Coming soonCannabis EducationCannabis Education at the Institute: a professional course and a free public program.Register your interest

Not-for-profit research & education institute · Cassowary Coast, Far North Queensland


Arnica

Arnica - Australian Institute of Pharmacognosy
In this article
  1. 0. Free-teaser block
  2. 1. Nomenclature
  3. 2. Definition
  4. 3. Source and Australian supply
  5. 4. Macroscopy
  6. 5. Microscopy
  7. 6. Chemistry
  8. 7. Named markers and assay limits
  9. 8. TLC fingerprint
  10. 9. HPLC fingerprint
  11. 10. Identity, purity, adulterants and contaminants
  12. 11. Traditional use
  13. 12. Current practice: use, preparations and doses
  14. 13. Clinical evidence
  15. 14. Pharmacology
  16. 15. Safety
  17. 16. Discussion
  18. 17. Conclusions
  19. 18. Research still needed
  20. 19. References
  21. 20. Document control
Share this articleFacebookXLinkedInWhatsApp

AIP-PH-ARNMON · Version 1.0 draft · First published 2026 · Last modified 2026 · Version history · Report an error

Arnica (topical) flower (Arnica montana L.), Asteraceae

Australian Herbal Pharmacopoeia (working title) · Monograph AIP-PH-ARNMON · Version 1.0 draft
Date: 2026
Status: working document, version 1.0. Not a statutory standard.
Prepared by: the Australian Institute of Pharmacognosy, Far North Queensland, Australia. Every author and contributor is named at the end of the monograph.


