Med, Nursing Schools Teaching Alternative Remedies

digg Share this on Facebook Huffpost - Med, Nursing Schools Teaching Alternative Remedies stumble reddit del.ico.us RSS

MARILYNN MARCHIONE | 11/ 2/09 12:00 AM | AP

What's Your Reaction?
Alternative Remedy

EDITOR'S NOTE: Ten years and $2.5 billion in research have found no cures from alternative medicine. Yet these mostly unproven treatments are now mainstream and used by more than a third of all Americans. This is one in an occasional Associated Press series on their use and potential risks.

___

Future doctors and nurses are learning about acupuncture and herbs along with anatomy and physiology at a growing number of medical schools. It's another example of how alternative medicine has become mainstream. And it's often done with Uncle Sam's help.

The government has spent more than $22 million to help medical and nursing schools start teaching about alternative medicine – lesson plans that some critics say are biased toward unproven remedies.

Additional tax money has been spent to recruit and train young doctors to do research in this field, launching some into careers as alternative medicine providers.

Doctors need to know about popular remedies so they can discuss them nonjudgmentally and give competent advice, the government says, and many universities and medical groups agree.

"Patients are using these things" whether doctors think they should or should not, and safety is a big concern, said Dr. Victor Sierpina, an acupuncturist at the University of Texas Medical Branch in Galveston who heads a group of academics who favor such training.

But to critics, it's like teaching Harry Potter medicine. Students are being asked to close their eyes to science principles that guide the rest of their training in order to keep an open mind about pseudoscience, they say.

Story continues below
advertisement

"I'm concerned about the teaching of illogical thinking to medical students" and lending credence to biologically implausible theories like distance healing and energy fields, said Dr. Stephen Barrett, a retired physician who runs Quackwatch, a Web site on medical scams.

Teaching about alternative medicine implies acceptance of it and "potentially creates more gullibility and less critical, objective thinking," said Dr. Wallace Sampson, editor of the journal Scientific Review of Alternative Medicine. "This will be felt in many indirect ways," he said, including judgment errors, misguiding people with severe diseases, and lax standards and laws.

The real issue is not whether alternative medicine should be taught, but how, said Dr. Joseph Jacobs, former head of the federal Office of Alternative Medicine.

"The parallel here is creationism versus science," Jacobs said. "If the topic is taught objectively, to help students communicate with patients, it's a good idea. If it's being taught as part of an advocacy, for acceptance among physicians, I think that's a little bit bogus."

Sometimes the line is blurry.

Some schools have close ties to alternative medicine providers or advocates who shape information on the schools' Web sites or classes for students and the public. Two examples:

_The University of Arizona's Center for Integrative Medicine has medical residency programs in hospitals around the country, partly sponsored by well-known advocate Dr. Andrew Weil, the center's founder. A private group that promotes such care, the Bravewell Collaborative, gives scholarships for dozens of the Arizona school's students to get hands-on training in integrative care clinics.

_The University of Minnesota offers medical students an elective course in alternative healing methods at a Hawaiian medical center founded by a philanthropist-advocate of such care, although students pay their own transportation and living expenses. In interviews with an Associated Press writer in 2007, several students raved about things they had tried firsthand, and said they returned more willing to recommend acupuncture, meditation, yoga, herbal remedies and other nontraditional care.

"Consumers are demanding it" and more research is needed to see what works, said Mary Jo Kreitzer, who directs the Minnesota school's alternative medicine curriculum. "Ultimately we need to align policy" so that insurers pay for these therapies, she said. "You could say that in that respect, we are advocates."

The field got a boost 10 years ago, with creation of the National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine. It made merging alternative and mainstream medicine "a central and overarching goal" and gave $22.5 million to 12 medical schools, two nursing schools and the American Medical Student Association to develop curriculum plans.

Kreitzer's and Sierpina's universities got grants, and both are active in the Consortium of Academic Health Centers for Integrative Medicine – 42 centers involved in researching or advocating for complementary and alternative medicine, or CAM.

However, a review of some of those teaching plans by Drs. Donald Marcus and Laurence McCullough of Baylor College of Medicine in Houston concludes that they are "strongly biased in favor of CAM," cite poor-quality research, and were not updated after better studies revealed a therapy did not work. The review is in the September issue of the journal Academic Medicine.

The section on herbals in the Medical Student Association's plan was written by the head of the American Botanical Council, an industry-supported research and education group, the article says.

Sierpina, the head of the medical school consortium, said the purpose of these lesson plans is not propaganda.

