Complementary and alternative treatments in multiple sclerosis

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapter

Abstract

Introduction Despite recent therapeutic advances, multiple sclerosis (MS) remains a chronic disabling disease with no cure. National surveys have demonstrated the widespread use of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) among the general population in the United States, and that individuals with a variety of chronic illnesses are more likely to use CAM than the general population., Several surveys have demonstrated that individuals with MS often explore CAM treatment options.– Neurologists have long recognized that many individuals with MS use alternative therapies but generally have taken little interest in these therapies. Individuals with MS and neurologists frequently adopt a “don't ask, don't tell” policy regarding alternative therapies. Neurologists are sometimes very negative about patient use of alternative therapies primarily for two reasons: first, they cite the lack of scientific evidence establishing efficacy for various CAM therapies; second, they focus on highly publicized therapies that are expensive, seemingly bizarre or even dangerous, such as replacement of amalgam dental fillings, magnet therapy, and bees stings, as being representative of CAM therapies and want to protect their patients from pointless expenses and risks. However, these negative attitudes are not well founded. First, despite individuals with MS reporting benefit from some alternative therapies, there has been a paucity of scientifically valid research on CAM therapies for MS. The lack of scientific evidence on efficacy does not mean that there is no benefit; we simply do not have the data to allow us to determine what works and what does not. Second, most individuals with MS who use CAM therapies tend to use affordable and low-risk treatments, such as diet therapies, nutritional supplements, herbal therapies, and mind–body therapies, such as yoga and prayer.– While there certainly are individuals with MS who make poor decisions regarding CAM use, in general, individuals with MS who use CAM seem to be sensible in their approach. Rather than ignoring the issue or adopting a universally negative attitude about CAM, neurologists should be better informed about CAM use so that they can serve as a resource for these individuals.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Title of host publicationMultiple Sclerosis Therapeutics, Fourth Edition
PublisherCambridge University Press
Pages562-573
Number of pages12
ISBN (Print)9781139023986, 9780521766272
DOIs
StatePublished - Dec 1 2011

Fingerprint

Complementary Therapies
Multiple Sclerosis
Therapeutics
Chronic Disease

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

Yadav, V., Shinto, L., & Bourdette, D. (2011). Complementary and alternative treatments in multiple sclerosis. In Multiple Sclerosis Therapeutics, Fourth Edition (pp. 562-573). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139023986.052

Complementary and alternative treatments in multiple sclerosis. / Yadav, Vijayshree; Shinto, Lynne; Bourdette, Dennis.

Multiple Sclerosis Therapeutics, Fourth Edition. Cambridge University Press, 2011. p. 562-573.

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapter

Yadav, V, Shinto, L & Bourdette, D 2011, Complementary and alternative treatments in multiple sclerosis. in Multiple Sclerosis Therapeutics, Fourth Edition. Cambridge University Press, pp. 562-573. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139023986.052
Yadav V, Shinto L, Bourdette D. Complementary and alternative treatments in multiple sclerosis. In Multiple Sclerosis Therapeutics, Fourth Edition. Cambridge University Press. 2011. p. 562-573 https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139023986.052
Yadav, Vijayshree ; Shinto, Lynne ; Bourdette, Dennis. / Complementary and alternative treatments in multiple sclerosis. Multiple Sclerosis Therapeutics, Fourth Edition. Cambridge University Press, 2011. pp. 562-573
@inbook{980bae3e017a4d9f90c9d759d3e048a3,
title = "Complementary and alternative treatments in multiple sclerosis",
abstract = "Introduction Despite recent therapeutic advances, multiple sclerosis (MS) remains a chronic disabling disease with no cure. National surveys have demonstrated the widespread use of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) among the general population in the United States, and that individuals with a variety of chronic illnesses are more likely to use CAM than the general population., Several surveys have demonstrated that individuals with MS often explore CAM treatment options.– Neurologists have long recognized that many individuals with MS use alternative therapies but generally have taken little interest in these therapies. Individuals with MS and neurologists frequently adopt a “don't ask, don't tell” policy regarding alternative therapies. Neurologists are sometimes very negative about patient use of alternative therapies primarily for two reasons: first, they cite the lack of scientific evidence establishing efficacy for various CAM therapies; second, they focus on highly publicized therapies that are expensive, seemingly bizarre or even dangerous, such as replacement of amalgam dental fillings, magnet therapy, and bees stings, as being representative of CAM therapies and want to protect their patients from pointless expenses and risks. However, these negative attitudes are not well founded. First, despite individuals with MS reporting benefit from some alternative therapies, there has been a paucity of scientifically valid research on CAM therapies for MS. The lack of scientific evidence on efficacy does not mean that there is no benefit; we simply do not have the data to allow us to determine what works and what does not. Second, most individuals with MS who use CAM therapies tend to use affordable and low-risk treatments, such as diet therapies, nutritional supplements, herbal therapies, and mind–body therapies, such as yoga and prayer.– While there certainly are individuals with MS who make poor decisions regarding CAM use, in general, individuals with MS who use CAM seem to be sensible in their approach. Rather than ignoring the issue or adopting a universally negative attitude about CAM, neurologists should be better informed about CAM use so that they can serve as a resource for these individuals.",
author = "Vijayshree Yadav and Lynne Shinto and Dennis Bourdette",
year = "2011",
month = "12",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1017/CBO9781139023986.052",
language = "English (US)",
isbn = "9781139023986",
pages = "562--573",
booktitle = "Multiple Sclerosis Therapeutics, Fourth Edition",
publisher = "Cambridge University Press",

