Criticism

Use of the terms "Complementary and alternative medicine CAM" and "alternative medicine" have been criticized.

CAM is not as well researched as conventional medicine which undergoes intense research before being released to the public.^[114] Funding for research is also sparse making it difficult to do further research for effectiveness of CAM.^[128] Most funding for CAM is funded by government agencies.^[114] Proposed research for CAM are rejected by most private funding agencies because the results of research are not reliable.^[114] The research for CAM has to meet certain standards from research ethics committees which most CAM researchers find almost impossible to meet.^[114] Because the results of CAM are not quantifiable, it is hard to prove its effectiveness and it appears to work in a more holistic sense.^[114] CAM is thought to help the patient in a mental or psychological sense since the research for CAM is hit and miss.^[114] Even with the little research done on it, CAM has not been proven to be effective.^[129] This creates an issue of whether the patient is receiving all the information about the treatment that is necessary for the patient to be well informed.^[114]

CAM is not as well regulated as conventional medicine.^[114] There are ethical concerns about whether people who perform CAM have the proper knowledge to perform the treatments they give to patients.^[114] CAM is often done by non-physicians and does not operate with the same medical licensing laws as conventional medicine.^[114] It is an issue of non-maleficence.^[130]