I am extremely skeptical of the current attempts to merge "alternative medicine" with the mainstream. It seems to me that these techniques are generally unsupported by hard evidence and in some cases, such as homeopathy, are exercises in fantasy. Hearing so-called medical professionals claiming that it is unfeasible to test the effectiveness of a Chinese herbal remedy because the diagnostic method is different from the methods used in the West is absurd; either it works well, works to a limited degree, or doesn't work at all.
If these "treatments" actually work as claimed, then they will surely stand up to serious research. Before such flights of fancy are included with medicine that has demonstrated benefits, their claims must be verified like any other course of treatment. Anecdotal evidence is a good place to start, but it is inadequate proof for something that could be fatal if misapplied. I agree with ...
