Naturopathic medicine developed. from the alternative healing systems alternative medicine, and train the. best naturopathic clinicians and clin …
White House Commission on Complementary and Alternative Medicine Policy March 2002
Appendix G Statement from Commissioners
LETTER FROM JOSEPH FINS, MD AND TIERAONA LOW DOG, MD
March 10, 2002 The Honorable Tommy G Thompson Secretary, Health and Human Services Washington, DC 20201 Dear Mr Secretary: We would like to thank the American public for allowing us to serve on the White House Commission on Complementary and Alternative Medicine Policy The Commission struggled with many complex issues and the final report reflects the enormous effort and hard work of the Commissioners and staff We support many of the Commissions recommendations and appreciate the efforts to accommodate a diversity of views and achieve a consensus Nonetheless, we feel it necessary to write this additional statement to provide clarification as these recommendations are considered for implementation These are views we have stated consistently throughout the Commissions twenty months of deliberations The
Executive Order 13147 directed that The White House Commission on Complementary and Alternative Medicine CAM Policy shall provide a report, through the Secretary, to the President on legislative and administrative recommendations for assuring that public policy maximizes the benefits to Americans of complementary and alternative medicine While many of the Commissions recommendations will help maximize the benefits of proven safe and effective approaches, practices and products, they do not appropriately acknowledge the limitations of unproven and unvalidated CAM interventions or adequately address the minimization of risk In this statement we will seek to be specific in our critique about these risk/benefit questions In this effort we hope to give voice to the healthy skepticism that exists in many sectors of American public life with regard to complementary and alternative medicine, a perspective that may not have been adequately represented in the constitution of the Commission or in
the testimony that we heard
1 Acknowledging the Limitations of Unproven CAM Interventions While the Report acknowledges that much of what is considered CAM has not been
Appendix G Statement from Commissioners
226
White House Commission on Complementary and Alternative Medicine Policy March 2002
shown to be safe and effective, a presumption exists that complementary and alternative medicine will be found to be beneficial This advocacy tone persists in the Report despite great efforts to achieve editorial balance Despite qualifying statements added to the Introduction of the Report — which we endorse — the body of the document continues to give voice to a perspective that suggests that most CAM interventions will be proven to be safe and effective through scientific research Last minute revisions to the Introduction do not mitigate more global statements that permeate the Report There continues to be language suggesting that CAM will lead us into a new paradigm of health care
that will provide answers for those with chronic disease, as well as our aging and underserved populations We will discuss these concerns in the context of research priorities, access and the underserved, the provision of primary care services and medical education 11 Research Priorities We strongly endorse the need for more research; however, we recognize that research dollars are finite The Commissions lack of a prioritization strategy for research initiatives, given the many areas that CAM encompasses, makes a general endorsement of research of limited value Promising areas of research should be investigated because they potentially have something to offer to the health of the American people or because they advance our scientific understanding of illness and healing Asking for more research money to investigate an approach, practice or product simply because it is CAM is an ideological, not evidence-based approach to science Recommendations for research on frontier areas of science
without a strategy for building this research on scientific foundations may result in spending precious health care research dollars on areas that are unlikely to yield any beneficial data such as iridology, psychic healing et al While dogmatic disbelief of everything that is not currently explainable is foolish, and indeed unscientific, it seems equally foolish to ask the taxpayer to bear the enormous expense of sorting out those areas that are plausible from those that are improbable With sound research priorities in mind, we feel it is important to point out that many of the recommendations made in the research and access sections of the Report are already being undertaken by NCCAM, a Center within the National Institutes of Health NCCAM has established fifteen specialty research centers that cover CAM approaches for many areas of major public health need These centers are focused on studying the underlying mechanisms of CAM modalities, cancer treatments, CAM for end-of-life care,
botanicals, the use of CAM therapies to reduce health disparities and integrative medicinei Given the concentration of expertise and existing infrastructure at NCCAM, recommendations for a wide sweeping CAM research agenda to be implemented across a large number of federal agencies does not appear to be a cost-effective or logical way to make progress
Appendix G Statement from Commissioners
227
White House Commission on Complementary and Alternative Medicine Policy March 2002
