Did you mean: alternative medicine (in medicine), List of Penn & Teller: Bullshit! episodes, Alternative Medicine (1997 Album by Dr. Strangely Strange)
| Dictionary: alternative medicine |
| Britannica Concise Encyclopedia: alternative medicine |
For more information on alternative medicine, visit Britannica.com.
| Answers Corp. Content: Alternative Medicine Encyclopedia |
| Encyclopedia of Public Health: Alternative, Complementary, and Integrative Medicine |
Conventional Medicine and Public Health
Traditionally, public health relies extensively on conventional (allopathic) medicine in its mission to prevent and treat disease. It accepts reductionistic methods to identify the origin of illness at the cellular and subcellular level, and then applies these principles in assessing and addressing risk factors in populations. This results in a three-tiered approach to the delivery of public health services: (1) primary prevention, which involves efforts to reduce exposure to risk factors for injury and illness; (2) secondary prevention, which involves the identification and control of disease in its early stages; and (3) tertiary prevention, which attempts to control the impact of existing illness and injury through prolonged treatment and rehabilitative services.
Paralleling the growth of technology-based medicine (and its effectiveness), however, has been a simultaneous rise in chronic illnesses that are resistant to current treatment modalities and very costly to society. Leading causes of morbidity in the early 1900s, such as trauma and infectious disease, have been supplanted by chronic conditions such as cancer, heart disease, and HIV (human immunodeficiency virus) infection. This requires the development of a new model of health care that is multidimensional and that recognizes all factors influencing health and illness. At a public health level, multidimensional problems require multidimensional interventions, which is the basis of the integrative medical approach.
Complementary and Alternative Medicine
In 1948, the World Health Organization (WHO) defined health as "a complete state of physical, mental, and social well-being and not merely the absence of disease or infirmity." The public increasingly embraces "holistic" medicine when seeking treatment for chronic medical conditions. This philosophical shift has led to a sharp increase in the use of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM), defined as modalities (e.g., acupuncture, herbal therapy, massage therapy), employed in place of, or as adjuncts to, conventional medical therapies. Surveys reveal that almost half of the U.S. population turns to such modalities, with acceptance and use of CAM expanding during the 1990s. Studies showing that CAM use tends to be higher among patients with diseases (e.g., cancer, arthritis), that are often inadequately treated by conventional approaches may suggest an inherent dissatisfaction with Western medicine. Research suggests, however, that the public is actually turning to CAM because its doctrines parallel their own personal values and belief systems. For example, patients want physicians who regard them as whole persons—minds and spirits as well as bodies—and who believe in the healing power of nature. In fact, although CAM therapies are very diverse, ranging from well-established cultural traditions (e.g., Chinese traditional medicine) to quasi-allopathic modalities marginally supported by current science (e.g., chelation therapy), most share common underlying philosophies. These include a belief in the interconnectedness of mind and body and respect for the innate mechanisms of healing.
Integrative Medicine
Practioners of conventional medicine are justifiably proud of the achievements of their profession—most notably the diagnostic, pharmacological, and surgical advances of the twentieth century. Total reliance on such technologies, however, has led to the dismissal of CAM modalities as archaic or ineffective. The result has been increasing divisiveness between proponents and opponents of unconventional therapies.
The descriptive phrase "integrative medicine," coined in the late twentieth century, characterizes a new model of health care rooted both in conventional and alternative medicine. In the broadest sense, integrative medicine employs modalities drawn from all medical therapeutic paradigms, providing patients with individualized treatment plans optimized for their specific clinical situations. The underlying philosophy recognizes and relies upon the innate healing capacity of the human body and emphasizes the importance of the relationship between practitioner and patient in fostering this capacity.
While incorporating aspects of both conventional medicine and CAM, integrative medicine does not uncritically accept either without evidence of validity and efficacy. Additionally, in weighing both the benefits and risks inherent to any therapy, regardless of its origin, the integrative practitioner initially selects the least invasive, least toxic, and least costly interventions appropriate to the situation.
A cornerstone of the integrative model is the assertion that health and healing optimally occur when all factors that influence the organism are addressed. To quote Sir William Osler (1849–1919), "It is more important to know what sort of patient has a disease than what sort of disease a patient has." Therefore, although a patient presents specific symptoms, the integrative practitioner inquires into all lifestyle, psychosocial, and spiritual influences affecting quality of life. The ensuing treatment plan includes recommendations such as dietary change, increase in physical activity, and stress reduction in addition to any specific therapies. Positive coping skills such as biofeedback, yoga, prayer, meditation, and community involvement are promoted.
Although the breadth and depth of CAM is beyond the scope of this chapter, a few of the more recognized and researched modalities are listed below:
Fundamental to the integrative model is the therapeutic relationship between the patient and doctor. Practitioners recognize that they are not the source of healing, but the means by which patients discover, or rediscover, their innate capacity to regain health. Therapeutic modalities, whether conventional or alternative, are simply adjuncts to this process; patients must take responsibility for their own health and well-being. To this end, each therapeutic decision is the result of a consideration of all appropriate modalities, whether conventional or CAM. Patients are thus active partners in choosing therapies consistent with their values and philosophical beliefs.
Integrative Medicine and the Future of Health Care
No one denies the existence of a crisis in the delivery and financing of health care. The arrangement of unregulated fee-for-service practices, reimbursement through managed care, and costly defensive medicine has complicated rather than alleviated the burden of escalating chronic illness associated with an aging population. The ensuing national debate has focused upon repair of this system, rather than the creation of a new design.
