2021/03/30

독후감 - (죽음이란 무엇인가)셀리 케이건 - 요약정리

독후감 - (죽음이란 무엇인가)셀리 케이건 - 요약정리

(죽음이란 무엇인가)셀리 케이건 - 요약정리
박용태조회 수 3830 추천 수 0 댓글 4?가
죽음이란 무엇인가
 
프롤로그 - 삶과 죽음 그리고 영생에 관하여
  • 질문들
  • 사람들대부분은 죽음은 나쁜 것 이라고 여기고 죽음에
  • 대한 생각을 본능적으로 외면하고자 하는데 철학적으로
  • 죽음은 정말 나쁜 것인가?
1장 - 죽음이 끝난 후에도 삶은 계속 되는가
  • 대답은 자명하다. 당연히 ‘아니오다. 죽은 다음에도 살아간다는 것은
  • 자기모순이다.
  • 생물학적 죽음의 단계는 B1(body)에서 Bn으로의 과정이다. ‘죽음’의 진정한 의미는 육체적 죽음 이후를 말하는데
  • ‘육체적 죽음 이후에 나는 계속 존재할까?
  •  인간에 관한 두 가지 관점
  • 1) 인간은 정신과 육체로 이루어져 있다. - 이원론
  • 2) 인간은 곧 ‘육체’다. -물리주의
  • 3)의 관점이 존재 할 수 있다. 오로지 마음,비물질,영혼- 유심론
  • 1)의 관점은 인간의 정신을 비물질적인 존재로 바라본다는 것이다.
  • 이원론에서 육체와 영혼은 서로 ‘작용’한다.

  • (저자는 묻는다.)
  • 그러나 영혼의 위치는 어디에 있는가? 내 영혼이 특정한 위치에 있다는 느낌은 내 몸이 끊임없이 전달하는 감각에 의해 조작된 환상이고 착각일 수 있다.
  • (저자는 영혼의 존재를 믿지 않는다. 라고 하면서)
  • 영혼에 공간이 필요한가에 대한 질문은 영혼의 존재를 믿는 사람에게 맡겨둔다.
  • 영혼과 육신을 믿는 사람들에게 육체적 죽음은 영혼에게 더 이상 영향을 끼치지 않지만 영혼이 사라지지 않는다.
  • 이원론을 받아들일 때 육체적 죽음이후에 살아남을 가능성을 지킬 수 있다.
  • 여기서 질문이 시작된다. 비물직적인 영혼이 정말로 존재할까? 둘째 영혼이 정말로 존재한다면 육체적 죽음이후에도 그대로 남아 있을까?
  • 우리의 영혼은 육체적 죽음 이후 얼마나 더 생존할까?
  • 물리주의 - 육체만으로 이루어진 인간
  • 이원론을 받아들일만한 타당한 근거가 있는가?
  • 인간은 생각하고 판단하고 느끼고 사랑하는 등 다양한 P(persona)기능을 수행하는 육체다.
  • 정신이란 육체가 P기능들을 제대로 수행함으로써 나타나는 현상이다.고로 육체적 기반이 망가지면 정신도 불가능하며 죽음이란 ‘P기능의 종말’을 의미한다.
  • 죽음에는 어떤 미스터리도 없다.
  • 물리주의자들에 정신은 얼마든지 영혼이라고 불리어질 수 있다.
  • 정신이란 무엇인가? 이원론자들은 정신은 곧 영혼이고 영혼은 비물질적인 존재라고 말한다.
  • 물리주의자들은 정신의 존재는 인정하지만 영혼의 존재는 믿지 않는다.
  • 육체는 누가 조정하는가? 자유의지인가 결정론인가 이원론자들의 주장
  • 1)인간은 자유의지를 갖고 있다.
  • 2)결정론의 지배를 받는 존재는 자유의지를 가질 수 없다
  • 3)순수하게 물리적인 존재는 결정론의 지배를 받는다.
  • 4)그러므로 인간은 순수하게 물리적인 존재가 아니다.
  • 위의 명제가 참인가?
  • 인간은 ‘자유의지를 갖고 있다는 환상 속에서 살아가는 물리적 존재‘일따름인가?
  • 양자역학의 해석에 따르면 기초물리학의 법칙은 결정론이 아니다. 물리학의 법칙들을 ‘확률적’이라고 설명한다.
3장 육체 없이 정신만 존재할 수 있는가
  • 데카르트는 육체와 정신은 다르다고 하는데 데카르트이론은 순수하게 사변적이라는 것이다.

  • 여기서 우리는 어떤 경험적 명제를 발견할 수 없고 그의 이론은 철저히 관념적 사고에만 기반을 두고 있다.
  • 육체 없이 영혼이 존재할 수 있다고 ‘생각’할 수 있기 때문에 내 몸과 마음은 서로 다른 존재라고 결론을 내릴 수 있다는 것이다. 데카르트는 ‘육체와 정신이 이론적인 차원에서 서로 다른 존재’라고 말한다.

  • 논리적으로 문제가 없다고 해서 그것이 진실이 아니다.
  • 유니콘을 상상할 수 있다고 해서 유니콘이 실제로 존재한다는 의미는 아니다.

  • 개밥바라기 별과 샛별이 다른 별이 아닌 같은 금성이듯이 육체 없이 정신만 존재할 수 있는 것은 오직 이론적인 세상에서만 가능. 고로 데카르트는 틀렸다.
  • 플라톤의 완벽한 왕국 - 에이도스,이데아, 형상은 측정가능한 일상적인 사물과는 다른 이상적인‘원형’ 또는 ‘기준’ 즉 ‘완벽한 존재’라는 점이다.
  • 완벽한 정의 아름다움 완벽한 원= 플라톤의 형이상학이다. 플라톤의 형상은 물리적인 세상과는 다른 차원에서 존재하는 왕국을 말한다. 플라톤의 형상은 수학의 세계에서는 적용된다.2+3=5 우리는 얼마든지 형상에 대해 생각할 수 있다. 오로지 이성의 세계에서만 가능 
  • 물리적 실체와 형상의 결정적 차이는 경험적 세상이 아니라 시공을 초월한 다른 세계에 존재한다는 사실에 있다.
  • 완벽한 플라톤 왕국의 관점에서 주변을 바라볼 때 주변은 혼돈 그 자체.
  • 플라톤의 형상은 영혼의 불멸과 연결되며 죽음이후의 벌어질 상황에 관심을 가지게 되었다.
  • 영혼이 육체적 죽음으로부터 어떻게 살아남을 수 있다고 장담할 수 있나? 소크라테스는 ‘정의 그 자체’ ‘3’은 물리적 존재가 아니며 육체와 같은 물리적 존재는 결코 이를 이해할 수 없을 거라고 생각했다. 그런데 이성은 형상을 이해할 수 있으므로 비물질적인 존재다. 요약하면
  • 1)형상은 영원하며 비물질적인 존재다.
  • 2)이성은 형상을 이해할 수 있다.
  • 3)영원하며 비물질적인 존재만이 영원하며 비물질적인 존재를 이해 할 수 있다.
  • 4)그러므로 이성은 영원하며 비물질적인 존재다.
  • 5)이성이 비물질적인 존재라는 것은 곧 영혼이라는 의미
  • 6)그러므로 영혼은 영원히 존재한다.

  • 3)의 명제가 참일까? 설득력이 없다. 시체를 연구하기위해 의사가 시체가 되어야 하나. 플라톤의 주장은 타당한가?
  • 소크라테스의 제자 심미아스의 질문 보이지 않는 것도 소멸 가능할까?
  • 화음은 보이지 않지만 소멸가능.
  • 보이지 않는= 1. 볼 수 없다. 2.인식할 수 없다.

  • 3. 발견할 수 없다. -전파

  • 과연 보이지 않는 존재는 소멸하지 않는가
  • 영혼은 절대 발견할 수 없는가
  • 발견 가능성의 의미로 해석할 때 영혼은 발견 가능
  • 뭔가를 믿지 않는다고 해서 그것이 존재하지 않는다는
  • 사실을 밝혀야 할 의무는 없다.(용,유니콘)

  • 인간의 정체성 - 2013년의 ‘나’와 2055년의‘나’는 상태는 다르지만 동일 인물인가?
  • 2045년에 육체적 죽음을 맞이한 뒤에도 ‘나‘는 계속 존재할까? 육체적 죽음뒤에도 지금의 나와 동일한 사람이 존재할 수 있을까? 영혼관점에서는 영혼이 존재한다면 육체가 죽어도 나는 살아남을 것이다. 라고 기대.
  • 하나의 가능성으로 받아들일 수 있다.

  • 영혼관점에서 인간의 정체성을 결정하는 핵심은 영혼이 같아야한다

알라딘: 자연치유

알라딘: 자연치유

자연치유   
앤드류 와일 (지은이),김옥분 (옮긴이)
정신세계사1996-12-09
원제 : Spontaneous Healing: How to Discover and Embrace Your Body's Natural Ability to Maintain and Heal Itself


432쪽

책소개

현대의학이 포기한 병을 자연치유력을 통해 극복한 환자들의 치유 사례부터 자연치유력을 증강시키는 실천 프로그램, 치유를 위한 마음자세와 전략적으로 의학을 이용하는 방법까지, 자연치유에 관한 모든 것을 상세히 소개한다.


목차
옮긴이의 말
머리말

제1부 치유체계
1. 치유의 비법을 찾아
2. 가까이에서 발견한 치유
3. 증언하는 사람들
4. 의사들이 행하는 주술
5. 놀라운 치유체계
6. 치유에 미치는 정신의 힘
7. 병 걸리는 인간, 치유하는 몸

제2부 효과적인 치유체계 활용법
8. 치유를 방해하는 요소들
9. 치유를 돕는 식사
10. 독소로부터 자신을 보호하는 방법
11. 강장식품
12. 낮에는 걷고 밤에는 쉬어라
13. 정신과 영혼
14. 치유력 증진을 위한 8주 프로그램

제3부 병을 다스리는 법
15. 적절한 치료법을 선택하는 방법
16. 대체의학의 치료법
17. 치유에 성공하는 환자들의 일곱 가지 전략
18. 일반적인 질병의 관리
19. 치유체계의 영원한 맞수, 암

후기 : 사회를 위한 처방
감사의 말

접기
저자 및 역자소개
앤드류 와일 (Andrew Weil) (지은이) 
하버드 의대 출신의 의학박사. 미국 국립정신건강연구원, 하버드 식물원 등에서 일했다. 현재 애리조나 대학의 '의학의 사회적 전망 강좌' 부책임자 및 '통합의학과정'의 책임자로 있다.
최근작 : <건강하게 나이먹기>,<자연치유> … 총 222종 (모두보기)

 ----------------------

전체 (1)
공감순 
     
이 책은 인간드라마요 명상록이다. 저자는 대체의학분야 대가중의 한분이다.  구매
being-peace 2011-03-09 공감 (1) 댓글 (0)
Thanks to
 
공감

Spontaneous Healing : How to Discover and Embrace Your Body's Natural Ability to Maintain and Heal Itself: Andrew Weil: 9780804117944: Amazon.com: Books

Spontaneous Healing : How to Discover and Embrace Your Body's Natural Ability to Maintain and Heal Itself: Andrew Weil: 9780804117944: Amazon.com: Books


Spontaneous Healing : How to Discover and Embrace Your Body's Natural Ability to Maintain and Heal Itself Mass Market Paperback – April 4, 2000
by Andrew Weil (Author)
4.6 out of 5 stars    336 ratings
 Hide other formats and editions
Price
New from Used from
Hardcover
AUD 26.54
AUD 13.43 AUD 0.36
Paperback
AUD 21.47
AUD 5.51 AUD 0.34
Mass Market Paperback
AUD 10.11
AUD 5.34 AUD 1.08
Audio CD, Abridged, Audiobook
AUD 22.60
AUD 22.60

Read less
 Report incorrect product information.
Print length
384 pages


Editorial Reviews
Review
"DR. ANDREW WEIL IS AN EXTRAORDINARY PHENOMENON."
--The Washington Post

"MEMORABLE . . . DR. WEIL MAKES HIS CASE CAREFULLY AND CLEARLY."
--The New York Times Book Review

"HIGHLY RECOMMENDED."
--Library Journal (starred review)
From the Inside Flap
The body can heal itself. Spontaneous healing is not a miracle but a fact of biology--the result of the natural healing system that each one of us is born with. Drawing on fascinating case histories as well as medical techniques from around the world, Dr. Andrew Weil shows how spontaneous healing has worked to resolve life-threatening diseases, severe trauma, and chronic pain. Weil then outlines an eight-week program in which you'll discover:
- The truth about spontaneous healing and how it interacts with the mind
- The foods, vitamins, supplements, and tonic herbs that will help you enhance your innate healing powers
- Advice on how to avoid environmental toxins and reduce stress
- The strengths and weaknesses of conventional and alternative treatments
- Natural methods to ameliorate common kinds of illnesses
And much more!
From the Back Cover
The body can heal itself. Spontaneous healing is not a miracle but a fact of biology -- the result of the natural healing system that each one of us is born with. Drawing on fascinating case histories as well as medical techniques from around the world, Dr. Andrew Weil shows how spontaneous healing has resolved life-threatening diseases, severe trauma, and chronic pain. Weil then outlines an eight-week program in which you'll discover:
-- The truth about spontaneous healing and how it interacts with the mind
-- The foods, vitamins, supplements, and tonic herbs that will help you enhance your innate healing powers
-- Advice on how to avoid environmental toxins and reduce stress
-- The strengths and weaknesses of conventional and alternative treatments
-- Natural methods to ameliorate common kinds of illnesses
And much more!

About the Author
Dr. Andrew Weil is a leader in the new field of integrative medicine, which combines the best ideas and practices of Western and alternative medicine. A graduate of Harvard Medical School, he is director of the Program in Integrative Medicine at the University of Arizona and founder of the Center for Integrative Medicine in Tucson, which is advancing the field worldwide. He is also the author of the New York Times bestseller 8 Weeks to Optimum Health. His Web site, "Ask Dr. Weil," is in the top five of all health-related programs on the Internet.
Excerpt. © Reprinted by permission. All rights reserved.
1
 
PROLOGUE IN THE RAIN FOREST
 
LET ME TAKE YOU with me to a faraway place I visited more than twenty years ago: the sandy bank of a wide river on a sultry afternoon in 1972. The river was a tributary of the Río Caquetá in the northwest Amazon, near the common border of Colombia and Ecuador, and I was lost. I was searching for a shaman, a Kofán Indian named Pedro, who lived in a remote hut somewhere in the huge, dense forest, but the trail that was supposed to take me there left me at an uncrossable river with no sign of how to proceed. It was getting late in the day.
 
Two days before, after a long, hard drive, I left my Land-Rover at the end of a dirt road and took a motorboat to a tiny frontier settlement, where I spent a restless night. The next day, I found some Indians who took me by canoe to the beginning of a trail they said would eventually bring me to the clearing where Pedro lived. “Half a day’s walk,” they told me, but I knew that half a day’s walk for an Indian might be more for me. I had a backpack with essentials, but not much food, since I expected to be staying with the shaman. After several hours in dark forest, the trail forked. No one had said anything about a fork. I listened for the whisper of intuition and decided to go to the right. After another hour I came upon a clearing with several huts and five Kofán men painting each other’s faces.
 
I was terribly hot and thirsty and asked in Spanish for water. The men ignored me. I asked again. They said they had no water. “No water?!” I exclaimed. “How can that be?” They shrugged and continued to apply their makeup. I asked for the shaman. “Not here,” said one of the Indians. “Where can I find him?” There was an offhanded indication of a trail beyond the huts. “Is it far?” I asked. Another shrug.
 
This was a new experience for me. In the hinterlands of Colombia I had always found Indians to be exceedingly hospitable. It was the inhabitants of the rough frontier towns, the mestizo fortune hunters, who were unfriendly and intimidating. Once I passed through them to Indian territory, I always felt safe, assured that the native people would take in a stranger, help him find his destination, and certainly give water to a thirsty traveler.
 
The five Kofán men were young, handsome, and, obviously, vain. They wore simple cotton tunics, had long, glossy, black hair, and were intently devoted to their cosmetic art. After one would apply new markings to forehead or cheek, the recipient would spend long minutes evaluating the additions in a broken piece of mirrored glass, grunting approval or requesting further embellishment. This was clearly going to take all afternoon. My presence held not the slightest interest for them, and after half an hour of being ignored, I put on my pack and continued down the trail, until, several hours later, it disappeared in a dense thicket at the edge of the big river, leaving me stranded.
 
It was strikingly beautiful there, although I was inclined to view the river and forest more as obstacles than as sources of sensory pleasure. Big, billowy cumulus clouds floated above the canopy of trees. The river was swift and clear. There was not a sign of human presence, no sounds except those of insects and birds. Were it not for the sandflies, small biting pests that are out in great numbers from dawn to dusk, I would not have minded camping there. I had a hammock and mosquito net in my pack and could have spent the night if necessary, but I felt anxious at the prospect of being lost, and discouraged by the fruitlessness of my quest.
 
This shaman, so difficult to reach, was said to be a powerful healer. In a year I spent wandering in South America, most of the shamans I met were disappointing. Some were drunks. Some were clearly out for fame and fortune. One, when he learned I was a doctor from Harvard, was interested only in persuading me to obtain for him a certificate from that institution testifying to his powers so that he could one-up his rivals. I had plenty of adventures during these travels, but in the end, none of them had taught me how to be a better doctor. Pedro was my last hope. He was unknown to the outside world. I would be the first gringo to visit him, and I had high hopes that he would teach me the secrets of healing I had so long been searching for.
 
But now I was lost, and the brilliant Amazon sun was taking on the rich golden tones of the end of afternoon. Night would come quickly here, meaning surprising chilliness along the river and no chance of reaching a habitation. I’m not a smoker, but I lit up three cigarettes at once, Pielrojas (“Redskins”), the local cheap brand, with a picture of a North American Indian on the pack. I puffed on them and blew smoke all around me, hoping for the usual temporary relief tobacco smoke brings from biting sandflies.
 
When in doubt, eat. I broke into my meager stores and found a packet of cocoa mix and some dried fruit. I set up a little butane stove, boiled some river water, and soon was sipping the hot liquid, which never tasted better—a bit of comfort and familiarity in this, for me, strange environment.
 
I was in this remote part of South America because I was searching for something I believed to be exotic and extraordinary, something worlds away from my ordinary experience. I was looking for insight into the source of healing power, and the interconnectedness of magic, religion, and medicine. I wanted to understand how the mind interacts with the body. Above all, I hoped to learn practical secrets of helping people to get well. I had spent eight years in a prestigious institution of higher learning, four studying botany and four studying medicine, but I had found no clear answers to my questions. My botanical studies awakened a desire to see the rain forest, meet native practitioners, and help rescue fast-disappearing knowledge of medicinal plants. My medical training made me want to flee from the world of invasive, technological treatment toward a romantic ideal of natural healing.
 
Three years before, in 1969, when I finished my basic clinical training, I made a conscious decision not to practice the kind of medicine I had just learned. I did so for two reasons, one emotional and one logical. The first was simply a gut feeling that if I were sick, I would not want to be treated the way I had been taught to treat others, unless there were no alternative. That made me uncomfortable about treating others. The logical reason was that most of the treatments I had learned in four years at Harvard Medical School and one of internship did not get to the root of disease processes and promote healing but rather suppressed those processes or merely counteracted the visible symptoms of disease. I had learned almost nothing about health and its maintenance, about how to prevent illness—a great omission, because I have always believed that the primary function of doctors should be to teach people how not to get sick in the first place. The word “doctor” comes from the Latin word for “teacher.” Teaching prevention should be primary; treatment of existing disease, secondary.
 
I am uneasy about the suppressive nature of conventional medicine. If you look at the names of the most popular categories of drugs in use today, you will find that most of them begin with the prefix “anti.” We use antispasmodics and antihypertensives, antianxiety agents and antidepressants, antihistamines, antiarrhythmics, antitussives, antipyretics, and anti-inflammatories, as well as beta blockers and H2-receptor antagonists. This is truly antimedicine—medicine that is, in essence, counteractive and suppressive.
 
