Designations of Medicines

  • Wiseman N
N/ACitations
Citations of this article
32Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

With the proliferation of medicines vying for recognition in modern health care systems, we are in some cases faced with the problem of what to call them. One has only to consider the terms ‘complementary’ and ‘alternative’, which appear in the title of this journal, to gain a sense of the problem. The two terms are virtually synonymous in their referents. Nevertheless, they differ markedly in their connotations, since they imply different roles in their relationship with the medicine that has come to dominate health care over the planet. What is more, they are considered by some as inappropriate designations for traditional medicines such as Chinese, Arabic and Ayurvedic medicine on the grounds that these cannot be defined in terms of an alien medical system of much more recent vintage. Many other terms used to designate medicines are also the subject of disagreement. Hence, clarification of their connotations may help to contribute to their understanding and thereby promote the development of a rational nomenclature. Before embarking on an investigation of terms used to refer to complementary and alternative medicines, it is as well to consider the confusing welter of terms that have arisen to denote the medicine with respect to which they are considered complementary or alternative.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Wiseman, N. (2004). Designations of Medicines. Evidence-Based Complementary and Alternative Medicine, 1(3), 327–329. https://doi.org/10.1093/ecam/neh053

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free