"We are not trying to make students CAM practitioners," but to train them to be "sensitive to where people come from, their folk medicine, their home remedies," he said.

Just as there are true believers who ignore evidence that something doesn't work, there are true doubters who are guilty of "arrogant thinking that we've got it all figured out," Sierpina said.

Dr. Mehmet Oz agreed. The Columbia University heart surgeon and frequent Oprah Winfrey guest, now with his own TV show, has long shown an open mind toward complementary and alternative medicine.

"Medicine is very provincial. We grow up thinking the way others have taught us to think. We are naturally biased. It is imperative that we look at what alternative cultures offer us, that we at least are fair in our skepticism of their impact." Otherwise, "we run a risk of locking out newcomers" with fresh ideas, he said.

That would be people like Jimmy Wu, a newly graduated doctor from the University of Wisconsin-Madison. Raised in a family originally from Taiwan, Wu said traditional healing practices are "very much ingrained" in how he thinks about sickness and health.

"It's just a very different way of observing" a patient to decide on treatments, rather than relying so heavily on lab tests and other traditional medical tools, he said.

The Madison medical school offered an optional course in alternative medicine. Seeking more than that, Wu spent a summer in Beijing with a university faculty member observing traditional Chinese medicine and acupuncture, and hopes to include these in a family medicine practice someday. With so many people using alternative care, "it is important that it be treated more than just an afterthought" by medical schools, Wu said.

Officials at several top schools say they teach respect for patient choices, but do not teach unproven remedies or theories.

"All medical treatments ought to be held to the same standard," whether a prescription drug, an herbal pill or a mode of care, said Dr. Philip Gruppuso, Brown University's associate dean for medical education.

For example, acupuncture comes up in several places in the curriculum where there is evidence that it may help certain types of pain. However, students are not taught about body meridiens that allegedly channel energy, which acupuncturists claim to affect. Whether a school is promoting magical thinking about a therapy depends "more on how it's taught than what's taught," Gruppuso said.

At Harvard University, students have a couple of elective courses in such topics as mind-body medicine, but a spokeswoman said the university does not advocate or teach alternative medicine.

Georgetown University, which started the nation's first graduate degree program in complementary and alternative medicine, strives for objectivity, said the program's director, Hakima Amri.

"We are giving the facts, teaching what we know today. We are not promoting anything," she said.

That means straight talk about controversial fields like homeopathy, or the energy medicines qi gong and reiki, which claim to heal through a healer's powers, even at a distance.

"The science is not there to support that," Amri said.

Georgetown's goal is "to train a new generation of open-minded but critical physicians or scientists," she said. "We have seen students who come who are all enthusiasm about CAM because they've seen it work on their grandmother or someone like that. Then they go through the program and they see it differently. We want them to be really critical, able to separate the good from the bad."

___

On the Net:

Medical school group: http://www.imconsortium.org/cahcim/about/home.html

EDITOR'S NOTE: Ten years and $2.5 billion in research have found no cures from alternative medicine. Yet these mostly unproven treatments are now mainstream and used by more than a third of all Americ...
EDITOR'S NOTE: Ten years and $2.5 billion in research have found no cures from alternative medicine. Yet these mostly unproven treatments are now mainstream and used by more than a third of all Americ...
Report Corrections
 
Comments
47
Pending Comments
0
iPhone App Promo
Post Comment

Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to

View Comments:
- fcsakes I'm a Fan of fcsakes 80 fans permalink
photo

Although I adore and in many instances, respect, science, I do not think I should fall to my knees and give thanks for the "truth" every time someone attaches the word "science" to something. After all, a lot of that "science" was paid for by people who hope to make bunches of money by studying this, that or the other thing. Much of what we take to be illness springs from our quiet little psyche and likewise, much of what we take to be "cure" comes from the same place.

Further, when an article like this appears, I read it with the same degree of skepticism that I read reports written by the FDA, AMA, NIH, WHO, or any other partisanly (yes, I invented the word) oriented individual or group. The fact is, for the most part if an individual BELIEVES something works or will work, quite often it does. Also, I suspect "natural medicine" does far less damage to the body than much of the accepted medical procedures and medicines that our overpaid physicians, clinics, drug manufacturers and hospitals tout.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:29 PM on 11/15/2009

The funnier part is those med schools teaching "alternative" medicine are pumping out D.O.'s that no one wants to touch....