0. Free-teaser block

0.1 Identity card

Monograph number AIP-PH-ARNMON (MediHerb A–Z list No. 7)
Title Arnica (topical) flower (Arnica montana L.), Arnicae flos
Version / year 1.0 draft, 2026. Next review 2029, or sooner if the registered phase III trial (NCT06822478) reports or a regulator acts
Accepted binomial Arnica montana L., Species Plantarum: 884 (1753). Accepted in the World Checklist of Vascular Plants (WCVP), read through ChecklistBank September 2026; IPNI 30090722-2. The Plants of the World Online page, which publishes the same dataset, could not be opened on 29/09/2026 (it served a browser check). WCVP also accepts two subspecies, subsp. montana and subsp. atlantica A.Bolòs [1]
Family Asteraceae (Compositae), order Asterales; no family change affects Arnica (section 1) [1]
Plant part Whole or partially broken, dried flower-heads (capitula), including involucre and receptacle [3]
Latin drug name Arnicae flos (Ph. Eur. 1391; EMA/HMPC) [2,3]
Principal synonyms Doronicum oppositifolium Lam. (homotypic); Doronicum arnica Desf., Doronicum montanum Lam., Arnica petiolata Schur and others under subsp. montana (heterotypic) [1,5]
Common names English: arnica, mountain arnica, leopard’s bane, wolf’s bane, mountain tobacco. German: Arnikablüten (drug), Bergwohlverleih. French: arnica (fleur d’). Dutch: valkruid, wolverlei [2,5,6]
Pharmacopoeial status elsewhere Ph. Eur.: yes, Arnica flower 01/2012:1391 and Arnica tincture 01/2008:1809, library copy 8th Edition [3]. EMA/HMPC: yes, EU herbal monograph, traditional use, cutaneous only, adopted 06/05/2014 [2,4]. WHO: yes, Flos Arnicae, vol. 3, 2007 [5]. BP: carries the Ph. Eur. text (Barnes lists BP 2007) [6]. BHP 1996: listed by Barnes and WHO [5,6]; not read by AIP. USP, ChP, API: no monograph found for this species
Australian status Permissible Ingredients Determination: yes, items 680 ARNICA FLOWER DRY and 682 ARNICA MONTANA (A, H), each with the requirement that, when used other than topically on unbroken skin, the maximum recommended daily dose is no more than 1 mg of the equivalent dry flower or dry herbal material [10]. Poisons Standard: not scheduled (June 2026 instrument searched in September 2026) [11]. ARTG: 116 entries returned for the keyword "arnica", 29/09/2026 (topical and homoeopathic products among them) [30]. Introduced: no Australian occurrence recorded [24]; not native, so no Nature Conservation Act 1992 (Qld) permit applies; not listed in the Biosecurity Regulation 2016 (Qld) [12]
Named markers Total sesquiterpene lactones, as 11α,13-dihydrohelenalin tiglate (CID 5281483): assay, minimum 0.40 per cent m/m on the dried drug, Ph. Eur. 1391 [3]. Chlorogenic acid (CID 1794427), astragalin (CID 5282102), isoquercitrin (CID 5484006), luteolin 7-glucoside (CID 5280637): TLC identity [3]. Rutin (CID 5280805): must be absent (exclusion of Calendula and Heterotheca) [3]. Helenalin/dihydrohelenalin ratio: chemotype marker; no pharmacopoeial limit [13]
Evidence snapshot Hand osteoarthritis pain, fresh-plant gel against ibuprofen gel: Tier B, 1 RCT, n = 204, no difference between arms [4,21]. Knee osteoarthritis, venous insufficiency, bruising: Tier C, 6 small or uncontrolled studies, very low certainty [4]. Ankle sprain, tincture spray: Tier C, 1 RCT arm comparison (n = 114), very low certainty [34]. Cutaneous leishmaniasis, tincture: Tier C, 1 phase Ib/II study, n = 16, no comparator [19]. Bruises, sprains, localised muscle pain: Tier T, tradition accepted by the HMPC [2]. Anti-inflammatory mechanism (NF-κB, C/EBPβ): Tier P [13]. Oral use: toxic; not a use [5,6,10]
Suggested citation Ridley T, Iggulden L. Arnica (topical) flower (Arnica montana L.), Arnicae flos. AIP-PH-ARNMON, version 1.0 draft. Cardwell: Australian Institute of Pharmacognosy; 2026. DOI to be assigned
Provenance Original AIP data: none. Every analytical figure, limit, method and trial result belongs to the source cited beside it. Sections 4, 5, 7, 8, 9 and 10 carry AIP bench data pending (no AIP voucher, section, plate or run yet). The distribution map (Figure 9), charts (Figures 10–12) and drawings (Figures 5, 7) are AIP drawings from cited data
Compiler and review Compiled by Dr Thomas Ridley (Education and Research). Technical review: Dr Fiona MacAllister (Botanical, sections 1-5 and adulterant species in 10), reviewed in 2026; Dr Hana Suzuki (QA, sections 6-10), reviewed in 2026; Dr Eleanor Whitcombe (Medicine, sections 12, 13, 15), reviewed in 2026. Evidence and citation audit: Dr Thomas Ridley (Education and Research, sources for sections 6–9, sections 12–19 and all figures), reviewed in 2026; as compiler he is not independent of the text, so the Librarian’s reference audit remains the independent check on section 19. Layout: Jesse Kirby (Community Outreach, whole-document layout, figure placement, captions and credit lines), reviewed in 2026. Published: not yet. Last modified: 2026. Version 1.0 draft
Canonical URL /pharmacopoeia/arnica-montana/ (on publication)
Figure 1. Arnica montana in flower on the summit pasture of the Planche des Belles Filles, Vosges, France, 23/06/2022: a
Figure 1. Arnica montana in flower on the summit pasture of the Planche des Belles Filles, Vosges, France, 23/06/2022: a basal rosette of broad, entire leaves and upright stems carrying orange-yellow flower-heads and buds. Photograph Espirat, CC BY-SA 4.0, Wikimedia Commons. Species checked from the image by the Botanical reviewer (provisional identification from a photograph; not an AIP voucher).

0.2 Summary

Arnica flower is the dried flower-head of Arnica montana, a perennial daisy of acid, nutrient-poor mountain grassland from Portugal and Spain to Norway and Ukraine. It does not grow wild in Australia and is imported. The European Pharmacopoeia identifies it by the flower-head’s structure, by its hairs and spiny pollen, and by a TLC fingerprint that must show chlorogenic acid and a set of flavonol zones while showing no rutin, which excludes the two commonest substitutes, pot marigold and Mexican "arnica" (Heterotheca inuloides). The assay is total sesquiterpene lactones, at least 0.40 per cent, calculated as dihydrohelenalin tiglate.

Two chemotypes are traded under the one name. Central European flowers are rich in helenalin esters; most Spanish flowers carry dihydrohelenalin esters instead. Helenalin is the more potent anti-inflammatory in laboratory tests, and the pharmacopoeial assay does not tell the two apart.

