Inside the Battle Between Traditional and Alternative Healing
Navigating a healthcare crisis requires complex decision-making based on a patient’s personal values, risk assessment, and therapeutic goals. In the modern medical landscape, the efficacy of a treatment plan often depends on the patient’s ability to access a comprehensive spectrum of data regarding both conventional and integrative modalities. As healthcare consumers increasingly seek personalized care, the role of informed consent—rooted in transparent access to all available therapeutic options—becomes a critical pillar of medical ethics.
We might make our healthcare decisions based on whether we have insurance or not. We might consider the cost/benefit or do a benefit/risk assessment of a pending option. We might even contemplate how our choices may impact the quality of our life both short and long-term.
We are all different. Our leaning towards what type of care we want should also be our choice not only in the modality of intervention we receive but also in the service providers we see. Some people prefer to be treated by a traditional orthodox medical provider, while others seek alternative natural choices for their care.
The “Structural Schism”
A historical divide exists within the healthcare industry between the allopathic model and integrative wellness practitioners. While the traditional medical model utilizes standardized pharmacological and surgical interventions for acute conditions, holistic practitioners emphasize a multi-dimensional approach that considers the physiological, psychological, and environmental factors influencing a patient’s recovery. This intersection—often referred to as integrative medicine—aims to provide a more holistic patient experience but faces significant challenges in digital visibility and institutional support.
Is Alternative Healing Is Winning Hearts—and Facing Foes
The healthcare industry is broken down into two basic camps. There are traditional medical professionals who treat specific health conditions. This is the doctor we might go to if we have the flu or break our arm. They might order a blood test or an x-ray to evaluate our symptoms. They might prescribe a medication or suggest surgery to heal our woes.
Then there are the healthcare providers who adopt an alternative look at health, healing, and wellness. These practitioners step outside of the traditional model. Their focus emphasizes the interconnectedness of the whole person, body, mind, and spirit in the effort to achieve optimal health.
These practitioners often address aspects of ourselves that conventional medicine overlooks. Granted, these therapies might not replace traditional medical care especially when treatment is needed for an acute situation, such as when we suffer a heart attack, but alternative health methods can be used for a wide array of health-related concerns.
Not sure what I mean by alternative therapies? NeuroLaunch, in their October 1, 2024 article Non-Therapeutic Interventions: Alternative Approaches to Health and Well-being shares this insight. “Picture this: you’re feeling under the weather, but instead of popping a pill, you decide to try something different. Maybe you roll out a yoga mat, whip up a green smoothie, or call a friend for a heart-to-heart chat. Congratulations! You’ve just dipped your toes into the world of non-therapeutic interventions.”
Alternative therapies can incorporate nutritional approaches to wellness such as making dietary changes, fasting, detoxing, or the incorporation of vitamins, minerals, herbs, and supplements into our overall health plan. It encompasses practices such as aromatherapy, meditation, hypnotherapy, biofeedback, acupuncture, chiropractic, and massage therapy. Holistic therapies can also include the use of reiki or yoga as part of our health journey.
Are Millions Are Ditching Pills for Alternative Paths
Today, an ever-growing number of individuals are looking outside of the traditional allopathic, orthodox medical model for answers to their health-related needs. Recent research suggests the desire to access non-traditional health options is gaining momentum with more people seeking holistic approaches to their health.
Analysis indicates more than 30 percent of adults use some form of therapy that is not part of a traditional medical plan each year. Put into perspective, Americans spend over $30 billion dollars annually for health services and products that are not covered by insurance. These health-minded individuals are willing to pay out of pocket for these alternative therapies.
Edvardas Garbenis in his 2025 article appearing on Healthnews entitled, Interest in Alternative Healing Modalities Has Grown 9x Since 2016, contends this shift is reflected in online searches. “By analyzing Google search trends for 35 of the most prominent alternative healing modalities, we reveal a staggering 837% global increase in interest — from 7.09 million monthly searches in 2016 to 66.41 million in 2024. In the U.S. alone, the rise is also remarkable, with a 694% surge in search volume during the period.”
(Note: The article Interest in Alternative Healing Modalities Has Grown 9x Since 2016 (https://healthnews.com/news/trends-in-alternative-healing-modalities/) has been taken down since I started researching this article in February 2025)
The shift toward alternative healing modalities is reflected in global search trends, showing a multi-fold increase in consumer interest in non-pharmacological interventions. However, as the market share for holistic wellness expands, questions arise regarding the economic incentives that influence information distribution. Analyzing the intersection of pharmaceutical industry advertising and digital search algorithms reveals a potential bias that prioritizes evidence-based medicine (EBM) over traditional and natural therapies, potentially narrowing the scope of a patient’s informed choice.
