Talk:Andrew Weil

Complementary medicine Vs alternative medicine
This article shouldn't use the term "alternative", but "complementary" instead. There is no such thing as an alternative to medicine. There is no alternative to a vaccine, antibiotics, etc,... But there can be complements to a medicine, even if they are placebos, as long as they help a patient in any way. All those articles about "alternative medicine" should start with a warning because they are misleading, based on nothing but pure belief, and therefore against what an encyclopedia is supposed to be: a source of knowledge. Romanoskov (talk) 15:26, 27 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Alternative medicine does have a specific meaning - please see Alternative medicine for an explanation. We also tend to follow the wording used by reliable sources, so if all the sources said "complementary" then we would use "complementary". We also don't decide whether the reliable sources are using the wrong word - an encyclopaedia simply summarises current understanding. Xurizuri (talk) 22:15, 10 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Literature on pseudoscience also commonly mention how alternative treatments can often also serve as a substitute for more effective medicine. Complementory (or integrative) are common slogans to sell it as something to be added on top of mainstream medicine, something that might somehow be more clueful about aspects that "allopathic" medicine apparently ignores, etc.  It may well be what Weil attempts, but it would be an exception if it was really an evidence-based practice (and we'd need independent reliable medicine-quality sources that make these claims to promote that).  Also, this is presented as if Weil was unique, but around the world many actual physicians have also promoted alternatives, or traditional practices, at the same time and there are clinics based on this principle.  — Paleo  Neonate  – 23:15, 11 November 2021 (UTC)