It takes but a little investigation to see the great divergence of opinion in the literature as to the actual efficacy of TCAM in hospital settings. This of course has nothing to do with TCAM value and benefit per se and everything to do with the way conventional medicine is practiced and standardized.
Looking at homeopathy as an example, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized trials are suited to rapid-diagnosis-based pharmacology but completely inappropriate for the evaluation of homeopathy's therapeutic potency. So the question becomes, how does one conduct investigations contiguous with the scientific method while allowing for the individualized interventions and widely variant posologies represented by classical homeopathic prescribing? How too can one make sense of ultramolecular and energy medicines in the language and aims of a mechanistic, materialist system, if only just long enough to get one's foot in the door? As it happens, I have some ideas.