GRACE :: Cancer Basics

Complementary and Alternative Medicine

Energy Machines as 21st Century “Snake Oil”: Anecdotes vs. Clinical Data

Share

I have expressed a good deal of skepticism about certain aspects of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM), but I’d emphasize that CAM is a diverse array of approaches, some becomingly increasingly studied and accepted by more conventional (acupuncture, massage, potentially some supplements), while others (far more likely to be alternative than complementary strategies) continue to evade scientific scrutiny and probably should because they’re fraudulent and expensive.

The Seattle Times just ran a series of articles on energy medicine machines that was highly critical of these approaches as a modern day “snake oil”, a successful money-making scan without medical merit and that could be harmful directly or in keeping people from pursuing more conventional and proven helpful conventional medical treatments. This is pretty much a verbatim assessment of my take on this industry, but I would extend my skepticism and concern about opportunism (including any anticancer bracelet or other jewelry) and some brick and mortar alternative medicine centers.

This is also a topic that was covered in the ACCP guidelines about CAM approaches for lung cancer (abstract here). Specifically, the relevant evidence-based guideline reads as follows: For lung cancer patients, therapies based on manipulation of putative bioenergy fields are not recommended. Simple enough, and this is based on an absence of any evidence of a medical benefit from either biofield or electromagnetic energy fields. The idea behind biofield approaches is that these can modify the energy fields that surround and penetrate the body. Electromagnetic field therapies, as the name implies, are designed to use electrical fields and/or magnetic fields in novel ways. This work is based on research on how electromagnetic fields alter cancer risk, related to questions of whether exposure to power lines or cell phones increases risk of cancer (abstracts here and here).

The take home message is that there’s never been any evidence from any study that treatments aimed at manipulating biofield or electromagnetic energy improves survival. Continue reading


Cancer Basics Expert Content

Archives

Lung/Thoracic Cancer Blog
Breast Cancer Blog
Pancreatic Cancer Blog
Head/Neck Cancer Blog

Recent Cancer Basics Blog Comments

Other Resources