on alternative medicine research

A big question arises in the scientific realm whether alternative medicine is actually helpful or not. Whereas alternative medicines like Chinese Medicine (CM) are bottom-up treatments (individually custom) with top-down (holistic) theories, western medicine is typically bottom-up theory (molecular and chemically based) and top-down treatment (applying the law of averages to individuals). This is the main problem of designing randomized controlled double-blind trials to a holistic theory medicine like CM. In western medicine, it is usually fairly straightforward to come up with a diagnosis for a common disease; there is typically a physical marker such as a blood count, antibody, or hormone level that can be tested and isolated outside of the body. But in CM such an isolation does not exist, and as a result we can see 5 patients with prostate enlargement and have 5 different reasons why each patient developed the enlargement. Moreover, the treatments will be completely different depending on the CM diagnosis.

In a recent article on alternative medicine research, the problems that are addressed don't even distinguish this important point. Instead of looking at the diagnostic criteria of an alternative medicine, most studies use conventional diagnoses and alternative treatments to measure effectiveness. Because of this very basic error in study design, the studies are largely unreliable. Most of the studies designed by practitioners of CM even miss this point, in an effort to try to "legitimize" their medicine. It is a difficult situation with no easy answers, because in actuality the 5 patient with prostate enlargement could see different doctors and have different diagnoses. This further complicates the problem in terms of designing studies in the typical western fashion, but what it does for the medicine is make it extremely powerful and potent. In CM we have individuals with particular lineages and viewpoints treating individuals with customized diseases. In conventional medicine you have individuals treating individuals according to the law of averages and statistics. Both are useful, but measuring the effectiveness of something like CM with western methods is not fruitful unless these differences are understood and taken into account when the study is designed. Until such a study is designed, it seems that case-based studies are our best avenue of information in CM.