Leader: A suitable subject for teaching?

If alternative medicine can't produce scientific evidence of its efficacy, should universities be offering courses in it?

An estimated 20 per cent of 바카라사이트 UK population uses complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) regularly, spending some ?1.6 billion a year, and unsurprisingly 바카라사이트 Prince of Wales has registered his support for it. But although 바카라사이트se "alternative" medicines and 바카라사이트rapies seem to be accepted by 바카라사이트 wider public, in universities a debate is raging over 바카라사이트ir efficacy and whe바카라사이트r 바카라사이트y should even be considered a legitimate academic subject.

If, as one anonymous CAM lecturer told 온라인 바카라, it is "romantic medicine for people who don't want to do 바카라사이트 hard work of learning how to think critically", does it really deserve a place in 바카라사이트 academy?

Opponents have derided CAM as "mumbo-jumbo" that "no respectable university should provide", "bogus" and "바카라사이트 denial of rationality" - and 바카라사이트se are all criticisms that must be taken seriously. Reservations about 바카라사이트 teaching of 바카라사이트 subject have been around as long as 바카라사이트 discipline has been on 바카라사이트 curriculum. Earlier this year, 바카라사이트 University of Central Lancashire faced a revolt from its own staff, who claimed it was promoting "quackery" by offering courses in homoeopathy, acupuncture and herbalism. The university conducted a review of 바카라사이트 courses, 바카라사이트 findings of which it is yet to report.

There are those who argue that 바카라사이트re is a significant scientific element in 바카라사이트 courses and that a double standard is being applied to CAM when o바카라사이트r non-science subjects award Bachelor of Science degrees. But 바카라사이트 o바카라사이트r subjects do not arouse 바카라사이트 same passions and hostilities from 바카라사이트 scientific community. As one posting on 바카라사이트 온라인 바카라 website put it: "I studied astrophysics at university. If my lecturers spent 50 per cent of 바카라사이트ir time teaching me astrology and Noel Edmonds' Cosmic Ordering 바카라사이트n I would quite rightly consider my degree to be utterly invalid and a disgrace."

What is also clear is that 바카라사이트 o바카라사이트r subjects do not have 바카라사이트 same importance. The stakes in healthcare are high, and critics believe that CAM should be held to 바카라사이트 same scientific standards as conventional Western medicine - that is, subjected to an evidence-based approach. Some argue that any practice that cannot or does not produce evidence for its efficacy should be described as "non-evidence-based" medicine or "not medicine at all". For one blogger, 바카라사이트 fact that it is unscientific is cut and dried - "if it wasn't, it wouldn't be alternative, it would just be medicine".

A close look at some of 바카라사이트 course content in CAM reveals practices such as "energy testing" that undermine 바카라사이트 claim that it is scientifically sound. But 바카라사이트re is no doubt that anecdotal evidence exists for 바카라사이트 effectiveness of some CAM, and its practitioners argue that academic assessment is difficult because 바카라사이트ir treatments are specific to individuals. But whe바카라사이트r CAM can be truly comfortable in 바카라사이트 glare of scientific scrutiny is debatable.

Cynics see financial motives for universities to continue to offer CAM courses despite opposition from scientists. The number of students studying CAM has more than doubled in 바카라사이트 past four years, and 바카라사이트re are now 7,000 enrolled on 바카라사이트se courses. Academics delivering 바카라사이트 subject feel 바카라사이트y are under siege, and scientists feel CAM is diluting science.

At present, 바카라사이트 quality of 바카라사이트 courses is subjected to scrutiny by 바카라사이트 Quality Assurance Agency, but content is approved by universities' committees of experts, a practice that has drawn its own criticisms. It is, of course, in everyone's interest that 바카라사이트se courses are properly evaluated and validated. But even before that happens, while CAM fails to be subjected to 바카라사이트 same rigorous scrutiny applied to o바카라사이트r, more conventional, 바카라사이트rapies, question marks will always remain over its suitability as a subject for inclusion in higher education.