An integrative approach to public health redefines the ideology of the system rather than attempting to repair the current model. It looks to equitable and universal access to health maintenance services, and focuses on disease prevention as well as on current treatments, which may not always be effective. Decisions regarding the provision of health care therefore do not simply originate from within the medical and reimbursement sectors, but become a social contract among individuals, providers, hospitals, academic institutions, corporations, communities, and governmental agencies. Individuals become accountable for the impact their behavioral choices have upon the community as well as on their own personal wellbeing. Health care providers and hospitals work to prevent illness as well as treat it, emphasizing accountability to the individual and the community over financial profit. Academic institutions develop programs that promote the synergistic training of students of medicine, nursing, pharmacy, and others involved in patient care. Corporations recognize the overall value of healthy employees and invest in individual and organized wellness programs. Communities acknowledge that health in not only the result of good medical care, but also of adequate housing, sanitation, and education. Finally, government serves as a safety net, ensuring access to medical care when all other resources fail, as well as enacting and enforcing legislation designed to protect both the individual and the health care system. Thus, the concept of integrative medicine encompasses not only the health of the individual, but of society as a whole.
(SEE ALSO: Chinese Traditional Medicine; Holistic Medicine; Prevention; Preventive Health Behavior; Preventive Medicine)
Bibliography
Astin, J. A. (1998). "Why Patients Use Alternative Medicine: Results of a National Study." Journal of American Medical Association 279(19):1548–1553.
Donnelly, W. J.; Spykerboer, J. E.; and Thong, Y. H. (1985). "Are Patients Who Use Alternative Medicine Dissatisfied with Orthodox Medicine?" Medical Journal of Australia 142(10):539–541.
Eisenberg, D. M.; Davis, R. B.; Ettner, S. L.; Appel, S.; Wilkey, S.; Van Rompay, M.; and Kessler, R. C.(1998). "Trends in Alternative Medicine Use in the United States, 1990–1997: Results of a Follow-up National Survey." Journal of American Medical Association 280(18):1569–1575.
Gaudet, T. W. (1998). "Integrative Medicine: The Evolution of a New Approach to Medicine and to Medical Education." Integrative Medicine 1(2):67–73.
Kaptchuk, T. J., and Eisenberg, D. M. (1998). "The Persuasive Appeal of Alternative Medicine." Annals of Internal Medicine 129(12):1061–1065.
Maizes, V., and Caspi, O. (1999). "The Principles and Challenges of Integrative Medicine." Western Journal of Medicine 171(3):148–149.
Rees, L., and Weil, A. (2000). "Integrated Medicine." British Medical Journal 322(7279):119–120.
Weil, A. (2000). "The Significance of Integrated Medicine for the Future of Medical Education." American Journal of Medicine 108(5):441–443.
— WILLIAM BENDA; ANDREW WEIL
| US History Encyclopedia: Alternative Medicine |
Alternative medical practices have arisen in or have easily been transported to the United States, where social values and political infrastructure have encouraged many forms to flourish. The pervading American value placed in persons having autonomy with respect to making decisions over their own bodies; the skepticism toward any professional group having a monopoly on a given field; and Article 10 of the U.S. Constitution, which reserves to each state the exclusive power to set standards, make rules, and license practitioners in their jurisdictions, have enabled the public and small groups of unorthodox practitioners to shape laws that limit the powers of the dominant orthodox medical profession and protect the interests of alternative minority groups. In Europe and most other countries, licensure and medical policy are centralized, and alternative practitioners and their supporters must win one large battle to gain political recognition or face being marginalized. In the United States, alternative medical movements have been able to fight simultaneous battles in several states, winning some and using those successes to institutionalize, build followings, set standards, and continue their struggles in other jurisdictions.
Although alternative medicine has existed throughout the country's history, the greatest growth of alternative medical movements occurred during three eras, when more broad-based social ideologies nurtured the philosophical premises and political aims of such movements. These ideologies were Jacksonian Democracy (roughly the 1820s to the 1840s), populism (1880s–1910s), and New Age thought (1970s–1990s).
The Era of Jacksonian Democracy
President Andrew Jackson and many of his followers trumpeted the virtues of "the common man, " feared large centralized institutions, and had a distrust of professionals, particularly when the latter sought special privileges or exclusive rights based upon expertise to practice in fields traditionally open to those with or without formal training. Consistent with these beliefs, three large alternative medical movements arose during this time.
Samuel Thomson, a self-trained root doctor from New Hampshire, believed that all disorders were caused by obstructed perspiration. He argued that fever was the body's effort to eliminate disease and that orthodox physicians, with their bleedings, blisterings, and use of drugs like mercury, arsenic, and antimony, were jeopardizing the lives of patients and causing many deaths. Thomson believed anyone could treat disease using six classes of remedies consisting of botanical drugs and the steam bath, all designed to produce great internal heat, eliminate the cold, and allow the body to reestablish its natural balance. Thomson wrote a popular book, prepared kits of his medicine, sold individual rights to his practice, and encouraged followers to defeat or repeal medical licensure laws that restricted the practice of medicine to formally trained physicians. Although Thomson was antiprofessional, other alternative groups that employed a wider range of botanical drugs emerged, including Eclectic Medicine, which established schools, journals, and hospitals and won status for its practitioners as physicians.
The second major group of medical reformers, part of the so-called popular health movement, believed that physicians were largely unnecessary because most diseases could be prevented by individuals adopting healthy habits. The most prominent American lecturer and writer in this movement, Sylvester Graham, maintained that disease resulted from excessive stimulation of the tissues. Any food that caused too much stimulation had to be avoided, including tea, coffee, alcohol, pastries, and all fleshy meats. Graham also used the doctrine of overstimulation to warn of the powerful dangers of too much sexual energy. Eating meat, he argued, produced a heightened sex drive, which was health destroying. One of his innovations was a cracker that still bears his name, which was initially designed in part to discourage overstimulation of this type.
The most significant European import during this era was Homeopathy, a system of practice originated by the German physician Samuel Hahnemann. Brought to America in the 1820s, homeopathy encompassed two essential principles. The first principle was that the drug best able to cure a given illness would be that which could produce the symptoms of that illness in a healthy person. The second principle was that the smaller the dose, the more powerful the effect. One active part per hundred was shaken in a vial, and one part of that solution was mixed with another ninety-nine inactive parts, and so on, usually thirty times. By the end of the nineteenth century, homeopaths constituted 10 percent and the eclectics 5 percent of the physician and surgeon population in the United States.
