Anonymous asked in HealthAlternative Medicine · 10 years ago

Are You Aware of The Growing Demand For and Integration of Alternative Medicine in Your Country?

This does appear to be a growing world wide phenomenon, expanding over the past 30 years and longer. ... Are you observing this growing change in your country?

Here is just a small sample of the prolific evidence available.

NOTE: ... "CAM" = ("Complimentary Alternative Medicine");

BMC Fam Pract. 2007 May 15;8:30.

“General practitioners' knowledge and practice of complementary/alternative medicine and its relationship with life-styles: a population-based survey in Italy.”

Giannelli M, Cuttini M, Da Frè M, Buiatti E.

Unit of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Department of Physical Therapy, Policlinico Italia, Rome, Italy.

“…Our objective was to explore GPs' knowledge of CAM and patterns of recommendation and practice, as well as the relationship between such patterns and GPs' life-styles. …”

………………… "... RESULTS: Overall response rate was 82.1%. Most respondents (58%) recommended CAM …”



Med J Aust. 2000 Feb 7;172(3):105-9.

"Complementary therapies: have they become accepted in general practice?"

Pirotta MV, Cohen MM, Kotsirilos V, Farish SJ.

Department of General Practice and Public Health, University of Melbourne, Carlton, VIC.

Comment in: - Med J Aust. 2000 Feb 7;172(3):102-3.

" ...RESULTS: Acupuncture, hypnosis and meditation are well accepted by the surveyed GPs, as over 80% have referred patients patients to practitioners of these therapies and nearly half have considered using them. General practitioners have trained in various therapies-- ..."


" ...In the United States, increasing numbers of medical colleges have started offering courses in alternative medicine. ...."

........ "... 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. ..."

10 Answers

  • Tony I
    Lv 5
    10 years ago
    Best Answer

    Quite simply:

    1. More and more people are realizing not only how ineffective mainstream drugs and treatements which manage symptoms instead of actually cure illness are. By pharmaceutical insiders own admissions, most of their drugs do not work for most people.

    2. More and more people are realizing how dangerous it is to put unnatural drugs into their natural bodies. That is why over 95% of the the 24,000 plus approved prescribed and over the counter medications have side effects. Those side effects result in over 140,000 deaths each year in hospitals and homes in the U.S. alone and hundreds and hundreds of thousands of serious adverse reactions. The side effects also lead to other conditions that require more and more drugs and more and more conditions in a never ending cycle so that by the time a male reaches 65 in the U.S., he takes an average of 15 prescribed and over the counter medications daily. It is a great model for profit, especially when your only marketplace is our bodies, but it is a horrible one for healing and humanity.


    3. More and more people are realizing that they have been lied to, and are continuing to be lied to, about natural and alternative healing. People realize that common sense alone tells us that mainstream allegations that the very vitamins and minerals and medicinal plants that have nourished and healed us for all these eons and which our bodies have developed to utilize are not effective and may even be dangerous simply cannot be true. People are looking at increasing rates of chronic illness in every age group and realiziing that it is not a lack of pharmaceuticals that is causing such increases. No one ever became ill due to a deficiency in drugs. Most become ill due to a deficiency in proper nutrition.

    Increasingly, thanks to information sources who are not beholden to Big Medicine's billions of dollars in advertising, people are finding out the truth. They see that the most heavily medicated country on earth by far continues to slip further down in longevity rankings and has now plummeted behind over 40 other countries so that our rankings are much closer to Mexico than they are to the top 10 countries for longevity. People are seeing others successfully use alternatives to mainstream drugs and treatments successfully. Many people are also learning about the evil history of Big Medicine to suppress nature and alternatives for the sake of greed. Anyone who doubts that history and wants to see what Big Medicine is really all about can see the truth here:

    "Modern Medicine: How Healing Illness became Managing Illness"

    It isn't pretty and it surely isn't what is taught in medical schools or the mainstream media, but it is hard to argue with facts and history.

    Some observations:

    It is a shame that mainstream naysayers have to resort to personal attacks and lies to try to justify their bias and agenda here. Already we have seen three blatant examples. First of all, obviously you and I are not the same person and anyone who knew squat would know that it costs people money to spend time trying to help others and spread the truth - time that could have been used to actually make money instead. On the other hand, paid bloggers abound in the tens of thousands and one has to wonder about the possibilities when they see constant denialism of anything that threatens the profits of Big Medicine.

