Integrative Medicine: A Bridge between Biomedicine and Alternative Medicine Fitting the Spirit of the Age

Abstract

Complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) are increasingly used by people in first world countries, almost always in combination with biomedicine. The combination of CAM and biomedicine is now commonly referred to as "integrative medicine" (IM). In Groningen, The Netherlands, we founded a center for integrative psychiatry, offering conventional and complementary mental health care. Like other centers for integrative (mental) health we have mostly received positive reactions although there have been negative and even hostile reactions as well, using phrases like "quackery" and "betrayal". We will try to illustrate that these polarising qualifications, in which "the good" is being positioned against "the bad" in an over-simplified manner, are unnecessary and not useful. Moreover, it is unlikely that this polarisation will stall the growth of IM. It seems that integration is not only a current tendency in medicine, but also a trend fitting the contemporary spirit of the age in which integration seems to be the most common focus. It can be observed in religion, philosophy, spirituality and psychotherapy as well. This article will discuss the difference between differentiation and integration and will show that the focus on differentiation or integration varies with time, mostly rising as a reaction to each other. The transition from one period to the next is often met with resistance and criticism. If the integrative movement is to survive, it cannot do without differentiation and must find a middle way in which appropriate attention is being paid to keeping the integrated parts sufficiently differentiated and allowing them to keep their own identity.

Investigation into Factors Influencing Roles, Relationships, and Referrals in Integrative Medicine

“…The congruence of health care values promotes an environment that is both patient-and practitioner-centered. 19 A nonhierarchical team approach to integrative care allows for the CAM practitioner to act as a patient's primary care giver. 20 As determined by this qualitative study, practitioner perceptions highlighted a preference toward this patient-centered nonhierarchical model of IM.…”

A review of the WHO strategy on traditional, complementary, and integrative medicine from the perspective of academic consortia for integrative medicine and health

“…This apparent change in openness to T&CM may be because integration is not only a current tendency in medicine, but also a trend fitting the contemporary spirit of the age in which integration seems to be the most common focus. It can be observed in religion, philosophy, spirituality and psychotherapy as well ( 105 ). It is also reflected in the WHO Traditional Medicine strategy 2014–2023.…”

Advocating for integrative medicine: providers' stories of resonance, negotiation, and community

“…Trailblazing for IM providers translates to continuous negotiation of remnant and real dialectic tensions communicated in a health care system that values evidencebased medicine as historically represented well in biomedicine and more recently in CAM. IM has been described as a successful bridging of biomedicine and CAM, but not without polarizing qualifications that are oversimplified 36 and challenges to collaboration that are vital for integration. 13 In this second category of communicating advocacy we focus on what we have located in providers' narratives as the predominant dialectic tensions they negotiate with other providers, patients, families, and the general public.…”