The Era of Populism
Midwestern populism encompassed a distrust of large East Coast–controlled businesses and institutions, a belief that elites had gained too much power, and a sense that common people had too little say in shaping government and law in their own interests. As opposed to Jacksonian Democracy, many populists were not against creating laws governing the professions as long as the interests of competing groups were protected. In the 1870s and 1880s, new medical licensure laws were enacted; however, homeopathic and eclectic physicians were given the same rights as orthodox physicians. Challenging this hegemony were two groups—osteopathy and chiropractic.
Osteopathy was founded by Andrew Taylor Still, an apprenticeship-trained Midwestern physician. Still, who had practiced for a time as a bonesetter, believed that disease was the result of an obstruction or imbalance of the fluids caused by misplaced bones, particularly of the spinal column. These misplacements could be corrected through physical manipulation. He established an infirmary and school in Kirksville, Missouri, in 1892. Still's followers relatively quickly gained some measure of legal protection, established other colleges, and gradually expanded osteopathy's scope of practice to incorporate drugs and surgery. Eventually, D.O.s (doctors of osteopathic medicine) won equal rights along with M.D.s as full-fledged physicians and surgeons in every state and equal recognition by the federal government. As homeopathic and eclectic medicine faded after the beginning of the twentieth century, osteopathy became, and remained, the only equivalent professional rival of allopathic medicine, although the differences between the two groups have faded considerably.
Chiropractic appeared within a decade of the emergence of osteopathy and was founded in Davenport, Iowa, by Daniel David Palmer. Like Still, Palmer believed that diseases were due to misplaced bones. Many early chiropractors or D.C.s (doctors of chiropractic) were initially charged with practicing osteopathy without a license, but they demonstrated to courts and eventually legislatures that their diagnostic and treatment techniques were different. Unlike osteopathic physicians, who grew to encompass the full range of medical training and skills, chiropractors, despite the addition of some adjuncts, continued to center their activities on spinal manipulation and quickly became associated in the public mind with that technique, though osteopathy had historical priority.
"new Age" Thought
Fueled by America's continued participation in the Vietnam War and frustration with the perceived failure of government to produce meaningful change consistent with their own beliefs, a growing number of middle-class Americans in the 1970s shifted their attention from reforming society by legislative action to focusing on the potential for personal improvement. Drawing upon the rich traditions of other cultures, and often incorporating metaphysical and spiritual understandings of the basis and meaning of life, millions of Americans turned to a variety of disparate health beliefs and practices, including traditional Chinese and Ayurvedic medicine; crystals and scented candles; rolfing and other body treatments; imaging and other psychological interventions; alternative diets; herbs, vitamins, and other supplements; and a rediscovery of homeopathic and botanical remedies. By the end of the twentieth century, more money was spent by Americans on alternative practitioners and remedies than on visits to the offices of conventional primary care physicians.
This movement also reflected a growing frustration with the way orthodox medicine was practiced. Too little time was spent listening to patients, and while science had contributed to the treatment of acute diseases, many patients with chronic illnesses wanted more relief from their conditions than conventional physicians could provide. The number of alternative treatments that became available provided patients with new choices and new hopes. Experience by physicians with some of these modalities, and later research indicating value in some forms of alternative treatment, encouraged a growing number of conventionally trained physicians to incorporate these methods under the banner of "holistic" or "integrative" medicine. The continued popularity of these most recent forms of alternative medicine will, as in earlier periods, depend not only on the perceived efficacy of the respective practices over time but also on the broader social trends and ideologies that facilitated the emergence and growth of these practices.
Bibliography
Berman, Alex, and Michael A. Flannery. America's Botanico-Medical Movements: Vox Populi. New York: Pharmaceutical Products Press, 2001.
Gevitz, Norman. The D.O.'s: Osteopathic Medicine in America. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1991.
———, ed. Other Healers: Unorthodox Medicine in America. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1988.
Haller, John S. Medical Protestants: The Eclectics in American Medicine, 1825–1939. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press, 1994.
Kaufman, Martin. Homeopathy in America: The Rise and Fall of a Medical Heresy. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1971.
McGuire, Meredith. Ritual Healing in Suburban America. New Brunswick, N.J.: Rutgers University Press, 1988.
Moore, J. Stuart. Chiropractic in America: The History of a Medical Alternative. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1993.
Whorton, James C. Crusaders for Fitness: The History of American Health Reformers. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1982.
| Spotlight: alternative medicine |

From our Archives: Today's Highlights, March 1, 2005
| Columbia Encyclopedia: alternative medicine |
| Health Dictionary: alternative medicine |
Medical practice or therapy that uses methods that have not been associated with the traditional, standard care most generally taught and executed by AMA-certified medical schools.
