[Skip to Content]
Access to paid content on this site is currently suspended due to excessive activity being detected from your IP address 54.167.142.229. Please contact the publisher to request reinstatement.
[Skip to Content Landing]
Article
June 21, 1995

Complementary Medicine: Useless or Unproven?-Reply

Author Affiliations

University of Nevada School of Medicine Reno

JAMA. 1995;273(23):1834-1835. doi:10.1001/jama.1995.03520470042024

This article is only available in the PDF format. Download the PDF to view the article, as well as its associated figures and tables.

Abstract

In Reply.  —I disagree with Dr Sampson's rebuttal of our review of the journal Complementary Therapies in Medicine. Sampson's fixation on semantics detracts from any real contribution he may be trying to make. "Traditional," at least as used in the United States in reference to medical practice, usually indicates medicine practiced by medical school—trained practitioners, scientifically based, ethical, rational, and backed by the scientific method, to use Sampson's terms. "Alternative" medicine usually refers to therapies that fall out of the mainstream of Western medical practice, often those not backed by the scientific method of scrutiny, and includes successful practices of acupuncture, biofeedback, hypnosis, and herb therapy among many other therapeutic modalities.Not everything that is useful in medicine lends itself to the scrutiny of double-blind studies. For example, how does one reliably measure the effect of spirituality or the influence of a loving family on individual health? Yet these intangibles

First Page Preview View Large
First page PDF preview
First page PDF preview
×