    Secondly, anyone who says that all CAM therapies have been found useless is telling a huge lie. It is a lie that was first planted in the mainstream media by Big Medicine advocates cherrypicked a handful of NCCAM studies which reflected poorly on some alternatives and which disregarded a host of positive studies. The story also conveniently chose to ignore the fact that most NCCAM sponsored studies were too new to have yet been concluded. The story was obviously planted to try to halt or reduce NCCAM funding and to plant a lie in the public perception of CAM treatments because more and more studies actually were beginning to produce results that threatened the monied interest of Big Medicine. If anyone doubts this, they can simply go to the studies section of the National Institute of Health's NCCAM and see for theirselves:

    Finally, the old line about "things that work become medicine" originated from a commedian's joke - and it truly is a joke. The reality is that things that can be patented become medicine and things that cannot be patented become downplayed and suppressed. You cannot patent nature.

    Resorting to lies and personal attacks speaks volumes about the credibility and character of those who stoop to do so.

  • 10 years ago

    This is blatantly the same user as "Tony I"

    People this user is a SALESMAN. do not fall for his rubbish. He is a paid SHILL of BIG ALTMED.

    He want's your money and doesn't care if your health suffers.

    No "Alternative Medicine" shows any evidence at all of working. If it did it would be just MEDICINE. Not Alternative medicine.

    Alternative MEANS no proof has been found. Once you show it to work it becomes medicine.

    Source(s): Homeopathy taught my bear to play poker and now it beats me every payday. Curse you Homeopathy.
  • dave
    Lv 7
    10 years ago

    As ever, it's just "one big conspiracy".

    No proof, no evidence, just a: "sCAM isn't popular, therefore shadowy forces must be operating" when of course the situation is no different to anything else that doesn't work, intelligent people don't get sucked in by it.

    Homeopathy and osteopathy have seen a DRAMATIC decline in courses offered at credible institutions. It's no mystery, people are sick of being scammed and aren't going to go into an occupation where they're going to get ridiculed for their outdated beliefs.

  • 10 years ago

    i think the change is wonderful. Conventional medicine has been brainwashing society for years and making doctors richer. Its time for people to wake up and realize that medication isnt natural and not a cure all for disease. Plants are natural and its even confirm in the scriptures. Disease develop from us eating chemically toxic food (inorganic), eating meat with hormones and steriods and not having a balance alkine environment in our body and taking unnatural medication. The body is very intelligent and so should we be so im all for alternative medicine.

  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • 10 years ago

    It's unfortunate, given how ineffective CAM is. The US has spent millions investigating CAM therapies. So far they've only disproven everyone single one.

    Humans are not rational. Simply look at the success of religion for evidence of this. Popularity means nothing. You've just presented a classical logical fallacy.

  • 10 years ago

    Of course more people want alternatives, and they're asking for them. That's what's got ConMed in such an uproar (conventional medicine=big pharma con job) they've hired a New York ad agency to post lurkers on blog sites running down complementary and alternative medicine. Same deal here. You have to question the motives of people who lurk on alternative medicine sites who are completely incapable of answering a single simple health question but have plenty of irrelevant opinions.

    Too bad more people are not aware of the underhanded bully tactics used by the AMA to manipulate the medical system, aided an abetted by major players in the pharmaceutical industry to get control of the medical schools.

    Alternative medicine practitioners are aware that 80% of allopathic medicine is not backed by any scientific evidence. It's a no-brainer to conclude that all the hype and hoopla about "evidence-based medicine" is pharma. company propaganda to build market share. Their drugs have more negative effects than positive ones, and they have the nerve to call these "side-effects". If you drop a bomb on a building with people inside, what's the side effect: killing the people or destroying the building? Pick one and call it collateral damage.

    The number of people who don't trust ConMed is growing. They're realizing that after they've been given the big runaround for "scientific" tests so that they can get a diagnosis, that's all they get! A name for a condition. Wow. Big help. Any cures? No, that would lead to a loss of income. So let's just dig around in our prescription bag for a) a pain-killer b) a corticosteroid c) antibiotics. Maybe something experimental, so you can become an unpaid/unwitting guinea pig for a drug company.

    The drug companies would like people to believe that they're not taking enough medications.