| Veterinary Dictionary: alternative medicine |
| Wikipedia: Alternative medicine |
| Acupuncture • Anthroposophic medicine • Ayurveda • Chiropractic • Herbalism • Homeopathy • Naturopathy • Osteopathy • Traditional medicine (Chinese • Tibetan) | |
| NCCAM classifications | |
|---|---|
| Whole medical systems • Mind-body interventions • Biologically based therapies • Manipulative therapy • Energy therapies | |
| See also | |
| Alternative medicine • Glossary • People | |
In Western culture, alternative medicine is any healing practice "that does not fall within the realm of conventional medicine",[1] or "that which has not been shown consistently to be effective."[2] Alternative medicine is often based on the belief that a particular health regimen has efficacious effects even while there exists various bodies of evidence to contradict such a belief under the rigorous standards of evidence based medicine. In practice, alternative medicine encompasses therapies with a historical or cultural, rather than a scientific, basis. Commonly cited examples include naturopathy, chiropractic, herbalism, traditional Chinese medicine, Unani, Ayurveda, meditation, yoga, biofeedback, hypnosis, homeopathy, acupuncture, and diet-based therapies, in addition to a range of other practices.[3] It is frequently grouped with complementary medicine, which generally refers to the same interventions when used in conjunction with mainstream techniques,[4][5][6] under the umbrella term complementary and alternative medicine, or CAM. Some significant researchers in alternative medicine oppose this grouping, preferring to emphasize differences of approach, but nevertheless use the term CAM, which has become standard.[7][8]
Alternative medicine practices are as diverse in their foundations as in their methodologies. Practices may incorporate or base themselves on traditional medicine, folk knowledge, spiritual beliefs, or newly conceived approaches to healing.[9] Jurisdictions where alternative medical practices are sufficiently widespread may license and regulate them. The claims made by alternative medicine practitioners are generally not accepted by the medical community because evidence-based assessment of safety and efficacy is either not available or has not been performed for many of these practices. If scientific investigation establishes the safety and effectiveness of an alternative medical practice, whereupon it becomes mainstream medicine and is no longer "alternative", and will therefore become widely adopted by conventional practitioners.[10][11] Because alternative techniques tend to lack evidence, some have advocated defining it as non-evidence based medicine, or not medicine at all. Some researchers state that the evidence-based approach to defining CAM is problematic because some CAM is tested, and research suggests that many mainstream medical techniques lack solid evidence.[12]
A 1998 systematic review of studies assessing its prevalence in 13 countries concluded that about 31% of cancer patients use some form of complementary and alternative medicine.[13] Alternative medicine varies from country to country. Dr. Edzard Ernst believes that in Austria and Germany CAM is mainly in the hands of physicians,[8] while some estimates suggest that at least half of American alternative practitioners are physicians.[14] In Germany, herbs are tightly regulated, with half prescribed by doctors and covered by health insurance based on their Commission E legislation.[15]
Contents |
There is no clear and consistent definition as to the exact nature of alternative or complementary medicines.[16]:17 In a 2005 report entitled Complementary and Alternative Medicine in the United States[16] the Institute of Medicine (IOM) adopted this definition:
Other groups and individuals have offered various definitions and distinguishing characteristics. The National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine (NCCAM) defines CAM as "a group of diverse medical and health care systems, practices, and products, that are not currently part of conventional medicine."[11] NCCAM has developed what the IOM calls "[o]ne of the most widely used classification structures"[16] for the branches of complementary and alternative medicine.[11] The Cochrane Complementary Medicine Field says:
David M. Eisenberg defines it as "medical interventions not taught widely at US medical schools or generally available at US. hospitals,"[18] while Richard Dawkins sardonically defines it as a "set of practices which cannot be tested, refuse to be tested, or consistently fail tests."[19]
The term "alternative medicine" is generally used to describe practices used independently or in place of conventional medicine. The term "complementary medicine" is primarily used to describe practices used in conjunction with or to complement conventional medical treatments. NCCAM suggests "using aromatherapy therapy in which the scent of essential oils from flowers, herbs, and trees is inhaled in an attempt to promote health and well-being and to help lessen a patient's discomfort following surgery"[11] as an example of complementary medicine. The terms "integrative" or "integrated medicine" indicate combinations of conventional and alternative medical treatments which have some scientific proof of efficacy; such practices are viewed by advocates as the best examples of complementary medicine.[11] Ralph Snyderman and Andrew Weil state that "integrative medicine is not synonymous with complementary and alternative medicine. It has a far larger meaning and mission in that it calls for restoration of the focus of medicine on health and healing and emphasizes the centrality of the patient-physician relationship."[20] The combination of orthodox and complementary medicine with an emphasis on prevention and lifestyle changes is known as integrated medicine. The Washington Post reports that a growing number of traditionally trained physicians practice integrative medicine, which it defines as "conventional medical care that incorporates strategies such as acupuncture, reiki and herbal remedies."[21]
Some scientists reject the use of the classification of any therapy as 'alternative medicine' on the grounds that "[t]here is only medicine that has been adequately tested and medicine that has not, medicine that works and medicine that may or may not work."[10] These scientists advocate a classification based on scientific evidence, and state that "[w]hat most sets alternative medicine apart, in our view, is that it has not been scientifically tested and its advocates largely deny the need for such testing." The US Institute of Medicine analyzed this approach to defining alternative medicine, which it called normative, and found it problematic because some CAM is tested, and much of mainstream medicine lacks strong evidence. The IOM found that in a study of 160 Cochrane systematic reviews of mainstream techniques, 20% were ineffective and 21% had insufficient evidence.[16] The IOM therefore defined alternative medicine broadly as the nondominant approach in a given culture and historical period. A similar definition has been adopted by the Cochrane Collaboration,[17] which is the leading body of evidence-based medicine, and official government bodies such as the UK Department of Health.[22] This definition does not take into account the Off-Label use of drugs- use which has not been scientifically tested. Off-label use of medications is very common. Up to one-fifth of all drugs are prescribed off-label and amongst psychiatric drugs, off-label use rises to 31% [23]
