Is it true that many of the practices of "alternative" medicine

are not scientifically proven?

PG, Billings

First of all, I think it is appropriate the term "alternative" is in quotations,

as a more appropriate term is really traditional medicine. What is

acceptable and available in the United States is actually conventional

medicine - the predominant medicine currently practiced. It is an important distinction, because these traditional treatments are not really "alternative"

but viable options and often preferable to more toxic or invasive treatments.

Much of what is termed "alternative" has been used for centuries and has past and

 current documentation.

Medicine has become big business and there is much salesmanship involved in the

idea that current standards of practice are the only methods supported

by science. In fact, there are massive amounts of scientific documentation for most of

the practices of naturopathic physicians, acupuncturists, herbalists and integrative

medical practitioners.

It has been acknowledged the basis of many pharmaceutical medicines are the herbs

that are "scientifically unproven," when used in the crude form,

as opposed to extracted, concentrated and dispensed in the form of drugs.

Did you know that there textbooks of botanical medicine, many that are centuries old? Research into commonly used herbs reveals the traditional

 use of many is appropriate based on the properties of the active ingredients.

Homeopathy (not to be confused with naturopathy) has three centuries of literature in

 every language, and is commonly used in Europe, India and South America.

It is a weak argument that unconventional treatments are not tested adequately. Many conventional substances and treatments used daily are tested and noted to have

serious side effects, yet are commonly used. A great number of treatments are not

tested, but prescribed because they have been useful over time. Sometimes, a

medication may be tested for something completely different.

Hormone replacement therapy is a good example of a treatment recommended by generations of medical practitioners when 10 years of research had been calling into question its safety in the case of heart disease alone.

There are decades of clinical experience and data in support of most of

the medicines recommended in our practice.

But many of the substances used in the natural health-care setting are generally non

toxic and beneficial. When a drug is manufactured that interrupts the normal physiology

of the body, it is necessary that it be subjected to rigorous testing.

I often say to patients we do not practice by using an herb or a vitamin in place of a drug. We look at the underlying cause of the problem.

Addressing this may entail a comprehensive approach, and an herb or vitamin may be only a minor factor.

Echinacea alone will do little to affect the common cold. But used with hydrotherapy,

mega nutrients, proper nutrition and other immune-stimulating herbs, it will decrease

the length and severity of an illness.

I find it interesting that conventional medical practitioners are consulted

about natural treatments. Would you consult a plumber about your electrical wiring or

an orthopedic surgeon about your heart? There is a tendency for many health-care practitioners to respond to questions about natural treatments with incomplete

information. The "unproven, unscientific" argument is an old fallback that does not hold

up. A new medical model is emerging - it is a unified theory of health applying a comprehensive mix of tools to facilitate a healing response.

It is what we, as naturopathic physicians, practice and see blossoming

around the county. Be assured you will see it more commonly in the future.

 Yellowstone Naturopathic Clinic
720 North 30 Street
Beautiful downtown Billings, Montana

Yellowstone Naturopathic Clinic
720 N. 30th St.
Billings, MT 59101
PHONE 406·259·5096/FAX 406·248·5655

ync@180com.net

Dispensary
406·254·9682

dispensary@yncnaturally.com