The media (for example, Yahoo and MSNBC) have recently taken a few shots at the US government investment into the study of Complementary and Alternative Medicines (CAM). The AP headline tell it all: “$2.5B spent, no alternative med cures” and the article continues: “Ten years ago the government set out to test herbal and other alternative health remedies to find the ones that work. After spending $2.5 billion, the disappointing answer seems to be that almost none of them do.”
The National Institutes of Health center in question - the National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine – has sponsored large clinical studies that found the following CAM products are not effective in their advertised conditions: echinacea for colds, gingko biloba for poor memory, glucosamine and chondroitin for arthritis, black cohosh for menopausal hot flashes, saw palmetto for prostate problems, and shark cartilage for cancer. The only CAM products shown to be effective are St John’s Wort for depression and ginger for the nausea associated with chemotherapy.
Around 40% of the US population has tried CAM during the last year, according to the NCCAM. One member of the Center suggests that this high number is because the public “not getting relief from conventional medicine”. Comments on blog sites reveal a split on the value of CAM – science on one side, belief on the other.
To my mind, the studies done by the NCCAM are useful, as they may convince people to avoid spending money on worthless medications. However, I’m not sure that $2½ billion should be budgeted again without a critical review of the Center’s role.