We know that alternative medicine use is associated with poorer survival in cancer, but what about the use of so-called “complementary medicine,” “complementary and alternative medicine,” or “integrative medicine”? Bad news. There’s still a negative correlation between the use of pseudoscientific and unproven medicine and cancer survival, even when used with conventional cancer therapy rather than instead of it.
Search: “debate”
We found 892 results for your search.
A few years ago, it was anthroposophic medicine. This year, it’s homeopathy. Quackademic medicine at the University of Michigan marches on.
Share this:
I warned you. I’ve been warning you for four years. Now that a federal right-to-try law has passed, the profiteering has begun. Let patients beware!
Share this:
Earlier this week, the University of Northern Iowa faced severe criticism for hosting the Midwest Summer Institute, a conference on facilitated communication. Yesterday, FC advocates struck back.
Share this:
Science is the most effective means of determining medical treatments that work and whose benefits outweigh their risks. Those who promote pseudoscientific or prescientific medicine, however, frequently appeal to other ways of knowing, often ancient ways of knowing from other cultures, and pointing out deficiencies in SBM to justify promoting their treatments. Do their justifications hold water?