12 Access and the Underserved When the Commission sought to be inclusive by expanding access to CAM products, providers and modalities to underserved populations through demonstration projects or other programs it did not adequately appreciate that these recommendations were being made for populations which have limited or no access to conventional medical care In this context, the provision of CAM becomes neither a complementary nor integrative intervention, but rather a less validated alternative to
conventional care The Commission heard testimony that many underserved populations utilize folkloric or CAM interventions because they cannot afford access to conventional careii It is worth considering whether these individuals would prefer a drug benefit over access to unproven supplements or if they would seek out CAM providers if they had the resources to receive care from primary care practitioners Given the state of the science, most CAM interventions can only be said to add to and not replace conventional interventions A consideration of CAM entitlements or an expansion of insurance benefit packages is one thing in the context of preexisting access to conventional medical care It is ethically quite another in the absence of such coverage While there is room for diversity in the health care system, we should not be a party to creating a separate but unequal care system It is our strong belief that we should provide basic health care to every American before expanding benefits to
include treatments or approaches that have not been shown through rigorous research to treat or prevent disease We must never foster a second-tier of medical care for those who are economically disadvantaged 13 Primary Care Practitioners The Commission debated at great length whether or not we would recommend that CAM practitioners be included in loan-forgiveness and scholarship programs, especially as it relates to their possible inclusion in the National Health Service Corps The Report carefully delineates the eligibility requirements for inclusion in this program and why Title VII of the Public Health Services Act does not recognize CAM practitioners as primary care providers eligible for inclusion in this program While we endorse demonstration projects that seek to identify what, if any, value CAM providers add to established primary care teams, we want to go on record noting that we do not believe that CAM providers are fungible with the primary care providers enumerated in Title
VII This concern does not mean that some CAM practitioners do not have the potential to add to the public health or meaningfully affect the lives of patients It is simply that they are not positioned for equivalency with conventional primary care providers Efforts to equate their degree of training, or the scientific basis of their practice, with that of the designated primary care specialties puts the public at risk of receiving unvalidated and non-evidence based primary care
Appendix G Statement from Commissioners
228
White House Commission on Complementary and Alternative Medicine Policy March 2002
14 Education and Training of Conventional Practitioners Conventionally trained health care practitioners must be able to dialogue with their patients about a wide variety of topics including sexuality, domestic violence, substance abuse, spirituality, death and dying, pain, emotional health and non-conventional therapies We strongly support the need for health care providers to be
able to critically assess the evidence for approaches, practices and products that their patients may be using, however, most medical schools approximately 72 already teach courses on what is considered CAM If the critique is that conventional medical curricula are lacking in areas such as nutrition, self-care instruction or preventive medicine, the appropriate response is to improve the teaching of this subject matter Furthermore, as medical educators we believe that recommendations for curricular reform will be better received if they are not cast in language that implies a mandate Whatever is included in the medical curriculum must remain true to scientific integrity, avoid ideological indoctrination and guard against teaching unproven treatments to the next generation of health care providers 2 The Minimization of Risk To fully meet the spirit of the Executive Order, the Report would need to do more than identify the benefits to be maximized It would also need to avoid the
assumption of avoidable risk, especially when the benefits are uncertain and the risks are clear We will now comment on how the Reports lack of definitional clarity limits appropriate risk management, address public preferences regarding regulation and consider the special concerns of vulnerable populations 21 Lack of Definitional Clarity Addressing the risks or benefits associated with CAM interventions is difficult because the recommendations suffer from a lack of specificity Generic recommendations neither serve the public interest nor protect the public health because they fail to distinguish between approaches, practices and products for which there is some scientific evidence and those that either stretch the realm of logic or are demonstrably unsafe The Reports inability to discriminate amongst CAM practices, products and practitioners leaves its recommendations open to interpretation This limits their applicability as public policy The Reports lack of definitional clarity