Well-known proponents of evidence-based medicine, such as the Cochrane Collaboration and Edzard Ernst, Professor of Complementary Medicine at the University of Exeter, use the term alternative medicine but agree that all treatments, whether "mainstream" or "alternative", ought to be held to standards of the scientific method.[24] Their view is that evidence-based medicine is an ideal state which has not yet been achieved by either current mainstream or alternative medicine. Ernst characterizes the evidence for many alternative techniques as weak, nonexistent, or negative, but states that compelling evidence exists for others, particularly certain herbs and acupuncture[25] – although this evidence does not mean these treatments are mainstream, especially not worldwide. What is alternative varies by discipline as well and country. For example, biofeedback is commonly used within the Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation community, but is considered alternative within the medical community as a whole, and some herbal therapies are mainstream in Europe, but are alternative in the United States.[26]
Criticisms of CAM by mainstream physicians have been numerous. Barrie R. Cassileth has succinctly summed up the situation:
According to the NCCAM,[11] formerly unproven remedies may be incorporated into conventional medicine if they are shown to be safe and effective. Several scientists share this point of view and state that "[o]nce a treatment has been tested rigorously, it no longer matters whether it was considered alternative at the outset. If it is found to be reasonably safe and effective, it will be accepted."[10] According to them it is possible for a method to change categories (proven vs. unproven) in either direction, based on increased knowledge of its effectiveness or lack thereof. Prominent proponents of this position are George D. Lundberg, former editor of the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), and Phil B. Fontanarosa, Senior Editor of JAMA,"[30] Richard Dawkins, Professor of the Public Understanding of Science at Oxford,[31][32][33] Edzard Ernst and Simon Singh,[34] and Stephen Barrett, founder and operator of Quackwatch, who argues that techniques currently labeled "alternative" should be reclassified as "genuine, experimental, or questionable. Genuine alternatives are comparable methods that have met science-based criteria for safety and effectiveness. Experimental alternatives are unproven but have a plausible rationale and are undergoing responsible investigation. ... Questionable alternatives are groundless and lack a scientifically plausible rationale. ... Blurring these distinctions enables promoters of quackery to argue that because some practices labeled "alternative" have merit, the rest deserve equal consideration and respect. Enough is known, however, to conclude that most questionable "alternatives" are worthless.[25][35][36] Many CAM methods are criticized by the activist non-profit organization Quackwatch.[37]
M.R. Tonelli argues that CAM cannot be evidence-based unless the definition of evidence is changed. He states that "the methods of developing knowledge within CAM currently have limitations and are subject to bias and varied interpretation. CAM must develop and defend a rational and coherent method for assessing causality and efficacy, though not necessarily one based on the results of controlled clinical trials."[38] Further, A review of Michael L. Millenson's book Demanding Medical Excellence: Doctors and Accountability in the Information Age described it as "a wake up call to both medicine and nursing" due to what Millenson calls a "lack of scientific-based medical practice". According to the review, the book states that "85% of current practice has not been scientifically validated" and that it suggests that users of the research presented by Medline should question research articles rather than assuming they are accurate simply because of where they are published. The review states that Millenson's thesis and conclusion call for all health researchers and policy makers to do a better job in assuring valid methodology and avoidance of bias in published research.[39] Michael Dixon, the Director of the NHS Alliance stated that “People argue against complementary therapies on the basis of a lack of evidence. But I’d say only 10 per cent of what doctors do in primary care is evidence-based."[40] Angell and Kassirer acknowledge that "many treatments used in conventional medicine have not been rigorously tested, either" but say that the scientific community is generally aware that this is a failing that needs to be remedied."[10]
Oxford University Press publishes a peer-reviewed journal entitled Evidence-based Complementary and Alternative Medicine (eCAM).[41]
NCCAM classifies complementary and alternative therapies into five major groups. The classification are rather loose, and there can be some overlap.[11]
Many people utilize mainstream medicine for diagnosis and basic information, while turning to alternatives for what they believe to be health-enhancing measures. Studies indicate that alternative approaches are often used in conjunction with conventional medicine.[48] This is referred to by NCCAM as integrative (or integrated) medicine because it "combines treatments from conventional medicine and CAM for which there is some high-quality evidence of safety and effectiveness."[11] According to Andrew T. Weil M.D., a leading proponent of integrative medicine, the principles of integrative medicine include: appropriate use of conventional and CAM methods; patient participation; promotion of health as well as treatment of disease; and a preference for natural, minimally-invasive methods.[49] A 1997 survey found that 13.7% of respondents in the United States had sought the services of both a medical doctor and an alternative medicine practitioner. The same survey found that 96% of respondents who sought the services of an alternative medicine practitioner also sought the services of a medical doctor in the past 12 months. Medical doctors are often unaware of their patient's use of alternative medical treatments as only 38.5% of the patients alternative therapies were discussed with their medical doctor.[50]
Edzard Ernst, Professor of Complementary Medicine at the University of Exeter, wrote in the Medical Journal of Australia that "about half the general population in developed countries use complementary and alternative medicine (CAM)."[52] Survey results released in May 2004 by the National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine, part of the United States National Institutes of Health, found that in 2002 62.1% of adults in the country had used some form of CAM in the past 12 months and 75% across lifespan (though these figure drop to 36.0% and 50% if prayer specifically for health reasons is excluded); this study included yoga, meditation, herbal treatments and the Atkins diet as CAM.[48][53] Another study suggests a similar figure of 40%.[54] A British telephone survey by the BBC of 1209 adults in 1998 shows that around 20% of adults in Britain had used alternative medicine in the past 12 months.[55] Ernst has been active politically on this issue as well, publicly requesting that Prince Charles recall two guides to alternative medicine published by the Foundation for Integrated Health, on the grounds that “[t]hey both contain numerous misleading and inaccurate claims concerning the supposed benefits of alternative medicine" and that "[t]he nation cannot be served by promoting ineffective and sometimes dangerous alternative treatments.”[56] In general, he believes that CAM can and should be subjected to scientific testing.[25][36][57]
The use of alternative medicine in developed countries appears to be increasing. A 1998 study showed that the use of alternative medicine had risen from 33.8% in 1990 to 42.1% in 1997.[58] In the United Kingdom, a 2000 report ordered by the House of Lords suggested that "...limited data seem to support the idea that CAM use in the United Kingdom is high and is increasing."[59] In developing nations, access to essential medicines is severely restricted by lack of resources and poverty. Traditional remedies, often closely resembling or forming the basis for alternative remedies, may comprise primary health care or be integrated into the health care system. In Africa, traditional medicine is used for 80% of primary health care, and in developing nations as a whole over one third of the population lack access to essential medicines.[60]
