Foreword
The Office of Alternative Medicine (OAM) was
established in 1991, with the appropriation of $2 million for an
office "to more adequately explore unconventional medical
practices." The Senate Appropriations Committee report
acknowledged that "many routine and effective medical
procedures now considered commonplace were once considered
unconventional and counterindicated. Cancer radiation therapy is
such a procedure that is now commonplace but once was considered
to be quackery."
One of the first goals of the OAM was to
develop a baseline of information on the state of alternative
medicine in the United States. To accomplish this, a series of
workshops were held in 1992. The first, a public meeting on June
17-18 in Bethesda, Maryland, included presentations from more
than 80 speakers who detailed issues and concerns of importance
to the alternative medicine community. On September 14-16, a
second workshop was convened in Chantilly, Virginia, with a total
of more than 200 participants who discussed the state of the art
of the major areas of alternative medicine and to direct
attention to priority areas for potential future research
activities. Cochairs of the workshop working groups organized
writing teams to collect and synthesize the available research in
their respective fields and to develop recommendations to the
National Institutes of Health (NIH).
This document represents the report of these
meetings to the NIH, and includes the input of more than 200
practitioners and researchers of alternative medicine from
throughout the United States. The hard work of the speakers,
panel members, authors of working papers, and editors in putting
this report together is gratefully acknowledged.
As the Office of Alternative Medicine proceeds
to carry out its congressional mandate, the recommendations for
future research in the report will be carefully considered.
However, it should be pointed out that this document does not
reflect endorsement of these therapies or recommendations for
research by the NIH, the U.S. Public Health Service, or the U.S.
Department of Health and Human Services. It reports on a series
of opinions expressed by nongovernment participants in the
workshops described above and is published for the purpose of
furthering the dialogue between the alternative-complementary
medicine communities and the biomedical research establishment.
The NIH cautions readers not to seek the
therapies described in this document for serious health problems
without consultation with a licensed physician. The NIH further
cautions that many of the therapies described have not been
subjected to rigorous scientific investigation to prove safety or
efficacy; and many have not been approved by the U.S. Food and
Drug Administration.
Preface
Because of the increasing sophistication of the
U.S. health care system, its increasing administrative costs, and
the exponentially expanding degree of training and specialization
required by the health care practitioners who administer it,
health care costs in this country have skyrocketed in the past
few decades. Indeed, in 1940, health care absorbed $4 billion, a
mere 4 percent of the U.S. gross national product (GNP); by 1992,
health care costs had ballooned to more than $800 billion, or
almost 14 percent of GNP._ Experts predict these costs will
exceed $1 trillion this year.
Despite these expenditures, many Americans
currently have little or no access to adequate health care. In
fact, 37 million Americans have no health insurance at all;
another 22 million have inadequate health care coverage. To
increase access to basic health care, individuals and
organizations from many sectors of society are now calling for
reform of the present health care system. To date, this debate
has focused mainly on making the current system less expensive
through capping the amount of damages that can be awarded because
of medical malpractice, limiting physician and hospital fees,
further regulating the pharmaceutical companies, and controlling
the misuse of health insurance.
Unfortunately, this debate has failed to take
into account the fact that the current health care crisis is
primarily a crisis of chronic disease. Today almost 33 million
Americans are functionally limited in their daily activities by
chronic, debilitating conditions such as arthritis, allergies,
pain, hypertension, cancer, depression, cardiovascular disease,
and digestive problems. More than 9 million, or almost one-third,
of these individuals have limitations so severe that they cannot
work, attend school, or maintain a household. The U.S. Public
Health Service (PHS) estimates that 70 percent of the current
health care budget is spent on the treatment of these
individuals; as the population grows older, such conditions will
continue to consume an even larger proportion of national health
care expenditures. Furthermore, the worldwide pandemic of
acquired immunodeficiency syndrome is threatening to completely
overwhelm the health care delivery systems in certain areas of
the United States.