undermines the legitimacy of safe and effective non-conventional approaches by failing to distinguish them from treatments that are improbable or fraudulent For instance, there is strong evidence that relaxation therapies help reduce chronic pain in patients with a variety of medical conditionsiii Glucosamine sulfate has been found superior to placebo for the treatment of osteoarthritisiv However, chelation therapy has not been shown to be beneficial for the treatment of ischemic heart disease,v though is still promoted as a treatment Alternative diets, coffee enemas, ozone therapy,
Appendix G Statement from Commissioners
229
White House Commission on Complementary and Alternative Medicine Policy March 2002
and shark cartilage offer little for cancer patients, however, acupuncture, aromatherapy, and meditation may be useful for nausea/vomiting, mild relaxation, and pain/anxiety, respectivelyvi The Reports inclusion of all CAM practices, without appropriate nuance, fails to
adequately appreciate the heterogeneity of these practices This omission undermines those areas within CAM that have already demonstrated safety and efficacy and may be ready for integration into the healthcare system Wellness and Health Promotion Promoting wellness, health promotion and prevention practices are phrases that recur throughout the Report and are cited as being the focus of many CAM approaches It is unclear what these terms actually mean, as no clear examples are provided in the document If it means that one can enhance his or her sense of well being through a healthy diet, regular exercise and other lifestyle modifications, there is little debate There is a large body of evidence for the beneficial role of nutrition, exercise and stress management in the scientific literature The Commissioners debated the inclusion of these lifestyle approaches under CAM and the final Report acknowledges that these approaches are found in both CAM and conventional medicine, but claims
that there is a greater emphasis placed upon them in CAM One has only to visit the local book store to find the numerous fad diet books that fall under CAM nutrition; high fat - high protein diets, eat according to your blood type diets and fruitarian diets, to name a few There is no single CAM nutritional approach In addition, if one were to accept that there actually is a greater emphasis on sound, scientific nutrition and exercise amongst CAM practitioners, there is no documented evidence that they are any more successful than conventional practitioners in motivating their patients to make lifestyle changes The Report fails to point out that CAM health promotion and prevention practices also include preventing disease by balancing qi, eliminating parasites and toxins, cleansing the liver and/or by cleansing the blood via a multitude of supplements and questionable practices Our uncritical acceptance of CAM wellness and health promotion can be interpreted as an endorsement of these
claims It is absolutely unclear what role, if any, CAM practices play in preventing disease and to what extent patients are burdened with useless treatments and products in their pursuit of wellness The Contributions of Public Health and Medicine to Wellness Registered dietitians, clinical nutritionists, conventionally trained scientists, physicians and public health professionals have done the bulk of the research in the area of nutrition It is important not to overlook the contributions of the pioneering Framingham study that documented the epidemiology of obesity, smoking and heart disease, which led to heart healthy diets, smoking cessation,
Appendix G Statement from Commissioners
230
White House Commission on Complementary and Alternative Medicine Policy March 2002
and a greater emphasis on exercise Through rigorous science we now have a much better understanding of the role foods, nutrients and exercise play in health and disease The notion that only CAM supports healthy
nutrition is neither accurate nor fair Furthermore, the suggestion that conventional medicine is primarily focused on disease, while CAM is primarily focused on health promotion and prevention was a point of contention on the Commission This perspective fails to adequately acknowledge public health initiatives that have been an integral part of medicine for decades, efforts that have dramatically improved the health of the Nation Cooptation of Spirituality The most troubling of these conflations is the inclusion of spirituality under the rubric of CAM There is no question that many Americans find comfort in prayer, religion and/or spiritual practices and that more attention should be paid to the role of spirituality in health care Nonetheless, it is disconcerting that the Report often categorizes spirituality as a CAM modality The Report cites papers that assert that when a patient is diagnosed with cancer and turns to prayer for comfort - he or she is considered to be using CAM When
spirituality is so designated, CAM prevalence grows dramatically The truth is that spirituality transcends any arbitrary designation of conventional and nonconventional medicine and cannot be claimed by any particular group Furthermore, the conflation of spirituality and/or religion with CAM could lead to an abridgement of the free exercise of religion by subjugating its practice to a regulated modality In sum, generic pronouncements about CAM neither serve the public interest nor protect the public health It is essential to separate the effective from the ineffective, the safe from the unsafe and to contextualize these practices against conventional modalities before any of them can be recommended for incorporation into the Nations healthcare system While recognizing that research will eventually answer many of these questions, the Commissions inability to distinguish and critically evaluate broad categories of practitioners and modalities in a meaningful way, limits the applicability
