"Complementary and alternative" medicine--a measure of crisis in academic medicine.

Academic medicine integrates three of the most honorable human activities: treating the ill, teaching, and research. The quality that all three share is persistent quest for truth. However, there is reluctance of academic medicine today to openly defend scientific truth by challenging the arguments and the very existence of "complementary and alternative medicine" (CAM). There is no sound proof of CAM effectiveness, no hypotheses on the mechanisms of their action, nor scientific reports testing them. The fact that patients are charged for these "healing" activities makes CAM a plain fraud. With these facts in mind, the name "complementary and alternative medicine" is undeserved and misleading. CAM advocates maintain that CAM should be recognized precisely because it is widely practiced and very promising, that it has a special holistic/human approach, and works at least as a placebo in situations where medicine can do nothing more. As it seems that the public interest in paramedicine will only grow stronger before it grows weaker, scientists must raise their voice and question the truthfulness of CAM more openly. N of 1 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) should be used to test effectiveness of CAM, just as they are used to test any other treatment. Irrespectively of the noble principles of human rights and political correctness, academic medicine must discuss paramedicine equally openly and on the basis of the same criteria as it discusses its own activities, results, and plans.