The world's scientific and social network for malaria professionals
Subscribe to free Newsletter | 10917 malaria professionals are enjoying the free benefits of MalariaWorld today

Artemisia defeats schistosomiasis

February 9, 2016 - 12:53 -- Pierre Lutgen

In parallel with the clinical trials run by a team of medical doctors in the province of Maniema on the efficiency of Artemisia annua and Artemisia afra against malaria, (see Breaking News Jan.5 on they have completed another large scale randomized, double blind trial against schistosomiasis, Artemisia vs Praziquantel.

The results confirm previous anecdotic results from several countries in Africa. Both arms in this trial had 400 infected patients. The treatment efficiency was 97 % in the Artemisia arm and 71% in the Praziquantel arm. No side effects were noticed in the Artemisia treatment. Praziquantel caused vomiting in 26.5% of the patients, abdominal pain in 18.5%, cephalalgy in 15.5%. Very impressive is the fact that the Artemisia treatment led to an unexpected almost complete absence of eggs in feces after 2 months.

Schistosomiasis kills 150 000 Africans per year and more than 70 000 000 are infected. A neglected disease in neglected, poor populations where the only existing drug, Praziquantel, loses efficiency year after year. These young African doctors have run these trials despite the oposition and intimidations of BigpharmaWHO. They will win the battle against neglected tropical diseases where Western chemical monotherapies have failed 

Jerome Munyangi, Michel Idumbo, Lucile Cornet-Vernet, Pierre Lutgen


Submitted by Marc Vanacker (not verified) on

The results obtained by another African partner confirm those posted on www.malariaworld org. for RDCongo under “Artemisia defeats Schistosomiasis”
60 people of all ages, including pregnant women, were treated in an endemic area on the riverbanks of a river. Powdered leaves and twigs of Artemisia afra were administered during seven days as aqueous infusion or as powder mixed with food. After one month complete disappearance of worms was found for over 65% of the patients and probably more, because our partner is not equipped for distinguishing dead worms from living ones.
The authors of these trials prefer to remain anonymous in order to avoid interferences with Bigpharma and their lackeys. We admire the courage of these Africans obliged to confront the watchdogs of medical colonialism, in order to save the lifes and the health of their children with the African herb Artemisia afra

Submitted by Pierre Lutgen on

It is frustrating to read a paper like the following:

Life cycle maintenance and drug-sensitivity assays for early drug discovery in Schistosoma mansoni. By Lombardo FC, Pasche V, Panic G, Endriss Y, Keiser in Nature Protocols. 2019 Jan 4, paper which completely ignores extraordinary results obtained by African doctors which were made public  3 years ago in under the title “ Artemisia defeats schistosomiasis” (2565 reads) and 4 years ago under the title "Artemisia annua efficiently cures bilharzia" (4294 reads).

Results which are now published in their final form with all details in a major research paper


Munyangi J, Cornet-Vernet L, Idumbo M, Lu C, Lutgen P, Perronne C, Ngombe N, Bianga J, Mupenda B, Lalukala P, Mergeai G, Mumba D, Towler M, Weathers P. Effect of Artemisia annua and Artemisia afra tea infusions on schistosomiasis in a large clinical trial.  Phytomedicine. 2018 Dec 1;51:233-240.

The paper in Nature Protocols blatantly ignores these results. “Drug discovery for schistosomiasis is still limited to a handful of academic laboratories worldwide, with only a few novel antischistosomal lead compounds being actively researched” We recommend that the authors of this paper leave for some time their laboratory bench and visit Africa to see the breakthroughs medical doctors and universities have achieved there against several tropical diseases like schistosomiasis and malaria with Artemisia afra. And recognize that the effort to develop monotherapies in Bigpharma laboratories may be vain.

Submitted by Miles Markus on

Perhaps the work was overlooked rather than ignored (e.g. researchers working on schistosomiasis would not necessarily see comments on MalariaWorld that are related to schistosomiasis). Irrespective of what the case may be, dodgy goings-on certainly do take place in malarial and other fields. I.e. authors actively avoid citing other authors. This is often (but not always) in order to try and get credit for something which should, in fact, be credited to earlier authors. Rumour has it that someone or other is researching the phenomenon. So the chickens might come home to roost if they publish on the subject!