Research Evidence for Complementary Therapies
Description
This article is from the Health Articles series.
Research Evidence for Complementary Therapies
Generally, there is little hard research evidence for the effectiveness of complementary therapies. This does not mean that these approaches are not useful -- just that the question is still open. As these approaches are researched, they either tend to move into the mainstream, as is currently happening with a range of mind-body therapies and acupuncture, or they are essentially abandoned, as has largely happened with laetrile, the popular cancer "cure" derived from apricot pits.
But cultural and institutional considerations also play a role in deciding what is and what is not considered "alternative." Almost by definition, a therapy is considered "alternative" if it is not taught in medical schools, even if there is good research evidence for efficacy as there is for acupuncture, chiropractic and some herbal therapies. For example, the strength of the research for the effectiveness of homeopathy for some conditions is quite compelling, yet because there is no rational scientific mechanism to explain its action, it is still dismissed by many researchers.
In Germany, for example, the herb St. John's Wort is prescribed much more often for mild to moderate depression than is the drug Prozac.
Continue to:
My Books