Part II: Comparative Analysis: Evidence-Based vs. Traditional Healing
The foundation of today’s mainstream orthodox medicine is centered on the concept of Evidence Based Medicine (EBM). EBM desires to provide us with all the information we need regarding a potential treatment. This treatment is ‘based upon careful study, years of research and clinical trials’. Through them, they hope to ensure us their products or services are ‘safe and effective’. Then, based on the proof offered, we can make an informed decision.
They often take a very dim view of alternative medicine practices. They point to the fact that many alternative therapies lack scientific validation. This viewpoint is echoed by the search results offered by providers like Google.
Prior to 2020, there was a vast array articles online discussing health related topics. Some advocated for traditional medical care while others provided a more natural way of addressing a concern. This landscape of results has drastically changed.
Today, the same search query brings up websites such as WebMD, the Mayo Clinic, or the National Library of Medicine (PubMed). These sites offer undecipherable scientific studies regarding a health problem or issue. The websites, which were encountered in the past, are nowhere to be found.
These mainstream health sites have one thing in common. They constantly remind you the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) doesn’t regulate vitamins, minerals, dietary supplements, or herbal remedies. They minimize any potential healing benefit a particular alternative modality might provide. They tend to suggest that ‘this therapy’ or ‘that therapy’ has not been tested, is not regulated, should not be trusted, and are to be avoided at all costs. Period!
Oh and don’t forget, alternative therapies should never be considered a replacement for traditional Western medicine.
Why? Because in their mind, alternative healthcare providers lack credibility. Without saying it out loud, these practitioners and/or the products they sell are inadvertently looked upon by mainstream medicine as a bunch of con artists wanting to sell you their special brand of snake oil.
This quote is from a Cleveland Clinic article entitled What Do ‘Complementary’ and ‘Alternative’ Medicine Really Mean? says it all. “This bears repeating: Complementary therapies can help you feel better, but they won’t cure major illnesses.”
The article goes on to share a quote from Robert Saper, MD, MPH, Chair of Wellness and Preventive Medicine, “These therapies rarely cure conditions, but they frequently can improve symptoms, improve patients’ quality of life, and help contribute to the treatment of chronic disease.”
Integrative medicine specialist, Dr. Umeda adds to the discussion, “Integrative physicians do not encourage the use of complementary therapies without appropriate evidence to support their use.”
PubMed, in support of mainstream medicine plainly states in their article Assessing The Benefit: Risk Ratio Of A Drug – Randomized And Naturalistic Evidence “Drugs provide therapeutic benefits, ie, curing a disease, slowing its evolution, or alleviating its symptoms.”
Many alternative health practitioners would respectfully disagree, pointing to the myriad of potential side effects these miracle cures offer including high blood pressure, constipation, vomiting, dizziness, edema, weight gain, and confusion. Some medications warn of potential heart attacks, liver failure, or other life-threatening reactions, up to and including death.
All one needs do is watch any network television show to see the many pharmaceutical commercials advertising this week’s cure-all. They might mention the use, and benefit of their product, only to spend the bulk of their time providing a long list of the drug’s dangerous side effects.
The Narrow Focus of Evidence-Based Medicine
EBM providers typically do not offer the full picture of an individual’s healthcare options. They deal with our health concerns with blinders on, blinders that say there has to be a randomized double-blind study of a treatment before they will add it to their bag of evidence-based tricks.
Options that fall outside of the precise treatment plan identified by the American Medical Association (AMA) and other health authorities are ignored, dismissed, and rarely discussed with the patient. They do not provide an all-encompassing view concerning a person’s health care options.
Say, for example, you hurt your back and you are in significant pain. You go to your doctor, are prescribed pain relievers and muscle relaxers, and are sent home to passively recover. A couple of weeks go by and you are not experiencing much improvement in your condition. The discomfort you feel is still intense.
Frustrated, you go back to your doctor who might order an x-ray or MRI. They might even go for the gusto and send you to an orthopedic surgeon with the subtle suggestion that you will probably need back surgery to fix what is going on. In their minds, this would be the next logical step for you in the progression of pain remission. The thought of trying something else is never brought up.
