How Allopathic Medicine Won the War
Behind the polished facade of modern medicine lies a gripping tale of power and exclusion. What if the healthcare you trust today was built on a deliberate effort to silence alternative medicine practices? From the chaotic medical landscape following the Civil War to the regulatory shifts of the modern era, explore the fascinating journey of how the AMA transformed a diverse, unregulated medical world into a monopoly of allopathic care.
It’s no secret that traditional, mainstream, allopathic physicians have long viewed alternative medicine providers with contempt and scorn. But what lengths have these physicians, and their professional organization, the American Medical Association (AMA), gone to deprive these ‘quack’ providers of their livelihoods? It might surprise you that the very people you have entrusted your health and well-being to were, at one time, hell-bent on destroying ‘fringe’ healing sciences and the professionals who provided them.
The Wild Frontier of Early Medicine
Early health care was a very different breed from what we see today. The medical industry, encompassing both products and services, operated without any regulation. The profession was flooded with medical sects promoting a wide spectrum of treatments for health concerns, with each group claiming superiority over the other. Their competing philosophies and diverse range of foundational beliefs made standardization of care near impossible.
Early healthcare sects included:
- Allopathy: Promoted treatments like bloodletting, purging, and lab-created drugs to mitigate disease. It focused on treating illnesses with evidence-based interventions, incorporating drug-based therapies and surgery, where they targeted symptoms and their underlying causes.
- Homeopathy: Introduced by Samuel Hahnemann, homeopathy revolved around the belief that “like cures like.” Thus, a substance that causes symptoms in a healthy person could be used as a remedy in a sick person. It was also believed that the lower the dose of a remedy, the greater its effectiveness.
- Thomsonianism: A dominant philosophy led by Samuel Thomson offered a botanical alternative to early nineteenth-century allopathic (drug-based) medicine. His self-administered methods involved cleaning the body, herbal remedies, and using a sauna.
- Eclecticism: Blended allopathic and herbal practices, positioning them as a middle ground philosophy.
- Chiropractic: Emphasized the body’s self-healing ability, using spinal adjustments to correct subluxations and improve nervous system function.
- Osteopathy: Focused on the body’s holistic unity and self-healing capacity through manual manipulation centered on an integration of musculoskeletal and circulatory health.
How Early Doctors and Health Crises Shaped Modern Medicine
It was not uncommon to make use of home remedies to heal an ailment if you got sick. Midwives, herbalists, folk healers, and apothecaries were available and were consulted if needed. Seeing a ‘doctor’ was rare and cost-prohibitive. Doctors, unlike the medical professionals we encounter today, were simple tradesmen who competed for patients in the diverse field of health-care options.
Becoming a doctor, regardless of the sect, was a very different affair than one would expect. The training they received lacked the academic rigors of the modern medical movement. Most hopeful doctors apprenticed under an experienced practitioner and did not receive formal training. In fact, no experience was required. A high school diploma was all you needed to attend a prestigious medical school, and the education they received could be likened to attending a trade school today.
The first US-based medical college, the Medical School of the College of Philadelphia, founded in 1765, marked the beginning of formal medical education in America. 1845 saw the launch of the Eclectic Medical Institute, which merged the philosophies of Thomsonians and Eclecticism sects. The Homeopathic Medical College of Pennsylvania opened its doors in 1848, offering students a 2 to 3-year course in Hahnemann’s methods.
The eruption of yellow fever (1793) and cholera (1832) exposed the weaknesses of existing medical practices and set the stage for the standardization of treatment protocols. The outbreak of the Civil War further spotlighted the need for consistency. The war created an unprecedented demand for medical care, with the US Army employing allopathic doctors trained in surgery and hygiene to head the attack.
While the methodology and treatments of allopathic physicians at the time weren’t perfect, their organizational structure, which included professional organizations like the AMA (1847), allowed for a coordinated response. Their ability to react quickly enhanced their credibility. Not that their treatments were necessarily effective, but they had an infrastructure that offered logistical advantages over their more grassroots competitors.