What is wrong with that? you may ask. If a fever is in the danger zone, or an allergic reaction is out of control, of course those symptoms should be counteracted. I have no objection to use of these treatments on a short-term basis for the management of very severe conditions. But I came to realize, early in my hospital days, that if you rely on such measures as the main strategy for treating illness, you create two kinds of problems. First, you expose patients to risk, because, by their nature, pharmaceutical weapons are strong and toxic. Their desired effects are too often offset by side effects, by toxicity. Adverse reactions to the counteractive drugs of conventional medicine are a great black mark against the system, and I saw more than enough of them in my clinical training to know that there has to be a better way. Botanical medicine appealed to me because it offered the possibility of finding safe, natural alternatives to the drugs I had been taught to use.
 
The second problem, less visible but more worrisome, is the chance that over time suppressive treatments may actually strengthen disease processes instead of resolving them. This possibility did not occur to me until I read the writings of a great medical heretic, Samuel Hahnemann (1755–1843), the German prodigy and renegade physician who developed homeopathy, one of the major schools of alternative medicine. Homeopathy relies on very small doses of highly diluted remedies to catalyze healing responses. I am not a homeopath. I disagree strongly with the many homeopaths who oppose immunization and find the whole system puzzling as well as incompatible with current scientific models of physics and chemistry. Nonetheless, I have experienced and observed homeopathic cures and admire the system for its use of treatments that cannot harm. What is more, I find some of Hahnemann’s ideas useful.
 
Read less
Product details
ASIN : 0804117942
Publisher : Ballantine Books (April 4, 2000)
Language : English
Mass Market Paperback : 384 pages

Andrew Weil, MD
 Follow
Biography
Andrew Weil, M.D., is a world-renowned leader and pioneer in the field of integrative medicine, a healing oriented approach to health care which encompasses body, mind, and spirit. His forthcoming book, "Mind Over Meds: Know When Drugs Are Necessary, When Alternatives Are Better – and When to Let Your Body Heal on Its Own," will be released on April 25th, 2017.

Combining a Harvard education and a lifetime of practicing natural and preventive medicine, Dr. Weil is the founder and director of the Arizona Center for Integrative Medicine at the University of Arizona Health Sciences Center, where he is also a Clinical Professor of Medicine and Professor of Public Health and the Lovell-Jones Professor of Integrative Rheumatology. Dr. Weil received both his medical degree and his undergraduate AB degree in biology (botany) from Harvard University.

Dr. Weil is an internationally-recognized expert for his views on leading a healthy lifestyle, his philosophy of healthy aging, and his critique of the future of medicine and health care. Approximately 10 million copies of Dr. Weil's books have been sold, including "Spontaneous Healing," "8 Weeks to Optimum Health," "Eating Well for Optimum Health," "The Healthy Kitchen," "Healthy Aging," and "Why Our Health Matters."

Online, he is the editorial director of www.drweil.com, the leading web resource for healthy living based on the philosophy of integrative medicine. He can be found on Facebook (facebook.com/drweil), Twitter (twitter.com/drweil), Instagram (instagram.com/drweil) and Pinterest (pinterest.com/drweil).

See a comprehensive list of Dr. Weil's information: about.me/DrWeil
 Show Less

Customer reviews
4.6 out of 5 stars

Top reviews
Top reviews from the United States
Still Here
5.0 out of 5 stars Don't let the 2nd half undermine the 1st half!
Reviewed in the United States on June 4, 2015
Verified Purchase
This book was incredibly inspiring and encouraging on my path to recovery from chronic pain.

It's worthy of 5 stars and I agree with 99% of what Dr. Weil says. I will offer one recommendation for reading this book: Don't let the 2nd half undermine what he says in the 1st half. The 2nd half gets very detailed about diet and herbs, and while I believe most of it has merit (I'm not so sure about the electromagnetic paranoia), the 1st half of this book is equally if not more important! I emphasize this because it's so easy for a reader to finish the book and say, "Ok, I need to do this, this, and this with my diet", all the while continuing on with a high-stress lifestyle and manner of thinking. Pay close attention to the stories of spontaneous healing in the first half, because it's always the change of THINKING and belief that catalyzed the patient's drastic recovery, and the diet part is supplemental.

I also highly recommend Dr. Sarno's book The Mindbody Prescription. I am currently reading The Mayo Clinic Guide to Stress-Free Living by Dr. Sood which is endorsed by Dr. Weil and has some merit as well.
67 people found this helpful
Helpful
Report abuse
Judith A. Carlson
5.0 out of 5 stars It's a great teaching source.
Reviewed in the United States on September 18, 2015
Verified Purchase
Some of the nutritional advice is a little bit outdated since the book was first published in 1995 but otherwise is just as I remembered it. I had loaned mine to a friend who subsequently moved without returning it. The techniques Dr.Weil advocates are not difficult and help the body to heal itself. However, nothing happens overnight so don't expect a magic sure. What I've always loved about Dr. Weil is that he uses a common sense approach and isn't adamant about not resorting to allopathic medicine - sometimes you just need an antibiotic, for instance! Anyway, if you want to take charge of your own health and be more comfortable despite any medical/psychological problems you are dealing with, this book is a great source for teaching you how to do that.
16 people found this helpful
Helpful
Report abuse
Faux-Creations
5.0 out of 5 stars Thoroughly good reading!
Reviewed in the United States on November 22, 2016
Verified Purchase
An excellent resource for the medical profession in dealing with the human body's ability to heal quickly when the right protocol is observed. Sickness cannot be dealt with by treating the symptoms but rather from a holistic viewpoint covering body, soul and spirit. Many sicknesses today come from unresolved emotions and once the emotion is dealt with, the recovery is sometimes almost spontaneous. Good reading.
11 people found this helpful
Helpful
Report abuse
ashier bourne
5.0 out of 5 stars IF you are into healing naturally, this book is ...
Reviewed in the United States on April 29, 2017
Verified Purchase
IF you are into healing naturally, this book is for you, it tells you about Andrew Weil's Journey to find the way to natural healing and where to go and get this healing and he talks about touring the Big Pharmacy and that 's why he change his mind About being an MD, instead he now teaches at the
city of Tuson, Arizona.
8 people found this helpful
Helpful
Report abuse
Jon
5.0 out of 5 stars Very Comprehensible with examples and Almost unbelievable stories.
Reviewed in the United States on January 31, 2020
Verified Purchase
This was a perfect well thought out book from front to back. The author did not Discredit modern medicine the highlighted it’s a weakness and provided alternatives. I do believe everyone should read this at least once. Everything was explained very easily for the reader and shared many of powerful stories of people overcoming illness when all hope in the medicine field was lost.
2 people found this helpful
Helpful
Report abuse
T. Faranda
4.0 out of 5 stars A reasoned resource on a subject fraught with difficulty
Reviewed in the United States on March 30, 2007
Verified Purchase
FULL DISCLOSURE - I have lymphoma and have been a patient of Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center for over three years, including a five month chemotherapy regimen.

Besides being the author of this book, which is sub-titled "How to Enhance Your Body's Natural Ability to Maintain and Heal Itself", who is Andrew Weil?

Well, he's a Harvard graduate (Botany) and Harvard medical school graduate, did an internship and then basically dropped out of the standard or orthodox medical field. Spent the next twenty years or so traipsing around the world talking with various shamans, Chinese herbalists, gurus, etc.

And he's gotten to be a very influential guy.

He has been a big proponent of natural therapies for the healing of maladies. While not opposed to allopathic or conventional medicine, Weil heavily criticizes the establishment for emphasizing "disease and it's treatment, rather than health and it's maintenance" (P. 65). He emphasizes natural healing and a variety of alternative therapies. In Weil's view, the body heals itself, it is a "healing system." And the healing system is a functional system, "not an assemblage of structures that can be neatly diagrammed" (P. 65).

Of course this is a point that has been noted by many people, and is obvious to anyone who thinks about it. If you get a cut, the cut heals itself. My son's currently broken ankle will mend itself; he has a cast on simply to protect the ankle from further damage. The cast doesn't heal the break. And the overwhelming opinion is that most cancers heal themselves; our immune system is constantly destroying abnormal cells before they get to any size or we know they are there.

Weil makes a point (P. 110) that "Treatment originates outside you. Healing comes from within."

The book is 280 pages long and divided into three parts. The first section is entitled "The Healing System" and is filled with stories and cases of people who were healed by alternative therapies. Herbs, acupuncture, aromatherapy, certain forms of classic osteopathic medicine, visualization, mind-body interactions, stuff like that.

The second and third sections are entitled "Optimizing the Healing System" - what to do to maintain good health - and "If you get sick". Weil lays out a variety of programs of preventive care. Much of it pretty basic like don't smoke and go for relaxing walks. And then stuff like using tonics and vitamins. The last section is a bit encyclopedic with short sections on various alternative approaches - Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM), Ayurvedic medicine, imagery and visualization therapy, chiropractic, on and on.

What about cancer? Weil points to the three standard therapies, surgery, chemotherapy, and radiation, with strong reservations on the latter two. Too much of a bludgeon approach, with chemotherapy especially having possible deleterious effects on other body systems. He suggests that the ultimate "cure" for cancer will come when we figure out how to "turn on" the immune system to attack and destroy the cancer cells, which somehow escaped or inoculated themselves from the body's immune system. As mentioned above, the standard opinion now is that most cancers develop due to an immune system failure. I think his opinion on the ultimate cancer cure is pretty much the standard opinion in the conventional medical establishment.

Of course the whole problem with Weil's approaches - diet, herbs, aromatherapy, "healing touch", is that there is scarcely any real scientific evidence for the efficacy of any of these approaches. It's all anecdotal. Where are the double blind studies, the comparisons between groups - all the studies that can lend credence to the anecdotes?

Weil admits there aren't many studies, and urges the studies be done. And as one of my physicians said to me, "There are no scientific studies. On the other hand, 2,000 years of Traditional Chinese Medicine has to have something to it."

As you can imagine, Weil has some really strident critics in the medical fraternity. No sense going there in this review.

What do I think? Well, Weil is not just another New Age Wacko. Not that I'll be trading my Sloan Kettering doctors for aromatherapy any time soon. BUT I have started taking an immune system support capsule that Weil recommends (I figure it can't hurt - got it at Shoprite) as well as taking glucosamine chondroitin three times a day for my joints, rather then just the occasional pill.
Read less
37 people found this helpful
Helpful
Report abuse
Dottie Parish
5.0 out of 5 stars A Book to Read Over and Over
Reviewed in the United States on January 29, 2013
Verified Purchase
The thesis of the book is that the medical profession only concerns itself with disease. Medical schools teach nothing about prevention or about the ability for the body to heal itself. It's not against medical care but tells many ways we can encourage our body's immune systems to help us heal. The author is a Harvard Medical school graduate. He has one chapter near the end of the book titled Cancer as a Special Case.

Throughout the book he mentions the pessimistic stance of many doctors who predict the worst - which of course can affect the mind and body of the patient usually in a negative way. I highly recommend this book. The case studies of miraculous healings are amazing and he has many helpful ideas which can boost immunity.
13 people found this helpful
Helpful
Report abuse
Katy
4.0 out of 5 stars Good information
Reviewed in the United States on June 23, 2017
Verified Purchase
I did get a lot out of this book on ways to deal with illnesses and the best practices for the best possible quality of life. However it was written decades ago, would love a current version.
5 people found this helpful
Helpful
Report abuse
See all reviews
Top reviews from other countries
Fiona
5.0 out of 5 stars Five Stars
Reviewed in the United Kingdom on August 4, 2017
Verified Purchase
Very interesting and useful; as a cancer survivor I've learned a lot
3 people found this helpful
Report abuse
Amazon Customer
5.0 out of 5 stars thank you
Reviewed in the United Kingdom on August 23, 2019
Verified Purchase
inspiring read
One person found this helpful
Report abuse
PJ
4.0 out of 5 stars Four Stars
Reviewed in the United Kingdom on April 25, 2018
Verified Purchase
a great gift
2 people found this helpful
Report abuse
hiyalm43
5.0 out of 5 stars Spontaneous Healing
Reviewed in the United Kingdom on June 28, 2012
Verified Purchase
The (used) book arrived on time and its condition was as described. This book has been my "bible" for the past 12 years and I wanted to share it with my daughter-in-law, to whom it was sent. Thank you for the wonderful service.
2 people found this helpful
Report abuse
m k fiddimore
4.0 out of 5 stars Four Stars
Reviewed in the United Kingdom on September 24, 2015
Verified Purchase
Makes you think!
Report abuse
See all reviews

2021/03/29

Amazon.com : 池田大作研究 世界宗教への道を追う

Amazon.com: Customer reviews: 池田大作研究 世界宗教への道を追う

池田大作研究 世界宗教への道を追うProduct description
出版社からのコメント
――著者・佐藤優氏(作家・元外務省主任分析官)から――
信仰の核心には何があるのか?
池田大作という人物・思想・行動を知らずに、
創価学会を理解することはできない。

「筆者は創価学会員でも公明党員でもない。
日本基督教団(日本におけるプロテスタントの最大教派)の教会員だ。
信仰を持つキリスト教徒である筆者は、日本で生まれ、急速に発展し、
世界宗教としての基盤を構築した創価学会の内在的論理を知り、
読者に紹介したいと考えている。
そのためには、創価学会員が持つ価値観、すなわち何に喜び、何に怒り、
何に悲しみ、何を望み、どう生きていこうとするかを等身大で摑みたいと思っている。
その際に重要なのは、対象である創価学会に対する敬意だ。
読者によっては、それを偏見ととらえるかもしれない。それはそれで構わない。
あえて言えば、筆者は、自らの価値観(創価学会を嫌う人から見れば偏見)が、
わかる形でこの本を書き進めている」

[内容紹介]
キリスト教徒である著者が、キリスト教神学の視点とインテリジェンスの分析手法で池田大作氏の深部に迫る。
北海道・夕張炭労事件、大阪事件、言論・出版問題にも新たな光をあて、世界宗教への道筋を描いた592ページの超大作。
AERA好評連載、待望の書籍化。

【序章】創価学会の内在的論理とは何か
【第1章】幼少時代の思い出、戦争に塗り込められた青年時代
【第2章】運命の師との出会い
【第3章】香峯子夫人との出会い、第3代会長就任へ
【第4章】創価学会と公明党―「政教分離」のあり方をめぐって
【第5章】夕張炭鉱労働組合問題の思想的意味
【第6章】大阪事件における権力との闘い
【第7章】創られたスキャンダル―「言論・出版問題」の真相
【第8章】宗門との訣別―日蓮正宗宗門というくびき
【終章】世界宗教への道を進む


付録・創価学会会憲全文
--This text refers to the tankobon_hardcover edition.
内容(「BOOK」データベースより)
内在的論理から人と思想に迫る。AEA好評連載待望の書籍化。 --This text refers to the tankobon_hardcover edition.


著者略歴 (「BOOK著者紹介情報」より)
佐藤/優
作家、元外務省主任分析官。1960年生まれ。同志社大学神学部卒業。同大学院神学研究科修了。85年、外務省入省。在ソ連・在ロシア日本大使館勤務。北方領土交渉などで活躍。2002年、背任と偽計業務妨害容疑で逮捕。09年、最高裁上告棄却。13年、執行猶予期間を満了し刑の言い渡しが効力を失う。同志社大学神学部客員教授。著書に『国家の罠』(毎日出版文化賞特別賞)、『自壊する帝国』(大宅壮一ノンフィクション賞、新潮ドキュメント賞)、『十五の夏』(梅棹忠夫・山と探検文学賞)など多数(本データはこの書籍が刊行された当時に掲載されていたものです) 
--This text refers to the tankobon_hardcover edition.

78 global ratings | 14 global reviews

5.0 out of 5 stars 学会の正しい歴史が書かれています
Reviewed in Japan on November 1, 2020
Verified Purchase
AERAの好評連載を書籍化したものです
第3代会長就任 小説人間革命執筆
大阪事件 宗門問題等
世界宗教へと飛翔した
学会の正しい歴史が
正確に 論理的に書かれています
創価学会会憲も収録されています
58 people found this helpful
Report abuse
Translate review to English
MMMM
2.0 out of 5 stars 物足りないが資料にはなる
Reviewed in Japan on November 6, 2020
Verified Purchase
創価学会や池田思想に切り込みたくて読んだ。
オシントということで要するに「人間革命」や「続人間革命」を読み込むことの重要さはわかる。
ただし池田べったりの立場であり、
構造改革や悪法の戦犯である与党公明党の体質には一切触れられてはいない。
私は宗教者として池田を見ることにも世界宗教のレベルにまで布教が達していることにも否定しない。
教義はともかく規模はすごい。
ただその堕落はかつて池田大作自体が憎んだものではないのか
少なくとも構造改革に反対しない創価学会と公明党は堕落しているし池田も例外ではない。
39 people found this helpful
Report abuse
Translate review to English
JTMY
5.0 out of 5 stars イエスキリストの使命感を持って書き込まれたものだ
Reviewed in Japan on November 13, 2020
Verified Purchase
創価学会、池田大作の思想を究明する著者の手法は、独創的で奥深さを秘めているものだが、読み手の視点次第で受け止め方が大きく異なってくる。どんな批判、中傷が寄せられるのか想定済みの著者は、対象への敬意を持って主体的に関与し内在的論理を解明しようとする。この著書に書かれていない背景知識を駆使して読み込みすれば、著者の力量に脱帽するだけでなく、創価学会が被った一連のスキャンダルは、類比すれ ば冤罪でもあり、反創価勢力が仕組んだ罠だと分かるだろう。しかも世界宗教として完了したキリスト教と世界宗教化し続ける創価学会との類比の論理も納得できる。
29 people found this helpful
Report abuse
Translate review to English
satoshi692
1.0 out of 5 stars 御用学者の書きなぐり
Reviewed in Japan on November 2, 2020
Verified Purchase
御用学者の走り書き。何故この人は信心しないのかな?
28 people found this helpful
Report abuse
Translate review to English
MASAKIYA
5.0 out of 5 stars 文芸春秋菊池寛賞受賞を裏付けた書籍
Reviewed in Japan on November 11, 2020
Verified Purchase
菊池寛賞の「プロテスタント神学に裏打ちされた深い知性をもって、専門の外交問題のみならず、政治・文学・歴史・神学の幅広い分野で執筆活動を展開。教養とインテリジェンスの重要性をていちゃくさせる」との受賞理由、「国家の罠」を執筆した人に「御用学者」のレッテルを張り、批反する人がレビューの仲に居るが、先入観が出来ていて、固定観念になっています。数多くの佐藤優さんの著書を、読み切らなければ、著者の知性は理解不能となる。
25 people found this helpful
Report abuse
Translate review to English
Amazon カスタマー
5.0 out of 5 stars 「類いまれなリーダーの履歴書」的な本
Reviewed in Japan on November 6, 2020
Verified Purchase
 いかなる組織においてもそれを率いるリーダーの力量の有無がその盛衰を分ける。
今日、世界宗教として台頭している組織を築いてきた人物の思考、行動を分析、評価した
久しぶりの書。日本人にもまだ十分知られていない人物をおおやけにした著者の使命感に
敬服する。今後この種の出版は数少ないと思われ、2次資料としての価値は大きいと言える。
24 people found this helpful
Report abuse
Translate review to English
Amazon カスタマー
5.0 out of 5 stars 第三者の目から見た創価学会の姿が見えて来る
Reviewed in Japan on November 14, 2020
Verified Purchase
佐藤さんの経歴、分析官の経験を活かした冷静な客観的立場から、資料、文献に基づき正しい評価をされています。創価学会に対する評価を第三者の客観的な目で分析をされています。一度は読む価値が十分にあります。
24 people found this helpful
Report abuse
Translate review to English
匿名
5.0 out of 5 stars 佐藤さんの全力作品
Reviewed in Japan on November 22, 2020
Verified Purchase
 いつものことながら、佐藤優さんの読み込みの深さに、敬服します。
 「本書は、私が全力を尽くして挑んだ作品だ」と述べられている通り、まさに、今までの創価学会、池田先生に対する書籍の中で、最も詳しく、深く探求されたものであると思います。
 少年時代の両親に対する思い、兄弟に対する内面の考えが、見事に再現されています。
 さらに、戸田先生との師弟関係も、「師匠のために、師匠のために」と、あらゆる戦いに勝ち抜いた心の内が、なぜこのように読みとれるのか、驚きです。
 プロテスタントであること、情報分析官であったが故の、佐藤さんだけのなせる技だと感服いたします。
 佐藤さんの分析のおかげで、池田先生の思いが、幼稚の私にも深く伝わります。
8 people found this helpful
Report abuse
Translate review to English
è¿ æ¾¤ã ã ã ã ­
5.0 out of 5 stars 面白いです一気読みしました!
Reviewed in Japan on December 8, 2020
Verified Purchase
創価学会について、伝聞や脱会者に基づく本しか無い中、とても良い解説本だと思いました
世間を騒がせた大きな事件の本質について、著者のキリスト教神学に照らし合わせて記載してあります
わたくしが腹落ちしたのは、炭労問題も、出版妨害問題も、炭労の上層部も藤原弘達氏も、マルクス主義の宗教観からの考えであることがわかりやすく記載されていました。1960年~1970年代の学者たちは全員マルクス主義を学んでいるのですね
わたくしの夫もマルクス経済学専攻していました東大にもマル経学者のエキスパートが大勢いらした時代です
マルクスの宗教は阿片、悩めるもののため息というのと、宗教蔑子の考えが根底にあったのがよくわかりました
創価学会に批判的な人にこそ読んでもらいたいです
島田博巳氏も良く読み込んで今までのような薄っぺらい評論ではなく良く考えて語ってほしい
10 people found this helpful
Report abuse
Translate review to English
ちぐはぐ
5.0 out of 5 stars インテリジェンスの視点からのアプローチ
Reviewed in Japan on November 28, 2020
Verified Purchase
池田大作氏が如何に深く日蓮仏法を信じ、真剣にそれに使え、命がけで世界への流布とそれによる人類全体の安寧と発展に行動しているか、を分析している一冊。仏教徒ではないクリスチャンの中立の目で見ています
7 people found this helpful
----------------
匿名
5.0 out of 5 stars 佐藤さんの全力作品
Reviewed in Japan on November 23, 2020
Verified Purchase
 いつものことながら、佐藤優さんの読み込みの深さに、敬服します。
 「本書は、私が全力を尽くして挑んだ作品だ」と述べられている通り、まさに、今までの創価学会、池田先生に対する書籍の中で、最も詳しく、深く探求されたものであると思います。
 少年時代の両親に対する思い、兄弟に対する内面の考えが、見事に再現されています。
 さらに、戸田先生との師弟関係も、「師匠のために、師匠のために」と、あらゆる戦いに勝ち抜いた心の内が、なぜこのように読みとれるのか、驚きです。
 プロテスタントであること、情報分析官であったが故の、佐藤さんだけのなせる技だと感服いたします。
 佐藤さんの分析のおかげで、池田先生の思いが、幼稚の私にも深く伝わります。
8 people found this helpful
Helpful
Report abuse
Translate review to English
è¿ æ¾¤ã ã ã ã ­
5.0 out of 5 stars 面白いです一気読みしました!
Reviewed in Japan on December 9, 2020
Verified Purchase
創価学会について、伝聞や脱会者に基づく本しか無い中、とても良い解説本だと思いました
世間を騒がせた大きな事件の本質について、著者のキリスト教神学に照らし合わせて記載してあります
わたくしが腹落ちしたのは、炭労問題も、出版妨害問題も、炭労の上層部も藤原弘達氏も、マルクス主義の宗教観からの考えであることがわかりやすく記載されていました。1960年~1970年代の学者たちは全員マルクス主義を学んでいるのですね
わたくしの夫もマルクス経済学専攻していました東大にもマル経学者のエキスパートが大勢いらした時代です
マルクスの宗教は阿片、悩めるもののため息というのと、宗教蔑子の考えが根底にあったのがよくわかりました
創価学会に批判的な人にこそ読んでもらいたいです
島田博巳氏も良く読み込んで今までのような薄っぺらい評論ではなく良く考えて語ってほしい
10 people found this helpful
---

