnamese Pharmacopoeia
Lanka
Australia Australian Register of Therapeutic Goods (ARTG)
Malaysia Malaysian Pharmacopoeia
Indonesia Indonesia Pharmacopoeia
South Africa CAM regulatory framework ⚠️
WHO WHO Monographs
✅ - Official monograph; ⚠️ - Dietary use
Table 4. Basic Principles of Network Pharmacology: Traditional vs. Network Pharmacology.
Table 4. Basic Principles of Network Pharmacology: Traditional vs. Network Pharmacology.
Feature Traditional Pharmacology Network Pharmacology
Philosophy Reductionist – targets one gene/protein Systems-oriented – considers multitarget interactions
Target Focus Single molecule Multiple targets, often in networks
Drug Design Goal High specificity Modulation of networks/pathways
View of Disease Caused by the dysfunction of a single entity Disease as a network perturbation
Data Used Experimental pharmacokinetics/dynamics Multi-omics, PPI networks, computational modeling
Mechanism Identification Binding affinity and downstream effects Topological influence on biological networks
Predictive Capacity Limited to known targets Broader scope; includes off-targets, repurposing, synergy predictions
Herbal/TCM Suitability Not applicable Especially suitable due to the multi-component nature
Validation Strong experimental support Requires computational and experimental integration
Limitations Ignores complexity and off-target effects Data noise, oversimplified networks, context-ignorant models
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.
Copyright: This open access article is published under a Creative Commons CC BY 4.0 license, which permit the free download, distribution, and reuse, provided that the author and preprint are cited in any reuse.
Prerpints.org logo

Preprints.org is a free preprint server supported by MDPI in Basel, Switzerland.

Subscribe

Disclaimer

Terms of Use

Privacy Policy

Privacy Settings

© 2026 MDPI (Basel, Switzerland) unless otherwise stated