An alternative health provider, on the other hand, might suggest soaking in a hot Epson salt bath to help relax your back muscles. They could recommend consuming herbs like turmeric or ginger to reduce muscle inflammation. Chiropractic, massage, or acupuncture might also be on their short list of things that may relieve your symptoms.
These therapeutic options might not fix your problem or relieve your discomfort, but they might! And that is the choice: soak in a hot tub for a few days to see if it helps or have surgery performed on your back without ever trying it first.
Personally, and based on my values and beliefs, I am going to try soaking in the tub first. If that doesn’t work, then surgery might be put on the table and considered an option.
The conspiracy deepens…
Part III: From Ancient Roots to Modern Pills: The Enduring Power of Plants in Medicine
Plants, including its leaves and roots, vines, and fungi form the basis of natural, traditional folk medicine. Their efficacy is undisputed. The use of therapeutic botanicals goes back thousands of years. Direct evidence of plants being used for the treatment and prevention of diseases dates back some 5000 years.
Texts including the Sumerian Treatise of Medical Diagnosis and Prognoses, the Twelfth Dynasty Egyptian Kahun Papyrus and the Chinese Huang-Di Nei-Jing or The Yellow Emperor’s Inner Classic are the oldest surviving medical text in the world. These health treatises record well-understood treatment modalities. The origin of these health protocols dates back even further.
The earliest suggestive evidence supporting the practice of early medical intervention surprisingly goes back 50,000 years. The study of Neanderthal skeletal remains discovered in the El Sidrón Cave of northern Spain revealed traces of medicinal herbs in the dental tartar of several of the individuals recovered.
One particularly intriguing skeleton found was of a teenage boy who suffered from a dental abscess as well as a parasitic infection, which would have led to chronic diarrhea. Studies of his dental tartar revealed traces of the poplar tree, which is rich in salicylic acid, a natural form of aspirin. The salicylic acid this plant contains is known to reduce pain – a wise herbal choice for this young man. This plant matter was not found in the teeth of any of the other skeletons.
The Evolution Of Modern Day Medicine
The esteemed place plants and other natural remedies held in the world’s pharmacopeia changed drastically in the later part of the 19th and early 20th century with the development of the first pharmacologically active plant-derived compound, morphine. The ability to separate the active compound (morphine) from its natural predecessor (opium) forever changed the landscape of medicine and therapeutics.
The modern-day pharmaceuticals we are prescribed, according the health experts, are made up of complex chemical compounds created in a lab. Here natural and synthetic ingredients are manipulated to produce a potent amalgam that emulates a naturally occurring substance. They are designed to have an amplified effect and are formulated to suppress undesirable symptoms quickly.
When we think of the development of a prescription medication we often envision people, in white lab coats, coming up with new and novel chemical formulations to address our health concerns. Would it surprise you to know that over 80% of the drugs offered today were first identified or isolated from known herbal remedies?
Even publications such as PubMed are quick to let us know how, in order to save time and money, drug manufacturers have turned their attention to herbal medicines as a starting point for new drug development. They point to the long and successful history of traditional remedies as evidence for their efficacy. They contend that “the information is readily available for modern scientific research on drug discovery.”
This same online journal also admits to the effectiveness of plants and other botanical remedies pointing out these substances carry a low level of adverse reactions. This is not the same outcome as their synthetic counterpart.
“About 8% of hospital admissions in the United States of America are due to adverse or side effects of synthetic drugs. Approximately 100,000 people each year die due to these toxicities. It means that the killed people in the U.S. by pharmaceutical drugs are at least three times more than the killed by drunken drivers. Each year also thousands of people die from supposedly “safe” over-the-counter drugs. Deaths or hospitalizations due to herbs are so rare that they are hard to find.”
Herbal Versus Synthetic Drugs; Beliefs and Facts
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5297475/
The Big Pharma Scam
Plant-based medicines and traditional remedies, according to many alternative healthcare providers, offer a safer and gentler substitute to traditional drug therapy. They work slower than their pharmaceutical counterparts. They endeavor to correct the underlying issue by aiding the body’s own healing process instead of just masking symptoms. Many of these same practitioners emphasize the side effects and long-term impact of taking synthetic pharmaceutical drugs as a cause for concern.
EBM doctors complain there isn’t any scientific evidence to support alternative therapies. Most alternative therapies come from traditional sources and have been used for centuries. Their efficacy has been attested to through thousands of years of use with successful results. That should count for something. So why throw the baby out with the bathwater?