Yet, there were only so many allopathic physicians available to fill the ever-increasing need for trained health professionals. Homeopathic and Thomsonians/Eclectic physicians filled this void by serving in the military as well as treating civilian populations.
The vast number of casualties experienced during the Civil War from non-battle-related injuries highlighted the failures and inadequacies of allopathic medicine and spurred on post-war calls for change. It opened the door to the advancement of alternative therapies, but this door would be brutally shut in their faces. It was only a matter of time.
The AMA used its association with the military as a platform to promote allopathic medicine. They began advocating for medical school reform, pushing for professional standards and licensure laws. They began a campaign of marginalizing their competitors as a means of solidifying their dominance in the U.S. healthcare market.
Patent Medicine: Natural Remedies Get A Bad Name
The rapid industrialization of the late 1800s caused people to move from the countryside into the cities to take factory jobs. Their access to land for growing herbs and the time needed to harvest and prepare herbal remedies became scarce. The completion of the transcontinental railroad spurred western expansion. The 1862 Homestead Act encouraged settlement of these newly opened areas, greatly increasing the number of people living in rural areas. These newfound towns lacked medical infrastructure.
This opened the door to ‘patent medicine’, which filled the healthcare gap in these two diverse populations. For the city dweller, it offered an affordable alternative to the labor-intensive process of cultivating herbs. For rural populations, health products became available by mail for households all across the country.
Patent medicines were proprietary, commercially produced remedies sold under brand names like Lydia E. Pinkham’s Vegetable Compound or Hostetter’s Stomach Bitters. Some had medicinal effects, including herbs such as willow bark (the precursor to aspirin) for pain relief, cinchona bark, which was an effective treatment for malaria (quinine), cherry bark for coughs, or black cohosh for menstrual relief.
There were also patent medicine companies that took advantage of an uninformed public. They were intentionally dishonest and only out for a quick buck. These products might have included an herbal remedy, but they were often incorporated at doses so low that they did not offer any therapeutic effect. These products often included alcohol, opium, cocaine, or sugar as their primary ingredients.
Take, for example, the popular soft drink Coca-Cola. It was originally marketed as a cure for headaches, fatigue, and nervousness. Its original formulation was made up of coca, kola nuts, sugar, carbonated water, and flavorings. It is no wonder people felt energized after drinking this sugar-filled, heavily caffeinated tonic that was laced with cocaine. While a natural cure like Coca-Cola might not have healed your concerns, you at least felt good. And as you will see, perhaps it felt too good!
Muckraking and Mayhem: The Birth of Regulation
Patent medicines weren’t the only areas where industrialization took hold. Food and food supplies were shifting from small-scale operations to large factories. Meatpacking plants, chemical dye manufacturers, and patent medicine companies were churning out goods with little oversight.
Reports arose of consumer fraud, food-borne illnesses, and product poisonings. Countless products on the market were contaminated or falsely labeled, undermining trust. The lack of standardization, testing, and labeling made it difficult for consumers to make informed choices. Muckraking journalists (investigative journalists who exposed corruption, injustice, or societal wrongs) began writing about these food safety issues.
McClure’s Magazine published investigative pieces by journalists like Edward F. Ladd and Mark Sullivan, who detailed the adulteration of common food products. Their research exposed how milk was frequently diluted with water or how wheat flour was mixed with chalk to increase its volume. They detailed how meat suppliers were adding harmful chemical preservatives like borax or formaldehyde to mask spoilage or to improve the meat’s appearance.
The release of Upton Sinclair’s novel The Jungle in 1905 exposed the horrific conditions and unsanitary practices in the meatpacking industry. Diseased, rotten, or contaminated meat was processed, chemically treated, or dyed to appear fresh and then sold to the public. Meat scraps that were swept up off the dirty, rat-infested floor were mixed together and ground into sausage. Cattle and hogs with tuberculosis or other diseases were slaughtered and sold without inspection. The graphic nature of his novel shocked the American public.
