Alternative medicine

Press, 13 September 1988, Page 12

Alternative medicine

Sir,—There should be another term for therapies which are deemed threatening by the conservative faction of the medical profession but which, because of its failure to perceive other directions, are rapidly becoming mainstream. If orthodox practices had offered me any relief from my uninteresting condition I would have stayed with them. My bigoted preference is for a medical practitioner with such added skills as homeopathy or acupuncture, but have also been helped by those whom the medical profession would condemn as quacks. If quackery consists of using diagnostic skills and herbs rather than an armoury of alien and possibly dangerous drugs, then I am for the ducks. If I feel unwell and, after numerous infusions of cow dung, taken at the going down of the sun and in the morning, am, to my satisfaction, made well, is the means by which I attained wholeness a matter for anyone but myself? — Yours, etc., JANET R. HOLM. September 9,1988.

Sir,—One may indeed agree with your correspondents, Connolly, Howard and Shanks, that homeopathy, iridology, colour therapy and the like are quackery. At the same time to extol orthodox medicine for its scientific basis is also wide of the mark. In the first place much of modern medicine has failed to ~7

meet .scientific standards of vali>■dation. Remember thalidomide and the Daikon Shield? Another widely used treatment, electric /■shock “therapy” has no basis in science and many people have suffered in consequence. Second, .there is more to medical practice .than -scientific treatment. Good' diagnosis, a caring attitude and reassurance are also important. It is because modern medi-

cine has too often consisted of the high-speed prescription of palliative medication and an attitude of arrogance (refer to the Cartwright report for some examples) that people turn to the alternatives, however cranky their theories. — Yours, etc., ■ BRUCE MOON. September 9, 1988.