Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Complementary and alternative medicine: The challenges of ethical justification: A philosophical analysis and evaluation of ethical reasons for the offer, use and promotion of complementary and alternative medicine. [REVIEW]Marcel Mertz - 2007 - Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 10 (3):329-345.
    With the prevalence of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) increasing in western societies, questions of the ethical justification of these alternative health care approaches and practices have to be addressed. In order to evaluate philosophical reasoning on this subject, it is of paramount importance to identify and analyse possible arguments for the ethical justification of CAM considering contemporary biomedical ethics as well as more fundamental philosophical aspects. Moreover, it is vital to provide adequate analytical instruments for this task, such as (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  • Questionable gate-keeping: Scientific evidence for complementary and alternative medicines (CAM): Response to Malcolm Parker. [REVIEW]Monika Clark-Grill - 2007 - Journal of Bioethical Inquiry 4 (1):21-28.
    The more popular complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) has become, the more often it is demanded that the integration of CAM should be limited to those approaches that are scientifically proven to be effective. This paper argues that this demand is ethically and philosophically questionable. The clinical legitimacy being gained by CAM and its increasing informal integration should instead caution against upholding the biomedical framework and evidence-based medicine as conditions of acceptance. Patients’ positive experiences with CAM deserve a truly scientific (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • Hybrid Knowledge and Research on the Efficacy of Alternative and Complementary Medicine Treatments.Yael Keshet - 2010 - Social Epistemology 24 (4):331-347.
    Analysis of the debate concerning the appropriate way of researching the effects of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) treatments highlights the controversial issue of the mind–body bond in medical research. The article examines a range of approaches, extending from outright opposition to CAM research, through the demand to employ only rigorous trials, to suggestions to use a hierarchy of evidence, up to practice‐based research proposals. These diverse approaches are analysed using theoretical concepts from the field of sociology of science and (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark