The attached file contains the slides used at the launch of the Business League’s Health and Therapy Special Interest Group on the 17th June.
The brief talk offered at this event was intended to promote and provoke discussion about aspects of evidence based practice; regulation and the challenges CAM practitioners are currently facing.
The slides can be downloaded here : Complementary Therapy Provocations #1
I wanted to be able to add some other thoughts to this blog about the issues..
Conversations with CAM (Complementary and Alternative Medicine) practitioners about some of the issues involved are generally met with one of three responses..
The first, and as this is my blog I can be a little judgmental, being the most balanced and rational. It is the real desire to consider both the efficacy of their particular flavour of CAM and the degree to which the underlying principles are based upon knowledge, research and solid hypotheses.
The second is an emotional rejection of any need for discussion as ‘they know it works’ and that they have ‘clients testimonials’ to prove it.
Leaving aside the idea that ‘proof’ suggests some kind of evaluation of which testimonial is such small and relatively low level evidence, such a position is clearly at odds with the ethical stance of ‘professional’ bodies and the development of a truly ‘professional’ attitude.
The third response is perhaps the most common, especially amongst the more ‘traditional’ of the CAM community. This response is characterised by the immediate challenge that ’science doesn’t know everything!’.
It’s as if a call for professionalism is an immediate challenge to the philosophies upon which CAM therapies are based. In some cases this may be so but to focus comments on the nature of science and the ‘ulterior motives’ of scientists is perhaps evading the real issues here.
First of all ’science’ is a process. It poses a series of questions and offers a way of testing, exploring and challenging ideas. Science is NOT a BELIEF system in and of itself although scientific method (the process) may result in conclusions which could be losely called ‘beliefs’.
The exciting thing about scientific enquiry is that there is the presupposition that ‘we’ don’t know everything. The scientific process is about challenging, questioning and sharing information and ideas. As new ideas are explored new questions arise to challenge what was ‘known’ to see if that knowledge is still valid. In this way scientific thinking and ideas evolve.
I have met numerous ‘practitioners’ who are guilty of the same crimes they accuse scientists of perpetrating - namely, having fixed ideas about how things work and being evangelical about them.
I am a self confessed Rational Mystic….
Of course science doesn’t have all the answers and of course there is space for exploring the subjective nature of human experience (if you like enjoying the mystical)… but the fact of the matter is that as therapists and practitioners we are dealing with peoples emotional, spiritual (if you like), mental and physical wellbeing and as such we have a responsibility to be crystal clear about:-
- What we are doing.. (the philosophical, ethical and professional basis of our therapy)
- Why we are doing it.. (based upon the best choices for the client)
- How we are monitoring it.. (ensuring that our practice is current, relevant and effective)
This does mean that we have a professional responsibility to question our approach and our practice.
IF we are claiming that our practice has a basis in science (physiology, neurology, bio-chemsitry for example) then we need to be informed about CURRENT developments in these fields; the research that is being undertaken (and not only that published within our own journals which are rarely peer-reviewed in way scientific method suggests) and how this knowledge relates to practice.
The main challenge for CAM is that many of the practices have approaches which are not the domain of science, but of metaphysics. This does not mean that there need not be a desire to question, explore and develop our practices BUT it does mean that we need to find a language to do so.
The alternative approaches and practitioners which use scientific sounding terminology are perhaps the most interesting to debate with.
Terms like ‘energy’, ‘quantum’, ‘resonance’, ‘harmonic’, ‘neural’, ‘toxins’, ‘immune system’ can be found in CAM literature and these scientific principles (ideas) are often misapplied either through ignorance or, in some cases, malevolence - the desire to ‘market’ the products/services concerned in a misleading way.
Have a look at www.drnatura.com and ask yourself what you think (believe) about the process and the claims made here.
If you want to apply some ‘critical thinking’ to this topic you might enjoy the article to be found on www.skeptoid.com/episodes/4083 which refers to ‘mucoid plaque’ and the whole issue of detoxification
Skeptoid is a weekly podcast - highly recommended as it will really focus your questioning skills.
It’s not about agreeing with these ideas its about using them as a platform for meaningful (and playfully heated) discussions.
I’ll leave things here - see where it goes..
Alan