Alternative medicines need risk-based regulation according to a newly released report from the C.D. Howe Institute. In “Regulating Alternative Medicines: Disorder in the Borderlands” authors Michael J. Trebilcock and Kanksha Mahadevia Ghimire recommend regulating certain popular forms of alternative medicine, especially when their use could be life-threatening to patients.
In many Western countries, the use of complementary and alternative medicines—such as naturopathy, homeopathy, acupuncture, traditional Chinese medicine, chiropractic medicine, osteopathy, and Western herbal medicine—has been growing. In most contemporary societies, biomedicine (also referred to as Western medicine) is strictly regulated, while regulation of alternatives is disconcertingly inconsistent and exists in a patchwork across jurisdictions. Patients may use alternative medicines in conjunction with biomedicine, but may choose to rely solely on alternatives to biomedicine.
“With use of alternative medicine increasing, a better approach to regulating certain popular alternative medicine is needed,” said Trebilcock.
The central challenge for regulation is how to allow for patients’ autonomy over their own treatment, while addressing the severe information asymmetries between practitioner and patient: a situation worsened when professionals misrepresent their skills or the benefits of their services.
“Regulation of CAMs should be calibrated to the degree of risk entailed, especially when alternatives are promoted as substitutes for, rather than as complements to, biomedicine in treating potentially life-threatening health conditions,” said Trebilcock
The report recommends:
- That regulatory responses should be calibrated to the degree of risk entailed for patients.
- State-sanctioned forms of delegated self-regulation of certification regimes by practitioners themselves.
- The creation by government of an overarching advisory body – an alternative medicine advisory council
- Ensuring that persons responsible are held liable for fraudulent, false or misleading advertisements or claims, tortious liability for negligence or criminal liability for gross negligence.
The C.D. Howe Institute is an independent not-for-profit research institute whose mission is to raise living standards by fostering economically sound public policies. Widely considered to be Canada's most influential think tank, the Institute is a trusted source of essential policy intelligence, distinguished by research that is nonpartisan, evidence-based and subject to definitive expert review.
For more information, please contact: Michael J. Trebilcock, Professor of Law, University of Toronto; Kanksha Mahadevia Ghimire, S.J.D. Candidate, University of Toronto; Laura Bouchard, Communications Officer, C.D. Howe Institute: Phone: 416-865-9935; email: lbouchard@cdhowe.org