Amazonカスタマー
1.0 out of 5 stars 現代日本の精神病理(本部が信徒たちの問題行動の責任を取らない、取る能力のない宗教団体)
Reviewed in Japan on November 26, 2020
創価学会は、マスメディアによって作られた精神病理の仮称のようなものです。創価学会員であるということを理由にして、自分の野放図な狂気を、他人に危害を加えることによって、発散させるような信徒が多数おり、警察や公安も彼らの行状を認知し始めている頃かと思います。これら信徒の行動は創価学会員であるということを抜きにして、冷静に観察したのであれば、DSMの精神障害のいずれかに該当することが分かるでしょう。このような彼らの行動は宗教団体の目的を著しく逸脱する行為であり、また、公共の福祉を著しく害する治安紊乱要因です。日本の精神医療の立ち遅れから、こういった信徒たちの、お世辞にも素行が良いとは言えない実態が放置されていますが、そういうことのために宗教があるのではないということを理解しないと、いずれ宗教法人法による解散命令が出るのは時間の問題です。池田大作氏が「憲法9条改正反対」というメッセージを発するのはこういった手に負えない信徒の現状を見て、再び戦争の惨禍に我が国が見舞われた際の光景が目前に浮かぶからでしょう。日本は先の戦争の反省をしているのか?と問うたら、おそらく彼ならば「反省の方法を知らない」と答えるかもしれません。こうした創価学会の信徒たちの実情について本部に苦情を申したところ「信徒である以前に、人間としてどうなのかという問題です」という回答をいただいています。このメッセージには、創価学会は組織として、信徒のやっていることについて、責任は取らないという含意があることをお忘れなく。日蓮の信仰は菩薩行。本当に信仰を大切にしている人ならば、膨大な経典を読み解くために、自分の日常生活に集中し、他人に構う暇など、とてもではないですがありません。創価学会員のやっていることは、単なる菩薩ごっこです。多くの人があなたたちに迷惑しています。同じ仏教者でありながら、こうした彼らの実態を放置している、その他の宗派も、いったい何を考えているのでしょうか?同教団の関連書のレビューを見れば分かるように、彼らの活動からは批判的思考を持った人間の姿を見出すことはできません。彼らがよく使いたがる「論理的」、「正しい」、「客観的」という言葉は、まともな研究者からしても扱いの難しい言葉であり、その点を学生時代にある程度学んだことがある人は、濫用を嫌います。また、ある集団内部における歴史の記述というものは、一次資料の収集、編纂といった作業が必要になるため、必然的に、ある程度の規則性を持った共同事業として、その事業内部における複数人による慎重な議論と検討を経た上で初めて成立するものです。佐藤氏は外務省の主任分析官だったという経歴がおありのようですが、そのような肩書は見栄えはするものの、内容の信憑性を保証するものではありません。残念ながら、彼は学会の関連誌に原稿を投稿しているため、学会の関連団体からお金をもらっている雇われ作家ということになります。この場合、常識的に彼は第三者ではありませんので、証言の客観性は実質的にも制度的にも保証されていません。もうお分かりの通り、創価学会はあくまでも昭和の時代の仏教をテーマにしたサブカルチャーなのだということが言えそうです。私の住んでいる地域を見ても、神社があり、寺院があり、庚申塔があり、道祖神があり、教会がありといった宗教的に大らかな風土があるわけですが、彼らの活動というものは、そういった基盤の上に初めて成立しているといえます。ですが、こういった背景を弁えず、彼らは自説の正当性ばかりに固執し、全く他を顧みることができていません。これは子供のやることです。学会の関連誌で「対話」という言葉が極めて重視されていることの背景には、それが学会員に一番欠けているものだからです。世の中にはいろいろなサブカルチャーがありますが、彼らが、世間で大きなトラブルを起こさないのは、彼らが、それをサブカルチャーだと理解しており、気心の知れた仲間と同じ趣味を楽しむ方法を彼らが知っているからです。創価学会も、こういった活動と同様に日本における代表的なサブカルチャーですが、そのサブカルチャーの秩序を非信徒に強制してくる点において、その他の集団とは明らかに性質が異なります。昨今、政府与党である自民党が彼らを集票活動に利用してしまった結果、彼らの行動が間接的にオーソライズされた形になり、彼らの暴力、脱法行為、治安妨害が野放しになっており、それが徒党を組んだ敵対者への嫌がらせとして結実している状態です。彼らの行動は異常であると言わなければなりません。今は、彼らが掲げるスローガンも穏当で耳当たりの良い美辞麗句で溢れていますが、戦時中の日本人の精神構造が今もまだ健在であるということに注意しないといけません。大衆受けだけを狙った中身のない昭和の権力闘争の幻想にいつまで彼らは浸っているつもりなのでしょうか?教育とは、人の素朴さにつける薬のようなものですが、こういう形で、それも政権を担っている政党の支持母体の構成員の関連書籍のレビューで、その不在が証明されてしまうのですから、この事態を大いに悲しむべきあると言えると思います。もしあなたが、教育関係者ならば面倒を見てあげないといけない病人が沢山いることを、この場で知ったことになります。彼らは未だ戦中を生きています。やっかいなことに、これはお金で解決できるような問題ではないということです。
10 people found this helpful
Helpful
Report abuse
Translate review to English
rdxmi2007
1.0 out of 5 stars 日本の「インテリジェンス」に失望
Reviewed in Japan on March 1, 2021
本書は創価学会の「内在的論理」について明らかにしたい、という動機で書かれ、
その分析手法として、

・キリスト教神学的手法
 (エキュメニカル神学:他者を信徒に取り込むための分析)
・インテリジェンス分析
 (「公開情報諜報(Open Source Intelligence)=OSINT(オシント)」)

を用い、

「池田の著作から『私の履歴書』、さらに創価学会の「精神の正史」である『人間革命』と『新・人間革命』」(「あとがき」より抜粋)

をまとめ直した本です。分析内容も詳しく、客観的に創価学会の主張を見ており「内在的論理を明らかにする」という意味では星5つでも良いと思います。
創価学会の門外漢である私が、「へー、創価学会ではこんな事言っているんだ」と知るには最適かもしれません。特に創価学会にお布施(=書籍を購入)したくは無いので、良かったです。

しかし、オシントという分析手法を採用したがために、創価学会の「宗教的プロパガンダ」をそのまま垂れ流す形になっているのがもったいないと思います。
それゆえに、この本に星5つを付ける人は、ほとんどが学会員になるはずです。

そして、佐藤優氏のこの書籍によって、私は日本の「インテリジェンス」に失望しました。菊池寛賞を受賞しているからと言って「インテリジェンス」が正しく十分なものの見方だという証明にはなりません。それこそ権威に目がくらんでいる先入観です。自分の目でものを見て、自分の頭で考えるべきです。
以下、本書22・23ページからの抜粋です。
----------
オシントにおいて中心となるのは政府や議会などの国家機関が公表する情報だ。国家が真実をすべて開示することはないが、公式の場で積極的な虚偽情報を流すことはほとんどない。そのようなことをして、露見した場合、当該国家が失うものが大きすぎるからだ。
(中略)
真偽が不確かな伝聞情報よりも公式文書を分析する方が、調査対象の内在的論理をつかむのに適切であると外務省主任分析官をつとめていたときの経験から筆者は確信している。
----------
国家がウソをつかない…ロシア・中国はもちろんの事、日本やアメリカを見てもそう言えるでしょうか?むしろ逆じゃ無いか?と私は思います。
それに「積極的な虚偽」で無ければ良いのか…というと、それもまた違うと思います。真実の中にちょっとだけ虚偽を混ぜ込めばこそ、大衆の心をコントロールできるんじゃないでしょうか。

話が横道にそれましたが学会の話に戻しますと、上記の話の続きに、25ページにて創価学会会憲・前文を無批判で引用しています。
----------
(中略)...日蓮大聖人の曠大なる慈悲を体し、末法の娑婆世界において大法を弘通しているのは創価学会しかない。ゆえに戸田先生は、未来の経典に「創価学会仏」と記されるであろうと断言されたのである。
----------

この「創価学会仏」について、創価学会元教学部長の原島崇氏の著書『池田大作先生への手紙』(1980年・晩聲社)の105・106ページから丸ごと引用します。
※原島崇氏、小平芳平氏はともに現在(2021年)では故人
----------
小平芳平(現公明党参議院議員)氏と、ある仕事のことで静岡研修道場に呼ばれました。昭和五五年六月のことだったと思います。ふとあることで小平芳平氏が「“創価学会仏”と戸田先生が言いましたものね」と語ったのです。すると先生は(註:ここで言う「先生」は池田大作氏を指す)「そうか、あんたも聞いたか」といい、小平氏は「ハイ!」と答えました。そして、別の機会に私は小平氏に聞きました。「戸田先生は、本当に創価学会仏といったのをあなたは直接聞いたのですか?」――これに対し、小平氏は記憶が定かでないとして「いや、よくわからない。池田先生から聞いたのかもしれない」と正直に答えてくださいました。私は、これはどうも先生のつくりごとか、あるいは戸田先生が事実言われたとしても、決して日蓮大聖人以外に創価学会仏なるものを想定されたこととはどうしても考えられません。それは別として、とにかく、先生はつくりごと、すりかえ、自分の言ったことを他の人の言にしてしまうこと、それも既成事実化してしまうことの名人です。
たとえば、戸田先生が最後に遺言として残されたとする有名な言葉「追撃の手をゆるめるな」というのは、池田先生がつくった言葉です。有名な的場事件があったときに、池田先生が戸田先生に伺った言葉として、それが一つの学会精神のバックボーンになっていったのですが……。それは私にも他の人にも「あれはオレがつくったんだよ」と明確に、真実を語ってくれました。もちろん、一般会員の方にそんな“真相”は明しません。
----------

オシントでは、原島崇氏の書籍は「真偽不確かな伝聞情報」なんでしょうね。
しかし原島崇氏によれば「戸田城聖氏が創価学会仏と言った」事も真偽不確かな伝聞情報です。それを「会憲(=会則)」にまでしたのが池田でしょう。

公式発表だけ鵜呑みにする手法が日本のインテリジェンスだそうです。もし、もっとその先の分析があるのであれば、この本はまだ出版すべきではなかったと思います。
だから星1つとしました。
2 people found this helpful
Helpful
Report abuse
Translate review to English
みどりちゃん
5.0 out of 5 stars 創価学会とは
Reviewed in Japan on February 6, 2021
「壁に突き当たった場合、政治革命家はその壁を壊そうとする。これに対して池田は、壁の向こう側の人に対話を呼びかける。対話によって、壁の向こう側にいる立場が異なる者の中に理解者を作ろうとする。」P316。という分析が印象的。
2 people found this helpful
Helpful
Report abuse
Translate review to English

--


























Healthy Aging: A Lifelong Guide to Your Well-Being , Weil, MD, Andrew

Healthy Aging: A Lifelong Guide to Your Well-Being eBook: Weil, MD, Andrew : Amazon.com.au: Kindle Store

Healthy Aging: A Lifelong Guide to Your Well-Being Kindle Edition
by Andrew Weil, MD (Author)  Format: Kindle Edition
4.4 out of 5 stars    258 ratings
 See all formats and editions
Kindle
$15.99
A unique book about aging that draws on the science of biogerontology as well as on the secrets of healthy longevity, from the renowned Dr. Andrew Weil.

In each of his widely acclaimed, best-selling books, Dr. Andrew Weil has been an authoritative and companionable guide through a uniquely effective combination of traditional and nontraditional approaches to health and healthy living. Dr. Weil explains that there are a myriad of things we can do to keep our bodies and minds in good working order through all phases of life. Hugely informative, practical, and uplifting, Healthy Aging is infused with the engaging candor and common sense that have made Dr. Weil our most trusted source on healthy living.
 
With detailed information on:
-Learning to eat right: Following the anti-inflammatory diet, Dr. Weil’s guide to the nutritional components of a healthy lifestyle
-Separating myth from fact about the would-be elixirs of life extension — herbs, hormones, and anti-aging “medicines”
-Learning exercise, breathing and stress-management techniques to benefit your mind and body
-Understanding the science behind the aging process
-Keeping record of your life lessons to share with loved ones
 
Healthy Aging features a glossary, an appendix summarizing the Anti-Inflammatory Diet and an appendix of additional resources.



Product description
Review
" Dr. Weil has arguably become American's best-known doctor." -- "The New York Times Magazine"
" Forget plastic surgery. Skip the pricey face creams and the drugs for creaky bodies. Natural-medicine champion Weil, who's now in his sixties, covers longevity research, aging, and how he's embracing the experience." -- "Life "Magazine
" Weil wants us to be sensible about growing old. . . . He argues that we should not fight aging. There's no winning that war. Instead, we should concentrate on aging well."
-- "The Washington Post"

Dr. Weil has arguably become American s best-known doctor. The New York Times Magazine
Forget plastic surgery. Skip the pricey face creams and the drugs for creaky bodies. Natural-medicine champion Weil, who s now in his sixties, covers longevity research, aging, and how he s embracing the experience. Life Magazine
Weil wants us to be sensible about growing old. . . . He argues that we should not fight aging. There s no winning that war. Instead, we should concentrate on aging well.
The Washington Post"

-Dr. Weil has arguably become American's best-known doctor.- --The New York Times Magazine
-Forget plastic surgery. Skip the pricey face creams and the drugs for creaky bodies. Natural-medicine champion Weil, who's now in his sixties, covers longevity research, aging, and how he's embracing the experience.- --Life Magazine
-Weil wants us to be sensible about growing old. . . . He argues that we should not fight aging. There's no winning that war. Instead, we should concentrate on aging well.-
--The Washington Post

"Dr. Weil has arguably become American's best-known doctor." --The New York Times Magazine
"Forget plastic surgery. Skip the pricey face creams and the drugs for creaky bodies. Natural-medicine champion Weil, who's now in his sixties, covers longevity research, aging, and how he's embracing the experience." --Life Magazine

"Weil wants us to be sensible about growing old. . . . He argues that we should not fight aging. There's no winning that war. Instead, we should concentrate on aging well."
--The Washington Post --This text refers to an alternate kindle_edition edition.

