In this standard report on a convention of science meeting alternative medicine in Philedalphia, Pat Rich examines the deep-set conservative values that became apparent through the "unpleasant sneering attitude" (para. 2) of the scientists. Rich delicately describes the opinions of the professionals by citing their "chortling and scoffing" (para. 1) when presented with the alternative practices such as "homeopathy, chiropractic, [and] traditional Chinese medicine" (para. 3). The reluctance and dismissal of alternative therapies by Western medicine supporters is subtly related to a sense of superiority amongst the group. Rich earnestly implores the readers to think otherwise. The author powerfully recalls of when "believers in viruses and genetics"
The findings of this survey showed that 73.6% agreed with the use of traditional medicines for health maintenance, 79.2% agreed for benign illness, such as colds or sprained ankles, and 90.3% agreed for palliative care (Zubek, 1994, p. 1926). Where they disagreed the most was with the use of traditional healing in the intensive care units, only 16.9% agreed with the use of this treatment for serious illness, such as cardiac or respiratory compromise, whether in the hospital (21.2% agreed) or as outpatients (26.4% agreed). Nearly half (48.6%) agreed with using traditional medicines for chronic illnesses, such as non-insulin dependent diabetes or Parkinson's disease (Zubek, 1994, p. 1926). One instance where physicians were unwilling to allow their patients to use Native medicine was while the patient is in the hospital, because the physician could be held legally responsible for any treatment administered while admitted under their care. There is also the problem of differentiating between legitimate Native healing practitioners and those who would take advantage of anyone not aware of the proper rituals and techniques that need to be performed (Zubek, 1994, p. 1929). This could be overcome by having a formalized licensing organization such as is used by Western practitioners (i.e. American Society of Clinical Pathology [ASCP]). That poses another problem though, as to whether traditionalists would be willing to have such an organization.
Complementary and alternative medicine, or CAM, can be characterized as a gathering of restorative, human services, and healing systems other than those incorporated into health care in the United States. CAM incorporates the perspectives, speculations, modalities, items, and practices connected with these systems and their utilization to treat disease and advance health and prosperity (McKenzie, 2012). Even though heterogeneous, the significant CAM frameworks have numerous normal attributes, including an attention on individualizing medications, treating the entire individual, advancing self-consideration and self-recuperating, and perceiving the otherworldly way of every person. What's more, numerous CAM frameworks have attributes generally found in standard human services, for example, an emphasis on great sustenance and preventive practices. Dissimilar to standard medication, CAM frequently needs or has just restricted trial and clinical concentrate; then again, experimental examination of CAM is starting to address this learning crevice. In this manner, limits in the
In modern medicine, alternative therapies are poorly understood and studied. The preference for alternative therapies, and herbal medicine were indicated, and the fear of relinquishing information regarding these practices were almost paralyzing. It seemed as though they were ashamed to admit to cultural healing practices, and did not divulge information to practitioners regarding their usage. The cultural disconnect was present as alternative/complimentary medicines are valued as a culture, and “modern” practitioners cast judgment on their usage. This perceived stigma additionally limited the information shared by the cultural participants with modern medical treatments, potentially causing additional harm, as some herbals are potentially toxic.
In Policy and Medicine’s blog, a response to an article posted in The Atlantic, Thomas Sullivan recounts whether modern medicine is on the decline verses alternative medicine becoming a more popular choice despite evidence that points to the contrary. By addressing the article in The Atlantic entitled The Triumph of New-Age Medicine by David H. Freeman, Sullivan’s thesis not only questions whether contemporary medicine is falling short in providing care but, loudly exclaims the opposite is true. Staying in tune with the pace of the article the main point is brought out early in the paper through data and statistics. Sullivan wastes no time in taking an implied view against alternative medicine. Implied because Sullivan does not overtly state opposition to alternative medicine, but by tone and supporting evidence it is clear he believes modern medicine has been given a bad rapport. In this rhetorical
Throughout the years there have been two traditions within the practice of medicine. One is the 'art of healing ' which involves its own specialised brand of training. The art of healing is dependent on the prescriber 's foreknowledge and the clients’ viewpoint of the prosperous results. The 'Science of healing ' is based on scientific and technological ideas. This tradition results in a lower liability for practitioners regarding the showing of an original approach to medicine, however the results of this method are more calculable (Kayne 2002). It is believed that the tradition of the ‘art of healing’ is increasing in popularity. The World Health Organisation states ' 'that the terms ' 'complementary medicine ' ' or ' 'alternative medicine’ ' are used interchangeably with traditional medicine in some countries. They refer to a broad set of health care practices that are not part of that country 's own tradition and are not integrated into the dominant health care system” (World Health Organization 2000). This type of treatment, is commonly known as ‘Complementary and alternative medicine’ (CAM). The word complementary derives from the meaning ‘together with’ established practices and the word alternative refers to ‘in place’ of established practices. Some patients choose to participate in complementary therapies along with the medication prescribed by their general practitioner whilst others prefer complementary therapies as opposed to the medications
However, the two countries identified in this essay, Sweden and the United States (U.S.), have various things in common. One of the similarities of the two countries is that both countries practice Contemporary and Alternative Medicine (CAM). The practice of CAM has played a major role in the wellness of patients and the entire society. CAM can be considered prayer for health, therapeutic, vitamins, and herbs. The United States practice massage therapy, chiropractic therapy, and daily vitamins. The leaves of Andrographis Paniculata, has been used in Sweden as an remedy for upper respirator infection (URI) and influenza (Wellness.com, 2006-2011). Another similarity of Sweden health care system and the U.S.
