Gloerfeld H
Abteilung für Zahnersatzkunde, Philipps-Universität Marburg.
Fortschr Kieferorthop. 1992 Feb;53(1):61-6. doi: 10.1007/BF02165147.
In recent years unconventional diagnostic and therapeutic concepts proposed by a number of doctors have increasingly been brought into the public's attention. Those involved have wanted to draw the distinction between the conventional understanding of medicine taught at universities and their concepts of "Holistic Medicine" ("Ganzheitsmedizin"), "Therapy by Experience" ("Erfahrungsheilkunde") and "Biological Medicine" ("Biologische Medizin"). The case of "Elektroakupunktur nach Dr. Voll (EAV)" will be taken as an example to show how an unconventional technique has been used for decades without its efficacy ever having been proven according to the criteria of scientifically orientated medicine. Nevertheless, the advocates of these unconventional concepts keep on supporting their views! The completely different approach to medicine and science--the cause of this divergence--will be explained. Furthermore, it will be considered if the high claims for this way of alternative medicine can be justified. However, even if no such alternative forms of medicine can be supported, some reorientation of the conventional medicine seems to be necessary.
近年来,一些医生提出的非常规诊断和治疗概念越来越受到公众关注。相关人士希望将大学所教授的传统医学理解与他们的“整体医学”(“Ganzheitsmedizin”)、“经验疗法”(“Erfahrungsheilkunde”)和“生物医学”(“Biologische Medizin”)概念区分开来。将以“沃勒博士的电针疗法(EAV)”为例,说明一种非常规技术是如何在几十年里一直被使用,但其疗效却从未按照科学导向医学的标准得到证实。然而,这些非常规概念的倡导者仍在坚持支持他们的观点!将解释医学与科学的完全不同的方法——这种分歧的根源。此外,还将探讨这种替代医学方式的高要求是否合理。然而,即使找不到支持此类替代医学形式的依据,传统医学似乎也有必要进行一些重新定位。