Hypertension

Aibo Li et al. (2025) · Frontiers in public health

This study tested whether spending three days in a forest could help lower blood pressure in older adults who already have essential hypertension (high blood pressure with no single identifiable cause). Thirty-six adults aged 60 to 80 with diagnosed hypertension took part: 24 went to a subtropical forest national park in China for a 3-day retreat, while 12 stayed in the city of Hangzhou following the same daily schedule, so researchers could compare the two settings directly. The forest group took part in daily gentle activities designed to immerse them in nature: eight trigrams boxing (a slow, breath-focused Qigong practice), a few hours of guided forest walking, a traditional tea ceremony, and a meditation session. Both groups ate the same meals and kept the same schedule. Before and after the trip, researchers measured blood pressure, heart rate, blood oxygen, heart-rate variability (a marker of nervous-system balance), several inflammation and stress-hormone markers in the blood, and mood using a standard questionnaire. After the trip, the forest group's blood pressure was significantly lower than the city group's, both the top number (systolic, ~134 vs. 147) and bottom number (diastolic, ~78 vs. 85). Inflammation, measured by a sensitive CRP blood test, was also significantly lower in the forest group. Heart-rate variability shifted in a pattern the researchers interpreted as a healthy autonomic-nervous-system adjustment for this population. On mood, the forest group reported significantly less tension and anxiety and significantly more energy and vitality than the city group; other mood measures trended better but weren't statistically significant. Heart rate, blood oxygen, and most other blood markers (IL-6, cortisol, oxidative-stress markers) didn't differ significantly between the groups. These results suggest a short forest retreat combining gentle nature-based activities may meaningfully help lower blood pressure, ease inflammation, and improve mood in older adults with hypertension, as a complement to standard care. Because the forest program bundled several practices together (forest walking, qigong, meditation, tea ceremony) and compared a larger forest group to a much smaller city group in a different location, it's hard to know how much came from the forest setting itself versus the other activities. The trial only lasted three days, so it can't say whether the benefits last, and larger, longer studies are needed before forest bathing becomes a standard recommendation for hypertension.

Saylee Deshmukh et al. (2025) · Frontiers in pharmacology

This systematic review and meta-analysis examined whether Ayurvedic treatments — herbs, traditional formulations, and purification procedures — can genuinely lower blood pressure in essential hypertension, the symptomless condition that drives much of the world's heart disease and stroke. Researchers screened over 22,000 records from six databases, including India's AYUSH Research Portal, and included 44 studies, with ten randomized controlled trials (524 participants) providing data strong enough to pool statistically. The interventions ranged widely: single herbs like Arjuna (Terminalia arjuna, Ayurveda's principal heart remedy), Rudraksha seed powder, and Eclipta alba extract; polyherbal and herbomineral formulations; and Panchakarma purification procedures such as therapeutic purgation. Treatment durations ran from 10 days to a full year. The meta-analysis compared Ayurveda against two benchmarks — placebo and standard blood-pressure drugs — using Cochrane methods with formal risk-of-bias assessment. The pooled answer was no significant difference either way. Versus placebo, systolic pressure fell a non-significant 2.63 mmHg (95% CI −6.04 to 0.79, p=0.13); versus standard drugs the gap was essentially zero (−0.22 mmHg, p=0.47) — Ayurveda neither beat the drugs nor clearly lost to them. Heterogeneity was extreme (I² up to 98%), meaning the trials disagreed sharply: two of three placebo-controlled and five of eight drug-controlled trials individually favored Ayurveda, while others favored the comparator. Uncontrolled before-after studies showed large drops of 16–29 mmHg, but those designs cannot separate treatment effects from regression to the mean. No adverse events were reported where safety was tracked. The honest takeaway on Ayurvedic care for high blood pressure: the tradition's safety record in these studies was good and some individual trials are promising, but pooled controlled evidence does not yet show blood-pressure reductions beyond placebo or medication. Given the risks of unmanaged hypertension, the review's own conclusion is that the evidence does not yet justify Ayurvedic approaches standing in for proven treatment.