Advocates of alternative medicine hold that the various alternative treatment methods are effective in treating a wide range of major and minor medical conditions, and that recently published research (such as Michalsen, 2003,[61] Gonsalkorale 2003,[62] and Berga 2003[63]) proves the effectiveness of specific alternative treatments. They assert that a PubMed search revealed over 370,000 research papers classified as alternative medicine published in Medline-recognized journals since 1966 in the National Library of Medicine database. See also Kleijnen 1991,[64] and Linde 1997.[65]
Complementary therapies are often used in palliative care or by practitioners attempting to manage chronic pain in patients. Complementary medicine is considered more acceptable in the interdisciplinary approach used in palliative care than in other areas of medicine. "From its early experiences of care for the dying, palliative care took for granted the necessity of placing patient values and lifestyle habits at the core of any design and delivery of quality care at the end of life. If the patient desired complementary therapies, and as long as such treatments provided additional support and did not endanger the patient, they were considered acceptable."[66] The non-pharmacologic interventions of complementary medicine can employ mind-body interventions designed to "reduce pain and concomitant mood disturbance and increase quality of life."[67] Physicians who practice complementary medicine usually discuss and advise patients as to available complementary therapies. Patients often express interest in mind-body complementary therapies because they offer a non-drug approach to treating some health conditions.[68] Some mind-body techniques, such as cognitive-behavioral therapy, were once considered complementary medicine, but are now a part of conventional medicine in the United States.[69] "Complementary medicine treatments used for pain include: acupuncture, low-level laser therapy, meditation, aroma therapy, Chinese medicine, dance therapy, music therapy, massage, herbalism, therapeutic touch, yoga, osteopathy, chiropractic, naturopathy, and homeopathy."[70]
In defining complementary medicine in the UK, the House of Lords Select Committee determined that the following therapies were the most often used to complement conventional medicine:[71] Alexander technique, Aromatherapy, Bach and other flower remedies, Body work therapies including massage, Counselling stress therapies, hypnotherapy, Meditation, Reflexology, Shiatsu, Maharishi Ayurvedic medicine, Nutritional medicine, and Yoga.
A 2002 survey of US adults 18 years and older conducted by the National Center for Health Statistics (CDC) and the National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine indicated:[48]
In 2004, a survey of nearly 1,400 U.S. hospitals found that more than one in four offered alternative and complementary therapies such as acupuncture, homeopathy, and massage therapy.[72]
The National Science Foundation has also conducted surveys of the popularity of alternative medicine. After describing the negative impact science fiction in the media has on public attitudes and understandings of pseudoscience, and listing alternative medicine as one of many pseudoscientific subjects, as well as mentioning the concerns of individual scientists, organizations, and members of the science policymaking community, it commented that "nevertheless, the popularity of alternative medicine appears to be increasing."[73]
In the state of Texas, physicians may be partially protected from charges of unprofessional conduct or failure to practice medicine in an acceptable manner, and thus from disciplinary action, when they prescribe alternative medicine in a complementary manner, if board specific practice requirements are satisfied and the therapies utilized do not present "a safety risk for the patient that is unreasonably greater that the conventional treatment for the patient's medical condition."[74]
| The examples and perspective in this section may not represent a worldwide view of the subject. Please improve this article and discuss the issue on the talk page. |
In the United States, increasing numbers of medical colleges have started offering courses in alternative medicine. For example, in three separate research surveys that surveyed 729 schools (125 medical schools offering an MD degree, 25 medical schools offering a Doctor of Osteopathic medicine degree, and 585 schools offering a nursing degree), 60% of the standard medical schools, 95% of osteopathic medical schools and 84.8% of the nursing schools teach some form of CAM.[75][76][77] The University of Arizona College of Medicine offers a program in Integrative Medicine under the leadership of Dr. Andrew Weil which trains physicians in various branches of alternative medicine which "...neither rejects conventional medicine, nor embraces alternative practices uncritically."[78] Accredited Naturopathic colleges and universities are also increasing in number and popularity in Canada and the USA. (See Naturopathic medical school in North America). In Connecticut, the University of Connecticut Medical School sponsors exposure to Ayurveda in periodic seminars and courses, for example, on mental health by a Yale affiliated medical doctor and psychiatrist (Ninivaggi, Frank John (2008). Ayurveda: A Comprehensive Guide to Traditional Indian Medicine for the West. Praeger Press: ISBN 0313348375).
Similarly "unconventional medicine courses are widely represented at European universities. They cover a wide range of therapies. Many of them are used clinically. Research work is underway at several faculties,"[79] but "only 40% of the responding [European] universities were offering some form of CAM training."[80]
In contrast to unconventional schools in Britain, no conventional medical schools offer courses that teach the clinical practice of alternative medicine.[81] The British Medical Acupuncture Society offers medical acupuncture certificates to doctors, as does the College of Naturopathic Medicine UK and Ireland.
Due to the uncertain nature of various alternative therapies and the wide variety of claims different practitioners make, alternative medicine has been a source of vigorous debate, even over the definition of alternative medicine.[82][83] Dietary supplements, their ingredients, safety, and claims, are a continual source of controversy.[84] In some cases, political issues, mainstream medicine and alternative medicine all collide, such as the case where synthetic drugs are legal but the herbal sources of the same active chemical are banned.[85] In other cases, controversy over mainstream medicine causes questions about the nature of a treatment, such as water fluoridation.[86] Alternative medicine and mainstream medicine debates can also spill over into freedom of religion discussions, such as the right to decline lifesaving treatment for one's children because of religious beliefs.[87] Government regulators continue to attempt to find a regulatory balance.[88]
Jurisdiction differs concerning which branches of alternative medicine are legal, which are regulated, and which (if any) are provided by a government-controlled health service or reimbursed by a private health medical insurance company. The United Nations Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights - article 34 (Specific legal obligations) of the General Comment No. 14 (2000) on The right to the highest attainable standard of health - states that
Specific implementations of this article are left to member states.
