When you stroll down the cold and flu aisle in a drugstore it’s easy to get lost in the dizzying array of products promising to clear sinus pressure, dry up sniffles and stop plaguing coughs. Some concoctions even offer it all in one magical pill. However, a government panel has found the evidence behind some of these claims is lackluster — and doctors say that could extend all the way down the aisle.
“There’s just not much that’s very effective for treating the common cold,” said Dr. Lauren Eggert, clinical assistant professor in the Pulmonary Allergy and Critical Care Division at Stanford University. “Most of the things out there — antihistamines, decongestants, cough medicines — none of them have a lot of evidence that they’re super effective at improving cough or common cold symptoms.”
This week the Food and Drug administration determined the country’s leading decongestant is really no better than a sugar pill. In a unanimous vote Tuesday, advisers to the agency said the key drug, phenylephrine, found in Sudafed P.E., Mucinex Sinus Max, Dayquil and other oral medications is simply not effective. The review was prompted by inquiries dating back nearly a decade. And experts warn the ineffectiveness is not limited to just that one drug. More reviews of over-the-counter drugs are expected.
Eggert pointed to the database UpToDate. Physicians use the resource when they want to see the summary of evidence for a group of medications. The conclusions for cold and flu remedies are disconcerting:
- Antihistamines, vitamins and herbal remedies are deemed ineffective.
- Cough syrups, decongestants, expectorants, and zinc may have minimal or uncertain benefits.
- Nasal sprays and analgesics like Tylenol and ibuprofen may be effective.
So, why are there so many cold and flu products on store shelves making big promises with little evidence to back them up?
The FDA’s over-the-counter drug list has not been updated since 1995. And many of the drugs sold today were grandfathered during the ’60s and ’70s when scientific studies were much less rigorous.

