Article ('Potential treasure trove': World Health Organization explores benefits of traditional medicines, December 20) is of great interest. It is unfortunate, however, that an organization such as the World Health Organization seems willing to promote the inclusion of traditional and other medicines into mainstream practice by relying heavily on emotive language – “heritage”, “tradition” and the sharing of local resources – rather than on clinical evidence. Then he seems to be contradicting himself by saying he doesn't support it unless there is strong and reliable evidence.
The difficulty seems to be a lack of understanding of what medicine is. Medicine should be understood as a single enterprise: evidence-based medical practice with patient safety and effectiveness at its core. It should not be split into categories such as “biological,” “traditional,” or “complementary” medicine.
Official medicine, as implied, does not reject treatment methods simply because they arose in traditional practice. In contrast, interventions such as tai chi, yoga, and many herbal medicines have been readily adopted after rigorous clinical trials demonstrated their safety and effectiveness. Much of modern pharmacology has its roots in traditional herbalism, refined and tested over time. The medicinal gardens of the Royal College of Physicians in London serve as a reminder of how clearly this is understood.
What mainstream medicine rejects are unproven claims and practices that pose a risk of harm. Attempting to legitimize such practices under the banner of “conventional” or “complementary” medicine amounts to entering clinical care through the back door. To claim otherwise is misleading at best and dangerous at worst.
Dr. Radhamanohar Macherla
Retired Consultant Physician, Barts NHS Foundation Trust; Associate Epidemiologist, Global Smallpox Eradication Program, World Health Organization1974
