Last week seven short films were broadcast on Channel 4 in the UK in the 4Thought slot presenting various viewpoints on whether Alternative Medicine should be available on the NHS. The videos can be seen here, and are well worth a look.
It was interesting to see the different viewpoints presented in a calm and reasonable manner, without the tiresome extremes of theatrics, sycophancy, conspiracy theories, claims and counterclaims that accompany such debates on internet forums.
In the films, the main objection to the integration of Complementary and Alternative Medicine (CAM) seems to be that alternative medicine is unproven, and that it is dangerous for people with serious diseases such as cancer to rely on alternative approaches. For the record I agree with this. I’m not a medical doctor, and I don’t try to be one. I don’t want that life and death responsibility (at least not without the 6 figure salary to go with it!). I don’t treat cancer, or any other condition for that matter – I treat people. I don’t interfere with, impede or advise against their mainstream treatment, and I definitely don’t advise them on their medication.
Overall, and perhaps unsurprisingly, I’m with Bowen Therapist Martina Hinds (featured in one of the 4Thought films) in her preference for an integrated system of medicine, as I have experienced such a system during my clinical acupuncture placement in a brain injury ward in a hospital in Nanjing, but I doubt that such a system will ever come about here.
For any complementary and alternative therapies to be accepted by the medical mainstream, they will have to demonstrate their efficacy in a manner that satisfies the reductionist approach favoured by the evidence-based medicine movement, and I have already written about how this may not be a suitable medium for the evaluation of holistic interventions.
But what if a therapy managed to demonstrate it’s effectiveness to a degree that allowed acceptance by mainstream medicine? Well, then it would cease to be an alternative form of medicine, and would become a medical intervention, and I dare say it wouldn’t be long before the practice of this medical intervention was restricted to ‘proper’ medically-trained practitioners, leaving the alternative practitioners out in the cold, unable to practice. A scary thought perhaps, but unlikely to happen due to the prevalence of close-minded pseudo-scepticism in health and other scientific fields. These so-called ‘free-thinkers’ seem unaware of their own bias towards alternative medicine, immediately dismissing any hint of efficacy instead of retaining the open-minded questioning attitude characteristic of true scepticism.
The consensus seems to be that if an outcome wasn’t obtained as part of a randomised controlled study then it didn’t happen. I am now in my eighth year of practice, and have consistently seen phenomenal results for the majority of my clients. These results and any testimonials from my clients are anecdotal evidence for the efficacy of my work. In evidence-based medicine terms anecdotal evidence is dismissed as, at worst, lies and fabrication, and at best, what? Coincidence? How many coincidences does it take, happening consistently, one after another over eight years before a statistically significant trend arises? Perhaps one of my mathematician friends can advise on that.
Current political developments with the NHS, where the slide towards privatisation has begun, may level the playing field somewhat between mainstream and CAM approaches as patients may eventually find that they have to pay for certain services. Currently in the UK, the perception is that the NHS is free, because services are subsidised and are not charged at the ‘point of sale’. Every taxpayer and national insurance contributor pays for the NHS, but because this payment is physically and ideologically removed from the service provided, medical treatment appears to be free, which can be a hurdle for those considering CAM treatment, where they are expected to pay the service provider.
Consider the situation in the Republic of Ireland, where people pay to see their GP. There people are more likely to choose a practitioner who will provide a solution to the problem, so for example a person with back pain might choose to see a Bowen therapist, who can usually provide lasting relief within a couple of treatments, rather than their GP, who might prescribe painkillers initially, and possibly eventually refer them for physiotherapy. As the NHS changes over the coming years, this is where we may find ourselves. Market forces and real-life efficacy will determine who thrives.
Posted by bowenbelfast 