Perhaps we can learn a lesson from the saga of Red Yeast Rice.
The Case Of Red Yeast Rice
A traditional Chinese remedy, Red Yeast Rice, is rice that has been cultured in Monascus purpureus a specific strain of yeast. It has long been used to improve circulation, treat indigestion, and reduce diarrhea. In recent years, it has come under a cloud of controversy because one of the chemical compounds found in red yeast rice is a substance called ‘Monacolin K’.
Monacolin K was identified as being able to help reduce cholesterol levels in the 1970s by the drug company Merck. It was extracted from the Aspergillus terreus fungus (not Monascus purpureus). They received FDA approval of their cholesterol-fighting drug, ‘Lovastatin’ and brought it to market.
1997 saw the release of a dietary supplement called ‘Cholesin’, manufactured by Pharmanex, Inc. This product contained a powdered form of red yeast rice and was promoted to US buyers as a cholesterol-lowering aid. This is when the games began.
A battle between Merck, Pharmanex, and the FDA ensued. Merck insisted they owned the rights to the ingredient Lovastatin (monacolin K), the plant-based extract. In the end, after several legal battles, actions were taken against the producers and distributors of products that contained high levels of naturally occurring monacolin K.
The FDA’s rationale was: due to the high levels of monacolin K, which matched the concentration found in Merck’s Lovastatin, these manufacturers were selling an unapproved drug over the counter.
Putting this into a different context, the actions taken by the FDA on Merck’s behalf would be likened to banning oranges and orange juice because a pharmaceutical company claimed to own a patent on vitamin C. How crazy is that?
But why is the FDA ignoring centuries of healing?
Part IV: FDA and Drug Approval: Why Is Big Pharma and Big Tech Battling Plant-Based Cures?
It has only been the last 100 years that synthetic drugs have been in use to help mitigate health concerns. Viewpoints like Dr. Nicola Williams, Ph.D.’s writing for News Medical Life Sciences, Herbal Versus Synthetic Medicines, echo the tenor espoused by orthodox medicine. “We trust them over and above natural medicines that have been around for thousands of years. This is because we know far more about them and their effects on the body.”
This singular viewpoint taints the entire drug regulatory process.
When a new drug comes to market it has to be approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). One of their edicts is to identify if a proposed drug represents an improvement over another available therapy.
Brown University Professor of Public Policy and Professor of Political Science, Eric Patashnik in his book Unhealthy Politics: The Battle over Evidence-Based Medicine, elaborates on this concept. “When drug companies apply for Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval, they generally only have to demonstrate that a drug works better than a placebo. They are typically not required to show that a new drug is superior to alternatives, and it’s often not in the pharmaceutical company’s economic interest to spend the money to assess the product’s effectiveness compared to other therapies.”
The FDA only focuses on comparing new drugs to those that have already passed through their regulatory process. They never include the effectiveness of an herb or dietary supplement as part of their evaluation. Only prescription medications and over-the-counter drugs are included. It is rationalized since dietary supplements such as vitamins, minerals, and herbal products fall under a different regulatory framework they do not need to be considered.
It seems ironic and short-sighted to not include a natural therapy as part of their approval process, especially if the new drug is formulated based upon a natural product.
Taking this one step further, research dollars are rarely invested in evaluating alternative therapies and their effectiveness. It seems unrealistic to insist something doesn’t work when it has never been assessed for its efficacy. These traditional sources might offer a safer and more effective choice than their prescription counterparts.
Based on their current approval process, the FDA, mainstream medicine and you will never know the full story.
Economic Incentives in Digital Health Information
This brings us back to the concept of healthcare choice and our ability to make an informed decision. Admit it. When we aren’t feeling well, the first thing we do is go look online for an answer.
Currently, Google controls over 90% of the search engine market. They are the gatekeepers controlling what information is seen and not seen by inquirers.
The programming of their algorithm (the instructions that identify what will appear in their search results or not) is bent on saving you from yourself. Google does this by limiting your exposure to anything they consider dangerous and potentially harmful, including alternative health information.
To an outsider, it may seem as if Google has made an all-out effort to disenfranchise anyone who offers a dissenting voice and dares to step outside the consensus established by EBM, the AMA, the FDA, the WHO and others. (See my article Google’s Health Heist: How Big Tech Stole My Voice—and Yours.)
This leaves many skeptical about their motives. Some speculate Google’s corporate interests are creating a backdrop where alternative health voices are suppressed in order to support their own bottom line.
