Abstract
In 1962, Richard Evans Schultes defined ethnobotany as “the study of the relationships which exist between people of the primitive society and their plant environment”. Ethnopharmacology, considered a sub-discipline of ethnobotany, has been conceptualized in different ways over time. Since the 80’s, implicit in these different concepts was the need for the validation of traditional/popular knowledge through pharmacological and phytochemical studies. According to these ideas, plants or animals identified during fieldwork should be investigated by these sciences in order to prove or disprove their “empirical” use, only resulting in an ethnopharmacological study if they passed through the methodologies of “academic laboratory science”. The historical trajectory of these concepts leads us to think that ethnopharmacology is a science only if tested and proven, without considering or recognizing the knowledge of other cultures as a science in itself. We present here some examples from traditional medicine hoping to bring a conceptual, holistic, practical and ethical reflection on the theme.
Key words:
ethnopharmacological study; fieldwork; laboratory science; laboratory study; scientific proof
Thumbnail