A number of alternative medicine advocates disagree with the restrictions of government agencies that approve medical treatments. In the United States, for example, critics say that the Food and Drug Administration's criteria for experimental evaluation methods impedes those seeking to bring useful and effective treatments and approaches to the public, and that their contributions and discoveries are unfairly dismissed, overlooked or suppressed. Alternative medicine providers recognize that health fraud occurs, and argue that it should be dealt with appropriately when it does, but that these restrictions should not extend to what they view as legitimate health care products.
In New Zealand alternative medicine products are classified as food products, so there are no regulations or safety standards in place.[90]
In Australia, the topic is termed as complementary medicine and the Therapeutic Goods Administration has issued various guidances and standards [91]. Australian regulatory guidelines for complementary medicines (ARGCM) demands that the pesticides, fumigants, toxic metals, microbial toxins, radionuclides and microbial contaminations etc, present in herbal substances should be monitored, although the guidance does not request for the evidences of these traits [92]. However, for the herbal substances in pharmacopoeial monographes, the detailed information should be supplied to relevant authorities [93]
The production of modern pharmaceuticals is strictly regulated to ensure that medicines contain a standardized quantity of active ingredients and are free from contamination. Alternative medicine products are not subject to the same governmental quality control standards, and consistency between doses can vary. This leads to uncertainty in the chemical content and biological activity of individual doses. This lack of oversight means that alternative health products are vulnerable to adulteration and contamination.[94] This problem is magnified by international commerce, since different countries have different types and degrees of regulation. This can make it difficult for consumers to properly evaluate the risks and qualities of given products.
Many alternative therapies have been tested with varying results. In 2003, a project funded by the CDC identified 208 condition-treatment pairs, of which 58% had been studied by at least one randomized controlled trial (RCT), and 23% had been assessed with a meta-analysis.[95] According a 2005 book by a US Institute of Medicine panel, the number of RCTs focused on CAM has risen dramatically. The book cites Vickers (1998), who found that many of the CAM-related RCTs are in the Cochrane register, but 19% of these trials were not in MEDLINE, and 84% were in conventional medical journals.[16]:133
As of 2005 the Cochrane Library had 145 CAM-related Cochrane systematic reviews and 340 non-Cochrane systematic reviews. An analysis of the conclusions of only the 145 Cochrane reviews was done by two readers. In 83% of the cases, the readers agreed. In the 17% in which they disagreed, a third reader agreed with one of the initial readers to set a rating. These studies found that for CAM, 38.4% concluded positive effect or possibly positive (12.4%) effect, 4.8% concluded no effect, 0.69% concluded harmful effect, and 56.6% concluded insufficient evidence. An assessment of conventional treatments found that 41.3% concluded positive or possibly positive effect, 20% concluded no effect, 8.1% concluded net harmful effects, and 21.3% concluded insufficient evidence. However, the CAM review used the 2004 Cochrane database while the conventional review used the 1998 Cochrane database.[16]:135-136
Most alternative medical treatments are not patentable, which may lead to less research funded by the private sector. Additionally, in most countries alternative treatments (in contrast to pharmaceuticals) can be marketed without any proof of efficacy—also a disincentive for manufacturers to fund scientific research.[96] Some have proposed adopting a prize system to reward medical research.[97] However, public funding for research exists. Increasing the funding for research of alternative medicine techniques was the purpose of the US National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine. NCCAM and its predecessor, the Office of Alternative Medicine, have spent more than $1 billion on such research since 1992.[98] The German Federal Institute for Drugs and Medical Devices Commission E has studied many herbal remedies for efficacy.[99]
Some skeptics of alternative practices say that a person may attribute symptomatic relief to an otherwise ineffective therapy due to the placebo effect, the natural recovery from or the cyclical nature of an illness (the regression fallacy), or the possibility that the person never originally had a true illness.[100]
In the same way as for conventional therapies, drugs, and interventions, it can be difficult to test the efficacy of alternative medicine in clinical trials. In instances where an established, effective, treatment for a condition is already available, the Helsinki Declaration states that withholding such treatment is unethical in most circumstances. Use of standard-of-care treatment in addition to an alternative technique being tested may produce confounded or difficult-to-interpret results.[101]
Forms of alternative medicine that are biologically active can be dangerous even when used in conjunction with conventional medicine. Examples include immuno-augmentation therapy, shark cartilage, bioresonance therapy, oxygen and ozone therapies, insulin potentiation therapy. Some herbal remedies can cause dangerous interactions with chemotherapy drugs, radiation therapy or anesthetics during surgery, among other problems.[7] An anecdotal example of these dangers was reported by Associate Professor Alastair MacLennan of Adelaide University, Australia regarding a patient who almost bled to death on the operating table after neglecting to mention that she had been taking "natural" potions to "build up her strength" before the operation, including a powerful anticoagulant that nearly caused her death.[102]
To ABC Online, MacLennan also gives another possible mechanism:
Conventional treatments are subjected to testing for undesired side-effects, whereas alternative treatments generally are not subjected to such testing at all. Any treatment — whether conventional or alternative — that has a biological or psychological effect on a patient may also have potentially dangerous biological or psychological side-effects. Attempts to refute this fact with regard to alternative treatments sometimes use the appeal to nature fallacy, i.e. "that which is natural cannot be harmful".
