At the same time alternative medicine RESEARCH could be a good thing (note – I say could be, not will be). It is all in the execution.

At the same time 2.5 billion sounds like alot. I hope regular science gets *vastly* more?

If it is done scientifically however, by credible scientists, alternative medicine research could reveal what is totally ineffective other than placebo effect, and should never be funded again (i.e. the totally ridiculous like homeopathy & reki) and which are effective therapies (certain naturopathic, i.e. botanical remedies, and who knows – maybe massage therapies and whatnot?).

For example, despite being a medical student, athiest, and total sceptic, I take enteric coated peppermint oil for intestinal spasm related to IBS, and I have never encountered anything as cheap, effective, and seemingly side effect free (and I have tried alot of options). Some “alternative” therapies may have merits (thousands of years of historical use must have come up trumps occasionally – e.g. see the history of 2500 year old rice water treatment of cholera/diarrhea and oral rehydration therapy vs. IV therapy… ORT “(re)discovered” in 1960’s) To refuse to investigate the efficacy scientifically is – well – unscientific and makes “science” into a religion.

-terry

PS Cost effectiveness, best use of resources, 2.5 BILLION etc I am not addressing at all and are probably very valid points.

Reference:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/31190909/

Homeopathy and it’s cousins are such a crock.