About the Author
Andrew Weil, M.D., a graduate of Harvard Medical School, is Clinical Professor of Medicine at the University of Arizona and director of the Program in Integrative Medicine at that institution. Dr. Weil produces a monthly newsletter, "Self-Healing," maintains a popular website, drweil.com, and writes a monthly column in Prevention magazine. He is a frequent guest on radio and television and lectures widely on nutrition and natural medicine. This is his tenth book. --This text refers to an alternate kindle_edition edition.
Product details
ASIN : B000SEFKA8
Publisher : Anchor; Reprint edition (26 November 2008)
Language : English
File size : 1478 KB
Text-to-Speech : Enabled
Enhanced typesetting : Enabled
X-Ray : Enabled
Word Wise : Enabled
Print length : 297 pages
Best Sellers Rank: 371,740 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
89 in Age-Related Diets & Nutrition
205 in Longevity
246 in Later Years
Customer Reviews: 4.4 out of 5 stars    258 ratings
Customers who viewed this item also viewed
Eight Weeks to Optimum Health, Revised Edition
Eight Weeks to Optimum Health, Revised Edition
Andrew Weil MDAndrew Weil MD
4.4 out of 5 stars 310
Kindle Edition
$14.99 
Products related to this item
Sponsored 
Processed Food Addict: Is This Me? Why You Can’t Stop Eating Junk Food and How to Permanently Break the Cycle of Yo-Yo Dieting, Bingeing, and Starving
Processed Food Addict: Is This Me? Why You Can’t Stop Eating J...
Karren-Lee Raymond PhD
 17
Kindle Edition
$6.43
All Natural Wellness Drinks: Teas, Smoothies, Broths, and Soups. A Collection of Healthy Drink Recipes (Healthy Living, Wellness and Prevention)
All Natural Wellness Drinks: Teas, Smoothies, Broths, and Soup...
Joseph Veebe
 26
Kindle Edition
$4.79
Supplements: The Ultimate Supplement Guide For Men: Health, Fitness, Bodybuilding, Muscle and Strength (Muscle Building Series Book 4)
Supplements: The Ultimate Supplement Guide For Men: Health, Fi...
Nicholas Bjorn
 69
Kindle Edition
$8.99
Introduction to CURRY (Essential Spices & Herbs)
Introduction to CURRY (Essential Spices & Herbs)
Joseph Veebe
 47
Kindle Edition
$5.47
Easy Indian Instant Pot Cookbook: Healing with Spices and Herbs: 50 Healthy Recipes: Quick and Easy Electric Pressure Cooker, Instant Pot Meals (Essential Spices & Herbs)
Easy Indian Instant Pot Cookbook: Healing with Spices and Herb...
Joseph Veebe
 6
Kindle Edition
$4.10
Beginner's Guide to Cooking with Spices (Essential Spices & Herbs)
Beginner's Guide to Cooking with Spices (Essential Spices & He...
Joseph Veebe
 39
Kindle Edition
$5.57
Easy Spicy Fish: All Natural, Healthy and Spicy Fish Recipes (Easy Spicy Recipes)
Easy Spicy Fish: All Natural, Healthy and Spicy Fish Recipes (...
Joseph Veebe
 1
Kindle Edition
$4.09


How would you rate your experience shopping for books on Amazon today





Very poor Neutral Great
Customer reviews
4.4 out of 5 stars
4.4 out of 5
258 global ratings
5 star
 67%
4 star
 15%
3 star
 10%
2 star
 5%
1 star
 3%
How are ratings calculated?
Review this product
Share your thoughts with other customers
Write a customer review

Sponsored 

Top reviews
Top reviews
Top review from Australia
Amazon Customer
3.0 out of 5 stars To medical
Reviewed in Australia on 28 July 2019
Verified Purchase
Boring
Helpful
Report abuse
See all reviews
Top reviews from other countries
Stephen McAteer
4.0 out of 5 stars Informative, scientific and easy to read.
Reviewed in the United Kingdom on 21 May 2013
Verified Purchase
A good book if you're interested in minimising the detrimental effects of aging. Contains useful information on diet and disease. He also explores the healthy mind with tips on how to help achieve it. Aside from a digression into inanimate objects that improve with age, it's all relevant to maintaining good health as you get older. All of the information is backed up with scientific research / studies. His writing style is easy on the brain too. Money well spent.
2 people found this helpful
Report abuse

8 Weeks 心身自在 (角川文庫): アンドルー ワイル, Weil,Andrew, 圭一, 上野: 本

Amazon.co.jp: 心身自在 (角川文庫): アンドルー ワイル, Weil,Andrew, 圭一, 上野: 本
心身自在 (角川文庫) (Japanese) Paperback Bunko – June 26, 1999
by アンドルー ワイル (著), Andrew Weil (原著), 上野 圭一 (翻訳)3.6 out of 5 stars    10 ratings


自在 (자재)
자유자재()의 준말  제 스스로 존재()함 
心身自在
심신이 자유롭다.

---
現代医学からシャーマニズムまで、人が「治る」メカニズムを究めた著者の世界的ベストセラー『癒す心、治る力』の実践編。本来、誰にでも備わっている自発的治癒力、免疫力を蘇らせる、8週間プログラムを紹介。
「五〇歳以上の人に」「七〇歳以上の人に」「成人男性に」「妊娠中の人と妊娠を予定している人に」「心血管疾患のリスクがある人に」「がんのリスクがある人に」など、ケース別の処方箋も紹介!
全世界で驚きとともに受けいれられた『癒す心、治る力』の理論を日々の暮らしの中で実践するための案内書。

현대의학에서 무속신앙까지 사람이 낫는 메커니즘을 탐구한 저자의 세계적인 베스트셀러 <치유하는 마음, 낫는 힘>의 실천편.  본래 누구나 갖고 있는 자발적 치유력, 면역력을 되살릴 수 있는 8주간 프로그램 소개.  

'50세 이상인 사람에게' '70세 이상인 사람에게' '성인 남성에게' '임신 중인 사람과 임신을 예정하고 있는 사람에게' '심혈관 질환 위험이 있는 사람에게' '암 위험이 있는 사람에게' 등 케이스별 처방전도 소개!
전 세계에서 놀라움과 함께 받아들인 '치유하는 마음, 낫는 힘' 이론을 일상생활 속에서 실천하기 위한 안내서.

---
第三部 オーダーメイドの処方せん
十四章 五〇歳以上の人に
十五章 七〇歳以上の人に
十六章 二〇歳以下の人に
十七章 成人男性のために
十八章 成人女性のために
十九章 妊娠中の人と妊娠を予定している人に
二十章 育児中の親に
二十一章 大都市に住んでいる人に
二十二章 旅行が多い人に
二十三章 太りすぎの人に
二十四章 心血管疾患のリスクがある人に
二十五章 がんのリスクがある人に
心身自在 (角川文庫)
+
This item:心身自在 (角川文庫) by アンドルー ワイル Paperback Bunko ¥924


Product description
内容(「BOOK」データベースより)
本書は、最新現代医学からシャーマニズムまで、人が「治る」メカニズムを究めるワイル博士が作成した、心身を癒すための究極のツールである。本来誰にでも備わっている自発的治癒力・免疫力を甦らせ、身体を、心を、そして人生をも変えていく。全世界で驚きとともに受けいれられた『癒す心、治る力』の理論を日々の暮らしの中で実践するための案内書。
Product Details
Publisher : 角川書店 (June 26, 1999)
Publication date : June 26, 1999
Language : Japanese
Paperback Bunko : 422 pages
Top reviews from Japan
Translate all reviews to English
シロムネオオハシ
4.0 out of 5 stars iHerbあたりにあるかも
Reviewed in Japan on August 16, 2017
Verified Purchase
欧米風漢方、という印象を受けました。
例えばDGL、偽性アルドステロン症を発症しないようにグリチルリチン酸を除去した甘草で胃炎に著効であるとか、肝臓に効くシリマリンであるとか、呼吸法とか。
5 people found this helpful
Helpful
Report abuse
Translate review to English
雅美
3.0 out of 5 stars ちょっと
Reviewed in Japan on September 19, 2018
Verified Purchase
本の評価が良かったのに 表紙が汚れていて ちょっとがっかりでした。
2 people found this helpful
Helpful
Report abuse
Translate review to English
yokonosuke
4.0 out of 5 stars 治療の物語
Reviewed in Japan on October 26, 2016
Verified Purchase
アンドルー・ワイルの本はたくさん出版されていますが、端的に纏められ、自分に合わせて、治療のプログラムが選べるところが良かった。
4 people found this helpful
Helpful
Report abuse
Translate review to English
Amazon カスタマー
5.0 out of 5 stars とても良かったですけど
Reviewed in Japan on July 18, 2015
Verified Purchase
とても良かったです。西洋医学、東洋医学、病気とは、治るとは、治療とは、治癒とは、……
今後の医療を考える上でとても参考になります。
4 people found this helpful
Helpful
Report abuse
Translate review to English
mica9
1.0 out of 5 stars 確認したつもりでしたが…
Reviewed in Japan on October 21, 2014
Verified Purchase
確認したつもりでしたが…内容が古くあまり参考にはなりませんでした。残念です。
8 people found this helpful
Helpful
Report abuse
Translate review to English
さくら
VINE VOICE
4.0 out of 5 stars 欧米人には難しくても
Reviewed in Japan on August 30, 2009
 『癒す心、治す力』を読んでワイル博士に興味を持ち、本書はその理論の実践版だということで、できればやってみたいなと思い購入しました。

 ここに書かれている8週間レシピは、必要なエクササイズ(主にウォーキング)、ダイエット(日常食)に、呼吸法とメンタルケアを加えたものですが、食事については日本人であればほぼ実践可能です。というのも、博士はアジア、特に日本の食材にとても詳しく、豆腐など日本で普通に手に入る食材を多用したレシピをたくさん書かれているからです。魚と野菜を中心にしたレシピは、健康的な食生活をしている日本人であれば普段の食事、といっても差し支えないものが多数あり、無理せず実践できると思います。

 特に、呼吸法がとても参考になりました。「呼吸」というだけあり、吸うのではなく息を吐くことから始まるのですね。ただの深呼吸ではなく、宇宙をイメージしたり、スピリチュアルな部分に働きかける呼吸法は、元気が出たりリラックスしたり、とその時々に応じて使い分けるとより効果が出るのでは、と思います。

 治癒をイメージするなど、心と体は切っても切れないものだということが丁寧に説明されていて、いざ病気にかかったときに、医者や薬に頼るだけではなく、自分自身の治癒力を高めることにより、回復を早めることができるのでは、と期待が持てます。

 ただ、ウォーキングに関しては、だんだん時間や日数をのばしていくのですが、実践できればもちろん健康増進により効果が出るのはわかりますが、仕事&子育てに忙しい私には、今は無理。普段仕事で忙しい人たちにもなかなか実践は難しいだろうと思われます。

 
Read less
23 people found this helpful
Helpful
Report abuse
Translate review to English
Amazon Customer
4.0 out of 5 stars 健康とはなんだろう?
Reviewed in Japan on May 10, 2002
 『癒す心、直る力 実践編』の文庫版。健康な生活を維持するための食習慣、運動の習慣、ストレスの対処法、呼吸法の改善を、メンタル/スピリチュアルな面も含めて、非常に具体的に説いている。その期間はとりあえずまず八週間。
 豊富なレシピが収録されているようなところに気を配りながら、コロンビアのシャーマンに会いに行こうとするくらいの著者だから、霊的な側面にも十分に留意されているところがこの本の魅力だ。しかし(いい意味で)何も特別なことが述べられているわけではないとも言える。日本で少しだけ健康に気をつけた生活を心がけている人ならば、かなりの点ですでに実行済みかもしれない。日々の生活の中でゆがめられてしまったさまざまな習慣を、この本にそってチェックしてみるのも!!いいだろう。
 ついでにいえば、この本を読みながらぼくは、何人かの親しいニューヨーカーを思い浮かべてしまった。彼らは、自然や健康を、人工的な環境の中で求めるべきものとして浮かび上がらせ、それに向かって日々効率的にこなしているようにぼくには見える。人工的に構築された世界で成功していればいるほど、意識的に人工的に健康を追い求めなければならないのかもしれない。
 自然と触れあうような健康的な生活を作り出すためのニューヨーカーの努力は、人工的な力を借りて長いあいだ快適な生活を追い求めてきた人間の努力とどのような関係にあるのだろう。その二つの危ういバランスのうえにしか、健康は維持されないのだろうか。
49 people found this helpful
Helpful
Report abuse
Translate review to English
フィリッポス2世
4.0 out of 5 stars ”健康自立”を目指す人にとっては,,,,,,,,,。
Reviewed in Japan on January 29, 2005
非常に、”利用価値”の有る本です。”具体的実践方法”が、豊富に記載されています。でも、この本を読む人に心掛けて頂きたい事は、”決して無理をしない。”と言う事です。”自分の日常生活”に、この本に書かれてある事の、”一部”でも取り入れる事から始めればいいのです。この本を読んで、”コレなら、俺でも出来る!!”と言う所が有ったら、それを、自分の”日常生活”に、取り入れればいい訳です。”自分に出来ない事”を、”無理して”やる必要は無いのです。”自分に出来る事”からやってみる事、始めてみる事、それは、健康に限らず、”人生の真理”だと思いますねえ。
43 people found this helpful
Helpful
Report abuse

Alternative medicine

 

Alternative medicine

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from Integrative medicine)
Jump to navigationJump to search
Alternative medicine
AM, complementary and alternative medicine (CAM), complementary medicine, heterodox medicine, integrative medicine (IM), complementary and integrative medicine (CIM), new-age medicine, pseudomedicine, unconventional medicine, unorthodox medicine, altmed
ClaimsAlternatives to reality-based medical treatments

Alternative medicine is any practice that aims to achieve the healing effects of medicine, but which lacks biological plausibility and is untesteduntestable or proven ineffective. Complementary medicine (CM), complementary and alternative medicine (CAM), integrated medicine or integrative medicine (IM), and holistic medicine are among many rebrandings of the same phenomenon. Alternative therapies share in common that they reside outside medical science, and rely on pseudoscienceTraditional practices become "alternative" when used outside their original settings without proper scientific explanation and evidence. Frequently used derogatory terms for the alternative are new-age or pseudo, with little distinction from quackery.

Some alternative practices are based on theories that contradict the science of how the human body works; others resort to the supernatural or superstitious to explain their effect. In others, the practice is plausibly effective but has too many side effects. Alternative medicine is distinct from scientific medicine, which employs the scientific method to test plausible therapies by way of responsible and ethical clinical trials, producing evidence of either effect or of no effect. Research into alternative therapies often fails to follow proper research protocols (such as placebo-controlled trials, blind experiments and calculation of prior probability), providing invalid results.

Much of the perceived effect of an alternative practice arises from a belief that it will be effective (the placebo effect), or from the treated condition resolving on its own (the natural course of disease). This is further exacerbated by the tendency to turn to alternative therapies upon the failure of medicine, at which point the condition will be at its worst and most likely to spontaneously improve. In the absence of this bias, especially for diseases that are not expected to get better by themselves such as cancer or HIV infection, multiple studies have shown significantly worse outcomes if patients turn to alternative therapies. While this may be because these patients avoid effective treatment, some alternative therapies are actively harmful (e.g. cyanide poisoning from amygdalin, or the intentional ingestion of hydrogen peroxide) or actively interfere with effective treatments.

The alternative sector is a highly profitable industry with a strong lobby, and faces far less regulation over the use and marketing of unproven treatments. Its marketing often advertises the treatments as being "natural" or "holistic", in comparison to those offered by "big pharma". Billions of dollars have been spent studying alternative medicine, with few or no positive results. Some of the successful practices are only considered alternative under very specific definitions, such as those which include all physical activity under the umbrella of "alternative medicine".

Definitions and terminology

The terms alternative medicinecomplementary medicineintegrative medicine, holistic medicinenatural medicineunorthodox medicinefringe medicineunconventional medicine, and new age medicine are used interchangeably as having the same meaning, and are almost synonymous in most contexts.[1][2][3][4] Terminology has shifted over time, reflecting the preferred branding of practitioners.[5] For example, the United States National Institutes of Health department studying alternative medicine, currently named the National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health (NCCIH), was established as the Office of Alternative Medicine (OAM) and was renamed the National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine (NCCAM) before obtaining its current name. Therapies are often framed as "natural" or "holistic", implicitly and intentionally suggesting that conventional medicine is "artificial" and "narrow in scope".[6][7]

Marcia Angell: "There cannot be two kinds of medicine – conventional and alternative".

The meaning of the term "alternative" in the expression "alternative medicine", is not that it is an effective alternative to medical science, although some alternative medicine promoters may use the loose terminology to give the appearance of effectiveness.[8][9] Loose terminology may also be used to suggest meaning that a dichotomy exists when it does not, e.g., the use of the expressions "Western medicine" and "Eastern medicine" to suggest that the difference is a cultural difference between the Asiatic east and the European west, rather than that the difference is between evidence-based medicine and treatments that do not work.[8]

Alternative medicine

Alternative medicine is defined loosely as a set of products, practices, and theories that are believed or perceived by their users to have the healing effects of medicine,[n 1][n 2] but whose effectiveness has not been established using scientific methods,[n 1][n 3][8][13][14][15] or whose theory and practice is not part of biomedicine,[n 2][n 4][n 5][n 6] or whose theories or practices are directly contradicted by scientific evidence or scientific principles used in biomedicine.[8][13][19] "Biomedicine" or "medicine" is that part of medical science that applies principles of biologyphysiologymolecular biologybiophysics, and other natural sciences to clinical practice, using scientific methods to establish the effectiveness of that practice. Unlike medicine,[n 4] an alternative product or practice does not originate from using scientific methods, but may instead be based on hearsayreligion, tradition, superstition, belief in supernatural energies, pseudoscienceerrors in reasoningpropagandafraud, or other unscientific sources.[n 3][8][10][13][19]

Some other definitions seek to specify alternative medicine in terms of its social and political marginality to mainstream healthcare.[20] This can refer to the lack of support that alternative therapies receive from medical scientists regarding access to research funding, sympathetic coverage in the medical press, or inclusion in the standard medical curriculum.[20] For example, a widely used[21] definition devised by the US NCCIH calls it "a group of diverse medical and health care systems, practices, and products that are not generally considered part of conventional medicine".[22] However, these descriptive definitions are inadequate in the present-day when some conventional doctors offer alternative medical treatments and introductory courses or modules can be offered as part of standard undergraduate medical training;[23] alternative medicine is taught in more than half of US medical schools and US health insurers are increasingly willing to provide reimbursement for alternative therapies.[24]

Complementary or integrative medicine

Complementary medicine (CM) or integrative medicine (IM) is when alternative medicine is used together with functional medical treatment, in a belief that it improves the effect of treatments.[n 7][10][26][27][28] For example, acupuncture (piercing the body with needles to influence the flow of a supernatural energy) might be believed to increase the effectiveness or "complement" science-based medicine when used at the same time.[29][30][31] Instead, significant drug interactions caused by alternative therapies may make treatments less effective, notably in cancer therapy.[32][33][34] Besides the usual issues with alternative medicine, integrative medicine has been described as an attempt to bring pseudoscience into academic science-based medicine,[35] leading to the pejorative term "quackademic medicine". Due to its many names, the field has been criticized for intense rebranding of what are essentially the same practices.[1]

CAM is an abbreviation of the phrase complementary and alternative medicine.[36][37] It has also been called sCAM or SCAM with the addition of "so-called" or "supplements".[38][39]

Other terms

Traditional medicine refers to the pre-scientific practices of a certain culture, in contrast to what is typically practiced in cultures where medical science dominates. "Eastern medicine" typically refers to the traditional medicines of Asia where conventional bio-medicine penetrated much later.

Holistic medicine is another rebranding of alternative medicine. In this case, the words balance and holism are often used alongside complementary or integrative, claiming to take into account a "whole" person, in contrast to the supposed reductionism of medicine.

Challenges in defining alternative medicine

Prominent members of the science[40][41] and biomedical science community[12] say that it is not meaningful to define an alternative medicine that is separate from a conventional medicine, because the expressions "conventional medicine", "alternative medicine", "complementary medicine", "integrative medicine", and "holistic medicine" do not refer to any medicine at all.[12][40][41][42] Others say that alternative medicine cannot be precisely defined because of the diversity of theories and practices it includes, and because the boundaries between alternative and conventional medicine overlap, are porous, and change.[16][43] Healthcare practices categorized as alternative may differ in their historical origin, theoretical basis, diagnostic techniquetherapeutic practice and in their relationship to the medical mainstream.[44] Under a definition of alternative medicine as "non-mainstream", treatments considered alternative in one location may be considered conventional in another.[45]

Critics say the expression is deceptive because it implies there is an effective alternative to science-based medicine, and that complementary is deceptive because it implies that the treatment increases the effectiveness of (complements) science-based medicine, while alternative medicines that have been tested nearly always have no measurable positive effect compared to a placebo.[8][35][46][47] John Diamond wrote that "there is really no such thing as alternative medicine, just medicine that works and medicine that doesn't",[41][48] a notion later echoed by Paul Offit: "the truth is there's no such thing as conventional or alternative or complementary or integrative or holistic medicine. There's only medicine that works and medicine that doesn't. And the best way to sort it out is by carefully evaluating scientific studies - not by visiting Internet chat rooms, reading magazine articles, or talking to friends."[49] Comedian Tim Minchin has also taken to the issue in his viral animation short Storm: "By definition alternative medicine has either not been proved to work, or been proved not to work. Do you know what they call alternative medicine that's been proved to work? Medicine."[50]

Types

Alternative medicine consists of a wide range of health care practices, products, and therapies. The shared feature is a claim to heal that is not based on the scientific method. Alternative medicine practices are diverse in their foundations and methodologies.[22] Alternative medicine practices may be classified by their cultural origins or by the types of beliefs upon which they are based.[10][8][19][22] Methods may incorporate or be based on traditional medicinal practices of a particular culture, folk knowledge, superstition,[51] spiritual beliefs, belief in supernatural energies (antiscience), pseudoscienceerrors in reasoning, propaganda, fraud, new or different concepts of health and disease, and any bases other than being proven by scientific methods.[10][8][13][19] Different cultures may have their own unique traditional or belief based practices developed recently or over thousands of years, and specific practices or entire systems of practices.

