Talk:Traditional medicine

message: So basically what I get from this article is that snake oil used by white Westerners it is rightfully acknowledged as alternative medicine quackery, but snake oil used by non-white non-Westerners gets labelled "Traditional Medicine."  A given type of unscientific snake oil would be recognized as harmful Alternative Medicine quackery when used by a New Age hippie from New York, but if the exact same snake oil is used by a villager in China or Africa it somehow gets transmuted into "Traditional Medicine."  Why is this?  Snake oil is snake oil.
RyokoMocha FOR I AM NYARLATHOTEP, THE CRAWLING CHAOS 04:24, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Quackery

message: I would like to request for someone to create a page on traditional Mexican medicine.  It is a rich topic that has been extensively studied from both cultural and scientific perspectives.  A google scholar search for "Traditional Mexican Medicine" may be a good starting point.  Cazort (talk) 19:56, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Request

message: I suggest that the definition on the following page should be used, although it maybe different to the one quoted in the article currently
http://www.who.int/medicines/areas/traditional/definitions/en/index.html
--222.64.31.57 (talk) 07:09, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Definition of traditional medicine..... 

message: http://whqlibdoc.who.int/publications/2003/9241546271.pdf
as a standardized practice--222.64.31.57 (talk) 07:40, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Please adopt the terms with the following 

message: the following
http://scholar.google.com/scholar?as_q=buddhist+medicine&num=10&btnG=Search+Scholar&as_epq=&as_oq=&as_eq=&as_occt=title&as_sauthors=&as_publication=&as_ylo=&as_yhi=&as_allsubj=all&hl=en&lr=&newwindow=1
--222.67.208.20 (talk) 03:08, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  The topic of ''Buddhist medicine'' has been added based on ..... plus ....

message: (Ping!  ) I have reverted this two word claim which Jagged 85, a problematic editor, inserted in about 10 articles several years ago. It is sourced to "Diane Boulanger (2002), "The Islamic Contribution to Science, Mathematics and Technology", OISE Papers, in STSE Education, Vol. 3." The actual title of her paper is The Islamic Contribution to Science, Mathematics and Technology: Towards Motivating the Muslim Child and this is in a (almost certainly non-peer reviewed) journal dedicated to education, written by a then undergraduate computer scientist.  Jagged 85, moreover, is noted for failing to correctly follow his sources, among other problems.  For full details see Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard#The Islamic Contribution to Science, Mathematics and Technology: Towards Motivating the Muslim Child and the Jagged 85 cleanup project that it links to. All the best, Rich Farmbrough, 00:46, 10 April 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: *Thanks for the helpful explanation, Rich. Would it make sense to retain the reference to Ibn al-Baitar? From a quick look, it seems appropriate. Regards, DA Sonnenfeld (talk) 02:05, 10 April 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: It is a bit of a nightmare, we should ideally re-write the whole section,  there are people around who have the knowledge to do that without intensive research, but I'm not one of them.  I dislike removing content, but so much of what Jagged 85 wrote is wrong (and he wrote a lot, albeit much was cut and pasted in many places), and such is the reliance on Wikipedia these days, that on other articles I have visited his mistakes, having been removed once, are coming back from sources that have copied them from WP.  A tremendous amount of work has been done (not by me, I hasten to add) to resolve these problems, but there's loads left.  All the best, Rich Farmbrough, 02:47, 10 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Jagged 85

message: Traditional medicine is fundamentally different from folk medicine in terms of classification. Folk medicine is a system that is regionally developed based on the requirements of a relatively small community. It is often related with regional conditions, available plants and herbs and although completely efficient it lacks a scientific understanding of the processes going on behind the treatment.
Traditional medicine is based on a platform upon which a science is built. It is a science in the sense that it is reproducible anywhere at anytime given a proper understanding of the applicable conditions. Extensive classification, practice and study often lead to the formation of scriptures in traditional medicine which is not present in folk medicine. Hence it would not be advisable to merge the two pages of Folk medicine and Traditional medicine. 
Ksajnani (talk) 16:07, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: The merger is now being discussed here. – Maky « talk » 03:28, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

text: It happened in December 2014. -- BullRangifer (talk) 05:42, 21 December 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Traditional medicine and folk medicine 