Google’s Financial Ties to the Healthcare and Pharmaceutical Industries
Google receives billions of dollars annually from paid advertisers on their search platform. Although the exact monetary amount is unknown, the overall amount paid for advertisements from pharmaceutical companies exceeded $300 billion dollars in 2022.
It is estimated that 5% of all online searches performed in Google Search involve a health-related concern. Theoretically speaking, if the pharmaceutical companies pay for the placement of their ads on these pages, which they currently do, it could amount to Google receiving $60 million dollars in ad revenue annually. (5% of $300 billion = $60 million.)
Even if a sliver of the $300 billion dollar market share went to Google, it could create reasonable incentives to promote traditional medical and pharmaceutical products over alternative ones.
The rabbit hole runs deeper than the advertising relationship Google has with the medical industry and pharmaceutical companies. Google, and their parent company Alphabet Inc., have invested heavily in the healthcare and pharmaceutical industries which includes the creations of Verily Life Sciences and Calico Life Sciences under the Alphabet umbrella. Google also has financial relationships with companies such as Sanofi, Otsuka, Pfizer, Novartis.
It is also no big secret that Alphabet Inc. brokered a $715 million deal between themselves and GlaxoSmithKline in 2016. Their most recent move into the healthcare industry was the 2023 merger between its DeepMind product (acquired in 2014) and its existing Google Brain, where it became Google DeepMind in April 2023.
These moves leave many wondering if Google’s algorithms were adjusted not with your health and safety in mind but to align with the company’s own self-interests.
Part V: Google’s One-Sided Health Game: Burying Alternatives, Robbing Your Choice
With all of this said, it seems apparent that Google is favoring individuals and organizations that champion orthodox medicine and the pharmaceutical industry over more natural alternatives. Even if their motives are well intentioned, should any one company have that much control over what information is available?
Google’s own search analysis shows that interest in natural products in recent years has grown exponentially with more and more people turning to alternative medicine as a means of protecting themselves from illness and disease.
They say knowledge is power. However, Google is only providing half the picture. They are limiting the fair and free access to a wide range of healthcare options, thus limiting our choices and our autonomy.
By taking away people’s opportunity to learn about and address their health concerns in a natural, holistic way they will never have the chance to pick the best path for themselves.
Informed choice implies we know all the facts and from that informed vantage point we can make a competent, cohesive decision. With orthodox medicine denying the efficacy of alternative therapies and Google following suite by devaluing alternative health sites, this choice, our choice is being taken away.
Taking action is the key to making positive changes in your life. For personalized guidance on your journey, schedule a session with Dr. Rita Louise contact her at SoulHealer.com to uncover deep-seated patterns and create a tailored plan for emotional transformation.
Join me every Thursday at 7:00 p.m. Central on YouTube at Just Energy Radio for Thursday Night Live, where we explore and share transformative strategies. Connect with a vibrant, loving community. Use it to release the old, embrace the new, and create a life filled with clarity, joy, and profound possibility. Your transformation begins now—take that first step today!
About The Author
Dr. Rita Louise is a Naturopathic Physician who specializes in medical intuition. She has over 30 years of clinical experience in holistic wellness and trauma recovery. She is the founder of the Institute of Applied Energetics and a bestselling author of seven books on health, healing, psychology and the human experience. Dr. Louise holds a PhD in Natural Health Counseling and is a recognized expert in the mind-body connection. Her work focuses on patient advocacy and empowering individuals through informed health choices. Connect with Dr. Rita’s research on Substack or explore her clinical services at SoulHealer.com.
© Copyright Rita Louise, Inc. – soulhealer.com. All rights reserved.
Medical Disclaimer: This article is for informational and educational purposes only and is not intended as medical advice. Always seek the advice of your physician or other qualified health provider with any questions you may have regarding a medical condition. Use of this site does not create a doctor-patient relationship.