Unscientific belief systems

Alternative medicine, such as using naturopathy or homeopathy in place of conventional medicine, is based on belief systems not grounded in science.[22]

Proposed mechanismIssues
NaturopathyNaturopathic medicine is based on a belief that the body heals itself using a supernatural vital energy that guides bodily processes.[52]In conflict with the paradigm of evidence-based medicine.[53] Many naturopaths have opposed vaccination,[54] and "scientific evidence does not support claims that naturopathic medicine can cure cancer or any other disease".[55]
HomeopathyA belief that a substance that causes the symptoms of a disease in healthy people cures similar symptoms in sick people.[n 8]Developed before knowledge of atoms and molecules, or of basic chemistry, which shows that repeated dilution as practiced in homeopathy produces only water, and that homeopathy is not scientifically valid.[57][58][59][60]
"They told me if I took 1000 pills at night I should be quite another thing in the morning", an early 19th-century satire on Morison's Vegetable Pills, an alternative medicine supplement.

Traditional ethnic systems

Ready-to-drink traditional Chinese medicine mixture

Alternative medical systems may be based on traditional medicine practices, such as traditional Chinese medicine (TCM), Ayurveda in India, or practices of other cultures around the world.[22] Some useful applications of traditional medicines have been researched and accepted within ordinary medicine, however the underlying belief systems are seldom scientific and are not accepted.

Traditional medicine is considered alternative when it is used outside its home region; or when it is used together with or instead of known functional treatment; or when it can be reasonably expected that the patient or practitioner knows or should know that it will not work – such as knowing that the practice is based on superstition.

ClaimsIssues
Traditional Chinese medicineTraditional practices and beliefs from China, together with modifications made by the Communist party make up TCM. Common practices include herbal medicine, acupuncture (insertion of needles in the body at specified points), massage (Tui na), exercise (qigong), and dietary therapy.The practices are based on belief in a supernatural energy called qi, considerations of Chinese astrology and Chinese numerology, traditional use of herbs and other substances found in China, a belief that the tongue contains a map of the body that reflects changes in the body, and an incorrect model of the anatomy and physiology of internal organs.[8][61][62][63][64][65]
AyurvedaTraditional medicine of India. Ayurveda believes in the existence of three elemental substances, the doshas (called Vata, Pitta and Kapha), and states that a balance of the doshas results in health, while imbalance results in disease. Such disease-inducing imbalances can be adjusted and balanced using traditional herbs, minerals and heavy metals. Ayurveda stresses the use of plant-based medicines and treatments, with some animal products, and added minerals, including sulfurarseniclead and copper sulfate[clarification needed].Safety concerns have been raised about Ayurveda, with two U.S. studies finding about 20 percent of Ayurvedic Indian-manufactured patent medicines contained toxic levels of heavy metals such as leadmercury and arsenic. A 2015 study of users in the United States also found elevated blood lead levels in 40 percent of those tested. Other concerns include the use of herbs containing toxic compounds and the lack of quality control in Ayurvedic facilities. Incidents of heavy metal poisoning have been attributed to the use of these compounds in the United States.[66][67][68][69][70][71][72][73]

Supernatural energies

Bases of belief may include belief in existence of supernatural energies undetected by the science of physics, as in biofields, or in belief in properties of the energies of physics that are inconsistent with the laws of physics, as in energy medicine.[22]

ClaimsIssues
Biofield therapyIntended to influence energy fields that, it is purported, surround and penetrate the body.[22]Advocates of scientific skepticism such as Carl Sagan have described the lack of empirical evidence to support the existence of the putative energy fields on which these therapies are predicated.[74]
Bioelectromagnetic therapyUse verifiable electromagnetic fields, such as pulsed fields, alternating-current, or direct-current fields in an unconventional manner.[22]Asserts that magnets can be used to defy the laws of physics to influence health and disease.
ChiropracticSpinal manipulation aims to treat "vertebral subluxations" which are claimed to put pressure on nerves.Chiropractic was developed in the belief that manipulating the spine affects the flow of a supernatural vital energy and thereby affects health and disease. Vertebral subluxation is a pseudoscientific concept and has not been proven to exist.
ReikiPractitioners place their palms on the patient near Chakras that they believe are centers of supernatural energies in the belief that these supernatural energies can transfer from the practitioner's palms to heal the patient.Lacks credible scientific evidence.[75]
Acupuncture involves insertion of needles in the body.

Herbal remedies and other substances

Substance based practices use substances found in nature such as herbs, foods, non-vitamin supplements and megavitamins, animal and fungal products, and minerals, including use of these products in traditional medical practices that may also incorporate other methods.[22][76][77] Examples include healing claims for non-vitamin supplements, fish oilOmega-3 fatty acidglucosamineechinaceaflaxseed oil, and ginseng.[78] Herbal medicine, or phytotherapy, includes not just the use of plant products, but may also include the use of animal and mineral products.[76] It is among the most commercially successful branches of alternative medicine, and includes the tablets, powders and elixirs that are sold as "nutritional supplements".[76] Only a very small percentage of these have been shown to have any efficacy, and there is little regulation as to standards and safety of their contents.[76]

chiropractor "adjusting" the spine.

Religion, faith healing, and prayer

ClaimsIssues
Christian faith healingThere is a divine or spiritual intervention in healing.Lack of evidence for effectiveness.[79] Unwanted outcomes, such as death and disability, "have occurred when faith healing was elected instead of medical care for serious injuries or illnesses".[80] A 2001 double-blind study of 799 discharged coronary surgery patients found that "intercessory prayer had no significant effect on medical outcomes after hospitalization in a coronary care unit."[81]

NCCIH classification

A US agency, National Center on Complementary and Integrative Health (NCCIH), has created a classification system for branches of complementary and alternative medicine that divides them into five major groups. These groups have some overlap, and distinguish two types of energy medicine: veritable which involves scientifically observable energy (including magnet therapycolorpuncture and light therapy) and putative, which invokes physically undetectable or unverifiable energy.[82] None of these energies have any evidence to support that they effect the body in any positive or health promoting way.[6]

  1. Whole medical systems: Cut across more than one of the other groups; examples include traditional Chinese medicine, naturopathy, homeopathy, and ayurveda.
  2. Mind-body interventions: Explore the interconnection between the mind, body, and spirit, under the premise that they affect "bodily functions and symptoms". A connection between mind and body is conventional medical fact, and this classification does not include therapies with proven function such as cognitive behavioral therapy.
  3. "Biology"-based practices: Use substances found in nature such as herbs, foods, vitamins, and other natural substances. (Note that as used here, "biology" does not refer to the science of biology, but is a usage newly coined by NCCIH in the primary source used for this article. "Biology-based" as coined by NCCIH may refer to chemicals from a nonbiological source, such as use of the poison lead in traditional Chinese medicine, and to other nonbiological substances.)
  4. Manipulative and body-based practices: feature manipulation or movement of body parts, such as is done in bodywork, chiropractic, and osteopathic manipulation.
  5. Energy medicine: is a domain that deals with putative and verifiable energy fields:
    • Biofield therapies are intended to influence energy fields that are purported to surround and penetrate the body. The existence of such energy fields have been disproven.
    • Bioelectromagnetic-based therapies use verifiable electromagnetic fields, such as pulsed fields, alternating-current, or direct-current fields in a non-scientific manner.

History

The history of alternative medicine may refer to the history of a group of diverse medical practices that were collectively promoted as "alternative medicine" beginning in the 1970s, to the collection of individual histories of members of that group, or to the history of western medical practices that were labeled "irregular practices" by the western medical establishment.[8][83][84][85][86] It includes the histories of complementary medicine and of integrative medicine. Before the 1970s, western practitioners that were not part of the increasingly science-based medical establishment were referred to "irregular practitioners", and were dismissed by the medical establishment as unscientific and as practicing quackery.[83][84] Until the 1970s, irregular practice became increasingly marginalized as quackery and fraud, as western medicine increasingly incorporated scientific methods and discoveries, and had a corresponding increase in success of its treatments.[85] In the 1970s, irregular practices were grouped with traditional practices of nonwestern cultures and with other unproven or disproven practices that were not part of biomedicine, with the entire group collectively marketed and promoted under the single expression "alternative medicine".[8][83][84][85][87]

Use of alternative medicine in the west began to rise following the counterculture movement of the 1960s, as part of the rising new age movement of the 1970s.[8][88][89] This was due to misleading mass marketing of "alternative medicine" being an effective "alternative" to biomedicine, changing social attitudes about not using chemicals and challenging the establishment and authority of any kind, sensitivity to giving equal measure to beliefs and practices of other cultures (cultural relativism), and growing frustration and desperation by patients about limitations and side effects of science-based medicine.[8][84][85][86][87][89][90] At the same time, in 1975, the American Medical Association, which played the central role in fighting quackery in the United States, abolished its quackery committee and closed down its Department of Investigation.[83]:xxi[90] By the early to mid 1970s the expression "alternative medicine" came into widespread use, and the expression became mass marketed as a collection of "natural" and effective treatment "alternatives" to science-based biomedicine.[8][90][91][92] By 1983, mass marketing of "alternative medicine" was so pervasive that the British Medical Journal (BMJ) pointed to "an apparently endless stream of books, articles, and radio and television programmes urge on the public the virtues of (alternative medicine) treatments ranging from meditation to drilling a hole in the skull to let in more oxygen".[90]

An analysis of trends in the criticism of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) in five prestigious American medical journals during the period of reorganization within medicine (1965–1999) was reported as showing that the medical profession had responded to the growth of CAM in three phases, and that in each phase, changes in the medical marketplace had influenced the type of response in the journals.[93] Changes included relaxed medical licensing, the development of managed care, rising consumerism, and the establishment of the USA Office of Alternative Medicine (later National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine, currently National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health).[n 9]

Medical education

Mainly as a result of reforms following the Flexner Report of 1910[95] medical education in established medical schools in the US has generally not included alternative medicine as a teaching topic.[n 10] Typically, their teaching is based on current practice and scientific knowledge about: anatomy, physiology, histology, embryology, neuroanatomy, pathology, pharmacology, microbiology and immunology.[97] Medical schools' teaching includes such topics as doctor-patient communication, ethics, the art of medicine,[98] and engaging in complex clinical reasoning (medical decision-making).[99] Writing in 2002, Snyderman and Weil remarked that by the early twentieth century the Flexner model had helped to create the 20th-century academic health center, in which education, research, and practice were inseparable. While this had much improved medical practice by defining with increasing certainty the pathophysiological basis of disease, a single-minded focus on the pathophysiological had diverted much of mainstream American medicine from clinical conditions that were not well understood in mechanistic terms, and were not effectively treated by conventional therapies.[100]

By 2001 some form of CAM training was being offered by at least 75 out of 125 medical schools in the US.[101] Exceptionally, the School of Medicine of the University of Maryland, Baltimore includes a research institute for integrative medicine (a member entity of the Cochrane Collaboration).[102][103] Medical schools are responsible for conferring medical degrees, but a physician typically may not legally practice medicine until licensed by the local government authority. Licensed physicians in the US who have attended one of the established medical schools there have usually graduated Doctor of Medicine (MD).[104] All states require that applicants for MD licensure be graduates of an approved medical school and complete the United States Medical Licensing Exam (USMLE).[104]

Efficacy

There is a general scientific consensus that alternative therapies lack the requisite scientific validation, and their effectiveness is either unproved or disproved.[10][8][105][106] Many of the claims regarding the efficacy of alternative medicines are controversial, since research on them is frequently of low quality and methodologically flawed.[107] Selective publication bias, marked differences in product quality and standardisation, and some companies making unsubstantiated claims call into question the claims of efficacy of isolated examples where there is evidence for alternative therapies.[108]

The Scientific Review of Alternative Medicine points to confusions in the general population – a person may attribute symptomatic relief to an otherwise-ineffective therapy just because they are taking something (the placebo effect); the natural recovery from or the cyclical nature of an illness (the regression fallacy) gets misattributed to an alternative medicine being taken; a person not diagnosed with science-based medicine may never originally have had a true illness diagnosed as an alternative disease category.[109]

Edzard Ernst characterized the evidence for many alternative techniques as weak, nonexistent, or negative[110] and in 2011 published his estimate that about 7.4% were based on "sound evidence", although he believes that may be an overestimate.[111] Ernst has concluded that 95% of the alternative therapies he and his team studied, including acupuncture, herbal medicine, homeopathy, and reflexology, are "statistically indistinguishable from placebo treatments", but he also believes there is something that conventional doctors can usefully learn from the chiropractors and homeopath: this is the therapeutic value of the placebo effect, one of the strangest phenomena in medicine.[112][113]

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.[114] According to a 2005 book by a US Institute of Medicine panel, the number of RCTs focused on CAM has risen dramatically.

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%), 4.8% concluded no effect, 0.7% 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 more developed 2004 Cochrane database, while the conventional review used the initial 1998 Cochrane database.[115]

Alternative therapies do not "complement" (improve the effect of, or mitigate the side effects of) functional medical treatment.[n 7][10][26][27][28] Significant drug interactions caused by alternative therapies may instead negatively impact functional treatment by making prescription drugs less effective, such as interference by herbal preparations with warfarin.[116][33]

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.[117]

Cancer researcher Andrew J. Vickers has stated:

Contrary to much popular and scientific writing, many alternative cancer treatments have been investigated in good-quality clinical trials, and they have been shown to be ineffective. The label "unproven" is inappropriate for such therapies; it is time to assert that many alternative cancer therapies have been "disproven".[118]

Perceived mechanism of effect

Anything classified as alternative medicine by definition does not have a healing or medical effect. However, there are different mechanisms through which it can be perceived to "work". The common denominator of these mechanisms is that effects are miss-attributed to the alternative treatment.

How alternative therapies "work":
a) Misinterpreted natural course – the individual gets better without treatment.
b) Placebo effect or false treatment effect – an individual receives "alternative therapy" and is convinced it will help. The conviction makes them more likely to get better.
c) Nocebo effect – an individual is convinced that standard treatment will not work, and that alternative therapies will work. This decreases the likelihood standard treatment will work, while the placebo effect of the "alternative" remains.
d) No adverse effects – Standard treatment is replaced with "alternative" treatment, getting rid of adverse effects, but also of improvement.
e) Interference – Standard treatment is "complemented" with something that interferes with its effect. This can both cause worse effect, but also decreased (or even increased) side effects, which may be interpreted as "helping". Researchers, such as epidemiologistsclinical statisticians and pharmacologists, use clinical trials to reveal such effects, allowing physicians to offer a therapeutic solution best known to work. "Alternative treatments" often refuse to use trials or make it deliberately hard to do so.

Placebo effect

placebo is a treatment with no intended therapeutic value. An example of a placebo is an inert pill, but it can include more dramatic interventions like sham surgery. The placebo effect is the concept that patients will perceive an improvement after being treated with an inert treatment. The opposite of the placebo effect is the nocebo effect, when patients who expect a treatment to be harmful will perceive harmful effects after taking it.

Placebos do not have a physical effect on diseases or improve overall outcomes, but patients may report improvements in subjective outcomes such as pain and nausea.[119] A 1955 study suggested that a substantial part of a medicine's impact was due to the placebo effect.[120][119] However, reassessments found the study to have flawed methodology.[120][121] This and other modern reviews suggest that other factors like natural recovery and reporting bias should also be considered.[119][121]

All of these are reasons why alternative therapies may be credited for improving a patient's condition even though the objective effect is non-existent, or even harmful.[116][35][47] David Gorski argues that alternative treatments should be treated as a placebo, rather than as medicine.[35] Almost none have performed significantly better than a placebo in clinical trials.[8][46][122][76] Furthermore, distrust of conventional medicine may lead to patients experiencing the nocebo effect when taking effective medication.[116]

Regression to the mean

A patient who receives an inert treatment may report improvements afterwards that it did not cause.[119][121] Assuming it was the cause without evidence is an example of the regression fallacy. This may be due to a natural recovery from the illness, or a fluctuation in the symptoms of a long-term condition.[121] The concept of regression toward the mean implies that an extreme result is more likely to be followed by a less extreme result.

Other factors

There are also reasons why a placebo treatment group may outperform a "no-treatment" group in a test which are not related to a patient's experience. These include patients reporting more favourable results than they really felt due to politeness or "experimental subordination", observer bias, and misleading wording of questions.[121] In their 2010 systematic review of studies into placebos, Asbjørn Hróbjartsson and Peter C. Gøtzsche write that "even if there were no true effect of placebo, one would expect to record differences between placebo and no-treatment groups due to bias associated with lack of blinding."[119] Alternative therapies may also be credited for perceived improvement through decreased use or effect of medical treatment, and therefore either decreased side effects or nocebo effects towards standard treatment.[116]

Use and regulation

Appeal

Practitioners of complementary medicine usually discuss and advise patients as to available alternative therapies. Patients often express interest in mind-body complementary therapies because they offer a non-drug approach to treating some health conditions.[123]

In addition to the social-cultural underpinnings of the popularity of alternative medicine, there are several psychological issues that are critical to its growth, notably psychological effects, such as the will to believe,[124] cognitive biases that help maintain self-esteem and promote harmonious social functioning,[124] and the post hoc, ergo propter hoc fallacy.[124]

Marketing

Edzard Ernst, a leading authority on scientific study of alternative therapies and diagnoses, and the first university professor of Complementary and Alternative Medicine. Here in 2012, promoting his book Trick or Treatment co-written with Simon Singh.

Alternative medicine is a highly profitable industry, with a strong lobby. This fact is often overlooked by media or intentionally kept hidden, with alternative practice being portrayed positively when compared to "big pharma".[6]

The popularity of complementary & alternative medicine (CAM) may be related to other factors that Edzard Ernst mentioned in an interview in The Independent:

Why is it so popular, then? Ernst blames the providers, customers and the doctors whose neglect, he says, has created the opening into which alternative therapists have stepped. "People are told lies. There are 40 million websites and 39.9 million tell lies, sometimes outrageous lies. They mislead cancer patients, who are encouraged not only to pay their last penny but to be treated with something that shortens their lives. "At the same time, people are gullible. It needs gullibility for the industry to succeed. It doesn't make me popular with the public, but it's the truth.[125]

Paul Offit proposed that "alternative medicine becomes quackery" in four ways: by recommending against conventional therapies that are helpful, promoting potentially harmful therapies without adequate warning, draining patients' bank accounts, or by promoting "magical thinking."[40] Promoting alternative medicine has been called dangerous and unethical.[n 11][127]

Friendly and colorful images of herbal treatments may look less threatening or dangerous when compared to conventional medicine. This is an intentional marketing strategy.