While the dominant system of health care in the
United States--often called "conventional medicine," or
biomedicine--is extremely effective for treating infectious
diseases and traumatic injuries, it is often ill equipped to
handle complex, multifaceted chronic conditions. One reason is
that over the years, conventional medicine has increasingly
emphasized finding a single "magic bullet" solution for
each condition or disease it confronts. The reality is that many
chronic conditions are not amenable to such one-dimensional
solutions.
Rather, such complex conditions require equally
multifaceted treatment approaches. Furthermore, it is far less
expensive to prevent them from occurring in the first place than
to attempt to treat the symptoms and consequences with surgery
and expensive drugs, which often offer only short-term solutions.
For example, coronary artery disease affects approximately 7
million Americans and causes about 1.5 million heart attacks and
500,000 deaths a year. Approximately 300,000 coronary artery
bypass graft operations are performed in the United States each
year at a cost of about $30,000 each, or $9 billion total. Yet
coronary artery bypass surgery prevents premature death in only a
few patients with the most serious main coronary or
multiple-vessel heart disease. On the other hand, heart disease
is almost entirely attributable to poor diet (i.e., high fat
intake) and unhealthy lifestyle decisions (alcohol consumption
and smoking), and thus can be avoided. For those who already have
heart disease, an extremely low-fat diet combined with exercise
and other therapies may actually start unclogging blocked
arteries and significantly extend life.
Thus, for health care reform truly to succeed
at reducing costs and increasing access, disease prevention must
be the ultimate focus of the primary health care system rather
than disease treatment. This change in emphasis can be
accomplished only by restructuring the current system so that
people learn that they are far better off staying healthy than
relying on high technology to rescue them from a lifetime of
unhealthy living. In addition, to care adequately and
cost-effectively for those who already have chronic illnesses,
health care reform must incorporate multifaceted approaches to
the treatment of these patients, approaches that control the
symptoms while alleviating the underlying causes.
In 1990, PHS recognized the need to completely
revamp the current approach to health and illness when it
released a 700-page report called Healthy People 2000. This
report enumerated the challenges and goals for improving the
Nation's collective health by the year 2000 and challenged the
Nation to move beyond merely saving lives. It explained that
"the health of a people is measured by more than death
rates. Good health comes from reducing unnecessary suffering,
illness, and disability. It comes from an improved quality of
life. Health is thus measured by citizens' sense of well-being.
The health of a Nation is measured by the extent to which the
gains are accomplished for all the people." To reach this
goal, the report called for "mobilizing the considerable
energies and creativity of the Nation in the interest of disease
prevention and health promotion" as an economic imperative.
This report was developed in the spirit of
Healthy People 2000. Its purpose is to investigate which
"alternative" health care options might best be
mobilized to help in the fight against the major diseases and
conditions that are robbing so many Americans of their quality of
life. The individuals who helped write it comprised members of
systems of medicine and therapies that emphasize improving
quality of life, disease prevention, and treatments for
conditions for which conventional medicine has few, if any,
answers. Therefore, the popular term alternative has been chosen
to describe these medical systems and therapies. Another term for
these systems and therapies, which is preferred in Europe, is
complementary medicine.
This report establishes a baseline of
information on alternative medicine, which may be used to direct
future research and policy discussions. Specifically, this report
will aid OAM in its mandate to establish an information
clearinghouse on alternative medicine so that the public,
policymakers, and public health experts can make informed
decisions about their health care options. The goal of OAM is to
speed the discovery, development, and validation of potent
treatments that may be added to the complementary wheel of
alternatives currently available to patients and practitioners.
Ultimately, it may provide the foundation for the development of
a whole new system of medicine, one that incorporates the best of
conventional and alternative medicines.
Brian M. Berman, M.D.
David B. Larson, M.D., M.P.H.
Cochairs, Editorial Review Board
December, 1994