Natural therapies also took a big hit with the publication of an article series entitled The Great American Fraud (1905-1906). The series written by Samuel Hopkins Adams and published in Collier’s Weekly exposed the dangers, deceptions, and fraudulent practices in the patent medicine industry. He targeted the misleading advertising that made false health claims, as well as the harmful ingredients in these widely sold remedies. His investigation uncovered the sad fact that only 5–10% of patent medicines had any verifiable restorative value. The rest of the manufacturers relied on deceptive tactics for their sales and use.
He openly addressed the addictive nature of many patent medicines, highlighting how drug dependency in America was on the rise. He also called out newspapers that relied on patent medicine advertisements, which accounted for 50% of their revenue. He also targeted the postal service for turning a blind eye and facilitating their sales.
Adam’s article series, while primarily targeting fraudulent patent medicines, significantly impacted herbal and natural doctors who relied on traditional remedies. His series created a wide-ranging climate of distrust in alternative practitioners who were unfairly swept up by the wave of public scorn. Legitimate natural practitioners and dangerous fraudsters became blurred in the public’s eye, with both groups being dubbed snake-oil salesmen.
The magazine articles and Upton Sinclair’s book sparked widespread outrage among the public, who urged for federal regulation of these uncontrolled and unregulated products. Their outcry played a pivotal role in galvanizing support for reform. It also provided the AMA with another powerful tool to discredit its competition.
The AMA, never wasting an opportunity, leveraged its Council on Pharmacy and Chemistry to expose the dangers of patent medicines. They provided expert testimony to Congress and pushed for regulation. They pressured Congress to hold hearings on food and drug safety, which led to the passage of the 1906 Pure Food and Drugs Act.
The Laws That Reshaped Medicine In America
The 1906 Pure Food and Drug Act, headed by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), founded in 1862 by President Abraham Lincoln, instituted federal oversight over food and drugs sold via interstate commerce. It focused on preventing the addition of harmful or inferior substances to products or offering false or misleading labeling.
The key provisions of the Act included:
- The addition of harmful substances to milk or meat.
- Using chemicals to conceal damaged, spoiled, or rotten meat.
- Substituting cheaper or inferior ingredients to increase volume.
- False or misleading labeling about a product’s contents, quality, or origin.
- The disclosure (labeling) of certain dangerous ingredients in drugs (e.g., alcohol, opium, cocaine, or other addictive substances).
Tasked with enforcement, the USDA was required to inspect food and drug products for adulteration or misbranding. They were responsible for testing products for harmful chemicals, contaminants, or inferior substitutes. The Act also authorized the USDA to prosecute violators with fines, product seizures, or criminal prosecution.
It was the first step in ensuring safer foods and drugs were available to consumers by setting federal standards. It solidified the USDA’s role as a key regulator of food and drug safety. The Act’s enforcement by the USDA laid the groundwork for the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), established in 1930, which expanded regulation under the 1938 Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act.
The 1914 Harrison Narcotics Tax Act
By 1914, an estimated 200,000 – 300,000 Americans were addicted to narcotic-laced products. Per the 1906 Pure Food and Drugs Act, companies were required to disclose any addictive substances, but made no effort to control their use or distribution. This lack of regulation allowed these harmful substances to proliferate.
To address the addiction epidemic and limit distribution, the 1914 Harrison Narcotics Tax Act was ratified. It regulated and taxed the production, importation, and distribution of opiates and coca products, including opium, morphine, heroin, and cocaine. It required individuals involved in these activities, such as manufacturers, importers, pharmacists, and medical professionals, to officially enroll with the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) and pay a nominal tax, payable via a tax stamp affixed to narcotic products, thus subjecting them to federal oversight.
The Act also mandated that these substances could only be dispensed by registered physicians or pharmacists for ‘legitimate medical purposes’ in the course of their professional practice. The over-the-counter sales of narcotic-containing medicines or sales directly to consumers without a prescription became illegal. Authorized parties, including allopathic doctors, homeopaths, osteopaths, and licensed naturopaths, were the only ones permitted to distribute these products to the public, as defined by state regulations.
