Question:
The White House Commission on Complementary and Alternative MedicinePolicy, which I chaired, was created in 2000 to assess these and otherdevelopments and to formulate recommendations to make the benefits ofcomplementary and alternative medicine (CAM) and its broader, more holisticperspective available to all Americans. The commission was establishedbecause of enormous public and congressional interest in CAM. Thecommission's work coincided with a similar study by the World HealthOrganization on the possible benefits of traditional systems of healing andof such modern CAM approaches as large-dose vitamin supplementation andhomeopathy.

The commission recently completed a report, which the White House isstudying, that will soon be on the desks of all members of Congress.

The commission's recommendations -- based on 20 months of public testimonyand discussion with most of the major conventional medical, as well as CAM,organizations -- can help to enlarge our perspective and refocus ourattention. They point to the need for a better balance between the currentresearch emphasis on finding "magic bullets" -- single drugs, proceduresor, indeed, single alternative therapies -- and the creation andinvestigation of comprehensive therapeutic approaches that combine the bestof conventional, complementary and alternative therapies.

In place of the current emphasis on finding and using more, and moreexpensive, high-tech interventions, the commission stresses the importanceof an informed public, of self-awareness and self-care (includingnutrition, exercise and mind-body approaches) in both clinical work andhealth professional education, and of the role of physicians as teachers aswell as "treaters."

Answer: In a program based on education and self-care, Ornish teachespatients tocombine significant dietary modifications, physical exercise, yoga andstress management in the context of a supportive group. Several studiespublished in prestigious journals have demonstrated improved physicalfunctioning and quality of life in Ornish's patients. The diameters oftheir coronary arteries have increased and they have no longer neededcoronary bypass surgery. Meanwhile, their insurers have saved up to $30,000for each person enrolled in the study.

this may be a totally naive question, but I will go ahead and stick my footin my mouth.

why dont the insurance companies sponsor these kinds of studies?!?!?!?

i mean,... a penny(or thousands of dollars) saved, is a penny (or thousandsof dollars) earned, right? multiply that by the literally millions of"insured" in the world.......

seems to me there is plenty of financial incentive for them, unless i'mmissing something obvious. plus, the insurance industry must have somepretty hefty lobbying power, and could probably ACTUALLY get something donealong these lines.

some of us who favor "alternative" stuff might not like the idea ofcorporate money funding and directing research in these areas, but, to me,it seems like the insurance companies would have the "purest" financialmotives( not involved in drug production or patents etc), if there is such athing as a pure financial motive.....