IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0053174.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Incommensurable Worldviews? Is Public Use of Complementary and Alternative Medicines Incompatible with Support for Science and Conventional Medicine?

Author

Listed:
  • Paul Stoneman
  • Patrick Sturgis
  • Nick Allum
  • Elissa Sibley

Abstract

Proponents of controversial Complementary and Alternative Medicines, such as homeopathy, argue that these treatments can be used with great effect in addition to, and sometimes instead of, ‘conventional’ medicine. In doing so, they accept the idea that the scientific approach to the evaluation of treatment does not undermine use of and support for some of the more controversial CAM treatments. For those adhering to the scientific canon, however, such efficacy claims lack the requisite evidential basis from randomised controlled trials. It is not clear, however, whether such opposition characterises the views of the general public. In this paper we use data from the 2009 Wellcome Monitor survey to investigate public use of and beliefs about the efficacy of a prominent and controversial CAM within the United Kingdom, homeopathy. We proceed by using Latent Class Analysis to assess whether it is possible to identify a sub-group of the population who are at ease in combining support for science and conventional medicine with use of CAM treatments, and belief in the efficacy of homeopathy. Our results suggest that over 40% of the British public maintain positive evaluations of both homeopathy and conventional medicine simultaneously. Explanatory analyses reveal that simultaneous support for a controversial CAM treatment and conventional medicine is, in part, explained by a lack of scientific knowledge as well as concerns about the regulation of medical research.

Suggested Citation

  • Paul Stoneman & Patrick Sturgis & Nick Allum & Elissa Sibley, 2013. "Incommensurable Worldviews? Is Public Use of Complementary and Alternative Medicines Incompatible with Support for Science and Conventional Medicine?," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(1), pages 1-6, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0053174
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0053174
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0053174
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0053174&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0053174?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Barry, Christine Ann, 2006. "The role of evidence in alternative medicine: Contrasting biomedical and anthropological approaches," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 62(11), pages 2646-2657, June.
    2. Easthope, G. & Tranter, B. & Gill, G., 2000. "General practitioners' attitudes toward complementary therapies," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 51(10), pages 1555-1561, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Scott, Clare & Walker, Jan & White, Peter & Lewith, George, 2011. "Forging convictions: The effects of active participation in a clinical trial," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 72(12), pages 2041-2048, June.
    2. Kelner, Merrijoy & Wellman, Beverly & Welsh, Sandy & Boon, Heather, 2006. "How far can complementary and alternative medicine go? The case of chiropractic and homeopathy," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 63(10), pages 2617-2627, November.
    3. Pedersen, Inge Kryger, 2013. "‘It can do no harm’: Body maintenance and modification in alternative medicine acknowledged as a non risk health regimen," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 56-62.
    4. Andrews, Gavin J. & Evans, Joshua & McAlister, Seraphina, 2013. "‘Creating the right therapy vibe’: Relational performances in holistic medicine," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 99-109.
    5. Deml, Michael J. & Notter, Julia & Kliem, Paulina & Buhl, Andrea & Huber, Benedikt M. & Pfeiffer, Constanze & Burton-Jeangros, Claudine & Tarr, Philip E., 2019. "“We treat humans, not herds!”: A qualitative study of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) providers’ individualized approaches to vaccination in Switzerland," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 240(C).
    6. Pescosolido, Bernice A. & Manago, Bianca & Olafsdottir, Sigrun, 2020. "The global use of diverse medical systems," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 267(C).
    7. Chung, Vincent C.H. & Hillier, Sheila & Lau, Chun Hong & Wong, Samuel Y.S. & Yeoh, Eng Kiong & Griffiths, Sian M., 2011. "Referral to and attitude towards traditional Chinese medicine amongst western medical doctors in postcolonial Hong Kong," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 72(2), pages 247-255, January.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0053174. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.