How Can Our Criticism of Traditional and Alternative Medicine Improve Healthcare?

The following article was translated from a blog post by Professor Dr. Edzard Ernst, a leading figure worldwide on "traditional, complementary and alternative therapies." We wanted to share his article because we think almost alike about traditional, complementary and alternative therapies and encounter very similar questions: I am regularly criticized for being negative and destructive rather than positive and constructive. One of the most recent comments I received was: With his qualifications, Edzard should offer a cure for coronavirus. Okay, I get it, homeopaths are "charlatans", but what does Edzard offer? Talk is very easy. Instead of dwelling on homeopaths' inability to prove their worth, Edzard should prove that he is better than they are, but unfortunately he is someone who has nothing more to offer. What good is it to find fault with "charlatans" when he cannot offer humanity and patients a solution? Even a beggar can do better than he can. Until he offers a treatment, it is not his job to find fault with others. It is true that many, if not most, of my posts are about exposing the false claims of alternative medicine practitioners or revealing the limitations of alternative medicine research. I understand why proponents of alternative medicine see this as negative behaviour. However, I see my criticism as a positive contribution: if today I show that this or another claim/therapy is not evidence-based;

• I may prevent some patients from using it tomorrow.
• also, this will keep them from wasting their money and, more importantly,
• guide them towards prudent medical decisions that may save lives in some cases.

Other people who criticize my work say that I should not constantly criticize alternative medicine, but should instead do something about modern medicine's many weaknesses. I think my work can help with this too. Let me explain: Showing how bogus alternative medicine is raises a question: Then why do so many people use it? An answer I often give (here and elsewhere) is that consumers are looking not for effective treatments, but rather for what used to be called the "art" of medicine:

• compassion,
• understanding,
• empathy,
• enough time with doctors,
• a caring therapeutic process.

These are things that patients often do not find when consulting their doctors, and these are things they often receive from alternative medicine practitioners. This insight should lead to the next logical step: namely, addressing compassion, empathy, etc. in modern medicine. Clearly, these qualities are central to good healthcare, and we do not need alternative medicine for patients to benefit from them. Science and the art of medicine are not mutually exclusive; there is no good reason for them not to coexist. And it is time to put the 'art' back into science-based medicine. Leaving this to alternative medicine practitioners does patients a disservice. So what good does my work do for humanity and patients? That is a question I cannot answer. All I can do is hope that my criticism will make a small contribution to improving future healthcare.

• 28 Myths and Facts About Coronavirus - What Should NUTRITION, SUPPLEMENTS and ACCESS TO FOOD Be Like During the Coronavirus Outbreak?