Health Affairs, 24, no. 4 (2005): 991-993 doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.24.4.991 © 2005 by Project HOPE	New Online   VP Candidates On Health Reform   Cutler On McCain's Plan   Scoring Obama's Plan   Roundtable: Politics, Reform   Number Of Uninsured   Delivery System Overhaul

This Article Full Text (HTML) Reprint (PDF) Submit a response to this article Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when eLetters are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Services E-mail this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in ISI Web of Science Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to My Personal Archive Download to Citation Manager Reprints & Permissions Citing Articles Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (3) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Nahin, R. L. Articles by Chesney, M. A. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Nahin, R. L. Articles by Chesney, M. A. Related Collections Access To Care Health Professions Education Health Reform Legal/Regulatory Issues Pharmaceuticals Physicians Chronic Care Consumer Issues Complementary And Alternative Medicine

Alternative Medicine

PERSPECTIVE

Racing Toward The Integration Of Complementary And Alternative Medicine: A Marathon Or A Sprint?

Health care opinion leaders concur that integration of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) into the U.S. health care system must be based on strong supporting evidence of safety and efficacy. As others have pointed out, integration is under way, despite the lack of reliable, rigorous science supporting the use of most CAM treatments. We contend that optimal integration of CAM is a long-term endeavor—a marathon rather than a sprint. The evidence base does not now support its wholesale assimilation; market forces, although compelling, should not be the primary consideration in integration.

                      What's this?