Alternative medicine is a sham... It's snake oil all over again.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:16 PM on 11/08/2009
- tarowig I'm a Fan of tarowig 4 fans permalink

I'm not sure I understand criticism towards this article - to me it simply points out that alternative medicine is being offered in medical/nursing schools now to give mainstream practitioners a better understanding of them and enable them to discuss these options with patients. Why is presenting the options to students to allow them to critically assess the benefits of those options a bad thing? Particularly when one of the common criticisms of mainstream medicine I find on Huffpost is that doctors/nurses do not engage enough in discussion of alternative remedies.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:55 PM on 11/03/2009

I believe the criticism is based on the article presenting a full picture of alternative medicine rather than a glowing endorsement.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:34 PM on 11/03/2009
- tarowig I'm a Fan of tarowig 4 fans permalink

That makes sense now. Thank you.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:09 AM on 11/04/2009

An article that quotes Stephan Barrett and Quackwatch just makes me roll my eyes. That guy was judged in two state courts to be without credibility. He is a sham. Why is he still quoted? The author really doesn't know what she is talking about but simply has some axe to grind about 'alternative' medicine.

Can we have a real journalist please?

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:48 AM on 11/03/2009
- euthman I'm a Fan of euthman 44 fans permalink
photo

Since the quacks have no science to bring to their argument, their only recourse is trying to silence their critics with lawsuits. That doesn't make alt med anything more than the fraud it is.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:55 AM on 11/03/2009
- jwander1 I'm a Fan of jwander1 3 fans permalink

Blah, blah, blah. The only fraud here is you, making these sweeping statements without having looked at the evidence for alternative therapies. Some "scientist" you are!

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:28 PM on 11/04/2009

Prolotherapy cured my injured neck. Intensive nutrition therapy and chelation have abated the symptoms of my MS, something the conventional medical drugs only made worse. My sister's migraines were cured by acupuncture - something no doctor was able to do for 18 years. You're welcome to keep taking your side-effect laden and often ineffective pharmaceuticals, euthman. For chronic conditions, I'll take alternative medicine every time. The proof is in my health.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:29 AM on 11/05/2009

co-signed.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:20 PM on 11/08/2009
- mofmars333 I'm a Fan of mofmars333 58 fans permalink
photo

I know what you man, Dragonfly.

How many times have we seen Barret & his quacks try to pin that label on good , credible & ethical individuals like they did with Andrew Wakefield who was, by lthe way, finally & recently vindicated?

It's becoming well known, who's who & what's what, now.

Check him out people & see a man who gave up his medical license to discredit any & all alternatives to the status quo in the medical field. It's thought big pharma backs him because he couldn't explain all his money as you can see here:

http://www.quackpotwatch.org/quackpots/quackpots/barrett.htm

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:27 AM on 11/03/2009
- mofmars333 I'm a Fan of mofmars333 58 fans permalink
photo

Here's some follow up that I can't believe people aren't discussing.

It's such good news for "US" who are trying to expose the cover up some call conspiracy theory, when in fact, we've crossed into conspiracy fact a long time ago.

Drug Giant Merck – “Destroy” Critical Doctors “Where They Live

"Court evidence now available on-line at the University of California library shows drug giant Merck systematically targeted “hit-lists” of doctors to discredit, neutralise or destroy critics of the safety and effectiveness of Merck’s drugs."

This included the controversial matter of Andrew Wakefield who's a British medical doctor who put children's health & safety over autism & the MMR vaccine before his career & has been hounded by big money ever since.

People here in these same type blogs who delighted in working to help discredit & smear him haven't said a word about this & I'm wondering what they're thinking?

http://childhealthsafety.wordpress.com/2009/10/12/merckdestroydoccritics/

Be sure to check out the whole site. It's wonderful to see so many articles & educational documentaries that bury all the deception our people have been fed for far too long.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:37 AM on 11/03/2009

I want proof wakefield was "vindicated."

Where are you basing this claim?

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:21 PM on 11/08/2009

I find this article amusing in its undisguised contempt for all things alternative. Apparently, the author is ignorant of the fact that 60% of our medicines are plant-based. Logical conclusion? You should pay attention to what an herbalist has to say about a plant's use. Herbal remedies that have been developed over 5000 years have lots of evidence to back them up--although not done according to modern scientific method. People aren't stupid. They tried things until something seemed to work. Then they used it again and again for a particular purpose. If it was useless, they wouldn't keep on doing it--wasting their time and money and the lives of those they loved! The Chinese government has been doing scientific studies on its traditional medicine methods for decades. What this author, and many of the medical establishment interviewed, fail to acknowledge is that our view of how the body works is not definitive. New discoveries are constantly altering our knowledge. Just because the Chinese believe in a system of energy and western science doesn't, does not mean it doesn't exist. Anyone recollect spontaneous generation? That was once the height of modern scientific thinking!

