Evaluating unconventional therapies
CMAJ 1998;159:759
See response from: E. Kaegi, M. Schneider
Bravo to Dr. Noel B. Hershfield for his letter "Herbal medicine: Show me the proof!" (CMAJ 1998;158[13]:1689-90 [full text]). It seems too few doctors are willing to ask the hard questions about alternative medicine.
Rather than take at face value the claims of nonscientific therapists such as naturopaths, it would be of more value to our profession and ultimately the public to subject these claims to rigorous testing before promoting them as bona fide treatments.
One gets the impression that medical journals are bending over backward to accommodate articles on unconventional treatments. For example, the article "A patient's guide to choosing unconventional therapies" (CMAJ 1998;158[9]:1161-5 [full text]) fails to make the point that the vast majority of unconventional treatments have no scientific basis and at best offer false hope.
Despite this, the article suggests that patients seek information on these therapies from unconventional health care providers. How is the lay person to discriminate between the validity of what they hear from a properly trained physician and what they might be told by an unconventional health care provider? Advising patients to "not hesitate to ask individuals about their training, licences and experience" is of no help in a society where legislative recognition of a health care "profession" has no relation to its scientific validity.
We face a real danger of a decline in medical standards of safety and efficacy if our profession's complacency continues. Science cannot cure all the world's problems, but it remains our best means of ensuring rational, effective and compassionate care for those who need it.
Lloyd Oppel, BSc, MD
White Rock, BC
lloyd_oppel@bc.sympatico.ca
 |
Send a letter to the editor Envoyez une lettre à la rédaction |
