Jeffrey wrote:
>I would say that they're called "alternative" just because they don't
>fit the existing medical or scientific paradigm. This paradigm is subject
>to
>change. Sometimes methods that have been successfully in use for
>thousands of
>years (like acupuncture) are considered experimental and alternative
>because
>they are part of a different paradigm.
I am an enthusiast of acupuncture, but you can't be sure it ( they ) were
successfully used for thousands of years, since you have no data proving it
( they ) did really work then.
Regarding their being considered experimental and alternative because they
are part of a different paradigm: Yes, that's it! Belonging to a
non-mainstream paradigm is exactly what qualifies whatever it is to be
called alternative. Being mainstream is what qualifies something to be the
first choice. Just don't forget that western medicine is mainstream not only
for being westerner, but also for being able to be demonstrated, repeated,
refuted, explained. That's not really what happens with acupuncture and
other systems... though I use them.
bye,
Caio
|
|  |