of many worthy recommendations 22 Public Preferences and the Regulation of Supplements The access section of the Report is predicated upon the premise that, The public has expressed interest in maintaining easy access to CAM practitioners Notwithstanding the selection bias of those who presented public testimony to the Commission, the data does not support that this is the view of a majority of Americans In fact, if we consider the regulation of dietary supplements as a wellstudied case in point, the literature indicates that the use of dietary supplements
Appendix G Statement from Commissioners
231
White House Commission on Complementary and Alternative Medicine Policy March 2002
has decreased and that the majority of Americans support increased regulation of supplements, including requiring the Food and Drug Administration to review the safety of new dietary supplements prior to their salevii This support for increased regulation and safer products is likely a consequence of
publicity surrounding St Johns Wort and drug-interactions, the potential liver toxicity of Kava,viii the presence of the anti-coagulant warfarin in PC-SPES, an herbal product used for prostate cancerix and the presence of heavy metals in a number of Asian herbal preparationsx We strongly support a number of recommendations made in the Report regarding the quality, safety and advertising of dietary supplements and the full implementation of the Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act DSHEA However, it remains to be seen if the full implementation of DSHEA will provide the public with the right combination of access and safety that national surveys indicate it desires For this reason, we strongly endorse the recommendation that Congress re-evaluate DSHEA following full implementation 23 Vulnerable Populations Patients will often resort to CAM practices, modalities and practitioners upon the diagnosis of a debilitating, chronic or terminal condition Recent Senate hearings have
documented the special vulnerability of the elderly on fixedincomes to these phenomenaxi The Reports contention that medicine lacks adequate treatment for pain and symptom management could contribute to the mistaken notion that conventional medicine has nothing to offer patients who chronically ill or in the process of dying It is important that the public be aware of the fine work done in hospices around the country and the emergence of palliative care as an important evidence-based clinical discipline able to ameliorate patient and family distress
3 Closing Statement We hope that the American public is well served by the Commissions work The Commission made enormous progress during its deliberations and we support many of its recommendations We believe that some of aspects of CAM, when appropriately defined, have the potential to benefit the health of the American public However, the Commissions inability to appropriately acknowledge the limitations of unproven and unvalidated CAM
interventions or adequately address the minimization of risk necessitates this statement We remain optimistic that the work of the Commission and the many people who presented testimony before it will make a contribution to the publics understanding of this complex issue We hope that the diversity of views on this topic does not engender divisiveness Where medical care is concerned, the common good calls for ideology and advocacy to yield to scientifically sound evidence of safety and efficacy We are confident that this can be accomplished
Appendix G Statement from Commissioners
232
White House Commission on Complementary and Alternative Medicine Policy March 2002
with respect and compassion for all Americans We appreciate the honor of serving with our fellow Commissioners and thank you for your consideration Respectfully Submitted,
_________________________ Tieraona Low Dog, MD
___________________________________ Joseph J Fins, MD,
FACP
———————————————————————–i http://nccamnihgov/ ii Huerta E Testimony before the WHCCAMP March 26, 2001 iii Integration of behavioral and relaxation approaches into the treatment of chronic pain and insomnia NIH Technology Assessment Panel on Integration of Behavioral and Relaxation Approaches into the Treatment of Chronic Pain and Insomnia JAMA 1996 Jul 24-31;2764:313-8 iv Towheed TE, Anastassiades TP, Shea B, Houpt J, Welch V, Hochberg MC Glucosamine therapy for treating osteoarthritis Cochrane review: In: Cochrane Library Issue 2 In: Oxford: Update Software, 2001 v Knudtson ML, Wyse DG, Galbraith PD, et al The Program to Assess Alternative Treatment Strategies to Achieve Cardiac Health PATCH Investigators Chelation therapy for ischemic heart disease: a randomized controlled trial JAMA 2002 Jan 23-30;2874:481-6 vi Ernst E A primer of complementary and alternative medicine commonly used by cancer patients MJA 2001; 174: 88-92 vii
Blendon RJ, DesRoches CM, Benson JM, Brodie M, Altman DE Americans views on the use and regulation of dietary supplements Arch Intern Med 2001 Mar 26; 1616:805-10 viii http://wwwfdagov/medwatch/SAFETY/2001/kavahtm ix http://wwwfdagov/medwatch/SAFETY/2002/safety02htmspes x Ernst E Toxic heavy metals and undeclared drugs in Asian herbal medicines Trends Pharmacol Sci 2002 Mar 1;233:136-9 xi Baratz RS Testimony before the Senate Committee on Aging September 10, 2001 http://agingsenategov/hr73rbhtm
Appendix G Statement from Commissioners
233
Source:hawaii.edu