The Act put a crushing blow on the patent medicine industry by limiting sellers, all of which the AMA saw as direct competition. Cutting out direct sales created a controlled market that favored established professionals. This did not stop the patent medicine industry. They persisted by reformulating their products, using non-narcotic ingredients, like Coca-Cola, until stronger regulations emerged.
The Flexner Report and the Fall of Alternative Medicine
Going back in time slightly, another huge factor leading to the beginning of the end of alternative medicine in America started with John D. Rockefeller. In 1901, the Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research, headed by Simon Flexner, was established in New York City. The Institute was funded by a $200 million endowment (an astronomical amount of money for that time) by Rockefeller.
The primary focus of the institute was to advance medical science through experimental research, particularly in bacteriology, immunology, pathology, and pharmacology. The institute emphasized laboratory research as a means to uncover disease mechanisms and explored ways to cure them. Their goal was to replace empirically driven data (observation and experience) with evidence based on systematic scientific investigation.
In 1910, a landmark shift toward evidence-based allopathic medicine began, revolutionizing medical practice and education in America.
Enter the Flexner Report
A report was commissioned by the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, in collaboration with the AMA, to assess the state of the United States and Canada’s medical colleges. Abraham Flexner, the brother of Simon Flexner, the head of the Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research, was tasked with the job of evaluating the schools. The in-depth ‘Flexner Report’ released in 1910, formally titled Medical Education in the United States and Canada, was eye-opening and damning.
American medical schools still had no agreed-upon standards and fell into two essentially competing factions. Allopathic schools, which adopted an empirical science-based, drug-centric curriculum, and other schools whose studies revolved around methods of natural healing. These included homeopathy, naturopathy, eclectic therapy, osteopathy, and chiropractic.
Flexner evaluated 161 schools. He championed schools whose curricula were rooted in a science-based approach, with pharmacology and drug therapy central to their curricula. He harshly critiqued schools that did not align with allopathy’s emerging framework. He deemed these institutions inadequate, their education lacking, and side-handedly labeled their graduates charlatans and quacks. He focused on their lack of scientific rigor and poor facilities. While not said out loud, his hope was to alienate these alternative institutions since he didn’t have a legal way of getting rid of them.
His report destroyed the credibility of schools offering drug-free medicine, thus impacting their sources of financial support. Flexner’s recommendations were used as a basis to redirect grant money to schools that met his criteria.
The Rockefeller Foundation, in addition to the $200 million endowment used to establish the Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research, provided an additional $100 million in grants to schools that emphasized drug-based research and clinical pharmacology. This caused the majority of non-conforming medical schools, like osteopathic colleges, to change their focus into research-oriented institutions in line with the now prevailing allopathic model. Those that didn’t practice in accordance with this new standard were refused funding and soon closed. The few schools that survived this financial purge and remained open experienced an uphill battle for survival.
Rockefeller’s financial influence and support of allopathic schools broadened the marginalization of alternative sects that relied on non-drug therapies. This further entrenched the world into a drug-centric system, which gave the AMA increased leverage over healthcare policy and education.
It didn’t stop there.
The AMA’s Council on Medical Education used Flexner’s report to advocate for the establishment of accreditation requirements for medical schools. Their well-funded allopathic infrastructure, backed by entities like the Rockefeller and Carnegie Foundations, allowed them to lobby state licensing boards. They sought to limit the practice of medicine to those who had not completed training at one of their recognized institutions.
Their efforts effectively blacklisted non-compliant institutions and pushed practitioners to the fringes of the medical world or out of medicine entirely. By 1919, the number of medical schools in the country had dwindled from 161 to 81, thus consolidating the AMA’s influence on health training as the gold standard of medicine.