}

TY - CHAP

T1 - Complementary and alternative treatments in multiple sclerosis

AU - Yadav, Vijayshree

AU - Shinto, Lynne

AU - Bourdette, Dennis

PY - 2011/12/1

Y1 - 2011/12/1

N2 - Introduction Despite recent therapeutic advances, multiple sclerosis (MS) remains a chronic disabling disease with no cure. National surveys have demonstrated the widespread use of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) among the general population in the United States, and that individuals with a variety of chronic illnesses are more likely to use CAM than the general population., Several surveys have demonstrated that individuals with MS often explore CAM treatment options.– Neurologists have long recognized that many individuals with MS use alternative therapies but generally have taken little interest in these therapies. Individuals with MS and neurologists frequently adopt a “don't ask, don't tell” policy regarding alternative therapies. Neurologists are sometimes very negative about patient use of alternative therapies primarily for two reasons: first, they cite the lack of scientific evidence establishing efficacy for various CAM therapies; second, they focus on highly publicized therapies that are expensive, seemingly bizarre or even dangerous, such as replacement of amalgam dental fillings, magnet therapy, and bees stings, as being representative of CAM therapies and want to protect their patients from pointless expenses and risks. However, these negative attitudes are not well founded. First, despite individuals with MS reporting benefit from some alternative therapies, there has been a paucity of scientifically valid research on CAM therapies for MS. The lack of scientific evidence on efficacy does not mean that there is no benefit; we simply do not have the data to allow us to determine what works and what does not. Second, most individuals with MS who use CAM therapies tend to use affordable and low-risk treatments, such as diet therapies, nutritional supplements, herbal therapies, and mind–body therapies, such as yoga and prayer.– While there certainly are individuals with MS who make poor decisions regarding CAM use, in general, individuals with MS who use CAM seem to be sensible in their approach. Rather than ignoring the issue or adopting a universally negative attitude about CAM, neurologists should be better informed about CAM use so that they can serve as a resource for these individuals.

AB - Introduction Despite recent therapeutic advances, multiple sclerosis (MS) remains a chronic disabling disease with no cure. National surveys have demonstrated the widespread use of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) among the general population in the United States, and that individuals with a variety of chronic illnesses are more likely to use CAM than the general population., Several surveys have demonstrated that individuals with MS often explore CAM treatment options.– Neurologists have long recognized that many individuals with MS use alternative therapies but generally have taken little interest in these therapies. Individuals with MS and neurologists frequently adopt a “don't ask, don't tell” policy regarding alternative therapies. Neurologists are sometimes very negative about patient use of alternative therapies primarily for two reasons: first, they cite the lack of scientific evidence establishing efficacy for various CAM therapies; second, they focus on highly publicized therapies that are expensive, seemingly bizarre or even dangerous, such as replacement of amalgam dental fillings, magnet therapy, and bees stings, as being representative of CAM therapies and want to protect their patients from pointless expenses and risks. However, these negative attitudes are not well founded. First, despite individuals with MS reporting benefit from some alternative therapies, there has been a paucity of scientifically valid research on CAM therapies for MS. The lack of scientific evidence on efficacy does not mean that there is no benefit; we simply do not have the data to allow us to determine what works and what does not. Second, most individuals with MS who use CAM therapies tend to use affordable and low-risk treatments, such as diet therapies, nutritional supplements, herbal therapies, and mind–body therapies, such as yoga and prayer.– While there certainly are individuals with MS who make poor decisions regarding CAM use, in general, individuals with MS who use CAM seem to be sensible in their approach. Rather than ignoring the issue or adopting a universally negative attitude about CAM, neurologists should be better informed about CAM use so that they can serve as a resource for these individuals.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84927114425&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84927114425&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1017/CBO9781139023986.052

DO - 10.1017/CBO9781139023986.052

M3 - Chapter

AN - SCOPUS:84927114425

SN - 9781139023986

SN - 9780521766272

SP - 562

EP - 573

BT - Multiple Sclerosis Therapeutics, Fourth Edition

PB - Cambridge University Press

ER -