The first reason for supporting alternative medicine is because it’s effective. In fact, Traditional Chinese medicine has been used for more than 5,000 years with proof of its effectiveness (Sutton, 2010, 95). In addition, TCM has punch of methods for treating patient's widely such as herbs and other (Sutton, 2010, 94-95). That means alternative medicine has proved its worth and won people’s respect.
A short 5 to 7 page composition in APA format on a treatment of choice in complementary alternative medicine. The composition must be supported by evidence base.
These people used alternative medicines and don’t feel comfortable confiding in their provider about their use of a variety of medicinal herbs or other alternatives to prescription medication to treat their health problems. The cultural disconnect was present as alternative/complimentary medicines are valued as a culture, and “modern” practitioners cast judgment on their usage. This cultural disconnectover the use of these alternative medicines puts a fear in them that results to their not getting proper medical treatment which further put them at risk when they do seek care (Page-Reeves et al., 2013)
Because many of the treatments of alternative medicine do not adhere to the principles of conventional medicine, whether or not to allow practice of these techniques in the United States is a major concern of the medical community today. The Food and Drug Administration is the decision making body of issues such as this and more often than not, does not approve many of these practices. Due to the fact that holistic medicine sometimes contradicts the fundamentals of biomedicine, health care regulation boards such as the FDA find it difficult to accept many of these treatments. Because the Western world is so unfamiliar with these techniques it is only natural for medical community to often disprove these methods. However, as more and more doctors discover the limitations of
The debate on whether homeopathic drug are as valuable as prescription drug in medical treatment rages on. It is commonly known that the big name pharmaceutical companies would like you to believe that homeopathic drugs are not as effective and in some cases much more deadly than their drugs. The general public stubbornly believes in the power of the pharmaceutical medications as being the only way to become healthy and stay healthy. However there are a number of alternative ways to maintain your health. This research paper will cover several different questions the general public should know. What is the origin of homeopathic medicine? How to stay healthy without
The purpose of this investigation is to establish and assess the interplay of homeopathic ideologies and its effect on homeopathic practice. This study focuses on the relevance, purpose and properties of the practice of homeopathy and contends that the ‘root’ of its practice may have a dramatic impact on its function in the healthcare of Western societies.
In recent years, there has been an increasing interest in complementary medicine, and indeed alternative medicine (Lee-Treweek 2002, Andrews 2004, Barry 2006). Moreover the number of professionally trained therapist and practitioners has increased giving the patient/client a better choice and at more competitive rates (Smallwood, 2005).
Homeopathic is effective for a wide range of ailments such as colds, flu, arthritis, allergies, and sprains to name just a few of the maladies for which there are homeopathic treatments for. But even homeopathy's most devoted supporters can not explain why it works, only that it does work. Critics of the homeopathic methods argue that the fundamental ideas behind homeopathy defy the laws of chemistry and physics and that it's theory makes no sense in the scientific world. (Langman, 1997). They also claim that homeopathic 'cures' are due to the so-called placebo effect; that the patients and professionals of homeopathy believe so strongly in their treatment that their belief system is actually the cure, not the homeopathic method used. (Langman, 1997). Homeopathy's newfound success also dismays many physicians, scientists and consumer advocates who regard the homeopathic formulas as ineffective, at best, and dangerous, at worst. They're especially concerned that by attempting to cure their ills with the homeopathic method, patients will not seek assistance from established treatments for very serious, perhaps life
The scientific community is much quicker to label this second type as quacks, whereas the scientific community has failed to gain a consensus on the legitimacy of the first type. Unfortunately, both are encompassed by the term alternative medicine. This paper will focus on the more controversial alternative medicines described in the first group.