“In the quarter-century after the Flexner Report‘s publication, the entire medical profession was dissected, examined, and reforged, transforming it from an unregulated free-for-all to an expert, science-based endeavor.” – https://www.realclearscience.com/blog/2018/11/08/1910_the_year_american_medicine_changed_forever.html
1938 Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act
Allopathic medicine scored another victory in its quest to control health care in America with the passage of the 1938 Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act. The Act was spurred on by a tragic public health crisis in 1937. A proprietary, over-the-counter drug, Elixir Sulfanilamide, was marketed by the S.E. Massengill Company. ‘Elixir’ was based on a legitimate antibiotic formulation. Unfortunately, the product also contained the toxic solvent diethylene glycol, which left over 100 people dead.
The 1938 Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act mandated manufacturers to register with the FDA and comply with its strict guidelines. The submission of laboratory testing, clinical trials, and detailed scientific reports was required in order to receive FDA approval and bring a new drug to market. The high costs of FDA registration, safety testing, and complying with ‘good manufacturing practices,’ favored large, well-funded pharmaceutical companies, like Pfizer and Merck, who could afford compliance. It left smaller manufacturers and many herbal remedy producers financially out in the cold.
Herbs and herbal compounds, unlike drug-based medications, are ‘in the public domain’. Herbs are widely plants and were used based on traditional knowledge. Naturally occurring substances, like herbs, and cannot be patented. Synthetic drugs, because they are based on man-made compounds could be patented, giving companies exclusive rights to production and sales.
Without a patent, competitors could replicate a proprietary formula, eroding a company’s potential high profit margin. We see a similar thing occurring today. Novel products created and patented in the US find themselves subject to cheap Chinese knock-offs, which cut into their sales and profitability. The inability to patent their formulations discouraged manufacturers from investing in the expensive FDA approval process.
Surviving the Crackdown: Patent Medicines and Herbal Workarounds
Thankfully, many patent medicines, sold prior to the 1938 Act, were ‘grandfathered in’ and were allowed to stay on the market as long as they maintained the same ingredients, conditions of use, and labeling. Products that survived this new law include household names such as Musterole, Doan’s Pills, Vicks VapoRub, Pepto-Bismol, and Ex-Lax.
Manufacturers who wanted to supply herbal remedies discovered a way to get around the letter of the law. They did this by avoiding making specific therapeutic claims. Herbal teas, such as chamomile, could be labeled as a health tonic. Ginseng tea could assert it supported digestive health. These vague statements allowed manufacturers to classify their product as a food product and not a drug.
The AMA continued leveraging public opinion regarding natural therapies, pointing a finger at the now illegal opium-laced patent medicines, arguing that all herbal remedies posed potential risk. Allopathic medicine and drug producers now had ‘scientific studies’ and ‘clinical evidence’ to support the efficacy of their new drug-based wonders. Herbal remedies could simply not compete.
Prescription Drugs: Sealing the Fate of Alternative Medicine
Another key provision of the 1938 Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act was the establishment of a system to classify drugs as either an ‘over-the-counter medication’ or a ‘prescription’. Prescription-only drugs required a licensed prescriber to ensure oversight for these potentially dangerous substances. In order to write a prescription, the practitioner was required to hold valid credentials from an accredited medical school or licensing board.
This all but sealed the deal for the rivals of allopathic medicine. By 1938, many states had outlawed naturopathic practitioners or no longer offered licensure. In the few states that did license naturopaths, their practice was restricted to prescribing natural, now over-the-counter remedies, and not synthetic medications.
Homeopathic doctors, as a licensed profession, had gone by the wayside when the last homeopathic college, the Hahnemann Medical College, joined forces with allopathic medicine in 1940, dropping homeopathy from its official curriculum. Chiropractors were disqualified from prescribing drugs from the outset of their licensure (1913 onward) since the scope of their practice focused on non-drug therapies. In essence, it left allopathic doctors as the last man standing.
There were just a few more twists and turns before the American public was fully entrenched in the health care system established by the AMA.