Arnica is used on unbroken skin for bruises, sprains and muscle pain, a use the HMPC accepts on tradition. One well-run trial found that a fresh-plant gel gave results similar to ibuprofen gel for hand osteoarthritis; the rest of the clinical evidence is small or uncontrolled. The main safety points are contact allergy (about 1 user in 100 in European marketing data) and serious toxicity if swallowed, including miscarriage when taken in pregnancy.

0.3 Contents with extent

Section Estimated extent (A4 pages, draft)
0 Free-teaser block 3
1 Nomenclature 1.5
2 Definition 0.5
3 Source and Australian supply, with 3.1 origin, climate and chemistry 5
4 Macroscopy 3
5 Microscopy 3
6 Chemistry 3.5
7 Named markers and assay limits 1.5
8 TLC fingerprint 1.5
9 HPLC fingerprint 2.5
10 Identity, purity, adulterants and contaminants 3
11 Traditional use 1.5
12 Current practice 2.5
13 Clinical evidence 4
14 Pharmacology 2.5
15 Safety 3
16–18 Discussion, conclusions, research needed 3
19 References 3
20 Document control 1
Totals (draft) The section estimates sum to about 49 pages; this printing runs to 40 A4 pages. 22 embedded figures: 8 licensed field, specimen or drug photographs, 1 public-domain plate, 2 licensed photomicrograph panels (neither is an AIP photomicrograph), 1 licensed UHPLC-MS chromatogram, 2 licensed figures from a review (chemotype map, structures), 2 AIP composites of PubChem structures, 6 AIP drawings and charts. About 25 tables. 0 AIP photomicrographs, 0 AIP chromatograms, 0 AIP plates. 9 human studies graded; 6 further trials and 1 appraisal listed but ungraded. 34 numbered references

Gaps stated plainly. AIP holds no vouchered sample and has made no section, plate or run: sections 4, 5, 7, 8, 9 and 10 carry "AIP bench data pending". No licensed photograph of a developed Ph. Eur. 1391 TLC plate was found, so Figure 7 is a zone-order drawing. The licensed chromatogram (Figure 8) is a UHPLC-MS research run on a tincture, not the Ph. Eur. HPLC-UV assay. Seven of the nine graded trials are graded from the HMPC assessment report and the Cochrane review; their primary reports are on the library fetch queue with other papers (listed in section 19), and those grades are provisional. The DAFF BICON import case, the TGA Database of Adverse Event Notifications and safety-alert list (the TGA pages could not be queried in September 2026), ANZCTR (refused access from our network in September 2026), WHO ICTRP (the portal returned an implausible result), Cochrane CENTRAL and Embase were not searched.

0.4 Contributors and access

Compiled by Dr Thomas Ridley, Head of Education and Research. The Botanical review (Dr Fiona MacAllister, Head of Botanical: sections 1–5, adulterant species in section 10, and the botanical figures), the QA review (Dr Hana Suzuki) and the Medicine review (Dr Eleanor Whitcombe, Head of Medicine: sections 12, 13 and 15, and Figures 10 and 11) are on record; each reviewer is credited once their review is on record (section 20). A preview of the monograph and all of section 15 (Safety) are free to every reader; the full text is for Scholar members and above, or the AUD $20 copy of this one title.

Free to every reader. The safety section of every monograph is open to everyone, signed in or not. In an emergency call 000. For poisoning, call the Poisons Information Centre on 13 11 26.

15. Safety

Red flags first. Arnica taken by mouth is a poisoning, and in pregnancy it has been followed by miscarriage: one woman in the second month of pregnancy miscarried a few days after drinking an infusion of 20 g of flowers, another within 24 hours of three tablespoons of home-made tincture, and multi-organ failure followed ingestion taken to end a pregnancy (case reports, as summarised by Bone and Mills, pp. 377–378) [8]. Anyone who has swallowed an arnica preparation (other than a homoeopathic dilution) needs emergency care; in Australia the Poisons Information Centre is on 13 11 26.

