Why have natural medicines NOT been studied with the same rigor as Rx medicines?

So much effort (and money) is put into finding new medicines out of synthetic chemicals as opposed to natural. Why not start with what has "worked" for 100's and 1000's of years? Why not prove or discredit the natural remedies (which may have fewer side effects) first before jumping into creating something from nothing?

Pharmaceutical companies have most of the money for researching cures and they cannot patent natural remedies. It's no more complicated than that.

one word


PROFITS

Because pharmaceutical companies have big bucks and big lobbyists. There just simply isn't the money in natural remedies.

The synthetic drug can be PATENTED. Money Honey...

I think for the same reason pot is not legal and that is because the goverment cannot control it.

It's because all or most of the "natural" remedies have already been exploited during the last two centuries to the point that their usefulness have gone to zero. That's to say, there's nothing more to be gained from them until some new "natural" substance is discovered. The stuff that made them work has been refined and processed to where we have them as old and/or current drugs. Now, these old drugs are being modified to venture into enhanced properties and possible "cures" for different diseases. Some work, but many others don't and are simply toxic to humans. The drug companies don't start out with just any synthetic chemical(s) to come up with a new medication. They starte with a known substance with known properties. They modify it in various ways to enhance delivery, effectiveness and possibly treat different diseases. In a few instances, they may come up with something for which there is no known disease or symptom - then it's back to the drawing boards. New medications are being developed and are taking a shorter time to come to the marketplace. Example: one old med may have taken 25 years to be developed and approved for use. However, a small modification of that med would have enhanced the benefit and only take seven years to be developed and approved for use. That's a benefit for all. The problem is the new drug, while cheaper to have developed, replaces the old one and the company would charge the public 10 times the cost. That's the shame of it.

Occasionally, research of this type does happen. The results have usually been disappointing, which leads to lack of interest in any further research. But the "natural medicines" live on, mostly through folklore, despite failing in research studies.

They can't be patented or controlled and the cost of research to get a 'drug' approval is astronomical and cannot be recouped.
see references below for info on natural medicine and treatments

Because doctors have gone to school and they think chemicals are better than natural remedies.

Pharmaceutical drugs can be similar to naturally occurring drugs, but derivatives often have to be synthesized because the natural drug simply DOES NOT WORK. I am not saying that synthesized drugs are superior to natural drugs, they are all drugs anyways. They each have their own effects/ side effects. As far as not using drugs that are believed to have "worked" for 100s of years... this is assuming these drugs actually worked in the first place. Many natural drugs are simply derivatives of commonplace painkillers that are on the market today. The users felt temporary relief from the painkiller and mistook it for a cure for their illness.
I am also not suggesting we avoid researching natural chemicals. I am just answering your question with reasons why!