Complementary and alternative drug therapy versus science-oriented medicine
| العنوان: | Complementary and alternative drug therapy versus science-oriented medicine |
|---|---|
| المؤلفون: | Anlauf, Manfred, Hein, Lutz, Hense, Hans-Werner, Köbberling, Johannes, Lasek, Rainer, Leidl, Reiner, Schöne-Seifert, Bettina |
| المصدر: | GMS German Medical Science; VOL: 13; DOC05 /20150623/ GMS German Medical Science GMS Ger. Med. Sci. 13:Doc05 (2015) GMS German Medical Science, Vol 13, p Doc05 (2015) |
| بيانات النشر: | German Medical Science GMS Publishing House; Düsseldorf, 2015. |
| سنة النشر: | 2015 |
| مصطلحات موضوعية: | Complementary Therapies, Placebo-Forschung, Biomedical Research, Anthroposophische Medizin, lcsh:Medicine, Anthroposophy, Cam, Anthroposophic Medicine, Complementary Alternative Therapy, Homeopathy, Medical Ethics, Phytotherapy, Placebo Research, Science-oriented Medicine, wissenschaftsorientierte Medizin, Article, Homöopathie, Germany, Humans, Phytotherapie, komplementär-alternative Therapie, Evidence-Based Medicine, CAM, science-oriented medicine, lcsh:R, phytotherapy, 610 Medical sciences, Medicine, Placebo Effect, ddc: 610, medical ethics, anthroposophic medicine, Medizinethik, homeopathy, placebo research, complementary alternative therapy |
| الوصف: | This opinion deals critically with the so-called complementary and alternative medical (CAM) therapy on the basis of current data. From the authors’ perspective, CAM prescriptions and most notably the extensive current endeavours to the “integration” of CAM into conventional patient care is problematic in several respects. Thus, several CAM measures are used, although no specific effects of medicines can be proved in clinical studies. It is extensively explained that the methods used in this regard are those of evidence-based medicine, which is one of the indispensable pillars of science-oriented medicine. This standard of proof of efficacy is fundamentally independent of the requirement of being able to explain efficacy of a therapy in a manner compatible with the insights of the natural sciences, which is also essential for medical progress. Numerous CAM treatments can however never conceivably satisfy this requirement; rather they are justified with pre-scientific or unscientific paradigms. The high attractiveness of CAM measures evidenced in patients and many doctors is based on a combination of positive expectations and experiences, among other things, which are at times unjustified, at times thoroughly justified, from a science-oriented view, but which are non-specific (context effects). With a view to the latter phenomenon, the authors consider the conscious use of CAM as unrevealed therapeutic placebos to be problematic. In addition, they advocate that academic medicine should again systematically endeavour to pay more attention to medical empathy and use context effects in the service of patients to the utmost. The subsequent opinion discusses the following after an introduction to medical history: the definition of CAM; the efficacy of most common CAM procedures; CAM utilisation and costs in Germany; characteristics of science-oriented medicine; awareness of placebo research; pro and contra arguments about the use of CAM, not least of all in terms of aspects related to medical ethics. GMS German Medical Science; 13:Doc05; ISSN 1612-3174 |
| وصف الملف: | application/pdf |
| اللغة: | English |
| تدمد: | 1612-3174 |
| DOI: | 10.3205/000209 |
| الوصول الحر: | https://explore.openaire.eu/search/publication?articleId=doi_dedup___::c6e8417e393224d9d5cf2a62405928f0Test |
| حقوق: | OPEN |
| رقم الانضمام: | edsair.doi.dedup.....c6e8417e393224d9d5cf2a62405928f0 |
| قاعدة البيانات: | OpenAIRE |
| تدمد: | 16123174 |
|---|---|
| DOI: | 10.3205/000209 |