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:54 PM on 11/02/2009

People have been praying to various gods for thousands of years with no apparent effect. Just because people have done something for a long time does not imply efficacy. For example, if I keep rock under my hat for a week my cough disappears; it is easy to think the rock cured me unless you know about the presence of an immune system.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:34 PM on 11/02/2009
- wrender I'm a Fan of wrender 22 fans permalink
photo

It would be easy to think the rock cured you if you didn't understand the placebo affect, a.k.a. the power of the mind to heal. It's a medical fact that one's belief can affect their physiology. But this fact gets little attention in medical "science". If the medical industry were to promote, and publicly help develop a better understanding of this placebo affect, alot of CEOs, doctors, nurses, and janitors, etc. would be out of work. In fact, the entire economy would take a huge hit. But strangely enough, many people think these entities are working with our best interests in mind. Therefore, they would be nothing but honest, and willing to share and encourage unprofitable remedies.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:15 AM on 11/03/2009

Seems to me there is a big difference between praying for something to happen to whatever god one believes in, and actually TRYING to effect a cure. You can see whether what you tried worked and duplicate it--or try something else to get the result you want. And if you seemed to have success with something, you pass that information on for others to try. If it works for them too, they pass the information on. It may not have been according to modern experimental design, but it is a common sense approach that worked for millenia.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:12 PM on 11/04/2009

"Apparently, the author is ignorant of the fact that 60% of our medicines are plant-based."

Do you have a reference for this claim?

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:44 AM on 11/03/2009
photo

I think the point is that in the past all medicines were plant and animal based. Today, about 40% of medicines are still plant based, but largely many medicines have been replaced with chemicals. It's easier to patent a synthetic compounds. Much more difficult to patent a common plant.

http://www.medicinehunter.com/plant_medicine.htm
http://www.patienthealthinternational.com/about-medicines/?itemId=1620662&nav=yes
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/9997.php
http://kidshealth.org/kid/feel_better/things/kidmedic.html

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:15 PM on 11/04/2009

Sorry, can't help you. It was something I read several years ago. Can't remember where.

Interesting that pharmaceutical companies still send ethnobotanists out into the world to hunt down new plant medicines by questioning the traditional healers of various tribes. Medical science is only now discovering all the nutritional and medical benefits of phytochemicals--a huge new area to research.

My point is that this author seems to imply that herbal remedies are some kind of magical thinking. Pretty silly.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:28 PM on 11/04/2009

This article shows that too many people in medical schools, nursing schools, and the general public are lacking in logical thinking skills. I was glad to see that money was spent to evaluate CAM but I was unrealistic to hope that the findings would be accepted. Too many people have a monetary interest in promoting quack treatments, and too many people want to believe in CAM as being safer or more "natural" than scientific­ally-verif­ied treatments.

I see nurses buying into CAM because it lets them feel like they are providing care to patients that MDs can't or won't provide. The placebo effect is powerful and the positive response from patients make the RNs feel they were effective.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:15 PM on 11/02/2009
- TigersEye I'm a Fan of TigersEye 54 fans permalink
photo

I don't agree. I've seen, far too often, how allopathic medicine treats the symptoms and not the cause. I've seen physicians give patients drug after drug after drug for digestive symptoms without bothering to discuss the impact and importance of healthy nutrition. Most allopathic providers don't seem to want to discuss with their patients the adverse effects that toxic food (and drink) additives such as MSG, Aspartame and HFCS have on the human body and encourage their patients to adapt a healthier lifestyle. But if we all were healthier who would be writing those checks to big pharma?

People are discovering for themselves that more often than not proper diet, exercise and healthy living will alleviate a lot of symptoms that they previously were given prescriptions for. For one example, Vitamin D3 has become a hot topic lately because of the connection between suboptimal immune systems, autoimmune disorders and D3 deficiency. People in this day and age eat too much junk and aren't getting nearly enough nutrients for a healthy body. People also want alternatives to the side effects and long term reliance on meds. It's worth a look.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:54 PM on 11/02/2009
photo

Great post!

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:16 PM on 11/04/2009
- jwander1 I'm a Fan of jwander1 3 fans permalink

There are plenty of moneyed interests in keeping drugs and surgery as the preferred treatments as well, pal. Are you going to call them quacks as well? Plus, you clearly haven't even looked into the evidence for alternative therapies before making up you mind. How scientific is that?