Bibliography
Bhanot, S. (2023, May 23). What is the difference between herbal medicine and pharmaceutical medicine? SOHMA Integrative Medicine. https://www.sohma.org/herbs/what-is-the-difference-between-herbal-medicine-and-pharmaceutical-medicine/
Biegler, P. (2022, October 25). Alternative therapies: Types and uses. Verywell Mind. https://www.verywellmind.com/alternative-therapies-types-and-uses-5207962
Brett, J. (n.d.). What are the long-term health effects of synthetic drugs? Live at Lucid. Retrieved March 6, 2025, from https://www.liveatlucid.com/post/what-are-the-long-term-health-effects-of-synthetic-drugs
Card, A. J. (2020, February 12). The need for a unified framework: A systematic review of evidence-based medicine. Preventive Medicine Reports, 17(4), e7068473. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7068473/
Cleveland Clinic. (2022, September 13). Complementary & alternative medicine: What’s the difference? https://health.clevelandclinic.org/complementary-alternative-medicine
Cleveland Clinic. (n.d.). LED light therapy. Retrieved March 6, 2025, from https://my.clevelandclinic.org/health/treatments/22146-led-light-therapy
Fiscella, K., Epstein, R. M., & Williams, G. C. (2016, October 5). Medical practice and patient-centered care. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 9(5), e5060137. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5060137/
Harvard Medical School. (2000, August 9). Alternative medicine: Evaluating the alternatives. JAMA, 284(6), 667–669. https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/187543
Healthline. (2023, June 15). Red yeast rice: Benefits, side effects, and dosage. https://www.healthline.com/nutrition/red-yeast-rice#Downsides
Healthnews. (2024, January 10). Trends in alternative healing modalities. https://healthnews.com/news/trends-in-alternative-healing-modalities/
Kluger, J. (2019, August 19). Google joins the pharmaceutical industry. The Vaccine Reaction. https://thevaccinereaction.org/2019/08/google-joins-the-pharmaceutical-industry/
Leonard, S. N., & Fitzgerald, R. (2015, April 23). Evidence-based education: A systematic review. Medical Education Online, 8(4), e4407626. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4407626/
Li, J., & Weil, A. (n.d.). Chinese cholesterol control: Red yeast rice. Retrieved March 6, 2025, from https://www.drweil.com/health-wellness/balanced-living/wellness-therapies/chinese-cholesterol-control/
Linke, S. E., Robinson, C. J., & Pekmezi, D. (2013, April 8). Behavioral interventions for health promotion. American Journal of Lifestyle Medicine, 6(3), e3619623. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3619623/
Mayo Clinic Proceedings. (2011, April). Is red yeast rice a suitable alternative for statins? https://www.mayoclinicproceedings.org/article/S0025-6196(11)60649-6/fulltext
Medical News Today. (2023, February 10). What is alternative medicine? https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/alternative-medicine#summary
Pascual, A. (2023, November 8). Herbal versus synthetic medicines. News-Medical.net. https://www.news-medical.net/health/Herbal-versus-Synthetic-Medicines.aspx
Patashnik, E., Gerber, A. S., & Dowling, C. M. (n.d.). Unhealthy politics: The battle over evidence-based medicine. [Publisher information unavailable]. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7068473/
Pharmanex. (1998, May 18). Pharmanex Cholestin cholesterol-lowering agent breaks major ad campaign. Citeline Insights. https://insights.citeline.com/PS086840/Pharmanex-Cholestin-cholesterol-lowering-agent-breaks-major-ad-campaign/
Saper, R. B., Eisenberg, D. M., Davis, R. B., Culpepper, L., & Phillips, R. S. (2011). Prevalence and patterns of use of complementary and alternative medicine among adults with chronic diseases. Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine, 8(10), e3181998. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3181998/
Scientific Origin. (n.d.). Home page. Retrieved March 6, 2025, from https://scientificorigin.com/
Smith, K., & Jones, L. (2016). Medical practice and alternative therapies. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 9(5), e5060137. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5060137/
Thompson, R. (2023, January 12). Red yeast rice: A natural cholesterol remedy. WebMD. https://www.webmd.com/cholesterol-management/red-yeast-rice
Turner, L., & Singer, P. (2017). Ethical issues in complementary and alternative medicine. Journal of Medical Ethics, 10(2), e5297475. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5297475/
UPI. (2017, March 8). Dental plaque DNA suggests Neanderthals treated pain with salicylic acid. https://www.upi.com/Science_News/2017/03/08/Dental-plaque-DNA-suggests-Neanderthals-treated-pain-with-salicylic-acid/6471488998298/
Willett, M. (2021, June 15). Google strategy map: Pharmaceuticals investments, partnerships, acquisitions. CB Insights. https://www.cbinsights.com/research/google-strategy-map-pharmaceuticals-investments-partnerships-acquisitions/
Zhang, Q., & Liu, Y. (2018). Assessing the benefit-risk ratio of a drug: Randomized and naturalistic evidence. Current Drug Safety, 13(3), 167–173. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29989061/