The other side of the coin: safety of complementary and alternative medicine

Abstract

Most consumers consider complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) products inherently safe. The growing simultaneous use of CAM products and pharmaceutical drugs by Australian consumers increases the risk of CAM–drug interactions. The Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) has a two‐tier, risk‐based regulatory system for therapeutic goods — CAM products are regulated as low risk products and are assessed for quality and safety; and sponsors of products must hold the evidence for any claim of efficacy made about them. Adverse reactions to CAM products can be classified as intrinsic (innate to the product), or extrinsic (where the risk is not related to the product itself, but results from the failure of good manufacturing practice). Adverse reactions to CAM practices can be classified as risks of commission (which includes removal of medical therapy) and risks of omission (which includes failure to refer when appropriate). While few systematic studies of adverse events with CAM exist, and under‐reporting is likely, most CAM products and practices do not appear to present a high risk; their safety needs to be put into the perspective of wider safety issues. A priority for research is to rigorously define the risks associated with both CAM products and practices so that their potential impact on public health can be assessed.

Anaesthetist's responses to patients' self-reported drug allergies

“…Despite the limitations of the Rawlinson and Thompson classification, it remains in use by many authors as a means to simply classify ADRs. 9 It has been suggested that in addition to the Type A and B reactions outlined above, a third group needs to be acknowledged. These are patients who experience an adverse event, such as nausea or vomiting, and wrongly ascribe this as being because of medication, when in fact it may be part of the disease process.…”

Educational intervention to improve physician reporting of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) in a primary care setting in complementary and alternative medicine

“…This has created a challenging situation when it comes to detecting, evaluating, and reporting ADRs, because many patients – and, remarkably, even CAM physicians – believe that these kinds of treatments are not associated with risk [ 5 ]. Patient surveys have suggested that this assumption may be traced to the belief that CAM products are 'natural' and therefore harmless [ 14 ]. Assumptions like these have led to a discrepancy between the growing interest in CAM remedies and the limited data on their potential to cause ADRs [ 13 , 15 - 17 ].…”

Complementray medicine seeking behaviour among Sudanese infertile women

“…These negative perceptions about safety of self-management strategies of infertility may look contradicting with the wide use, but it can be explained in light of the pressure from husbands, inlaws and society in general to conceive. A study conducted in Jordan revealed similar findings that in spite of the risk encountered when using herbal medicine with conventional medicine, participants still using them [43]. In addition, the unsuccessful previous trials or decreased potential of conventional medical interventions may lead to that some women become 'desperate' to try anything to achieve the desired motherhood.…”