Jump to content

Template talk:Alternative medicine

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Osteopathy[edit]

We just had a discussion over at Template talk:Alternative medical systems#Osteopathy that culminated with Osteopathy being removed from that template. The main thrust of the argument is that osteopathy makes a bad example for the template because there is no space to cover the nuance of a DO (which is roughly equivalent to an MD) vs. a holistic osteopath (in places where the use of the term is loosely regulated). The same logic would seem to apply here. Would anyone object were I to remove the link? - 2/0 (cont.) 23:30, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Done. - 2/0 (cont.) 23:04, 20 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorting this template[edit]

What should the divisions in this template be?

In classifying alternative medicine, one classification system could be by method of action. An article in Nature proposed these divisions:

  1. biological agents
    1. diet
    2. herbs
    3. vitamins
  2. energy
    1. Qigong
    2. Reiki
    3. Magnets
  3. systems and philosophies
    1. Traditional Chinese medicine
    2. Ayurveda
    3. homeopathy
  4. mind/body
    1. spirituality
    2. yoga
    3. mediation
  5. body manipulation
    1. Massage
    2. Chiropractic

If we used this system, that could put everything under a broad umbrella and limit the number of divisions we need to make. This system has the benefit of being established by a reliable source, also. Blue Rasberry (talk) 15:58, 3 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This is a good start, but the article's authors had a couple of minor oversights. The term "bodywork" should be used to include all hands-on manipulative therapies, including massage, as there are a number of non-massage bodywork modalities. Also, this system is lacking a category for interventions based on movement retraining. A number of related templates already use the NCCAM (NIH's alt med division) categories: {http://nccam.nih.gov/}. They reflect more complete thought than the Nature article categories. --Karinpower (talk) 17:54, 29 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Related discussion. Altanner1991 (talk) 21:14, 19 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]