A Critical Review on Complementary and Alternative Medicine/Pseudo-medicine/Quackery: Implication on Health Policy

유사의료/보완의료에 대한 보건의료정책학적 고찰

Nowadays, it is surely the quack which stands as one of the most controversial, problematic. the quack has been a consistent target of contested public protection strategies in the past few centuries in many countries. Recently, complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) is increasingly utilized and accepted by patients and providers throughout the health care system in the world, most accounts attribute this growing acceptability to the shortcomings of conventional medicine, the appeal of CAM's core beliefs, and the growing body of research indicating that CAM actually works. However, the governments of western countries have called for measures to ensure that the public are protected from incompetent and dangerous practitioners. Common to these controversies has been a suggestion to ban, exclude or limit the medical practice of those deemed to be damaging rather than improving the health of individuals as a measure of public protection. This article describes the experiences of western counties' health care system which is moving in a more pluralistic direction. By examining the ways in which regulatory efforts in the countries have come to address what is invariably described as a growing interest in CAM, this study show how the problem of CAM/quackery today is increasingly located in an ethical field of practitioner competency, qualifications, conduct, responsibility and personal professional development, regardless of the form of therapy in question. Many countries developed a series of measures and strategies to contain the acceptance of CAM groups, such as insisting on scientific evidence of safety and efficacy, resisting integration of CAM with conventional medicine and opposing government support for research and education. In a sense, those countries' movements serve to protect not only patients, but the dominant position of medicine and its allied professions, and to maintain existing jurisdictional boundaries within the healthcare system. The popular support for CAM will require that health professional stakeholders continue to address the challenges this poses, and at the same time protect their position at healthcare system. To cope with the quack, professional body, public sector and health authorities should consider the safety of consumers of healthcare and responding to the demands of the community for CAM therapies as well as the claims of the established healthcare professions. Finally, some implications for future health care were suggested.