skip to main content

You Are Here: Home / Programmes / The Other Medicine / Fit to practise
 
 

Programme 5: Fit To Practise

 
01
The misery of migraine - does CAM hold the answers?

Other Medicine transcript

How can you tell the healers from the charlatans? Who is fit to practise?

Listen to this programme

Listen again to programme five: Fit to practise

To use listen again, you'll need have a free piece of software called RealPlayer on your computer. If the link doesn't work, visit audio help from the BBC.

Programme-by-programme

A marriage made in heaven

Sometimes called "the Prince Charles approach", there's a move to try and integrate CAM and orthodox medical practices for the benefit of all - but like many unions, there is unease on both sides. Can we really say that CAM and mainstream medical practice is a marriage made in heaven?
Could the problems of delayed diagnosis or dangerous advice be avoided with tighter regulation and better training in CAM? Could this stop vulnerable or desperate people being relieved of their cash by charlatans and quacks? How can patients find out who to trust?

Can anyone call themselves a homeopath or an osteopath? (Osteopathy was the first CAM to be properly regulated, and only those practitioners who have attained a prescribed level of training can call themselves osteopaths). What about crystal therapists? Doctors can go on day courses and call themselves acupuncturists, whereas traditional practitioners of Chinese medicine see their training as a lifelong project.

How does regulation in the CAM world compare with the “conventional” medical world? How have internal political power struggles within CAM slowed progress in this area? The House of Lords Select Committee report recommends that each therapy should have a single regulatory authority with clear guidelines on competency and training – how likely is that, and what are the hurdles? At the moment, most practitioners are free to practise as they like after they are qualified – should CAM therapists be subject to the same sort of five-yearly revalidation that doctors now have to undergo?

We speak to students of CAM at various stages of their training – comparing, say, the four year or longer training in osteopathy with a two day course in aromatherapy massage. Given that many therapies incorporate a considerable element of diagnosis, some have argued that therapists should do more basic medical science training (in anatomy, physiology, biochemistry and pharmacology). Is this another example of medical colonialism?


This website is provided for general information only, and should not be treated as a substitute for the medical advice of your own doctor or any other health care professional. The BBC and the Open University are not responsible or liable for any diagnosis made by a user based on the content of the Open2.net website. The BBC and the Open University are not liable for the contents of any external internet sites listed, nor do they endorse any commercial product or service mentioned or advised on any of the sites. Always consult your own GP if you're in any way concerned about your health.

Bookmark with:
  • del.icio.us
  • Digg
  • Facebook
  • Newsvine
  • NowPublic
  • Reddit
  • Stumbleupon
 
 

Explore Open2

Hüzünlü Bosphorus

Engin Isin takes us to the banks of the Bosphorus and Istanbul, a city of longing and joy.

Doctors at work

A very British institution - but one shaped by migrant labour. Meet the doctors who shaped the NHS.

Dragonfly

Bringing our calendar to life: Dragonflies, hawkmoths and plovers.

 
 

Site info and help