Who Documented Echinacea: Plains Remedies to Clinical Trials

Plains peoples used purple coneflower before a Nebraska doctor sent a root to Cincinnati in 1885. The trials that followed still disagree on what echinacea does for colds.

The history of echinacea starts with Plains peoples, and the sources we could verify for their use are twentieth-century compilations. A [USDA plant guide](https://plants.sc.egov.usda.gov/DocumentLibrary/plantguide/pdf/pg_ecan2.pdf) calls purple coneflower the most widely used medicinal plant of the Plains Indians and lists uses for toothache, sore throats and snakebite. The documented medical story starts in 1885, when a Nebraska doctor sent the root to a Cincinnati firm to be named. He was already using it in a preparation he called Meyer's Blood Purifier, so the root was in use before anyone had named the plant. **Jump to:** [Plains groups](#which-plains-groups-used-echinacea) · [The 1885 Nebraska root](#how-did-a-nebraska-root-reach-cincinnati) · [Europe](#did-echinacea-reach-europe-and-when) · [Products](#why-do-echinacea-products-differ-so-much) · [The trials](#what-do-the-large-trials-find) · [Bottom line](#bottom-line) · [FAQ](#frequently-asked-questions) ## Which Plains groups used echinacea? The guide lists the Dakota, Omaha, Pawnee, Ponca, Teton Sioux and Winnebago as groups that used the root for toothache. The Cheyenne, Dakota, Fox and Winnebago used the plant as a painkiller. The Lakota ate the root and green fruit when they were thirsty or sweating. The guide also calls purple coneflower the only native prairie plant that folk practitioners and doctors popularized as a medicine. These are summaries of older fieldwork, not 1800s diaries. The guide's sources date from 1977 to 1992. A 1999 paper on Great Plains uses by K. Kindscher appears in the [University of Kansas research record](https://biosurvey.ku.edu/pub/uses-echinacea-angustifolia-and-other-echinacea-species-native-americans-great-plains), which lists only the citation. We could not confirm an 1800s written account that names these groups. ## How did a Nebraska root reach Cincinnati? In the fall of 1885, Dr. H. C. F. Meyer of Pawnee City, Nebraska, sent a root to Lloyd Brothers in Cincinnati because he wanted it named. Professor John King of Cincinnati took up the plant, and in 1887 he announced it to the medical profession. John Uri Lloyd's 1917 treatise, issued by Lloyd Brothers, says Meyer probably learned of the root from Native people. Lloyd's own conclusion was that "the American Indian discovered it, and the American physician established it" ([Lloyd, 1917](https://herbarium.emory.edu/_includes/documents/sections/drug-treatises/LLoyds_A-Treatise-on-Echinacea_1917.pdf)). ## Did echinacea reach Europe, and when? We could not verify how or when Europe took it up. Lloyd's treatise does not mention Germany. The earliest German research we could confirm is a 1985 paper by H. Wagner and colleagues. According to PubMed, their water extracts of Echinacea purpurea and Echinacea angustifolia yielded polysaccharide fractions with immunostimulating activity in granulocyte and carbon clearance tests ([Wagner et al., 1985](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/4052142/)). The earliest German clinical trial we could confirm was published in 1998 by a Munich research group, which tested root extracts of both species in 302 volunteers ([Melchart et al., 1998](https://doi.org/10.1001/archfami.7.6.541)). ## Why do echinacea products differ so much? Echinacea covers three species: E. angustifolia, E. pallida and E. purpurea. According to PubMed, a 2005 review found that their constituent profiles differ and that some marketed samples did not meet recognized pharmaceutical standards ([Barnes et al., 2005](https://doi.org/10.1211/0022357056127)). The review names alkamides and caffeic acid derivatives among the constituent groups considered important for activity. The trials show how much the input matters. Turner's 2005 study tested three extracts of E. angustifolia roots, made with supercritical carbon dioxide or with 60% and 20% ethanol. Yale and Liu's 2004 trial used freeze-dried juice from the aerial parts of E. purpurea ([Yale and Liu, 2004](https://doi.org/10.1001/archinte.164.11.1237)). A label that says only "echinacea" leaves out the details each trial depended on. For a label checklist, read [Safe Supplements: How to Know What You Are Actually Getting](/health/vitamin-d-complete-guide/supplement-safety-quality-testing-guide). ## What do the large trials find? According to PubMed, these trials and reviews set the record. The reference page for these studies is [Immune Health](/health/immune-health). | Study | Design | Reported result | |---|---|---| | [Melchart et al., 1998](https://doi.org/10.1001/archfami.7.6.541) | 302 volunteers, 12 weeks, root extracts of both species | Time to first infection did not differ (P = .49) | | [Turner et al., 2005](https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa044441) | 399 volunteers challenged with rhinovirus | No significant effect on infection or symptoms | | [Barrett et al., 2010](https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-153-12-201012210-00003) | 719 people aged 12 to 80 with a new cold | Colds 0.53 days shorter, not significant (P = .075) | | [Jawad et al., 2012](https://doi.org/10.1155/2012/841315) | 755 healthy adults, 4 months, E. purpurea (95% herb, 5% root) | Fewer cold episodes than placebo | | [Wahl et al., 2008](https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6882-8-56) | 90 children with recurrent otitis media | Borderline higher risk of acute otitis media (65% on echinacea, 41% on placebo) | | [Karsch-Völk et al., 2014, Cochrane](https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD000530.pub3) | 24 trials, 4,631 people | No significant difference in any of 12 prevention comparisons | | [Shah et al., 2007, meta-analysis](https://doi.org/10.1016/S1473-3099(07)70160-3) | 14 studies | 58% lower odds of a cold; colds 1.4 days shorter | The two reviews point in opposite directions. The Cochrane authors also reported a post hoc pooled estimate of a 10 to 20 percent relative risk reduction, though they say its clinical relevance is questionable. Quality changes the reading too. Caruso and Gwaltney judged nine placebo-controlled trials in 2005, and only two met all 11 design criteria. Both reported negative results ([Caruso and Gwaltney, 2005](https://doi.org/10.1086/428061)). For another look at cold research on supplements, see [Quercetin + Zinc: What the Research Actually Shows](/health/immune-health/quercetin-zinc-research). A 2006 meta-analysis of three experimental rhinovirus studies favored echinacea, with placebo recipients 55% more likely to develop a clinical cold ([Schoop et al., 2006](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clinthera.2006.02.001)). Its first author lists a Swiss herbal manufacturer as his affiliation. Emory University's herbarium hosts a PDF of Lloyd's 1917 treatise. It is the document that tells the Meyer story, and it is the producer's own account. ## Bottom line If a label says echinacea, check which species and plant part it contains. Treat the cold-prevention evidence as unsettled. The better-designed trials mostly found no clear effect, and the positive pooled estimate rests on a different set of studies. ## Frequently asked questions ### Which communities used echinacea before European writers recorded it? The USDA guide names Plains groups, including the Dakota, Omaha, Pawnee, Ponca, Teton Sioux, Winnebago, Cheyenne and Fox, with uses from toothache to snakebite. The Lakota ate the root and green fruit when thirsty. The sources the guide cites date from 1977 to 1992. We could not confirm an 1800s written account naming these groups, so the answer rests on twentieth-century compilations of older fieldwork. ### How did echinacea reach European medicine? We could not document the route with sources we could check. Lloyd's 1917 treatise does not mention Germany. The earliest German research we could confirm is a 1985 polysaccharide study, and the earliest German clinical trial we could confirm was published in 1998. Some popular histories give 1930s dates for a German product. We could not verify them, so this page leaves them out. ### Why does echinacea have so many species and preparations? Three species are sold under the name: E. angustifolia, E. pallida and E. purpurea. A 2005 review found that their constituent profiles differ and that some marketed samples did not meet recognized pharmaceutical standards. The trials used different plant parts, including roots and aerial parts, and different extracts. A label that says only echinacea does not say which of these the product contains. ### Which compounds are studied most? The review names alkamides and caffeic acid derivatives among the groups considered important for activity, and it notes that the profiles differ between species. It calls the chemistry well documented and the clinical effectiveness not yet proven, so it does not tie any single compound to the trial results. Readers comparing products should check which species the label names, since the constituent profiles are not the same. ### What do the large trials find? The results depend on the design and the outcome. The 2014 Cochrane review found no significant difference in any of the 12 prevention comparisons that reported colds, and only one of seven treatment trials showed shorter colds. A 2007 meta-analysis of 14 studies found lower odds of colds. On the hub's evidence scale, the cold-prevention evidence is insufficient because the human results conflict. ### How do the preparations differ in the research? Each trial tested a different product. Turner's 2005 study used three root extracts made with different solvents. Yale and Liu's 2004 trial used juice from aerial parts. Melchart's 1998 trial used roots of both species. The Cochrane reviewers declined to pool the trials in their main analysis because the studies differed too much. ## Next reads - [Immune Health](/health/immune-health): the reference page for the cold and infection trials summarized above. - [Safe Supplements: How to Know What You Are Actually Getting](/health/vitamin-d-complete-guide/supplement-safety-quality-testing-guide): how to check species and plant part on a label. - [Turmeric and Curcumin: From Eastern Texts to the Capsule](/blog/history/history-of-turmeric-and-curcumin-from-ayurveda-to-isolation): another plant whose traditional use came before its isolated compound. ### Related reading - [Elderberry as a syrup, from hedgerow shrub to supplement](/blog/history/history-of-elderberry-from-hippocrates-to-syrup) - [reishi and the triterpene story](/blog/history/history-of-reishi-from-shennong-to-triterpenes)