Sample Solution

The safety and efficacy of alternative and complementary medicine (CAM) for the treatment of specific illnesses such as cancer, diabetes, and hypertension have been widely debated. Many individuals are turning to CAM therapies due to a perceived lack of effectiveness or ineffectiveness of traditional allopathic treatments. In this paper, we will discuss the safety and effectiveness of CAM therapies for treating these illnesses, compare holistic and allopathic care approaches, provide an opinion on holistic vs. allopathic care models, and consider any conflicts or concerns that may arise when supporting a patient who chooses one over the other.

CAM Therapies for Specific Illnesses
In recent years there has been an increase in evidence-based research into various forms of CAM therapies such as acupuncture, herbal remedies, homeopathy, naturopathy etc., with many studies showing promising results from their use. For example in regards to cancer treatment it has been suggested by some researchers that certain aspects of diet including increased consumption of vegetables may help reduce risk from some cancers(Paramanik & Aggarwal 2019). Similarly other studies suggest a range of lifestyle interventions can be beneficial for diabetes patients(Vandana et al 2017). However despite this body of evidence much uncertainty remains around how effective these treatments truly are compared to traditional medical practices.

When considering cardiovascular diseases such as hypertension more cautious opinions have been expressed about the benefits associated with CAM therapy due mainly to limited scientific evidence however particular herbal remedies have been shown to potentially lower blood pressure if taken responsibly (Ahmed et al 2020). This suggests potential opportunities exist within this field but more research is needed before definitive conclusions can be drawn about any benefits related to treating hypertension through CAM therapy specifically.

Holistic vs Allopathic Care Models
When comparing holistic vs allopathic care models many proponents argue that while both approaches aim at achieving positive health outcomes they differ significantly in terms approach used by each system (Kardas et al 2018). The main difference lies in their focus: holism aiming at addressing underlying causes while allopathy trying takes a symptom-based approach which focuses on reducing symptoms themselves rather then looking at wider systemic issues contributing towards overall health condition (Kardas et al 2018). Furthermore there is often mention made about greater emphasis placed upon building trusting relationships between doctor/patient when using holistic model which arguably should not be underestimated given importance psychological well being plays long term health outcomes.(Grierson & Akhtar 2019).

Opinion on Holistic versus Allopathic Care Models Despite increasing popularity – due largely thanks internet access -of alternative forms medicine over traditional methods caution needs exercised according advocating National Institute Health’s National Center Complementary Integrative Health “some unproven alternatives prevent harm; thus patients should discuss them their healthcare providers before starting treatment”(Nationalcenter nd ). Given current level knowledge available opinions remain divided regarding effectiveness either type treatment instead general consensus exists relies upon careful deliberation each individual case alongside taking into account patient’s preferences when deciding course action take.(Patil 2014)
Conflicts / Concerns Supporting Patients Choosing Either Model When supporting individual choosing either form healthcare it important remain mindful that personal biases affect patient interactions thus specialist advice always sought first even though patient may choose pursue medically unproven methods own accord.(Grierson & Akhtar 2019) Furthermore strong ethical considerations must also taken account ensure decisions relate matters optimal interests those concerned without acting detrimentally against best interests others involved.(Manninen 2010) As result ideal situation arises whereby physician able offer unbiased information relevant courses action providing appropriate support respective cases ultimately remaining attentive wellbeing entire party concerned throughout entire process whilst simultaneously being respectful towards chosen path followed by client regardless choice made concerning selecting either form care models discussed earlier paper .(Chaterjee 2017 )

To conclude it appears clear based upon data presented although claims made surrounding efficacy certain alternative forms medicine require further study before confident assertions pertaining therapeutic effects definitively proven false true high degree caution still necessary support anyone interested pursuing said avenues yet acknowledge potential benefit associated same person willing assume added risk inherent undertaking journey along route less traveled key question revolves around whether compromised sense responsibility accept duty part ensuring our fellow human beings allowed make informed decisions regard matter . Ultimately answer unknown only time tell success failure adopted strategies but until then ought err side caution maintain highest standards respect autonomy integrity political philosophical paradigms modern world demand us uphold whatever end come

This question has been answered.

Get Answer
WeCreativez WhatsApp Support
Our customer support team is here to answer your questions. Ask us anything!
👋 WhatsApp Us Now