The debate between proponents and critics of complementary and alternative medicine
(CAM) continues to renew both old and new arguments and biases at the start of the
twenty-first century. The opinions of health providers, consumers, and researchers
remain divided on whether this “unproven form of medicine” can be or ever will be
demonstrated as being cost-effective, accessible, and most importantly,medically useful
and safe. Even writing about CAM, especially when using terminology not familiar to the
general public, can be fraught with difficulties and complexities.New sensitivities in medical
language need to evolve as CAM becomes better understood through its study,evaluation,
and ultimate acceptance or rejection. That is, definitions and descriptions of CAM
should remain flexible as more information about this evolving field becomes available.
This chapter discusses six areas that are important in shaping the best “descriptors”
of CAM: definitional, historical antecedents, usage-demographic factors, clinical/
research methodologies, evidence-based issues, and training/education. These
areas are not mutually exclusive but rather interact and are mutually influential.
Chapter 16 focuses on tangential but important areas of consumer involvement, the
CAM market, and federal/state regulations.