Allopathic Specialties
Mark V. Boswell, B. Eliot Cole in Weiner's Pain Management, 2005
Allopathic medicine is the health care practice combating disease through the use of treatments producing effects different from those produced by the disease, producing a second condition that is antagonistic to the first (Arizona Medical Board, 2004). Allopathic physicians, as doctors of medicine (M.D.s), routinely do physical examinations to be able to diagnose, prevent, and treat illnesses, injuries, and other disorders, often using highly technical procedures. Allopathic physicians, as medical doctors, are not just one homogeneous group that provides the same services to all patients, but a large group of extensively educated practitioners who have initially trained in the common areas of medical science and primary medical specialties before pursuing different specialty areas of interest. Physicians working in pain management/medicine serve as valuable members of treatment teams providing multidisciplinary care for those in pain and work to prevent, remove, or control pain through the provision of unique, often highly specialized skills and therapeutics. This chapter describes for non-allopathic pain practitioners the background and training of allopathic physicians. It identifies the specialty implications for managing pain and the range of pain-related services provided by these different types of practitioners.
The social context of disease, health and medicine
Kelvyn Jones, Graham Moon in Health, Disease and Society, 1987
In the mid-nineteenth century there was a wide variety of treatments and approaches to disease, and the public could choose from a range of professionals who could provide allopathic, chiropractic, and homeopathic medicine. Allopathic medicine is the precursor of modern orthodox medicine and its distinctive feature is the use of a large amounts of drugs as antidotes to counteract symptoms. Chiropractice aims to restore body equilibrium and considerable importance is attached to body manipulation. Homeopathy was developed empirically by Hahnemann (1755–1843) who tried to use drugs in a more gentle, precise way. Drugs are not used as counteracting antidotes but as a means of curing like by like. The general principle of the treatment is to administer minute doses of a substance which produces symptoms in a healthy person similar to those produced by the disease.
Wild Plants as a Treasure of Natural Healers
Mahendra Rai, Shandesh Bhattarai, Chistiane M. Feitosa in Wild Plants, 2020
In remote villages, where do people go for treatment when they are sick? Local people can cure their diseases with the help of modern or allopathic medicine, or with more traditional, alternative, or complementary medicine. The system of natural healing has been widely recognized, established, and well accepted in the remote villages in different regions of the world. Although modern allopathic medicine is known to be common, effective, fast curing, and frequently being improved through scientific research, many patients feel comfortable and find better results by using both the modern and complementary medicines and following both systems of medication. Thus, these days, in fact, complementary/alternative medical systems have increased in availability and scope, and are receiving more popularity.
Rejecting Reality and Substituting One?'s Own; Why Bioethics Should Be Concerned With Medically Unexplained Symptoms
Published in The American Journal of Bioethics, 2018
Mark Henderson Arnold, Ian Kerridge
Allopathic, traditional, and complementary systems of medicine are characterised as much by their similarities as by their differences. Chief among these is the internal “logic” whereby an ontology of disease (which differentiates disease from “non-disease”) provides the basis for diagnosis, therapy, and social status (Eriksen et al. 2013). Medically unexplained symptoms (MUS), by their very nature, therefore, challenge the ontology and episteme of medicine. The lack of a tangible explanatory pathology and failure to allign with conventional biomedical taxonomies is particularly problematic for allopathic medicine, which is highly reductionist, committed to positivism, and emphasizes mechanistic reasoning and pathobiological constructions of disease (Eriksen et al. 2013). The result, as O'Leary makes clear, is that MUS are delegitimized and those who suffer from MUS may be stigmatized and abandoned by both the medical systems and by the health care practitioners charged with their care.
Mercurius solubilis attenuates scopolamine-induced memory deficits and enhances the motor coordination in mice
Published in International Journal of Neuroscience, 2018
Simranjeet Kaur, Anudeep Kaur, Gurjit Singh, Rajbir Bhatti
Cognition is a complicated phenomenon involving thought processes that participate in individual registration, encoding, selection, transformation and information retrieval. Cognitive process develops throughout the school life and adolescence, leading to the development of skills such as thought, language, etc. [1–4]. A lack of choices to treat memory impairments in allopathic medicine have shifted focus on to alternative therapies. Homeopathy is now a well-regarded discipline in medicine. Progressive efforts are being made to standardize homeopathic formulations. The homeopathic remedies are prepared by special methods involving a cascade of dilution and thereafter dynamization [5]. Dynamization process, according to Hahnemann, is proposed to have a dilution of more than 50,000 times at each stage [6,7]. Mercurius solubilis is a homeopathic remedy that is found in the naturally occurring ore, cinnabar [8]. The method of preparation of merc sol involves precipitation of mercury with nitric oxide and formation of a gray powder which is dried and treated until it dissolves [9].
Training Medical Professionals to Work with Patients with Neurodevelopmental Disorders: A Systematic Review
Published in Developmental Neurorehabilitation, 2020
Katherine Ceglio, Mandy J Rispoli, Eric M Flake
Across the studies, five categories of medical personnel participated in training: medical students, medical residents, nursing students, nurses, and physicians. Medical students were trained in 15 different studies (44.1%), 13 of which trained allopathic medicine (MD) students and two of which trained physician assistant students. Twelve studies trained medical residents (35.3%). Four studies trained nursing students (11.8%). Nine studies trained nurses (17.7%), one of which one trained nurse midwives, specifically. Eight studies trained physicians (14.7%), seven of which trained pediatricians while one study did not specify the type of physician. Some studies trained more than one type of medical personnel in their training, so studies were counted within the totals of each type of medical personnel trained. Not surprisingly, classroom training was most commonly applied to students. The remaining training types (online, experiential, and combined) were fairly evenly distributed across students and practicing medical providers. Due to this overlap, it is not possible to distinguish training models that may be more or less effective for medical providers in different stages of their careers. Instead, it appears that the training model likely aligns with existing resources and learning or professional development opportunities.
Related Knowledge Centers
- Alternative Medicine
- Antibiotic
- Ayurveda
- Biomedicine
- Homeopathy
- Traditional Medicine
- Unani Medicine
- Evidence-Based Medicine
- Doctor of Osteopathic Medicine
- Humorism