Social factors

Authors have speculated on the socio-cultural and psychological reasons for the appeal of alternative medicines among the minority using them in lieu of conventional medicine. There are several socio-cultural reasons for the interest in these treatments centered on the low level of scientific literacy among the public at large and a concomitant increase in antiscientific attitudes and new age mysticism.[124] Related to this are vigorous marketing[128] of extravagant claims by the alternative medical community combined with inadequate media scrutiny and attacks on critics.[124][129] Alternative medicine is criticized for taking advantage of the least fortunate members of society.[6]

There is also an increase in conspiracy theories toward conventional medicine and pharmaceutical companies,[34] mistrust of traditional authority figures, such as the physician, and a dislike of the current delivery methods of scientific biomedicine, all of which have led patients to seek out alternative medicine to treat a variety of ailments.[129] Many patients lack access to contemporary medicine, due to a lack of private or public health insurance, which leads them to seek out lower-cost alternative medicine.[130] Medical doctors are also aggressively marketing alternative medicine to profit from this market.[128]

Patients can 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 have potential to cause life-threatening anaphylactic reactions in a very few individuals. 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 therapies to avoid the adverse effects of conventional treatments.[124][129]

Prevalence of use

According to recent research, the increasing popularity of the CAM needs to be explained by moral convictions or lifestyle choices rather than by economic reasoning.[131]

In developing nations, access to essential medicines is severely restricted by lack of resources and povertyTraditional remedies, often closely resembling or forming the basis for alternative remedies, may comprise primary healthcare or be integrated into the healthcare system. In Africa, traditional medicine is used for 80% of primary healthcare, and in developing nations as a whole over one-third of the population lack access to essential medicines.[132]

Some have proposed adopting a prize system to reward medical research.[133] However, public funding for research exists. In the US increasing the funding for research on alternative medicine is the purpose of the US National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine (NCCAM). NCCAM has spent more than US$2.5 billion on such research since 1992 and this research has not demonstrated the efficacy of alternative therapies.[122][134][135][136][137][138] The NCCAM's sister organization in the NIC Office of Cancer Complementary and Alternative Medicine gives grants of around $105 million every year.[139] Testing alternative medicine that has no scientific basis has been called a waste of scarce research resources. [140][141]

That alternative medicine has been on the rise "in countries where Western science and scientific method generally are accepted as the major foundations for healthcare, and 'evidence-based' practice is the dominant paradigm" was described as an "enigma" in the Medical Journal of Australia.[142]

In the US

In the United States, the 1974 Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act (CAPTA) required that for states to receive federal money, they had to grant religious exemptions to child neglect and abuse laws regarding religion-based healing practices.[143] Thirty-one states have child-abuse religious exemptions.[144]

The use of alternative medicine in the US has increased,[10][145] with a 50 percent increase in expenditures and a 25 percent increase in the use of alternative therapies between 1990 and 1997 in America.[145] Americans spend many billions on the therapies annually.[145] Most Americans used CAM to treat and/or prevent musculoskeletal conditions or other conditions associated with chronic or recurring pain.[130] In America, women were more likely than men to use CAM, with the biggest difference in use of mind-body therapies including prayer specifically for health reasons".[130] In 2008, more than 37% of American hospitals offered alternative therapies, up from 27 percent in 2005, and 25% in 2004.[146][147] More than 70% of the hospitals offering CAM were in urban areas.[147]

A survey of Americans found that 88 percent thought that "there are some good ways of treating sickness that medical science does not recognize".[10] Use of magnets was the most common tool in energy medicine in America, and among users of it, 58 percent described it as at least "sort of scientific", when it is not at all scientific.[10] In 2002, at least 60 percent of US medical schools have at least some class time spent teaching alternative therapies.[10] "Therapeutic touch" was taught at more than 100 colleges and universities in 75 countries before the practice was debunked by a nine-year-old child for a school science project.[10][75]

Prevalence of use of specific therapies

The most common CAM therapies used in the US in 2002 were prayer (45%), herbalism (19%), breathing meditation (12%), meditation (8%), chiropractic medicine (8%), yoga (5–6%), body work (5%), diet-based therapy (4%), progressive relaxation (3%), mega-vitamin therapy (3%) and Visualization (2%)[130][148]

In Britain, the most often used alternative therapies were Alexander techniqueAromatherapy, Bach and other flower remedies, Body work therapies including massage, Counseling stress therapies, hypnotherapyMeditationReflexologyShiatsuAyurvedic medicine, Nutritional medicine, and Yoga.[149] Ayurvedic medicine remedies are mainly plant based with some use of animal materials.[150] Safety concerns include the use of herbs containing toxic compounds and the lack of quality control in Ayurvedic facilities.[69][71]

According to the National Health Service (England), the most commonly used complementary and alternative medicines (CAM) supported by the NHS in the UK are: acupuncture, aromatherapy, chiropractic, homeopathy, massage, osteopathy and clinical hypnotherapy.[151]

In palliative care

Complementary therapies are often used in palliative care or by practitioners attempting to manage chronic pain in patients. Integrative 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."[152] 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."[153]

Regulation

Health campaign flyers, as in this example from the Food and Drug Administration, warn the public about unsafe products.

The alternative medicine lobby has successfully pushed for alternative therapies to be subject to far less regulation than conventional medicine.[6] Some professions of complementary/traditional/alternative medicine, such as chiropractic, have achieved full regulation in North America and other parts of the world[154] and are regulated in a manner similar to that governing science-based medicine. In contrast, other approaches may be partially recognized and others have no regulation at all.[154] In some cases, promotion of alternative therapies is allowed when there is demonstrably no effect, only a tradition of use. Despite laws making it illegal to market or promote alternative therapies for use in cancer treatment, many practitioners promote them.[155][156]

Regulation and licensing of alternative medicine ranges widely from country to country, and state to state.[154] In Austria and Germany complementary and alternative medicine is mainly in the hands of doctors with MDs,[36] and half or more of the American alternative practitioners are licensed MDs.[157] In Germany herbs are tightly regulated: half are prescribed by doctors and covered by health insurance.[158]

Government bodies in the US and elsewhere have published information or guidance about alternative medicine. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), has issued online warnings for consumers about medication health fraud.[159] This includes a section on Alternative Medicine Fraud,[160] such as a warning that Ayurvedic products generally have not been approved by the FDA before marketing.[161]

Risks and problems

Negative outcomes

Adequacy of regulation and CAM safety

Many of the claims regarding the safety and efficacy of alternative medicine are controversial. Some alternative therapies have been associated with unexpected side effects, which can be fatal.[162]

A commonly voiced concerns about complementary alternative medicine (CAM) is the way it's regulated. There have been significant developments in how CAMs should be assessed prior to re-sale in the United Kingdom and the European Union (EU) in the last 2 years. Despite this, it has been suggested that current regulatory bodies have been ineffective in preventing deception of patients as many companies have re-labelled their drugs to avoid the new laws.[163] There is no general consensus about how to balance consumer protection (from false claims, toxicity, and advertising) with freedom to choose remedies.

Advocates of CAM suggest that regulation of the industry will adversely affect patients looking for alternative ways to manage their symptoms, even if many of the benefits may represent the placebo affect.[164] Some contend that alternative medicines should not require any more regulation than over-the-counter medicines that can also be toxic in overdose (such as paracetamol).[165]

Interactions with conventional pharmaceuticals

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, and insulin potentiation therapy. Some herbal remedies can cause dangerous interactions with chemotherapy drugs, radiation therapy, or anesthetics during surgery, among other problems.[37][116][33] An 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.[166]

To ABC Online, MacLennan also gives another possible mechanism:

And lastly there's the cynicism and disappointment and depression that some patients get from going on from one alternative medicine to the next, and they find after three months the placebo effect wears off, and they're disappointed and they move on to the next one, and they're disappointed and disillusioned, and that can create depression and make the eventual treatment of the patient with anything effective difficult, because you may not get compliance, because they've seen the failure so often in the past.[167]

Side-effects

Conventional treatments are subjected to testing for undesired side-effects, whereas alternative therapies, in general, 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 potential to possess dangerous biological or psychological side-effects. Attempts to refute this fact with regard to alternative therapies sometimes use the appeal to nature fallacy, i.e., "That which is natural cannot be harmful." Specific groups of patients such as patients with impaired hepatic or renal function are more susceptible to side effects of alternative remedies.[168][169]

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."[170] 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.[170]

Treatment delay

Alternative medicine may discourage people from getting the best possible treatment.[171] Those having 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.[172] 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.[173] Between 2001 and 2003, four children died in Australia because their parents chose ineffective naturopathic, homeopathic, or other alternative medicines and diets rather than conventional therapies.[174]

Unconventional cancer "cures"

There have always been "many therapies offered outside of conventional cancer treatment centers and based on theories not found in biomedicine. These alternative cancer cures have often been described as 'unproven,' suggesting that appropriate clinical trials have not been conducted and that the therapeutic value of the treatment is unknown." However, "many alternative cancer treatments have been investigated in good-quality clinical trials, and they have been shown to be ineffective....The label 'unproven' is inappropriate for such therapies; it is time to assert that many alternative cancer therapies have been 'disproven'."[118]

Edzard Ernst has stated:

any alternative cancer cure is bogus by definition. There will never be an alternative cancer cure. Why? Because if something looked halfway promising, then mainstream oncology would scrutinize it, and if there is anything to it, it would become mainstream almost automatically and very quickly. All curative "alternative cancer cures" are based on false claims, are bogus, and, I would say, even criminal.[175]

Rejection of science

There is no alternative medicine. There is only scientifically proven, evidence-based medicine supported by solid data or unproven medicine, for which scientific evidence is lacking.

— P.B. Fontanarosa, Journal of the American Medical Association (1998)[42]

"CAM", meaning "complementary and alternative medicine", is not as well researched as conventional medicine, which undergoes intense research before release to the public.[176] Practitioners of science-based medicine also discard practices and treatments when they are shown ineffective, while alternative practitioners do not.[6] Funding for research is also sparse making it difficult to do further research for effectiveness of CAM.[177] Most funding for CAM is funded by government agencies.[176] Proposed research for CAM are rejected by most private funding agencies because the results of research are not reliable.[176] The research for CAM has to meet certain standards from research ethics committees, which most CAM researchers find almost impossible to meet.[176] Even with the little research done on it, CAM has not been proven to be effective.[178] Studies that have been done will be cited by CAM practitioners in an attempt to claim a basis in science. These studies tend to have a variety of problems, such as small samples, various biases, poor research design, lack of controls, negative results, etc. Even those with positive results can be better explained as resulting in false positives due to bias and noisy data.[179]

Alternative medicine may lead to a false understanding of the body and of the process of science.[171][180] Steven Novella, a neurologist at Yale School of Medicine, wrote that government-funded studies of integrating alternative medicine techniques into the mainstream are "used to lend an appearance of legitimacy to treatments that are not legitimate."[181] Marcia Angell considered that critics felt that healthcare practices should be classified based solely on scientific evidence, and if a treatment had been rigorously tested and found safe and effective, science-based medicine will adopt it regardless of whether it was considered "alternative" to begin with.[12] It is possible for a method to change categories (proven vs. unproven), based on increased knowledge of its effectiveness or lack thereof. A prominent supporter of this position is George D. Lundberg, former editor of the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA).[42]

Writing in 1999 in CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians Barrie R. Cassileth mentioned a 1997 letter to the US Senate Subcommittee on Public Health and Safety, which had deplored the lack of critical thinking and scientific rigor in OAM-supported research, had been signed by four Nobel Laureates and other prominent scientists. (This was supported by the National Institutes of Health (NIH).)[182]

In March 2009, a staff writer for the Washington Post reported that the impending national discussion about broadening access to health care, improving medical practice and saving money was giving a group of scientists an opening to propose shutting down the National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine. They quoted one of these scientists, Steven Salzberg, a genome researcher and computational biologist at the University of Maryland, as saying "One of our concerns is that NIH is funding pseudoscience." They noted that the vast majority of studies were based on fundamental misunderstandings of physiology and disease, and had shown little or no effect.[181]

Writers such as Carl Sagan, a noted astrophysicist, advocate of scientific skepticism and the author of The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark (1996), have lambasted the lack of empirical evidence to support the existence of the putative energy fields on which these therapies are predicated.[74]

Sampson has also pointed out that CAM tolerated contradiction without thorough reason and experiment.[183] Barrett has pointed out that there is a policy at the NIH of never saying something doesn't work, only that a different version or dose might give different results.[122] Barrett also expressed concern that, just because some "alternatives" have merit, there is the impression that the rest deserve equal consideration and respect even though most are worthless, since they are all classified under the one heading of alternative medicine.[184]

Some critics of alternative medicine are focused upon health fraud, misinformation, and quackery as public health problems, notably Wallace Sampson and Paul Kurtz founders of Scientific Review of Alternative Medicine and Stephen Barrett, co-founder of The National Council Against Health Fraud and webmaster of Quackwatch.[185] Grounds for opposing alternative medicine include that:

Many alternative medical treatments are not patentable,[192] which may lead to less research funding from the private sector. In addition, in most countries, alternative therapies (in contrast to pharmaceuticals) can be marketed without any proof of efficacy – also a disincentive for manufacturers to fund scientific research.[193]

English evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins, in his 2003 book A Devil's Chaplain, defined alternative medicine as a "set of practices that cannot be tested, refuse to be tested, or consistently fail tests."[194] Dawkins argued that if a technique is demonstrated effective in properly performed trials then it ceases to be alternative and simply becomes medicine.[195]

CAM is also often less regulated than conventional medicine.[176] There are ethical concerns about whether people who perform CAM have the proper knowledge to treat patients.[176] CAM is often done by non-physicians who do not operate with the same medical licensing laws which govern conventional medicine,[176] and it is often described as an issue of non-maleficence.[196]

According to two writers, Wallace Sampson and K. Butler, marketing is part of the training required in alternative medicine, and propaganda methods in alternative medicine have been traced back to those used by Hitler and Goebels in their promotion of pseudoscience in medicine.[8][197]

In November 2011 Edzard Ernst stated that the "level of misinformation about alternative medicine has now reached the point where it has become dangerous and unethical. So far, alternative medicine has remained an ethics-free zone. It is time to change this."[198]

Conflicts of interest

Some commentators have said that special consideration must be given to the issue of conflicts of interest in alternative medicine. Edzard Ernst has said that most researchers into alternative medicine are at risk of "unidirectional bias" because of a generally uncritical belief in their chosen subject.[199] Ernst cites as evidence the phenomenon whereby 100% of a sample of acupuncture trials originating in China had positive conclusions.[199] David Gorski contrasts evidence-based medicine, in which researchers try to disprove hyphotheses, with what he says is the frequent practice in pseudoscience-based research, of striving to confirm pre-existing notions.[200] Harriet Hall writes that there is a contrast between the circumstances of alternative medicine practitioners and disinterested scientists: in the case of acupuncture, for example, an acupuncturist would have "a great deal to lose" if acupuncture were rejected by research; but the disinterested skeptic would not lose anything if its effects were confirmed; rather their change of mind would enhance their skeptical credentials.[201]

Use of health and research resources

Research into alternative therapies has been criticized for "...diverting research time, money, and other resources from more fruitful lines of investigation in order to pursue a theory that has no basis in biology."[47][35] Research methods expert and author of Snake Oil ScienceR. Barker Bausell, has stated that "it's become politically correct to investigate nonsense."[122] A commonly cited statistic is that the US National Institute of Health had spent $2.5 billion on investigating alternative therapies prior to 2009, with none being found to be effective.[122]

Gallery

See also

Notes

  1. Jump up to:a b "[A]lternative medicine refers to all treatments that have not been proven effective using scientific methods."[10]
  2. Jump up to:a b "Complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) is a broad domain of resources that encompasses health systems, modalities, and practices and their accompanying theories and beliefs, other than those intrinsic to the dominant health system of a particular society or culture in a given historical period. CAM includes such resources perceived by their users as associated with positive health outcomes. Boundaries within CAM and between the CAM domain and the domain of the dominant system are not always sharp or fixed."[11]
  3. Jump up to:a b "It is time for the scientific community to stop giving alternative medicine a free ride. There cannot be two kinds of medicine – conventional and alternative. There is only medicine that has been adequately tested and medicine that has not, medicine that works and medicine that may or may not work... speculation, and testimonials do not substitute for evidence."[12]
  4. Jump up to:a b "The phrase complementary and alternative medicine is used to describe a group of diverse medical and health care systems, practices, and products that have historic origins outside mainstream medicine. Most of these practices are used together with conventional therapies and therefore have been called complementary to distinguish them from alternative practices, those used as a substitute for standard care. ... Until a decade ago or so, "complementary and alternative medicine" could be defined as practices that are neither taught in medical schools nor reimbursed, but this definition is no longer workable, since medical students increasingly seek and receive some instruction about complementary health practices, and some practices are reimbursed by third-party payers. Another definition, practices that lack an evidence base, is also not useful, since there is a growing body of research on some of these modalities, and some aspects of standard care do not have a strong evidence base."[16]
  5. ^ "An alternative medical system is a set of practices based on a philosophy different from Western biomedicine."[17]
  6. ^ "CAM is a group of diverse medical and health care systems, practices, and products that are not generally considered part of conventional medicine."[18]
  7. Jump up to:a b The Final Report (2002) of the White House Commission on Complementary and Alternative Medicine Policy states: "The Commissioners believe and have repeatedly stated in this Report that our response should be to hold all systems of health and healing, including conventional and CAM, to the same rigorous standards of good science and health services research. Although the Commissioners support the provision of the most accurate information about the state of the science of all CAM modalities, they believe that it is premature to advocate the wide implementation and reimbursement of CAM modalities that are yet unproven."[25]
  8. ^ In his book The Homœopathic Medical Doctrine Samuel Hahnemannthe creator of homeopathy wrote: "Observation, reflection, and experience have unfolded to me that the best and true method of cure is founded on the principle, similia similibus curentur. To cure in a mild, prompt, safe, and durable manner, it is necessary to choose in each case a medicine that will excite an affection similar (ὅμοιος πάθος) to that against which it is employed."[56]
  9. ^ According to the medical historian James Harvey Young:

    In 1991 the Senate Appropriations Committee responsible for funding the National Institutes of Health (NIH) declared itself "not satisfied that the conventional medical community as symbolized at the NIH has fully explored the potential that exists in unconventional medical practices.[94]

  10. ^ As the medical professor Kenneth M. Ludmerer noted in 2010: "Flexner pointed out that the scientific method of thinking applied to medical practice. By scientific method, he meant testing ideas with well-planned experiments to establish accurate facts. The clinician's diagnosis was equivalent to the scientist's hypothesis: both medical diagnosis and hypothesis required the test of an experiment. Flexner argued that mastery of the scientific method of problem solving was the key for physicians to manage medical uncertainty and to practice in the most cost-effective way."[96]
  11. ^ "Kessler refers to a lack of efficacy but never pushes back at Hatch by enumerating the dangers that unregulated products pose to the public, the dangers that fill the pages of Offit's book."[126]