    The jurisdiction that I'm in has a Regulated Health Professions Act, and all of the alternative/complementary medical disciplines either have or are in the process of setting up their own Colleges of Practise.

    Alternative medicine is steadily growing in most major countries.

    Source(s): Natural health student.
  • Anonymous
    10 years ago

    You are providing evidence that alt med has good PR and marketing.

    It is not evidence of efficacy or safety.

  • 10 years ago

    I am very much aware of the growing demand for this type of treatment alternative. Mainstream medicine certainly does not have all the answers, but neither does naturopathic medicine. All I know is that some naturopathic treatments have helped me when traditional medicine could not.

    All the skeptics can provide are anecdotal evidence or faulty clinical trials to support their claim that naturopathic remedies can't possibly work. They demand "scientific evidence" that home remedies are effective, where are the studies (not subjective) that "prove" their assertions? There is NO financial ability from naturopathic medicines that cost a mere fraction of other medications to support an actual scientific study of a treatments' effect. IF the pharmaceutical company wanted to squash a naturopathic cure, why don't they foot the bill for these studies and have the FDA ban the treatment? The number one reason is that they are afraid that these "hokey cures" actually do work and proving that to be the case would make their medications worthless!

    My personal example is local raw honey for desensitizing allergies. I KNOW it works, it has worked for me and other people I know. Can we get a grant to do an actual "clinical study" on 5000 people (hmmm might be worth a try....) The pharmaceutical companies have nothing to gain by conducting this study, because when it is found to be effective they will lose out on the income from allergy shot ($200+ per year) and antihistamines ($60 to $300 per year) income from former patients who are now able to control their allegies with an $8 jar of honey. The skeptics bash this idea with nothing more than ANECDOTAL evidence, yet they demand that we somehow come up with the financial resources to prove to them something that anyone who has tried this treatment will tell them it is effective to some degree.

    I am proud that almost ALL of our local medical and nursing schools here are requiring their students to take at least some basic courses in hollistic medicine. It is about time they they figured out that most modern medications only treat the symptom and not the cause of most conditions.

    EDIT: rhianna darling, you still have NO IDEA how allergens work. The same grass and tree pollens that float through the air that make people miserable ALSO float through the air and become part of the honey that I ingest. Even if you want to insist that my cure is psychosomatic, I am still much happier paying $8 as compared to $500 for my treatment. If honey is such a "harmful" treatment option why haven't drug companies run a clinical study to get it banned? You have the burden to PROVE that honey does not work, I don't need proof because I already KNOW it works for me. OR maybe I just made up my allergy symptoms for the past 30 years because I enjoy headaches, runny nose, and congestion....

    PS ALL clinical studies are anecdotal. Part of the process is asking people how they feel as well as objective symptomology. Pain medications work PURELY on a subjective basis as pain is PURELY a subjective symptom. Yet doctors will prescribe Vicodin when I tell them it has no effect on me -- their training can't get them to understand that maybe it really just doesn't work!

    PPS Someone pointed out to me that you are probably confusing allergy desensitization with antihistamines. Honey has NO antihistamine property -- it will not treat allergy symptoms. It takes weeks for the desensitization to occur. Also I am calling out your LIE about allergy shots in the UK -- a simple search produced dozens of references to allergy shot programs in the UK and the fact that the shots are being replaced by a pill called grazax (whether it's a pill or a shot, it serves the same purpose) -- quit making up lies to "support" your failing arguments.

    PPPS You also have no clue what "burden of proof" really means. If I were to try peddling honey, then I would have the burden of proving that my claims about it are true. The only thing I am doing is suggesting that people try an "alternative" because I have discovered that it worked effectively for me. If you wish to give me several hundred thousand dollars to conduct a study to prove this assertion that otherwise provides me no financial benefit, then be my guest. You are trying to tell me something that contradicts what I already know, without providing any viable evidence or study to support your argument -- you are using anecdote which you tell me is unacceptable.

    PPPPS Dust and mold also contribute to allergy problems for people that are allergic to those allergens. I am not saying that honey is a "cure-all" -- and you can't give me any one medication for allegies that would be a "cure-all" either. Quit taking my comments out of context and putting them into a FICTICIOUS context just to "prove your point." Honey desensitizes people to the allergens that the honey is exposed to -- that is all. NOTHING I have said about honey is untrue, you have twisted my comments and added your own suppositions to try to make them untrue.