From Veterans to Victory: How Allopathy Conquered Healthcare
Post World War II, there was a strain on the existing medical infrastructure in the country. The U.S. faced a shortage of hospital beds and medical facilities fostered by the return of millions of veterans with healthcare needs. The 1946 Hill-Burton Act was signed into law by President Harry S. Truman. The Act addressed critical healthcare deficiencies in the United States by providing $3.7 billion in federal funding to construct, expand, and modernize hospitals.
The newly established facilities adhered to the AMA’s accreditation standards, effectively barring alternative practitioners from utilizing them. This bolstered the already strong infrastructure of allopathic medicine, enabling the AMA to campaign for the ideological advantages of hospital-based care over home-based treatment. The emphasis on specialization and hospital-based care significantly disadvantaged alternative medicine practitioners, who typically relied on outpatient or home care.
The Kefauver-Harris Amendments
The Kefauver-Harris Amendments, passed in 1962, updated key provisions in the 1938 Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act. It was prompted by the release of a new drug designed to alleviate morning sickness in pregnant women – thalidomide. This new medication caused 10,000 to 20,000 birth defects globally. It exposed critical gaps in the FDA’s approval process. The overhaul of the FDA’s pre-market drug safety testing, extended FDA review times, and increased development costs. This sidelined the last few small drug producers.
The Final Blow
The final blow in the takeover of allopathic medicine as the gold standard of health care arrived with the introduction of the Medicare and Medicaid programs (1965) under the Social Security Act. The Social Security Act was signed into law in 1935 by President Franklin D. Roosevelt. This legislation was in response to the financial stress experienced during the Great Depression. It aimed to provide economic security for the country’s most vulnerable populations, namely, the poor, the disabled, and the elderly. The Social Security Act was updated in 1965 to address access to critical healthcare for these disenfranchised groups.
Health insurance wasn’t a new concept in the 1960s. The Depression and rising health care costs left many individuals unable to afford medical care. Privately funded health insurance companies arose as a way to spread the financial risk, allowing individuals to pool their resources to cover healthcare costs. Employers started offering health insurance as a benefit to attract and retain workers. Unions also pushed for coverage to improve worker welfare for all of their members.
These early insurance plans were developed in collaboration with physicians and hospitals, all of which were AMA members. In essence, their provisions were designed by and for allopathic providers, which ensured coverage aligning with AMA standards.
As patients increasingly relied on workplace-offered insurance, the AMA’s House of Delegates, its legislative arm, adopted a resolution opposing the inclusion of any alternative practices. These practitioners were referred to as “cultists,” with the AMA portraying them as unscientific, working outside the scope of evidence-based medicine.
The AMA’s policies were integrated into insurance plans’ benefit structures. Submitted health claims that fell outside of the AMA model were summarily denied reimbursement. By 1970, approximately 80% of all Americans relied on health coverage through either private insurance or Medicare/Medicaid. This financial leverage and economic control virtually eliminated all of their competition and cemented the AMA’s monopoly over healthcare.
The Legacy of American Medicine
From the unregulated chaos of the 19th century to the highly controlled, drug-centric system of today, the journey of American medicine is a cautionary tale of power and influence. The historical showdown between natural and allopathic medicine was never a fair fight. What started as competing philosophies quickly became a battle for economic and political control, with the AMA leveraging public sentiment, political influence, and immense financial backing to marginalize its rivals.
The health system we have today is not simply the result of scientific evolution; it’s the outcome of a deliberate campaign to eliminate competition. The next time you’re faced with a health decision, consider this: Are you choosing what is truly best for your body, or are you simply choosing from the only options the system allows?
About Dr. Rita Louise
Bestselling author, Dr. Rita Louise is the Founder of the Institute Of Applied Energetics and former host of Just Energy Radio. She is a Naturopathic physician, medical intuitive and intuitive counselor. Dr. Rita is the author of 7 books as well as hundreds of articles that have been published worldwide. She is also the producer of a number of full length and feature videos. Dr. Rita has appeared on film, radio, television and has spoken at conferences around the world covering topics such as health and healing, relationships, ghosts, intuition, ancient mysteries and the paranormal.