Is alternative medicine effective?

Alternative medicine has no proven effect

Question: Is alternative medicine effective?
Position‹2 of 3›: No, alternative medicine is not effective
Argument‹2 of 3›: Alternative medicine has no proven effect

There is no scientific evidence of alternative medicine's effectiveness.

The argument

The argument begins with a contrast in method rather than in results. Conventional medicine relies on methods proven to be safe and effective with carefully designed trials and research, and it maintains a mechanism for catching what the trials miss: doctors and nurses are bound to report side-effects of treatment, which are collated federally or nationally, and treatments are withdrawn if necessary. What distinguishes the conventional approach on this account is not that it is always right but that it is built to discover when it is wrong. The use of alternative medicine appears to be increasing, yet complementary and alternative treatments lack any evidence on which to base sound decisions, and popularity is not offered as a substitute for that evidence. Despite millions of dollars spent on research, there is zero evidence of efficacy, which matters because the spending establishes that the absence is not the result of the field being ignored. Homeopathy is given as the clearest case: the active ingredient is so diluted in water as to be untraceable, relying on the principle of "memory of water." This is not supported by any scientific theory, so there is neither a proposed mechanism nor a measurable substance for a mechanism to act through. The final step distinguishes two claims that are often run together. Millions of people with cancer seek CAM treatments, and this is where a wealth of well evaluated rigorous research into CAM has been done; the efficacy of those CAM treatments has been disproven. This contrasts with claims of CAM practitioners who state the treatments are unproven, which is very different and suggests that perhaps they work but no one has yet worked out how. Unproven invites further investigation; disproven does not. Because alternative medicine has no proven effect, proponents conclude, alternative medicine is not effective.

Premises

[P1]Conventional medicine relies on carefully designed trials and reports side-effects so unsafe treatments can be withdrawn. [P2] Despite millions spent on research, complementary and alternative medicine has zero evidence of efficacy, and homeopathy's memory of water has no scientific basis. [P3] Rigorous research into CAM cancer treatments has actively disproven their efficacy, not merely left it unproven. [C] Therefore, because alternative medicine has no proven effect, alternative medicine is not effective.

Counter-arguments

CAM is almost impossible to research. For example, to answer the question 'does yoga work to reduce back pain?' you have to ask what kind of yoga? What kind of back pain? Additionally, what does it mean to "work" — to help someone avoid surgery, hold a job or need less medication? Some things — the body meridians that acupuncturists say they follow, or energy forces that healers say they manipulate — cannot be measured, and many scientists question their existence. CAM is not simply a new array of therapeutic tools that need to be evaluated; it presents other ways to think about disease and therapeutics, and consequently new ideas about how research should be strategically developed. Therefore the structure of CAM research should be different, in subtle but important ways.

Rejecting the premises

[Rejecting P1] It is impossible to disprove alternative medicine.

Framing

- Scientific method is the gold standard of evidence.

The argument

Premises

Counter-arguments

Rejecting the premises

Framing

Further reading