References

  1. Jump up to:a b Shapiro, Rose (2010-09-30). Suckers: How Alternative Medicine Makes Fools of Us All. Random House. ISBN 9781409059165.
  2. ^ Bombardieri, D.; Easthope, E (October 2000). "Convergence between Orthodox and Alternative Medicine: A Theoretical Elaboration and Empirical Test". Health4 (4): 479–94. doi:10.1177/136345930000400404S2CID 71900519.
  3. ^ Shuval, Judith T.; Averbuch, Emma (2012). "Complementary and Alternative Healthcare in Israel"Israel Journal of Health Policy Research1 (7): 7. doi:10.1186/2045-4015-1-7PMC 3424827PMID 22913721.
  4. ^ Freedman, David H. (July–August 2011). "The Triumph of New-Age Medicine"Archived from the original on 10 May 2015. Retrieved 6 June 2015.
  5. ^ "Integrative medicine": A brand, not a specialtyScience Based Medicine
  6. Jump up to:a b c d e f Barrett, Stephen; London, William M.; Kroger, Manfred; Hall, Harriet; Baratz, Robert S. (2013). Consumer health: a guide to intelligent decisions (9th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill. pp. 34–35, 134, 137. ISBN 9780078028489OCLC 758098687.
  7. ^ "Directive 2004/24/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council"Official Journal of the European Union. 2004-04-30.
  8. Jump up to:a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r s t Sampson, W. (1995). "Antiscience Trends in the Rise of the "Alternative Medicine" Movement". Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences775 (1): 188–97. doi:10.1111/j.1749-6632.1996.tb23138.xPMID 8678416S2CID 2813395.
  9. ^ Kolata, Gina (June 17, 1996), "On Fringes of Health Care, Untested Therapies Thrive"The New York Times, retrieved December 22, 2015
  10. Jump up to:a b c d e f g h i j k l m National Science Board (2002). "Chapter 7: Science and Technology: Public Attitudes and Public Understanding, Section: Belief in Alternative Medicine"Science and Engineering Indicators. Arlington, Virginia: Division of Science Resources Statistics, National Science FoundationUS Government. Archived from the original on 2009-03-12.
  11. ^ IOM Report 2005, p. 19.
  12. Jump up to:a b c d Angell, M.; et al. (1998). "Alternative medicine--The risks of untested and unregulated remedies" (PDF)New England Journal of Medicine339 (12): 839–41. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.694.9581doi:10.1056/NEJM199809173391210PMID 9738094.
  13. Jump up to:a b c d Hines, Terence (2003). Pseudoscience and the Paranormal(2nd ed.). Amerst, New York: Prometheue Books. ISBN 9781573929790.Sampson, Walter (March 2001). "The Need for Educational Reform in Teaching about Alternative Therapies"Academic Medicine76 (3): 248–50. doi:10.1097/00001888-200103000-00011PMID 11242574.Coulter, Ian D; Willis, Evan M (June 2004). "The Rise and Rise of Complementary and Alternative Medicine: a Sociological Perspective"Medical Journal of Australia180 (11): 587–89. doi:10.5694/j.1326-5377.2004.tb06099.xPMID 15174992S2CID 15983789.Sagan 1996
  14. ^ Kent Heather (1997). "Ignore Growing Patient Interest in Alternative Medicine at Your Peril - MDs Warned"Canadian Medical Association Journal157 (10): 1427–28. PMC 1228476PMID 9371077.
  15. ^ Goldrosen MH, Straus SE (2004). "Complementary and alternative medicine: assessing the evidence for immunological benefits"Nature Reviews Immunology4 (11): 912–21. doi:10.1038/nri1486PMID 15516970S2CID 11708302.
  16. Jump up to:a b Harrison's Principles of Internal Medicine 2015, p. 1, chpt. 14-E.
  17. ^ "Complementary Medicine – Alternative Medical Systems"WebMD. 2014-01-14. Archived from the original on 2015-06-01. Retrieved 2015-06-04.
  18. ^ "The Use of Complementary and Alternative Medicine in the United States"National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health. 2015-04-07. Archived from the original on 2015-06-01. Retrieved 2015-06-04.
  19. Jump up to:a b c d Beyerstein BL (2001). "Alternative medicine and common errors of reasoning". Academic Medicine76 (3): 230–37. doi:10.1097/00001888-200103000-00009PMID 11242572S2CID 41527148.
  20. Jump up to:a b Saks, M. (1992). "Introduction". In Saks, M. (ed.). Alternative Medicine in Britain. Oxford: Clarendon Press. pp. 1–21. ISBN 9780198272786.
  21. ^ IOM Report 2005, p. 19.
  22. Jump up to:a b c d e f g h i j k "Complementary, Alternative, or Integrative Health: What's In a Name?". NCCIH Pub. No. D156. National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health (NCCIH)National Institutes of Health (NIH)US Dept. of Health and Human Services (US HHS). May 2002. Archived from the original on 2005-12-08. Retrieved 2006-07-11.
  23. ^ Sir Walton: Science and Technology Committee 2000Chapter 1: Introduction.
    Kopelman 2004.
    Wieland et al. 2011.
    Astin, J.A.; et al. (1998). "A review of the incorporation of complementary and alternative medicine by mainstream physicians"JAMA Internal Medicine158 (21): 2303–10. doi:10.1001/archinte.158.21.2303PMID 9827781.
    Pelletier, K.R.; et al. (1997). "Current trends in the integration and reimbursement of complementary and alternative medicine by managed care, insurance carriers, and hospital providers". American Journal of Health Promotion12 (2): 112–22. doi:10.4278/0890-1171-12.2.112PMID 10174663S2CID 46772634.
  24. ^ IOM Report 2005, pp. 17196–252.
  25. ^ White House Commission on Complementary and Alternative Medicine Policy (2002). "Overview of CAM in the United States: Recent History, Current Status, And Prospects for the Future"Final ReportNIH Pub. 03-5411. US Government Printing Office. ISBN 978-0160514760. Archived from the original on 2013-02-15. Chapter 2 archived 2011-08-25.
  26. Jump up to:a b Ernst, E. (1995). "Complementary medicine: Common misconceptions"Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine88 (5): 244–47. PMC 1295191PMID 7636814Complementary medicine, defined as health care which lies for the most part outside the mainstream of conventional medicine.
  27. Jump up to:a b Joyce, C.R.B. (1994). "Placebo and complementary medicine". The Lancet344 (8932): 1279–81. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(94)90757-9PMID 7967992S2CID 36724993.
  28. Jump up to:a b May, J. (2011). "What is integrative health?". BMJ343: d4372. doi:10.1136/bmj.d4372PMID 21750063S2CID 206893456.
  29. ^ "Complementary and Alternative Medicine in Cancer Treatment (PDQ®): Questions and Answers About Complementary and Alternative Medicine in Cancer Treatment"NCI website. Physician Data Query (PDQ®). National Cancer Institute (NCI), NIH. Archived from the original on 2012-12-15. Retrieved 2012-12-11.
  30. ^ Borkan, J. (2012). "Complementary alternative health care in Israel and the western world"Israel Journal of Health Policy Research1 (1): 8. doi:10.1186/2045-4015-1-8PMC 3424836PMID 22913745.
  31. ^ "What is Complementary and Alternative Medicine (CAM)?"National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine. Archived from the original on 2005-12-08. Retrieved 2006-07-11.
  32. ^ Zeller, T.; Muenstedt, K.; Stoll, C.; Schweder, J.; Senf, B.; Ruckhaeberle, E.; Becker, S.; Serve, H.; Huebner, J. (2013-03-01). "Potential interactions of complementary and alternative medicine with cancer therapy in outpatients with gynecological cancer in a comprehensive cancer center". Journal of Cancer Research and Clinical Oncology139 (3): 357–65. doi:10.1007/s00432-012-1336-6ISSN 1432-1335PMID 23099993S2CID 29598970.
  33. Jump up to:a b c Ben-Arye, Eran; Polliack, Aaron; Schiff, Elad; Tadmor, Tamar; Samuels, Noah (2013-12-01). "Advising patients on the use of non-herbal nutritional supplements during cancer therapy: a need for doctor-patient communication"Journal of Pain and Symptom Management46 (6): 887–96. doi:10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2013.02.010ISSN 1873-6513PMID 23707384.
  34. Jump up to:a b Li B, Forbes TL, Byrne J (2018). "Integrative medicine or infiltrative pseudoscience?". Surgeon16 (5): 271–277. doi:10.1016/j.surge.2017.12.002PMID 29305045.
  35. Jump up to:a b c d e Gorski, D. (2010-08-03). "Credulity about acupuncture infiltrates The New England Journal of Medicine"Science-Based MedicineArchived from the original on 2013-09-28.
  36. Jump up to:a b Elsevier Science (2002). "Author interview (Edzard Ernst, editor ofThe Desktop Guide to Complementary and Alternative Medicine)". Harcourt International. Archived from the original on 2002-03-02.
  37. Jump up to:a b Cassileth, B.R.; et al. (2004). "Complementary and alternative therapies for cancer". The Oncologist9 (1): 80–89. doi:10.1634/theoncologist.9-1-80PMID 14755017.
  38. ^ "The short and irreverent e-dition of The Skeptic's Dictionary – part 1 – sCAM – so-called complementary and alternative medicine"skepdic.com. Retrieved 2016-10-15.
  39. ^ Tyreman, Stephen (2011-05-01). "Values in complementary and alternative medicine". Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy14 (2): 209–17. doi:10.1007/s11019-010-9297-5ISSN 1572-8633PMID 21104324S2CID 32143622.
  40. Jump up to:a b c Offit, P. (2013). Do You Believe in Magic?: The Sense and Nonsense of Alternative Medicine. HarperCollins. ISBN 978-0062222961.Also published in the UK as Offit, Dr Paul (2013-06-09). Killing Us Softly: The Sense and Nonsense of Alternative MedicineISBN 9780007491735.
  41. Jump up to:a b c Diamond, J. quoted in Dawkins 2003. (p. 36 in 2004 US ed. ISBN 0618335404).
  42. Jump up to:a b c Fontanarosa, P.B.; et al. (1998). "Alternative medicine meets science". JAMA280 (18): 1618–19. doi:10.1001/jama.280.18.1618PMID 9820267S2CID 5485601.
  43. ^ IOM Report 2005, pp. 14–20.
  44. ^ Sointu 2012, p. 13.
  45. ^ Nissen, N.; et al. (2013). "Researching alternative and complementary therapies: Mapping the field". Medical Anthropology32 (1): 1–7. doi:10.1080/01459740.2012.718016PMID 23206171S2CID 31843233.
  46. Jump up to:a b Carroll, R.T. (2011-05-14). "complementary medicine"The Skeptics Dictionary (Online ed.). Archived from the original on 2013-09-27. 2013-09-27.
  47. Jump up to:a b c Novella, S. (2010-08-04). "Acupuncture pseudoscience in The New England Journal of Medicine"Science-Based MedicineArchived from the original on 2013-09-28.
  48. ^ Jeffery, Nick (2015). "There is no such thing as alternative medicine"Journal of Small Animal Practice56 (12): 687–688. doi:10.1111/jsap.12427ISSN 1748-5827PMID 26735773.
  49. ^ Offit, Paul A. (2013). Do you believe in magic? : the sense and nonsense of alternative medicine (1st ed.). New York, NY: Harper. ISBN 978-0-06-222300-5OCLC 849738969.
  50. ^ Minchin, Tim (2011-04-07). Tim Minchin's Storm the Animated Movie.
  51. ^ O'Connor 1995, p. 2.
  52. ^ Sarris, J.; et al. (2010). Clinical Naturopathy: An Evidence-based Guide to Practice. Elsevier Health Sciences. ISBN 9780729579261.
  53. ^ Jagtenberg T, Evans S, Grant A, Howden I, Lewis M, Singer J (2006). "Evidence-based medicine and naturopathy"J Altern Complement Med12 (3): 323–28. doi:10.1089/acm.2006.12.323PMID 16646733.
  54. ^ Ernst E (2001). "Rise in popularity of complementary and alternative medicine: reasons and consequences for vaccination". Vaccine20 (Suppl 1): S89–93. doi:10.1016/S0264-410X(01)00290-0PMID 11587822.
  55. ^ "Naturopathic Medicine"American Cancer Society. 1 Nov 2008. Archived from the original on 3 April 2015. Retrieved 20 Nov 2010.
  56. ^ Hahnemann 1833, p. iii48–49.
  57. ^ Ernst, E. (2002). "A systematic review of systematic reviews of homeopathy"British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology54 (6): 577–82. doi:10.1046/j.1365-2125.2002.01699.xPMC 1874503PMID 12492603.
  58. ^ House of Commons: Science and Technology Committee (22 February 2010). Evidence Check 2: Homeopathy (PDF) (Report). HC 45, Fourth Report of Session 2009–2010. London: The Stationery Office.
  59. ^ Shang, Aijing; Huwiler-Müntener, Karin; Nartey, Linda; Jüni, Peter; Dörig, Stephan; Sterne, Jonathan AC; Pewsner, Daniel; Egger, Matthias (2005), "Are the clinical effects of homoeopathy placebo effects? Comparative study of placebo-controlled trials of homoeopathy and allopathy", The Lancet366 (9487): 726–32, doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(05)67177-2PMID 16125589S2CID 17939264
  60. ^ "Homeopathy: An Introduction". Backgrounders. NCCIH. 2013 [2009]. Archived from the original on 2013-10-15.
  61. ^ Beyerstein, BL; Wallace Sampson (1996). "Traditional Medicine and Pseudoscience in China: A Report of the Second CSICOP Delegation (Part 1)"Skeptical Inquirer20 (4). Archived from the original on 2009-10-04.
  62. ^ Lu, Gwei-Djen; Needham, Joseph (1980). Celestial Lancets: a History and Rationale of Acupuncture and Moxa. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 9780521215138.
  63. ^ Maciocia, Giovanni (1995). Tongue Diagnosis in Chinese Medicine. Seattle: Eastland Press. ISBN 9780939616190.
  64. ^ Camillia Matuk (2006). "Seeing the Body: The Divergence of Ancient Chinese and Western Medical Illustration" (PDF)Journal of Biocommunication32 (1).
  65. ^ Deshpande, Vijaya (January 1987). "Medieval Transmission of Alchemical and Chemical Ideas between India and China" (PDF)Indian Journal of History of Science22 (1): 15–28. PMID 11622483. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2015-05-05.
  66. ^ Wujastyk 2003, p. xviii.
  67. ^ Mishra 2004, p. 8.
  68. ^ Dasgupta, Amitava; Hammett-Stabler, Catherine A (2011). Herbal Supplements: Efficacy, Toxicity, Interactions with Western Drugs, and Effects on Clinical Laboratory Tests. Hoboken NJ: John Wiley and Sons. pp. 202–05ISBN 9780470433508.
  69. Jump up to:a b Valiathan, M.S. (2006). "Ayurveda: Putting the house in order"(PDF). Guest Editorial. Current Science90 (1): 5–6.
  70. ^ Centers for Disease Control Prevention (CDC) (9 July 2004). "Lead Poisoning Associated with Ayurvedic Medications – Five States, 2000–2003"Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report53 (26): 582–84. PMC 2768057PMID 15241300.
  71. Jump up to:a b Saper, R.B.; et al. (2008). "Lead, mercury, and arsenic in US- and Indian-manufactured Ayurvedic medicines sold via the Internet"JAMA300 (8): 915–23. doi:10.1001/jama.300.8.915PMC 2755247PMID 18728265.
  72. ^ Hall, Harriet (2017-12-14). "Ayurveda: Ancient Superstition, Not Ancient Wisdom"Skeptical Inquirer. Retrieved 1 February 2018.
  73. ^ Breeher L, Mikulski MA, Czeczok T, Leinenkugel K, Fuortes LJ (6 Apr 2015). "A cluster of lead poisoning among consumers of Ayurvedic medicine"International Journal of Occupational and Environmental Health21 (4): 303–07. doi:10.1179/2049396715Y.0000000009PMC 4727589PMID 25843124.
  74. Jump up to:a b Sagan 1996.
  75. Jump up to:a b Rosa L, Rosa E, Sarner L, Barrett S (April 1998). "A close look at therapeutic touch"JAMA279 (13): 1005–10. doi:10.1001/jama.279.13.1005PMID 9533499.
  76. Jump up to:a b c d e Abdulla, Sara (May 13, 1999). "Phytotherapy – good science or big business?". Naturedoi:10.1038/news990513-8Science-based medicine, with its emphasis on controlled study, proof, evidence, statistical significance and safety is being rejected in favour of 'alternative medicine' – an atavistic portmanteau of anecdote, hearsay, rumour and hokum.... Probably the most commercially successful and widely used branch of alternative or complementary medicine is 'phytotherapy'. These are the tablets, powders and elixirs, otherwise known as herbal medicine, that are sold in most countries, through health shops and pharmacies as 'nutritional supplements'.... Only a tiny minority of these remedies have been shown to have mild-to moderately beneficial health effects... So why are affluent, otherwise rational, highly educated people (for this is the average user profile) so hungry for phytotherapy?... people still believe that 'natural' equals good and safe despite plenty of evidence to the contrary." ... as far as the human body is concerned, 'natural' is meaningless... Equally, what's so safe about consuming substances that need meet no standards of contents? ...
  77. ^ De Smet, Peter A.G.M. (December 1997). "The Role of Plant-Derived Drugs and Herbal Medicines in Healthcare". Drugs54 (6): 801–40. doi:10.2165/00003495-199754060-00003PMID 9421691S2CID 46970414.
  78. ^ "According to a New Government Survey, 38 Percent of Adults and 12 Percent of Children Use Complementary and Alternative Medicine"(Press release). NIH News. Bethseda, Maryland: National Center for Complementary and Integrative Medicine. 10 December 2008. Retrieved 4 June 2015.
  79. ^ Pearce, Alison; Simpson, Neil (March 1998). "A paediatrician's guide to complementary medicine". Current Paediatrics8 (1): 62–67. doi:10.1016/S0957-5839(98)80061-4.
  80. ^ "Faith Healing – Making Treatment Decisions". American Cancer Society. June 15, 2009.
  81. ^ Aviles, Jennifer M.; Whelan, Sr Ellen; Hernke, Debra A.; Williams, Brent A.; Kenny, Kathleen E.; O'Fallon, W. Michael; Kopecky, Stephen L. (December 2001). "Intercessory Prayer and Cardiovascular Disease Progression in a Coronary Care Unit Population: A Randomized Controlled Trial". Mayo Clinic Proceedings76 (12): 1192–98. doi:10.4065/76.12.1192PMID 11761499S2CID 7300728.
  82. ^ "Energy Medicine: An Overview". Backgrounders. NCCIH. 2005 [2004]. Archived from the original on 2016-05-22.
  83. Jump up to:a b c d Quack Medicine: A History of Combating Health Fraud in Twentieth-Century America, Eric W. Boyle, [1]
  84. Jump up to:a b c d Countercultural Healing: A brief History of Alternavie Medicine in America, James Whorton, PBS, November 4, 2003, [2]
  85. Jump up to:a b c d Nature Cures  – The History of Alternative Medicine in America, James C. Whorton, Oxford University Press, 2002, "Archived copy"(PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 2015-06-08. Retrieved 2015-06-08.
  86. Jump up to:a b The Rise and Rise of Complementary and Alternative Medicine: a Sociological Perspective, Ian D Coulter and Evan M Willis, Medical Journal of Australia, 2004; 180 (11): 587–89
  87. Jump up to:a b "The Alternative Fix – Introduction"www.pbs.org. Frontline – PBS.
  88. ^ The New Age of Alternative Medicine, Why New Age Medicine Is Catching On, Claudia Wallis, Time Magazine, 11-4-1991, [3]
  89. Jump up to:a b Ankerberg, John; Weldon, John (1996). New Age Medicine, Encyclopedia of New Age Beliefs. pp. 470–508. ISBN 9781565071605.
  90. Jump up to:a b c d Smith, T (1983). "Alternative medicine"British Medical Journal (Clinical Research Ed.)287 (6388): 307–08. doi:10.1136/bmj.287.6388.307PMC 1548588PMID 6307462One of the few growth industries in contemporary Britain is alternative medicine. An apparently endless stream of books, articles, and radio and television programmes urge on the public the virtues of treatments ranging from meditation to drilling a hole in the skull to let in more oxygen.
  91. ^ Other healers, other cures: A guide to alternative medicine, Helen Kruger, 1974, [4]
  92. ^ Law, Donald (18 May 1975). "A Guide to Alternative Medicine". Hippocrene Books, New York – via Amazon.
  93. ^ Winnick, T.A. (2005). "From quackery to "complementary" medicine: The American medical profession confronts alternative therapies". Social Problems52 (1): 38–61. doi:10.1525/sp.2005.52.1.38JSTOR 10.1525/sp.2005.52.1.38.
    Winnick, T.A. (2009). "From Quackery to "Complementary" Medicine: The American Medical Profession Confronts Alternative Therapies". In Conrad, P. (ed.). The Sociology of Health and Illness (8th ed.). New York: Worth. pp. 261–77. ISBN 9781429205580.
  94. ^ Young, J.H. (1998). "The Development of the Office of Alternative Medicine in the National Institutes of Health, 1991–1996". Bulletin of the History of Medicine72 (2): 279–98. doi:10.1353/bhm.1998.0110PMID 9628052S2CID 26685737.