Contact allergy (the main adverse effect). The HMPC puts the frequency of allergic skin reactions at about 1 in 100 users, from 1280 patients in marketing-authorisation safety data, with no serious reactions [4]. Reactions are itching, redness and eczema, occasionally vesicles [2,4]. In patch testing of eczema patients, 4.3 per cent (150 of 3480) reacted to arnica tincture, many of them probably cross-reactions (Willuhn, as summarised in ref 13). In Danish Compositae-allergic patients, 23 per cent reacted to arnica (Paulsen, as summarised by Bone and Mills, p. 485) [8]. Across the trials, allergic reactions were the usual adverse event: 5 treatment-related events in the arnica arm of the hand-osteoarthritis trial [4], 2 allergic withdrawals out of 100 in the venous trial [4], 1 of 79 in the knee study [4]. Helenalin esters (α-methylene-γ-lactone plus cyclopentenone) are the main haptens; dihydrohelenalin esters also sensitise, and thymol esters may contribute [13]. In eight arnica-allergic patients tested with isolated lactones, two reacted to a dihydrohelenalin ester and none to a helenalin ester, as summarised by Schmidt [13]; AIP comment: the DH chemotype cannot be assumed to be less allergenic. Case reports include occupational eczema in growers and pharmacy workers, facial eczema after touching the plant, and a woman with enlarging necrotic lesions of the face and leg, fever and malaise after a 1.5 per cent arnica cream, diagnosed as Sweet’s syndrome; the authors attributed the lesions to pathergy to arnica, and Bone and Mills record that the syndrome was leukaemia-related [4,8]. Reported rates vary widely: a 1992 review found arnica allergy in 11–75 per cent of patients at dermatology clinics, while later studies found up to 1.14 per cent (Bone and Mills, p. 378) [8]. Causality assessment (WHO-UMC), AIP comment: the trial reactions are probable (temporal link, dechallenge by withdrawal, known mechanism); the Sweet’s syndrome case is possible (a plausible trigger, but an underlying leukaemia explains the syndrome as well).

Irritation. Undiluted tincture on skin, prolonged use, or use on damaged skin and leg ulcers can cause oedematous dermatitis, blistering and superficial necrosis [5]. In a reconstructed human epidermis model and in rat dermal toxicity tests, an Ph. Eur. tincture (0.05 per cent lactones) was neither corrosive nor irritant [18].

Toxicity by mouth. Arnica is poisonous if swallowed: gastroenteritis, disturbed heart rate, palpitations, breathlessness, muscle paralysis and death are recorded [5,6]. WHO cites a fatal poisoning after 70 g of tincture [5]; Barnes records serious, non-fatal symptoms after 30 mL of a 20 per cent tincture [6]. A 19-year-old man who drank tea made from arnica leaves and flowers by mistake developed myalgia, rigors, fever, tachycardia, hypotension and raised creatinine and liver enzymes, and recovered after six days of treatment (as summarised by Bone and Mills, p. 378) [8]. A mouth rinse used undiluted caused severe mucosal injury [5]. Oral LD₅₀ of helenalin: mice 150, rats 125, rabbits 90, hamsters 85 mg/kg [5]. The HMPC gives an oral LD₅₀ of an unspecified extract above 5 g/kg in rats and 123 mg/kg in mice [4].

Genotoxicity, reproduction. An unspecified extract was mutagenic in the Ames test (TA98, TA100), attributed to flavonols; helenalin itself was not mutagenic up to 30 µg/mL [4,5]. Helenalin damaged chromosomes in Chinese hamster ovary cells in vitro; the relevance in vivo is not established (Bone and Mills, p. 377) [8]. Adequate tests of reproductive toxicity, genotoxicity and carcinogenicity have not been done; the HMPC gave the inadequate genotoxicity data as its reason for not supporting an EU list entry [2,4]. Helenalin at 6–20 mg/kg intraperitoneally was not teratogenic in mice [5]; oral extracts stimulated the uterus in rats and guinea pigs [5].

Contraindications. Known allergy to arnica or other Asteraceae [2,5,9]. Broken or abraded skin, open wounds, leg ulcers [2,5,9]. Eyes and mouth [9]. Oral use of herbal preparations [5,10].

Interactions.