An exception to the normal thinking regarding side-effects is Homeopathy. Since 1938 the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has regulated homeopathic products in "several significantly different ways from other drugs."[104] Homeopathic preparations, termed "remedies," are extremely dilute, often far beyond the point where a single molecule of the original active (and possibly toxic) ingredient is likely to remain. They are thus considered safe on that count, but "their products are exempt from good manufacturing practice requirements related to expiration dating and from finished product testing for identity and strength," and their alcohol concentration may be much higher than allowed in conventional drugs.[104]
Those who have experienced or perceived success with one alternative therapy for a minor ailment may be convinced of its efficacy and persuaded to extrapolate that success to some other alternative therapy for a more serious, possibly life-threatening illness.[citation needed] For this reason, critics argue that therapies that rely on the placebo effect to define success are very dangerous. According to mental health journalist Scott Lilienfeld in 2002, "unvalidated or scientifically unsupported mental health practices can lead individuals to forgo effective treatments" and refers to this as “opportunity cost.” Individuals who spend large amounts of time and money on ineffective treatments may be left with precious little of either, and may forfeit the opportunity to obtain treatments that could be more helpful. In short, even innocuous treatments can indirectly produce negative outcomes.[105]
A study published in 1998[54] indicates that a majority of alternative medicine use was in conjunction with standard medical treatments. Approximately 4.4 percent of those studied used alternative medicine as a replacement for conventional medicine. The research found that those who used alternative medicine tended to have higher education or report poorer health status. Dissatisfaction with conventional medicine was not a meaningful factor in the choice, but rather the majority of alternative medicine users appear to be doing so largely because "they find these health care alternatives to be more congruent with their own values, beliefs, and philosophical orientations toward health and life." In particular, subjects reported a holistic orientation to health, a transformational experience that changed their worldview, identification with a number of groups committed to environmentalism, feminism, psychology, and/or spirituality and personal growth, or that they were suffering from a variety of common and minor ailments - notably anxiety, back problems, and chronic pain.
Authors have speculated on the socio-cultural and psychological reasons for the appeal of alternative medicines among that minority whose use them in lieu of conventional medicine. There are several socio-cultural reasons for the interest in these treatments centered around the low level of scientific literacy among the public at large and a concomitant increase in antiscientific attitudes and new age mysticism.[106] Related to this are vigorous marketing[107] of extravagant claims by the alternative medical community combined with inadequate media scrutiny and attacks on critics.[106][108] There is also an increase in conspiracy theories towards conventional medicine and pharmaceutical companies, mistrust of traditional authority figures, such as the physician, and a dislike of the current delivery methods of scientific biomedicine, all of which have lead patients to seek out alternative medicine to treat a variety of ailments.[108] Many patients lack access to contemporary medicine, due to a lack of private or public health insurance, which lead them to seek out lower-cost alternative medicine.[48] Medical doctors are also aggressively marketing alternative medicine to profit from this market.[107]
In addition to the social-cultural underpinnings of the popularity of alternative medicine, there are several psychological issues that are critical to its growth. One of the most critical is the placebo effect, which is a well-established observation in medicine.[109] Related to it are similar psychological effects such as the will to believe,[106] cognitive biases that help maintain self-esteem and promote harmonious social functioning,[106] and the post hoc, ergo propter hoc fallacy.[106] Patients can also be averse to the painful, unpleasant, and sometimes dangerous side effects of biomedical treatments. Treatments for severe diseases such as cancer and HIV infection have well-known, significant side effects. Even low-risk medications such as antibiotics can potentially cause life-threatening anaphylactic reactions in a very few individuals. More commonly, many medications may cause minor but bothersome symptoms such as cough or upset stomach. In all of these cases, patients may be seeking out alternative treatments to avoid the adverse effects of conventional treatments.[106][108]
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||
This entry is from Wikipedia, the leading user-contributed encyclopedia. It may not have been reviewed by professional editors (see full disclaimer)
| Shopping: alternative medicine |
Did you mean: alternative medicine (in medicine), List of Penn & Teller: Bullshit! episodes, Alternative Medicine (1997 Album by Dr. Strangely Strange)
| Homeopathy | |
| Medical Profession | |
| Medicine and Surgery |
| What are the beliefs behind alternative medicine? Read answer... | |
| Does insurance cover alternative medicine? Read answer... | |
| Are you against Alternative methods for medicine? Read answer... |
| How legitimate is alternative medicine? | |
| What are Principles of complemantary and alternative medicines? | |
| When alternative medicine being use? |
Copyrights:
![]() | Dictionary. The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition Copyright © 2007, 2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Updated in 2009. Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved. Read more | |
![]() | Britannica Concise Encyclopedia. Britannica Concise Encyclopedia. © 2006 Encyclopædia Britannica, Inc. All rights reserved. Read more | |
![]() | Answers Corp. Content. © 1999-2009 by Answers Corporation. All rights reserved. Read more | |
![]() | Encyclopedia of Public Health. Encyclopedia of Public Health. Copyright © 2002 by The Gale Group, Inc. All rights reserved. Read more | |
![]() | US History Encyclopedia. © 2006 through a partnership of Answers Corporation. All rights reserved. Read more | |
![]() | Spotlight. © 1999-2009 by Answers Corporation. All rights reserved. Read more | |
![]() | Columbia Encyclopedia. The Columbia Electronic Encyclopedia, Sixth Edition Copyright © 2003, Columbia University Press. Licensed from Columbia University Press. All rights reserved. www.cc.columbia.edu/cu/cup/. Read more | |
![]() | Health Dictionary. The New Dictionary of Cultural Literacy, Third Edition Edited by E.D. Hirsch, Jr., Joseph F. Kett, and James Trefil. Copyright © 2002 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Published by Houghton Mifflin. All rights reserved. Read more | |
![]() | Veterinary Dictionary. Saunders Comprehensive Veterinary Dictionary 3rd Edition. Copyright © 2007 by D.C. Blood, V.P. Studdert and C.C. Gay, Elsevier. All rights reserved. Read more | |
![]() | Wikipedia. This article is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution/Share-Alike License. It uses material from the Wikipedia article "Alternative medicine". Read more |
Mentioned in
A man's nature runs either to herbs, or to weeds; therefore let him seasonably water the one, and destroy the other.

- Francis Bacon