Got to Medline and do some research: vitamin D and cancer - 5,600 Medline search results; vitamin C and cancer - 3,734 Medline search results; magnesium and diabetes - 1,190 Medline search results; green tea and cancer - 1,309 Medline search results. There are thousands and thousands of additional studies.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:45 PM on 11/04/2009

The problem is, brentrn, allopathic medicine has no "cure" for many conditions. The pharmaceuticals often prescribed are laden with side effects and only minimally effective. I have MS. The 4 drugs prescribed to control the disease have from 32-45% efficacy at slowing the disease down, not curing it. And the side effects of these drugs can be horrendous - suicidal depression, dying flesh around the injection sites, liver damage, increased incidence of cancer, and sometimes even increased disease activity.

You claim the public lacks "logical thinking skills." Well let me tell you. Unless you've been diagnosed with an incurable, progressive disease that has minimal treatment options you have absolutely NO IDEA WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT! I have had far more success using intensive nutrition therapy and chelation than any of the pharmaceuticals. You ought to try living in my shoes for a short while. You wouldn't make such ridiculous accusations about the "general public" Mr. or Ms. Knowitall.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:53 AM on 11/05/2009

Brent, I agree fully. It's a shame to see fellow medical professionals falling into this trap.

My hospital has a few RN's that offer "healing touch" and "reiki" treatments... We are a magnet hospital....I keep hoping some day reiki and crystal balls will go the route of "24-hour Hollywood Diet."

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:48 PM on 11/08/2009
- wrender I'm a Fan of wrender 22 fans permalink
photo

People are finally beginning to find truth through personal experience. It's the only thing we can trust anymore. Why would mainstream medical science have any interest in finding positive results in alternative medicine? There's really not much money to be made in doing so.

The truth is, allopathic medicine is really the alternative medicine. It's the alternative to what nature has provided us with for millenia. As a species that evoloved on planet Earth, we are surrounded by the fuel that sustains us as well as heals us. This isn't to say allopathic medicine has no place in treating illness, but it should be viewed as an option only.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:48 PM on 11/02/2009
- TigersEye I'm a Fan of TigersEye 54 fans permalink
photo

Great post and you're absolutely right.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:34 PM on 11/02/2009
- euthman I'm a Fan of euthman 44 fans permalink
photo

What "nature has provided us with" is a body that can function for about 45 years if it can survive a panoply of childhood infections, the challenge of childbirth, and potential for various injuries. What "allopathic medicine" has given us is a body that can last 30 to 40 years beyond what nature gave us, plus safe childbirth, and a childhood free of life-threatening viral and bacterial infections.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:02 AM on 11/03/2009
- wrender I'm a Fan of wrender 22 fans permalink
photo

You assume two things. Firstly, that our extended lifespan is due solely to allopathic medicine as opposed to things like better nutritional understanding, sanitation technology, less strife and hunger, less life-threatening circumstances, or overall better standard of living. We can't discount extended lifespan as a natural evolutionary trait either. Undoubtedly, emergency room / hospital treatment plays a role, if mostly due to the fact that there are medicines and treatments that can save one's life after trauma. I'd even concede to some vaccinations playing a vital role as well. But it's good to see that we're beginning to see more options. I'd personally like to see the best of both (allopathic & natropathic) forms of medicine coexist peacefully.

The second thing you assume is that the longer lifespan is indeed what's best for humanity or the planet in general. It's nice to think we can live well into our 70s and beyond, but that's mainly because we've achieved it and have come to expect it. But our planet is not in the best of conditions at the moment, politically, sociologically or geologically. It would be interesting to see a study of how our current lifespan affects our world. Is it positive, or ultimately negative?

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:04 AM on 11/03/2009
- shoabear I'm a Fan of shoabear 6 fans permalink

Oh the myopia.

This is a tired argument. Very tired. Yes, yes of course allopathic medicine has provided the human race with truly astounding advancements. Allopathy has its place and is going nowhere. We need it.

But alternative therapies have their place as well. Can we try to reign in the binary thinking just for a moment euthman?

Full disclosure: I am an acupuncturist in Ca. NOt many people know this but I chose a 5 year advanced degree with a very strong integrative medicine program. The president of my school was a surgeon and the biomedicine department's classes are ALL taught by MD's as is much of the Oriental Med dept (MD's from China).

Allopathic medicine is now becoming a very strong component in my field. Please stop making sweeping judgments and pitting these fields against each other.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:52 AM on 11/04/2009

 You must be logged in to comment. Log in  or connect with 

Connect