message: This article seems to fill a void in the general article History of medicine and may be a candidate as a subarticle to the series.  Anyone interested in this article is welcome to join the discussion.  I'm proposing an overhaul of History of medicine, both to improve the quality of its discussion of Western Medicine, and to improve its world view of other medical traditions in the rest of the world.  All are welcome to join in the discussion.  Hi-storian (talk) 23:36, 4 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: New project starting

message: I'm recommending that it gets removed.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.64.105.180 (talk) 08:01, 28 July 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't understand why, unless you WP:IDONTLIKEIT, in which case dont remove it, it is sourced. Have you got a policy based reason to remove it? -Roxy, the dog. barcus 08:05, 28 July 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Disagree with removal; Roxy makes good points  — Sir-Douglas (talk) 15:28, 4 December 2021 (UTC)

text: I agree it should be removed. A more appropriate photo that still represents how endangered species correspond to traditional medicine is needed. Youngmv (talk) 00:48, 30 August 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: That picture of the mutilated slow loris is pretty disturbing for this article.

message: Why was the sentence I added to safety concerns deleted? The sentence read "However, given that iatrogenic complications from chemical pharmaceuticals ranks as a third leading cause of death in the U.S. and Britain[34], Traditional Medicine may be considered relatively safe in comparison."
MSun333 (talk) 01:37, 23 August 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: It was deleted because it was anti-scientific and made a false comparison. Your other addition was very good. Carl Fredrik talk 08:50, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Safety concerns deletion

message: I am speaking as an anthropology undergraduate interested in the culture of medicine. I feel that there is something lacking in the 'modern usage' section of this article. After the 'medieval and later' section, which discusses how traditional medicine was influenced by generally well-respected scientists (famous Islamic physicians like Avicenna) and endorsed by the Western empires (Imperial Spain) which heavily influenced the creation of the 'modern world', we do not get a clear idea as to how 'traditional' medicine came to diverge from standard practice.
There is some hint that there is no absolute boundary between 'traditional' and 'modern' medicine (i.e. that we have been able to derive medicines from the ingredients involved in traditional cures), but I believe it would benefit from some examples (like the discovery of artemisinin), and I might try editing the article to add some myself. I think it would also be interesting to provide examples of how 'tradition' (i.e. knowledge not necessarily empirically supported but nonetheless 'passed down') continues in standard Western medical practice. This could be as simple as describing the rituals/traditions of medical education or we could discuss examples of non-empirically-supported medical practices which caused harm in the modern era.
I want to stress that I don't have any particular bias in favour of 'traditional' medicine and don't seek to make its present-day practice appear more empirical or scientifically valid than it is. I personally rely on what would be called 'modern' forms of medicine. I do think, however, that this article should pose challenging examples of situations where the distinction between 'traditional' and 'modern' medicine becomes unclear. We could also discuss recent attempts to integrate these practices, such as partnerships between indigenous practitioners and MDs/clinicians. I also generally think some sections are underdeveloped (such as the one on indigenous American practices, which is only one sentence and doesn't really integrate what is said about indigenous practice elsewhere in the article).
I will do my own bit to try to improve and expand the article, but I am writing here to encourage others to do the same. PigeonAppreciator (talk) 17:13, 27 July 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: From traditional to 'modern'

message: "Classical history
....
 The first Chinese herbal book was the Shennong Bencao Jing, compiled during the Han Dynasty but dating back to a much earlier date, which was later augmented as the Yaoxing Lun (Treatise on the Nature of Medicinal Herbs) during the Tang Dynasty. 
"
Huangdi Neijing is before the Shennong Bencao Jing. see wiki Huangdi Neijing
~~ Ted ~~ 2607:FEA8:4A2:4100:5C03:A6A:1118:C842 (talk) 11:35, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wrong History in the "Classical  History" section 

message: The redirect Magico-medical has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at  until a consensus is reached.  Utopes (talk / cont) 06:04, 22 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  "[[:Magico-medical]]" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]] 

message: The redirect Magico-healing has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at  until a consensus is reached.  Utopes (talk / cont) 06:04, 22 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  "[[:Magico-healing]]" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]] 

message: — Assignment last updated by Carterrrd (talk) 04:28, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: Psychology Capstone