    PPPPPS The reason that one can EXPECT honey to work for desensitizing allergies is for the same reason allergy shots work at all. Small doses of the allergen is administered to allow the body to build up a natural resistance to it. Allergy shots ARE a form of homeopathic medicine, so to call homeopathy outright "hogwash" is to deny the fact the modern medicine DOES use it in certain treatments. EVERYTHING has it's place in medicine -- diet, medication, even meditation. To say that something doesn't work because it hasn't been "proven" is an "argument from ignorance." Things work because they work, you don't have to have "proof" to make it work.

    Source(s): Here is a website that describes in general all the steps (and assumed costs) inherent in a "clinical trial"
  • Anonymous
    10 years ago

    Yes but this does not demonstrate efficacy! This is a logical fallacy, "Appeal to Popularity" and fail.

    In the UK, where our health care system is publicly funded, few or no hospitals offer AltMed services. Out of the 5 homoeopathic hospitals that existed, only 4 remain. Please explain, if it's so popular, why do 95% of UK hospitals ignore it?


    @Skippy: Oh dear, you STILL haven't understood the "burden of proof fallacy" have you? It is up to the person making the claim that something exists or works to provide the evidence. The plural of anecdote is anecdote, not data!

    I'm not saying the idea of local honey preventing hayfever is completely impossible. The point I have tried to make is that not only is there no credible evidence that local honey prevents hayfever, there is no rational reason to expect it to either.

    1. Contrary to popular belief, the majority of pollens associated with hay fever come from trees and grass, which are not used by bees to make honey.

    2. There is no pollen in honey as the bees keep it in separate cells in the hive, and not the honey boxes, which is where the honey is drawn from.

    The next problem is that it takes quite a bit of time for bees to make honey, there is a high chance that by the time you actually get to eat it, many of the plants (which the vast majority of allergens are not caused by anyway) will have stopped flowering and new ones will have started.

    Let me guess, you alties think the honey has memory!

    " I KNOW it works,"

    How do you KNOW it works? Hayfever comes and goes. I haven't had hayfever for the last few years, yet this year I have it. I did try local honey myself and I know several people who have too and it didn't work- hey you like anecdotes!

    "The pharmaceutical companies have nothing to gain by conducting this study, because when it is found to be effective they will lose out on the income from allergy shot ($200+ per year) and antihistamines ($60 to $300 per year)"

    First, in the UK we do not routinely use allergy shots (only in rare and severe cases). This is the same for many other countries FAIL

    Hayfever isn't the only reason we use antihistamines. They are used for skin allergies and other allergies completely unrelated to hayfever. FAIL.


    Edit 2@ Skippy: LOL “You have the burden to PROVE that honey does not work, I don't need proof because I already KNOW it works for me.”

    I didn't say it didn't work. I said there is no rational reason to expect to work and there is no evidence supporting it.

    “Honey has NO antihistamine property”

    I never said it did you are making assumptions. Desensitization and antihistamines are two completely different things. Desensitization involves treatment by increasing doses of an allergen with people who have IgE-mediated conditions until a dose is reached that is effective in reducing disease severity from natural exposure, which essentially “resets” the immune system to prevent allergic reactions. Antihistamines suppress the immune response, they are antagonise histamine H1 receptors. FAIL.

    “ Also I am calling out your LIE about allergy shots in the UK”

    Nope, I didn't lie. I did NOT say they are not used in the UK, I said they are not routinely used in the UK. This is a site provided by the NHS for medical advice. Scroll down to immunotherapy and you'll see it quite clearly states that this type of therapy is reserved for severe cases, which are actually uncommon. One of the main reasons they are not routinely used here in the UK is because of the safety profile risk, especially with asthmatics.

    Also, I haven't twisted anything I didn't say you said it is a cure-all for all allergies. You said that big pharma would be put out of business if local honey prevented hay-fever because no one would buy antihistamines, I simply stated that hayfever isn't the only indication to use antihistamines.

    You said, local honey prevents hayfever. I said, there is no evidence to support this or indeed any rational reason to expect it to.

    So FAIL still.


    Oh and Tony: I'm surprised you still have the audacity to show your face after your epic science fail;_ylt=Av...

  • Mr E
    Lv 7
    10 years ago

    in general, i think they're just following the money.

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.