Fan Ruiping, Holliday Ian
Department of Public and Social Administration, City University of Hong Kong, Kowloon, Hong Kong.
J Med Ethics. 2007 Aug;33(8):454-61. doi: 10.1136/jme.2006.017483.
There is a prevailing conviction that if traditional medicine (TRM) or complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) are integrated into healthcare systems, modern scientific medicine (MSM) should retain its principal status. This paper contends that this position is misguided in medical contexts where TRM is established and remains vibrant. By reflecting on the Chinese policy on three entrenched forms of TRM (Tibetan, Mongolian and Uighur medicines) in western regions of China, the paper challenges the ideology of science that lies behind the demand that all traditional forms of medicine be evaluated and reformed according to MSM standards. Tibetan medicine is used as a case study to indicate the falsity of a major premise of the scientific ideology. The conclusion is that the proper integrative system for TRM and MSM is a dual standard based system in which both TRM and MSM are free to operate according to their own medical standards.
有一种普遍的观点认为，如果将传统医学（TRM）或补充替代医学（CAM）纳入医疗保健系统，现代科学医学（MSM）应保持其主要地位。本文认为，在传统医学已确立且仍然活跃的医疗背景下，这一立场是错误的。通过思考中国对西部地区三种根深蒂固的传统医学形式（藏医、蒙医和维吾尔医）的政策，本文挑战了科学意识形态，这种意识形态要求所有传统医学形式都要按照现代科学医学标准进行评估和改革。藏医被用作案例研究，以表明科学意识形态一个主要前提的错误性。结论是，传统医学和现代科学医学的适当整合系统是一个基于双重标准的系统，在这个系统中，传统医学和现代科学医学都可以根据自身的医学标准自由运作。