Interaction Evidence Grade
Warfarin: raised INR with nosebleeds in an 81-year-old woman who applied a large amount to her back; topical arnica was the only change in her medicines Single case report (Chetak 2011), as summarised by the HMPC, which accepted an interaction but did not require a label warning for a first report [4]. The primary report was not found on PubMed Clinical, single case; WHO-UMC possible (AIP comment). Check the INR if a patient on warfarin starts heavy topical use
Antiplatelet effect of helenalin and dihydrohelenalin Ex vivo human platelets, 3–300 µM [4] Theoretical; plasma levels after topical use were below detection in rats [18]
Cross-reactivity with other sesquiterpene-lactone plants (chamomile, feverfew, tansy, yarrow; Lauraceae) Patch-test series [8,9] Clinical (allergy)

No pharmacokinetic interaction study exists. The HMPC lists no interactions [2]; Bone and Mills list none known (p. 377) [8]. Stockley’s Drug Interactions (2008, library copy) has no arnica entry (text search, September 2026). AIP comment.

Pregnancy and lactation. No safety data for topical use; the HMPC does not recommend use in pregnancy [2]; WHO contraindicates it in pregnant and nursing women, citing emmenagogue use and uterine stimulation in animals [5]; Barnes advises avoidance in pregnancy and breastfeeding [6]; MediHerb lists "external use only" for both [9]. Bone and Mills class oral use in pregnancy as high risk (their Category X), expect no harm from topical use, and advise against internal use while breastfeeding and against applying it near the nipple (p. 377) [8]. Oral use in pregnancy has been followed by miscarriage (Red flags, above) [8]. Grade: regulatory and reference-text advice, with case reports for oral use; no study of topical use in pregnancy or lactation.

Children and older people. Not recommended under 12 years for lack of data [2]; keep out of reach of children [5]. One ankle-sprain trial enrolled children from 6 years, without separate safety results [34]. No specific data in older people; trials enrolled adults up to 79 years [4].

Overdose. No topical overdose is reported [2]. Oral ingestion is a poisoning (above).

TGA. Checked at Medicine review, September 2026, and reported as found. The TGA website search and safety-alert listing for "arnica" returned a bot-check page or timed out, so no alert list was retrieved. The Database of Adverse Event Notifications redirected to a Microsoft Power Apps portal behind a terms-of-use page, which AIP’s tools cannot query, so it was not searched. Nothing in this monograph depends on either search, and nothing here should be read as "the TGA holds no report": AIP does not know that. A manual DAEN and safety-alert search is listed in section 18. Arnica is not in the Poisons Standard [11], and listed medicines for use other than on unbroken skin are capped at 1 mg dry flower equivalent a day [10].

Referral line. Anyone with a skin reaction, a wound, a pregnancy, a child to treat or an anticoagulant prescription should consult a degree-qualified herbalist with competencies and adequate training in pharmacognosy before using arnica. Swallowing any arnica preparation other than a homoeopathic dilution is a poisoning and needs emergency care (Poisons Information Centre, 13 11 26).

27 more pages follow · 13,690 words, 21 figures, 23 tables

Still to come in this monograph

  1. 1. Nomenclature
  2. 2. Definition
  3. 3. Source and Australian supply
  4. 4. Macroscopy
  5. 5. Microscopy
  6. 6. Chemistry
  7. 7. Named markers and assay limits
  8. 8. TLC fingerprint
  9. 9. HPLC fingerprint
  10. 10. Identity, purity, adulterants and contaminants
  11. 11. Traditional use
  12. 12. Current practice: use, preparations and doses
  13. 13. Clinical evidence
  14. 14. Pharmacology
  15. 16. Discussion
  16. 17. Conclusions
  17. 18. Research still needed
  18. 19. References
  19. 20. Document control

The rest of this monograph is open to members. One membership covers every members’ feature on the site.

Checking your membership…

Share this articleFacebookXLinkedInWhatsApp

Report an error or submit evidence

If something in this monograph is wrong, out of date or missing, tell us and show us the evidence. Every report is logged under the AIP Evidence Charter and assessed on the evidence alone; the outcome is kept on the record, and an upheld report is corrected with a dated notice on this page.

Open the report form

What kind of report is this?

A report without evidence is still logged, and closed as “no evidence lodged”.

We use your name and email only to acknowledge and answer this report. They are kept with the dispute record, are not shared, and are not published unless you tick the box above. The evidence you send may be published. See the Privacy Policy.

The Institute sets and publishes its own monographs. The catalogue is in Publications.