Home Forums Blogs Articles Photos Videos Contact FAQ

Alternative medicine - Definitions

Alternative medicine - Definitions: Encyclopedia II - Alternative medicine - Definitions

Alternative medicine broadly describes methods and practices used in place of, or in addition to, conventional medical treatments. The precise scope of alternative medicine is a matter of some debate and depends to a great extent on the definition of "conventional medicine." The debate on alternative medicine is complicated further by the diversity of treatments that are categorized as "alternative." These include practices that incorporate spiritual, metaphysical, or religious underpinnings; non-European medical traditions; newly developed approaches to healing; and a number of others. Proponents of ...

Alternative medicine: Encyclopedia II - Alternative medicine - Definitions

Alternative medicine - Definitions

Alternative medicine broadly describes methods and practices used in place of, or in addition to, conventional medical treatments. The precise scope of alternative medicine is a matter of some debate and depends to a great extent on the definition of "conventional medicine."

The debate on alternative medicine is complicated further by the diversity of treatments that are categorized as "alternative." These include practices that incorporate spiritual, metaphysical, or religious underpinnings; non-European medical traditions; newly developed approaches to healing; and a number of others. Proponents of one class of alternative medicine may reject others.

Detractors of alternative medicine may also define it as "diagnosis, treatment, or therapy which can be provided legally by persons who are not licensed to diagnose and treat illness", although some medical doctors find value using alternative therapies in the practice of "complementary medicine".

Many in the scientific community define alternative medicine as any treatment, the efficacy and safety of which has not been verified through peer-reviewed, controlled studies. This form of definition is not based on political views or protection of turf, but hinges exclusively on questions of effectiveness and safety. It is thus possible for a method to change categories in either direction, based on increased knowledge of its effectiveness or lack thereof.

The boundaries of alternative medicine have changed over time as some techniques and therapies once considered to be "alternative" have been accepted by mainstream medicine.

The opposite is equally true, with methods once thought to be effective being dropped when it is discovered that their only effect was because of the placebo effect, or when their side effects were found to result in an unfavorable safety-to-benefit ratio.

This tendency for constant change in scientic medicine is considered by some advocates of alternative medicine as a sign of weakness. Scientists, on the other hand, consider this ability to change opinions based on increasing knowledge, as one of modern medicine's greatest strengths. They consider a perseverance in using old methods as a warning sign of a possible unwillingness to learn or change in tact with increased knowledge:

"In the pseudosciences, a challenge to accepted dogma is often considered a hostile act if not heresy, and leads to bitter disputes or even schisms." "Sciences advance by accommodating themselves to change as new information is obtained. In science, the person who shows that a generally accepted belief is wrong or incomplete is more likely to be considered a hero than a heretic." [1]

Alternative medicine - A misleading term?

Various advocates and critics of alternative therapies believe (for very different reasons) that the term "alternative medicine" is misleading:

Some advocates believe that Western therapies are the "alternative" in that they were preceded by traditional therapies. Others believe that the term was invented by advocates of "allopathic" medicine in an attempt to discredit natural therapies [2].

Some critics assert that the opposite is the case:

"Complementary and alternative medicine" ("CAM") is an imprecise marketing term that is inherently misleading. "Alternative" methods are loosely described as practices outside of mainstream health care. They lack evidence of safety and effectiveness and are generally not covered by insurance plans. "Complementary medicine" is loosely described as a synthesis of standard and alternative methods that uses the best of both. In truth, there are no "alternatives" to objective evidence of effectiveness and safety." -- NCAHF

An increasingly common method for critics to express their skepticism about the terminology, is their use of the acronym sCAM, which stands for so-Called "Alternative" Medicine (always spelled with a small "s" and capitalized "CAM").

The acronym has been very deliberately designed by skeptics to expose what they see as "the deceptiveness and inaccuracy inherent in the popular jargon that is being used to describe and market unproven and disproven healing methods." [3]

These critics consider the commonly used expression "evidence-based alternative medicine", to be an oxymoron. They assert that if a method has become evidence-based, then it should no longer be considered or classified as "alternative medicine". Their use of the term sCAM is an attempt to combat this misuse, and to prevent what they see as a "dumbing down" of modern medicine.

Critics of alternative therapies assert that they are not effective and consequently are not a legitimate alternative to conventional medicine. Richard Dawkins, professor of the Public Understanding of Science at Oxford University, defines alternative medicine as "that set of practices that cannot be tested, refuse to be tested or consistently fail tests" (See Diamond 2003).

Many on both sides believe that alternative therapies can become accepted as conventional medicine if they are scientifically proven to be effective.

"Evidence-based methods are effective, and effective methods should be evidence-based. If a method appears to be effective, then it should be possible to prove it. If the research has not been done yet, it should be. We must remember that "Absence of proof is not the same as the absence of fact; it simply demonstrates the lack of adequate research. - Robert Sydenham. "Lack of evidence in the literature is not evidence of lack of effectiveness." [4]