Monday, September 19, 2011

How I want my doctor to approach alternative medicine.

I was pleased to see that CPSO is considering guidelines that are more open-minded about alternative medicine, but I'm concerned at the kinds of criticism this idea is receiving.

I would love to have my doctor give me alternative medicine advice because then I'd get one-stop shopping. My doctor would tell me if I would benefit from seeing a gastroenterologist or a gynecologist or a dermatologist. He would tell me if I would benefit from taking a certain vitamin or if I should avoid a certain over-the-counter drug. I'd also like him to tell me if I'd benefit from seeing a naturopath or taking a certain herb. I don't want to have to come up with the idea myself.

However, it concerns me that some organizations don't want CPSO even thinking about alternative medicine because it's "unscientific" or "unproven".

The reason why many alternative therapies are "unproven" is because they aren't required to undergo the same scientific testing as conventional medicine, so they often don't. The fact that they're unproven doesn't mean that they don't work, it doesn't mean that they're dangerous, it just means that the science hasn't been done yet.

Analogy: I have never in my life undergone any sort of formal English-language proficiency testing. That doesn't mean I can't speak English. Of course, you can't go around blindly assuming that I can speak English either, but you could conduct an informal, unscientific test by speaking to me in English, and the results of that would be a pretty good indicator.

I'm also worried that critics seem to be assuming that unproven = harmful. It's very possible for something to not have been tested scientifically but not be harmful. It's even possible for it be ineffective but not be harmful.

Analogy: When I was having difficulty swallowing, I googled up the reflexology points for the esophagus and massaged them. Is reflexology scientifically proven? A quick google is inconclusive. (To say nothing of the fact that my amateur attempt at reflexology was probably not properly done.) But it certainly wasn't harmful for me to sit there massaging my own feet on the off-chance that it might help.

One of the (many) things that frustrates me about GERD "treatment" is that conventional medicine and naturopathy recommend different (and often contradictory) diet changes. For example, conventional medicine says no to citrus and yes to low-fat milk products, and naturopathy is the other way around. So I find myself in the position of having two trained, credentialed, experienced professionals, both of whom have gotten results for me in the past, telling me opposite things. And, because I don't feel pain when I'm refluxing, I can't even do an experiment and see which works best for me.

I see conventional and alternative medicines as complementary tools in my toolkit, and I want my practitioners to work together as a team rather than competing with each other. When I see medical professionals getting alarmist, conflating "unproven" with "dangerous", it starts making me wonder if they have something to hide. And I don't want to be wondering if they have something to hide, because I need to be able to trust them - I'm not smart enough to figure stuff out myself.

If my doctor were to start warning me away from all alternative treatments just because they haven't gone through full clinical testing, I'll just end up feeling disinclined to tell him about any alternative treatments I might be experimenting with. I want him to warn me away from anything known to be dangerous, point me towards any treatments or alternative medicine professionals likely to be useful, and non-judgementally give me any information he might have about things that are harmless but likely ineffective. Anything less is useless to me and weakens the credibility of his profession in my eyes.

2 comments:

laura k said...

"I see conventional and alternative medicines as complementary tools in my toolkit, and I want my practitioners to work together as a team rather than competing with each other."

And in fact, many practitioners refer to "CAM" - complimentary and alternative medicine. Often what starts out as "alternative" becomes widely accepted - certain natural supplements that lower cholesterol, for example, or acupuncture to treat allergies and migraines.

You're absolutely right that "unproven" simply means that neutral fact, unproven. In the US, at least, drug trials are funded by pharmaceutical companies, so if they don't see potential for huge profits, they don't research it. So: unproven.

A sensible approach to CAMs is an important criterion in a family doc for me.

cord blood said...

Simply wish to say your article is as astonishing. The clearness in your post is just nice and i could assume you’re an expert on this subject. Well with your permission let me to grab your feed to keep updated with forthcoming post. Thanks a million and please carry on the enjoyable work.