  95. ^ Flexner, A.The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching (CFAT) (1910). "Medical Education in the United States and Canada Bulletin Number Four (The Flexner Report)". Boston: D. B. UpdikeMerrymount Press. Available from CFAT: The Flexner ReportArchived 2013-11-05 at the Wayback Machine.
  96. ^ Ludmerer, K.M. (2010). "Commentary: Understanding the Flexner Report" (PDF)Academic Medicine85 (2): 193–96. doi:10.1097/ACM.0b013e3181c8f1e7PMID 20107341.
  97. ^ Bianco, C. (April 2000). "How Becoming a Doctor Works: Medical School Curriculum"HowStuffWorks websiteArchived from the original on 2013-10-05.
  98. ^ "Stanford's medical curriculum"Stanford University websiteStanford University School of Medicine. Archived from the original on 2013-05-09. Retrieved 2013-01-26.
  99. ^ "Medical Student Education Program: Curriculum Overview"Yale University websiteYale School of Medicine. Archived from the originalon 2013-10-04.
  100. ^ Snyderman, R.; et al. (2002). "Integrative medicine: Bringing medicine back to its roots". JAMA Internal Medicine162 (4): 395–97. doi:10.1001/archinte.162.4.395PMID 11863470S2CID 46177131.
  101. ^ Berman, B.M. (2001). "Complementary medicine and medical education"BMJ322 (7279): 121–32. doi:10.1136/bmj.322.7279.121PMC 1119400PMID 11159555.
  102. ^ "Cochrane CAM Field"University of Maryland website. Center for Integrative Medicine, School of Medicine, University of Maryland. Archived from the original on 2013-09-28.
  103. ^ "Center for Integrative Medicine"University of Maryland website. University of Maryland School of Medicine. Archived from the originalon 2010-03-23.
  104. Jump up to:a b "Doctor of medicine profession (MD)"MedlinePlusUS National Library of Medicine, NIH. 2011-02-03. Archived from the original on 2013-01-27. Retrieved 2012-12-20.
  105. Jump up to:a b Kent, H. (1997). "Ignore growing patient interest in alternative medicine at your peril - MDs warned"Canadian Medical Association Journal157 (10): 1427–28. PMC 1228476PMID 9371077.
  106. Jump up to:a b Goldrosen, M.H.; et al. (2004). "Complementary and alternative medicine: assessing the evidence for immunological benefits". Perspective. Nature Reviews Immunology4 (11): 912–21. doi:10.1038/nri1486PMID 15516970S2CID 11708302.
  107. ^ IOM Report 2005.
  108. ^ Sarris, J. (2012). "Current challenges in appraising complementary medicine evidence" (PDF)Medical Journal of Australia196 (5): 310–11. doi:10.5694/mja11.10751PMID 22432660S2CID 31044567.
  109. ^ Alcock, J. (1999). "Alternative medicine and the psychology of belief"Scientific Review of Alternative Medicine3 (2).
  110. ^ Ernst, E. "The HealthWatch Award 2005: Prof. Edzard Ernst: Complementary medicine: The good the bad and the ugly". UK: HealthWatch. Archived from the original on 2013-10-16.
  111. ^ Ernst, E. (2011). "How Much of CAM Is Based on Research Evidence?"Evidence-based Complementary and Alternative Medicine2011: 676490. doi:10.1093/ecam/nep044PMC 3136881PMID 19465405.
  112. ^ "Alternative Medicine: Think yourself better"The Economist. 2011-05-19. pp. 83–84. Archived from the original on 2011-05-22.
  113. ^ Ernst, E. (2008). "Placebo and other Non-specific Effects". In Ernst, E. (ed.). Healing, Hype, or Harm? A Critical Analysis of Complementary or Alternative Medicine. Imprint Academic, Societas. ISBN 9781845401184.
  114. ^ Katz, D.L.; et al. (2003). "The evidence base for complementary and alternative medicine: Methods of evidence mapping with application to CAM". Alternative Therapies in Health and Medicine9 (4): 22–30. PMID 12868249.
  115. ^ IOM Report 2005, pp. 135–36.
  116. Jump up to:a b c d e Zeller, T.; Muenstedt, K.; Stoll, C.; Schweder, J.; Senf, B.; Ruckhaeberle, E.; Becker, S.; Serve, H.; Huebner, J. (2013-03-01). "Potential interactions of complementary and alternative medicine with cancer therapy in outpatients with gynecological cancer in a comprehensive cancer center". Journal of Cancer Research and Clinical Oncology139 (3): 357–65. doi:10.1007/s00432-012-1336-6ISSN 1432-1335PMID 23099993S2CID 29598970.
  117. ^ Bodeker, G.; et al. (2002). "A public health agenda for traditional, complementary, and alternative medicine"American Journal of Public Health92 (10): 1582–91. doi:10.2105/AJPH.92.10.1582PMC 3221447PMID 12356597.
  118. Jump up to:a b Vickers, A. (2004). "Alternative cancer cures: 'Unproven' or 'disproven'?". CA – A Cancer Journal for Clinicians54 (2): 110–18. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.521.2180doi:10.3322/canjclin.54.2.110PMID 15061600S2CID 35124492.
  119. Jump up to:a b c d e Hróbjartsson A, Gøtzsche PC (January 2010). Hróbjartsson A (ed.). "Placebo interventions for all clinical conditions" (PDF)The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews106 (1): CD003974. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD003974.pub3PMC 7156905PMID 20091554.
  120. Jump up to:a b Hróbjartsson A, Gøtzsche PC (May 2001). "Is the placebo powerless? An analysis of clinical trials comparing placebo with no treatment". The New England Journal of Medicine344 (21): 1594–602. doi:10.1056/NEJM200105243442106PMID 11372012.
  121. Jump up to:a b c d e Kienle GS, Kiene H (December 1997). "The powerful placebo effect: fact or fiction?". Journal of Clinical Epidemiology50 (12): 1311–8. doi:10.1016/s0895-4356(97)00203-5PMID 9449934.
  122. Jump up to:a b c d e "$2.5 billion spent, no alternative cures found". Alternative Medicine. NBCNews.comAssociated Press. 2009-06-10.
  123. ^ Sobel, D.S. (2000). "Chapter 28: The Cost-effectiveness of Mind-body Medicine Interventions". In Mayer, E.A.; Saper, C.B. (eds.). The Biological Basis for Mind Body Interactions. Progress in Brain Research. Volume 122. pp. 393–412. doi:10.1016/S0079-6123(08)62153-6ISBN 9780444500496PMID 10737073.
  124. Jump up to:a b c d e f Beyerstein, B.L. (1999). "Psychology and 'alternative medicine' social and judgmental biases that make inert treatments seem to work"Scientific Review of Alternative Medicine3 (2). Archived from the original on 2011-10-12. Retrieved 2008-07-07.
  125. ^ "Complementary therapies: The big con?"The Independent. London. 2008-04-22. Archived from the original on 2010-04-17. Retrieved 2010-04-23.
  126. ^ Jerome Groopman (October 19, 2013). "The Quackish Cult of Alternative Medicine. Dr. Paul Offit's battle against charlatanism"The New Republic. Retrieved 2015-02-03.
  127. ^ Weisleder, P (January 2010). "Unethical prescriptions: alternative therapies for children with cerebral palsy". Clinical Pediatrics49 (1): 7–11. doi:10.1177/0009922809340438PMID 19628756S2CID 19719686.
  128. Jump up to:a b Weber, D.O. (1998). "Complementary and alternative medicine considering the alternatives". Physician Executive24 (6): 6–14. PMID 10351720.
  129. Jump up to:a b c d e Beyerstein, B.L. (2001). "Alternative medicine and common errors of reasoning". Academic Medicine76 (3): 230–37. doi:10.1097/00001888-200103000-00009PMID 11242572S2CID 41527148.
  130. Jump up to:a b c d Barnes, P.M.; Powell-Griner, E.; McFann, K.; Nahin, R.L. (2004). "Complementary and alternative medicine use among adults: United States, 2002" (PDF)Advance Data from Vital and Health Statistics(343): 1–19. PMID 15188733.
  131. ^ Martin, Hélène; Debons, Jérôme (2015). CAM and conventional medicine in Switzerland : divided in theory, united in practice. In N. K. Gale & J. V. McHale, Routledge Handbook of Complementary and Alternative Medicine. Perspectives from social science and law. London and New York: Routledge. pp. 271–91.
  132. ^ "Traditional medicine". WHO. 2003. Archived from the original on 2008-07-27. Retrieved 2008-03-06.
  133. ^ Horrobin, D.F. (1986). "Glittering prizes for research support". Nature324 (6094): 221. Bibcode:1986Natur.324..221Hdoi:10.1038/324221a0S2CID 28273314.
  134. ^ Salzberg, Steven. "$142 Million For Quack Medicine Buried Inside The New 2018 Budget"Forbes. Retrieved 2019-02-14.
  135. ^ "NCCIH Funding: Appropriations History". NCCIH. 2008-01-09. Archived from the original on 2009-06-25. Retrieved 2008-04-02.
  136. ^ "NCCIH Strategic Plan 2016-2021, or: Let's try to do some real science for a change"Science-Based Medicine. 2016-04-04. Retrieved 2019-02-14.
  137. ^ Atwood, K.C., IV (September–October 2003). "The Ongoing Problem with the National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine"Skeptical Inquirer27 (5). Archived from the original on 2009-11-16. Retrieved 2009-11-18.
  138. ^ Green S (2001). "Stated goals and grants of the Office of Alternative Medicine/National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine". Scientific Review of Alternative Medicine5 (4): 205–07.
  139. ^ "Annual Report on CAM 2011" (PDF).
  140. ^ Wadman, Meredith (7 December 2009). "Centre turns away from healing herbs"Nature. Nature Publishing Group. 462 (7274): 711. doi:10.1038/462711aPMID 20010660.
  141. ^ Gorski, DH; Novella, SP (September 2014). "Clinical trials of integrative medicine: testing whether magic works?". Trends in Molecular Medicine20 (9): 473–76. doi:10.1016/j.molmed.2014.06.007PMID 25150944.
  142. ^ Coulter, I.D.; et al. (2004). "The rise and rise of complementary and alternative medicine: A sociological perspective"Medical Journal of Australia180 (11): 587–89. doi:10.5694/j.1326-5377.2004.tb06099.xPMID 15174992S2CID 15983789.
  143. ^ Merrick, Janna (June 2003). "Spiritual Healing, Sick Kids and the Law: Inequities in the American Healthcare System". American Journal of Law & Medicine29 (2): 269–99. doi:10.1017/S0098858800002847PMID 12961808.
  144. ^ "Definitions of Child Abuse and Neglect" (PDF). Child Welfare Information Gateway. 2007. Archived from the original (PDF) on 11 October 2007. Retrieved 2009-02-27.
  145. Jump up to:a b c Eisenberg, D.M.; et al. (1998). "Trends in alternative medicine use in the United States, 1990–1997: Results of a follow-up national survey"JAMA280 (18): 1569–75. doi:10.1001/jama.280.18.1569PMID 9820257.
  146. ^ Warner, J. (2006-07-20). "Alternative Medicine Goes Mainstream"WebMDCBS NewsArchived from the original on 2013-09-28. Retrieved 2013-03-11.
  147. Jump up to:a b "Latest Survey Shows More Hospitals Offering Complementary and Alternative Medicine Services" (Press release). American Hospital Association. 2008-09-15. Archived from the original on 2012-09-02. Retrieved 2013-03-14.
  148. ^ Barnes, P.M.; Bloom, B.; Nahin, R.L. (2008). "Complementary and alternative medicine use among adults and children: United States, 2007"National Health Statistics Reports (12): 1–23. PMID 19361005.
  149. ^ Sir Walton: Science and Technology Committee 2000.
  150. ^ Wujastyk 2003.
  151. ^ "Complementary and alternative medicine (CAM)"NHS Careers website. National Health Service in England (NHS), UK Dept. of Health. Archived from the original on 2013-04-03. Retrieved 2013-03-11.
  152. ^ Kellehear, A. (2003). "Complementary medicine: Is it more acceptable in palliative care practice?"Medical Journal of Australia179 (6 Supplement): S46–48. doi:10.5694/j.1326-5377.2003.tb05580.xPMID 12964939S2CID 35560507.
  153. ^ Menefee, L.A.; Monti, D.A. (2005). "Nonpharmacologic and complementary approaches to cancer pain management"The Journal of the American Osteopathic Association105 (5 Supplement): S15–20. PMID 16368903. Archived from the original on 2008-12-01.
  154. Jump up to:a b c WHO 2005.
  155. ^ "Complementary and alternative therapies – Cancer in general"www.cancerresearchuk.org. Cancer Research UK.
  156. ^ "Complementary cancer care service"www.uclh.nhs.uk.
  157. ^ Cassileth, B.R. (1996). "Alternative and complementary cancer treatments"The Oncologist1 (3): 173–79. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.493.434doi:10.1634/theoncologist.1-3-173PMID 10387984.
  158. ^ Marty, A.T. (1999). "The Complete German Commission E Monographs: Therapeutic Guide to Herbal Medicines". Books, Journals, New Media. JAMA281 (19): 1852–53. doi:10.1001/jama.281.19.1852-JBK0519-2-1.
  159. ^ "Medication Health Fraud"fda.gov. 2019-02-09.
  160. ^ "Alternative Medicine Fraud"fda.gov.
  161. ^ FDA, Use Caution With Ayurvedic Products
  162. ^ Niggemann, B.; Grüber, C. (22 February 2003). "Side-effects of complementary and alternative medicine". Allergy58 (8): 707–16. doi:10.1034/j.1398-9995.2003.00219.xPMID 12859546S2CID 30248695.
  163. ^ Colquhoun, D. (2012). "Regulation of alternative medicine ‐ Why it doesn't work" (PDF)Scottish Universities Medical Journal. EPub. 1(16): 1–9.
  164. ^ Connelly, P. (2012). "The ethics of acupuncture" (PDF)Scottish Universities Medical Journal1 (2): 165–69.
  165. ^ Malcolm, R. (2012). "Small but intriguing – The unfolding story of homeopathic medicine" (PDF)Scottish Universities Medical Journal. EPub. 1 (15): 1–7.
  166. ^ Hills, B. (2011-09-23) [1999]. "Fake healers: Why Australia's $1 billion-a-year alternative medicine industry is ineffective and out of control"BenHills.com. Archived from the original on 2012-03-15. Retrieved 2008-03-06.
  167. ^ Swan, N. (2000-10-02). "Alternative Medicine – Part Three"The Health ReportAustralian Broadcasting CorporationRadio National. Archived from the original on 2008-03-06. Retrieved 2008-03-06.
  168. ^ Roozbeh, J; Hashempur, M. H.; Heydari, M (Nov 2013). "Use of herbal remedies among patients undergoing hemodialysis"Iran J Kidney Dis7 (6): 492–95. PMID 24241097.
  169. ^ Del Prete, A; Scalera, A; Iadevaia, M. D.; Miranda, A; Zulli, C; Gaeta, L; Tuccillo, C; Federico, A; Loguercio, C (2012). "Herbal products: benefits, limits, and applications in chronic liver disease"Evid Based Complement Alternat Med2012: 1–19. doi:10.1155/2012/837939PMC 3443820PMID 22991573.
  170. Jump up to:a b Stehlin, I. (December 1996). "Homeopathy: Real medicine or empty promises?"FDA Consumer Magazine. Archived from the original on 2007-10-12.
  171. Jump up to:a b (Edzard), Ernst, E. (2018-01-11). More harm than good? : the moral maze of complementary and alternative medicine. Smith, Kevin. Cham, Switzerland. p. 18. ISBN 9783319699417OCLC 1019807158.
  172. ^ Navarro, V.J.; et al. (2006). "Drug-related hepatotoxicity". New England Journal of Medicine354 (7): 731–39. doi:10.1056/NEJMra052270PMID 16481640S2CID 41793815.
  173. Jump up to:a b Lilienfeld, S.O. (2002). "Our raison d'ĕtre"Scientific Review of Mental Health Practice1 (1). Archived from the original on 2007-07-11. Retrieved 2008-01-28.
  174. Jump up to:a b Hughes, D. (2010-12-23). "Alternative remedies 'dangerous' for kids says report"BBC NewsArchived from the original on 2010-12-24.
  175. ^ Miller, Gabriel (2 September 2014), "Asking the Experts: Complementary and Alternative Medicine and Cancer"Medscape, retrieved 7 September 2014
  176. Jump up to:a b c d e f g Ernst, E.; et al. (2004). "Ethical problems arising in evidence based complementary and alternative medicine"Journal of Medical Ethics30 (2): 156–59. doi:10.1136/jme.2003.007021PMC 1733834PMID 15082809.
  177. ^ Ernst, E. (1999). "Funding research into complementary medicine: The situation in Britain". Complementary Therapies in Medicine7 (4): 250–53. doi:10.1016/S0965-2299(99)80011-9PMID 10709311.
  178. ^ Ernst, .E; Pittler, M.H.; Stevinson, C.; White, A., eds. (2001). The Desktop Guide to Complementary and Alternative Medicine. Edinburgh: Mosby. ISBN 9780723432074OCLC 492760852.
  179. ^ Hall, Harriet (2019). "Science Envy in Alternative Medicine"Skeptical Inquirer43 (4): 21–23. Archived from the original on 2019-09-17. Retrieved 17 September 2019.
  180. ^ Fisken, Roger A. (2014-05-19). "Teach evidence based, not alternative, medicine"BMJ348: g3218. doi:10.1136/bmj.g3218ISSN 1756-1833PMID 24839973S2CID 206902331.
  181. Jump up to:a b Brown, D. (2009-03-17). "Scientists speak out against federal funds for research on alternative medicine"The Washington Post. Retrieved 2010-04-23.
  182. ^ Cassileth, B.R. (1999). "Evaluating complementary and alternative therapies for cancer patients"CA – A Cancer Journal for Clinicians49(6): 362–75. doi:10.3322/canjclin.49.6.362PMID 11198952S2CID 7889638.
  183. ^ Sampson W, Atwood K (2005). "Propagation of the absurd: demarcation of the absurd revisited". Med. J. Aust183 (11–12): 580–81. doi:10.5694/j.1326-5377.2005.tb00040.xPMID 16336135S2CID 43272637.
  184. ^ Barrett, S. (2004-02-10). "Be Wary of "Alternative" Health Methods"QuackwatchArchived from the original on 2008-05-09. Retrieved 2008-03-03.
  185. ^ "NCAHF Mission Statement"National Council Against Health Fraud (NCAHF) website. 2009-11-30. Retrieved 2013-03-11.
  186. ^ Steele, F.R. (1996). "Book review: The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark by Carl Sagan"Nature Medicine2 (9): 1042. doi:10.1038/nm0996-1042S2CID 41229701.
    Hines, T. (2003). Pseudoscience and the Paranormal (2nd ed.). Amherst, New York: Prometheus Books. ISBN 9781573929790.
    Sampson, W. (2001). Grollman, A.P. (ed.). "The need for educational reform in teaching about alternative therapies"Academic Medicine76 (3): 248–50. doi:10.1097/00001888-200103000-00011PMID 11242574.
    Coulter et al. 2004.
    Kent 1997.
    Sagan 1996.
  187. ^ Xiaorui Zhang. "Traditional Medicines: Definitions"WHO Website. Medicines. Archived from the original on 2013-09-27. Retrieved 2012-11-11. Extracted from WHO 2000.
  188. ^ IOM Report 2005, pp. 17–19.
  189. ^ Zollman, C.; et al. (1999). "What is complementary medicine?". ABC of complementary medicine. BMJ319 (7211): 693–96. doi:10.1136/bmj.319.7211.693PMC 1116545PMID 10480829.
  190. ^ IOM Report 2005, p. 146.
  191. ^ Acharya, D.; et al. (2008). Indigenous Herbal Medicines: Tribal Formulations and Traditional Herbal Practices. Jaipur, India: Aavishkar Publishers. p. 440. ISBN 9788179102527.
  192. ^ Fonfa, Anne E. (September 1, 2017). "Patient Perspectives: Barriers to Complementary and Alternative Medicine Therapies Create Problems for Patients and Survivors"Integrative Cancer Therapies6 (September 2007): 297–300. doi:10.1177/1534735407306598PMID 17761643.
  193. ^ Ernst, E. (2005). "The efficacy of herbal medicine -- An overview". Fundamental & Clinical Pharmacology19 (4): 405–09. doi:10.1111/j.1472-8206.2005.00335.xPMID 16011726S2CID 2327655.
  194. ^ Dawkins, R. (2003). Menon, L. (ed.). A Devil's Chaplain: Selected Essays. London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson. ISBN 9780753817506. (p. 180 in 2004 US ed. ISBN 0618335404).
  195. ^ Holloway, R. (2003-02-14). "A callous view". Books. The Guardian. London. Archived from the original on 2010-04-11. Retrieved 2010-04-23.
  196. ^ Ernst, E. (1996). "The ethics of complementary medicine"Journal of Medical Ethics22 (4): 197–98. doi:10.1136/jme.22.4.197PMC 1376996PMID 8863142.
  197. ^ Butler, K.; et al. (1992). A Consumer's Guide to "Alternative Medicine": A Close Look at Homeopathy, Acupuncture, Faith-healing and Other Unconventional Treatments. Consumer Health Library. Buffalo, New York: Prometheus. ISBN 9780879757335.
  198. ^ Ernst, E. (2011-11-08). "Alternative medicine remains an ethics-free zone"The Guardian. London. Archived from the original on 2013-01-28.
  199. Jump up to:a b Ernst E (2011). "Conflicts of Interest in Alternative Medicine"Skeptical Inquirer35 (4).
  200. ^ Gorski D (16 November 2009). "Conflicts of interest in science-based medicine"Science-Based Medicine.
  201. ^ Hall HA (27 April 2011). "Conflicts of interest"Science-Based Medicine.

Bibliography

Further reading

World Health Organization

Journals

External links