The C.A.M. Report
Complementary and Alternative Medicine: Fair, Balanced, and to the Point
  • About this web log

    This blog ran from 2006 to 2016 and was intended as an objective and dispassionate source of information on the latest CAM research. Since my background is in pharmacy and allopathic medicine, I view all CAM as advancing through the development pipeline to eventually become integrated into mainstream medical practice. Some will succeed while others fail. But all are treated fairly here.

  • About the author

    John Russo, Jr., PharmD, is president of The MedCom Resource, Inc. Previously, he was senior vice president of medical communications at, a complementary and alternative medicine website.

  • Common sense considerations

    The material on this weblog is for informational purposes. It is not medical advice or counsel. Be smart, consult your health professional before using CAM.

  • Recent Posts

  • Recent Comments

    Update: Prevalence of CAM use

    Researchers at the University of Sheffield, in the UK, updated previous systematic reviews.

    First, the details.

    • 51 reports from 49 surveys of 12-month prevalence conducted in 15 countries were reviewed.
      • There were 32 estimates of 12-month prevalence of any CAM use.
      • There were 33 estimates of 12-month prevalence of visits to CAM practitioners.
    • Quality of the reports was variable, with 59% meeting at least four quality criteria.

    And, the results.

    • There was evidence of substantial CAM use in the 15 countries surveyed.
    • There was no evidence to suggest a change in 12-month prevalence of CAM use since the previous systematic reviews were published in 2000.
    • Estimates of 12-month prevalence of any CAM use (excluding prayer) showed remarkable stability.
      • Australia
        • 49%: 1993
        • 52%: 2000
        • 52%: 2004
      • USA
        • 36%: 2002
        • 38%: 2007

    The bottom line?

    With the apparent increase in awareness and acceptance of CAM options, it’s interesting that CAM use has not increased.

    The authors believe that governments should get more involved to improve the quality of these surveys.

    Why do the authors think government intrusion is needed? Considering the trillions of dollars of debt across countries and the potential for conflicts of interest with respect to national healthcare, this doesn’t seem like the best use of our money.

    10/16/12 19:59 JR

    Comments are closed.