Medical provision in the twenty-first century.

Abstract

193 On 21 November 2000, the United Kingdom’s House of Lords Select Committee on Science and Technology published a report on Complementary and Alternative Medicine (CAM) in Britain in response to a growing demand for these therapies. In light of significant advances in nuclear transfer experiments and its potential for treatment of trauma and a range of incurable and degenerative diseases (e.g., Parkinson’s disease, stroke, and spinal cord injuries), the House of Lords voted on 22 January 2001, to permit human embryonic stem cell research. Coincidentally, on 12 February 2001, the profile of the human genome was first published, presenting unique scientific opportunities that could alter the manner in which genetically complex human diseases are prevented or treated. Herein lies the paradox in medical provision. What impact could such scientific breakthroughs have on alternative medical practices, particularly herbal medicine, which has witnessed the biggest growth among alternative therapies with a current U.K. market estimated in the region of $340.8 million per annum (Kingston, 2001)? The appeal of herbal medicine and herbal supplements within the public health domain is well documented but is the concept of integrated medicine wholly unrealistic in the light of current scientific innovation and the enormous potential that it presents to medicine? The world is witnessing a technologic revolution and an explosion of scientific knowledge of amazing proportions. Advances in medical science have surpassed our wildest expectations, posing new therapeutic possibilities that constantly challenge and redefine the parameters of medical ethics. Nowhere is this more apparent than in the new developments in the biomedical sciences such as the Human Genome Project (HGP) and stem cell therapy. It may be difficult for herbalists to accept the applications of the latest medical breakthroughs readily, but it is essential that practitioners have knowledge of such developments for a number of reasons. For instance, an understanding of individual variation and disease susceptibility may benefit herbal therapeutic practice, particularly where the tailoring of herbal prescriptions to the individual patient is a crucial factor. This is made more pertinent when examining the effects of herbal remedies in different people, in addition to the concept of synergy of the active ingredients. To gain a full and accurate understanding of such scientific innovation could not only demonstrate the benefits of such techniques but could also clearly define the limitations and possibly any disadvantages that inadvertently favor herbal medicine. To be informed of treatment options that are available could improve understanding of patients’ perception of new scientific innovation, thus enabling a clear recognition of patients’ needs and appropriateness of treatment. Moreover, an increased awareness of the range of medical provision in the 21st century would give a clear indication of the context and framework in which herbal medicine is practiced. Although any future alliances between