传统医学从业者和实践的法定监管:需要明确的政策制定指南。

Nadine Ijaz, Heather Boon
{"title":"传统医学从业者和实践的法定监管:需要明确的政策制定指南。","authors":"Nadine Ijaz,&nbsp;Heather Boon","doi":"10.1089/acm.2017.0346","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The World Health Organization (WHO) has called for the increased statutory regulation of traditional and complementary medicine practitioners and practices, currently implemented in about half of nations surveyed. According to recent WHO data, however, the absence of policy guidelines in this area represents a significant barrier to implementation of such professional regulations. This commentary reviews several key challenges that distinguish the statutory regulation of traditional medicine practitioners and practices from biomedical professional regulation, providing a foundation for the development of policy making parameters in this area. Foremost in this regard are the ongoing impacts of the European colonial encounter, which reinforce biomedicine's disproportionate political dominance across the globe despite traditional medicine's ongoing widespread use (particularly in the global South). In this light, the authors discuss the conceptual and historical underpinnings of contemporary professional regulatory structures, the tensions between institutional and informal traditional medicine training pathways, and the policy challenges presented by the prospect of standardizing internally diverse indigenous healing approaches. Epistemic and evidentiary tensions, as well as the policy complexities surrounding the intersection of cultural and clinical considerations, present additional challenges to regulators. Conceptualizing professional regulation as an intellectual property claim under the law, the authors further consider what it means to protect traditional knowledge and prevent misappropriation in this context. Overall, the authors propose that innovative professional regulatory approaches are needed in this area to address safety, quality of care, and accessibility as key public interest concerns, while prioritizing the redress of historical inequities, protection of diverse indigenous knowledges, and delivery of care to underserved populations.</p>","PeriodicalId":520659,"journal":{"name":"Journal of alternative and complementary medicine (New York, N.Y.)","volume":" ","pages":"307-313"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1089/acm.2017.0346","citationCount":"24","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Statutory Regulation of Traditional Medicine Practitioners and Practices: The Need for Distinct Policy Making Guidelines.\",\"authors\":\"Nadine Ijaz,&nbsp;Heather Boon\",\"doi\":\"10.1089/acm.2017.0346\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The World Health Organization (WHO) has called for the increased statutory regulation of traditional and complementary medicine practitioners and practices, currently implemented in about half of nations surveyed. According to recent WHO data, however, the absence of policy guidelines in this area represents a significant barrier to implementation of such professional regulations. This commentary reviews several key challenges that distinguish the statutory regulation of traditional medicine practitioners and practices from biomedical professional regulation, providing a foundation for the development of policy making parameters in this area. Foremost in this regard are the ongoing impacts of the European colonial encounter, which reinforce biomedicine's disproportionate political dominance across the globe despite traditional medicine's ongoing widespread use (particularly in the global South). In this light, the authors discuss the conceptual and historical underpinnings of contemporary professional regulatory structures, the tensions between institutional and informal traditional medicine training pathways, and the policy challenges presented by the prospect of standardizing internally diverse indigenous healing approaches. Epistemic and evidentiary tensions, as well as the policy complexities surrounding the intersection of cultural and clinical considerations, present additional challenges to regulators. Conceptualizing professional regulation as an intellectual property claim under the law, the authors further consider what it means to protect traditional knowledge and prevent misappropriation in this context. Overall, the authors propose that innovative professional regulatory approaches are needed in this area to address safety, quality of care, and accessibility as key public interest concerns, while prioritizing the redress of historical inequities, protection of diverse indigenous knowledges, and delivery of care to underserved populations.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":520659,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of alternative and complementary medicine (New York, N.Y.)\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"307-313\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1089/acm.2017.0346\",\"citationCount\":\"24\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of alternative and complementary medicine (New York, N.Y.)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1089/acm.2017.0346\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2018/1/23 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of alternative and complementary medicine (New York, N.Y.)","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1089/acm.2017.0346","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2018/1/23 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 24

摘要

世界卫生组织(世卫组织)呼吁加强对传统和补充医学从业人员及其做法的法定监管,目前在接受调查的约一半国家实施了这种监管。然而,根据世卫组织最近的数据,缺乏这方面的政策指导方针是实施这类专业条例的重大障碍。本评注审查了区分传统医学从业者和做法的法定监管与生物医学专业监管的几个关键挑战,为制定这一领域的决策参数奠定了基础。在这方面,最重要的是欧洲殖民遭遇的持续影响,尽管传统医学正在广泛使用(特别是在全球南方),但它加强了生物医学在全球范围内不成比例的政治主导地位。在这种情况下,作者讨论了当代专业监管结构的概念和历史基础,制度和非正式传统医学培训途径之间的紧张关系,以及标准化内部多样化土著治疗方法的前景所带来的政策挑战。认知和证据的紧张关系,以及围绕文化和临床考虑交叉的政策复杂性,给监管机构带来了额外的挑战。在将专业监管定义为法律下的知识产权主张的基础上,作者进一步考虑了在这种背景下保护传统知识和防止盗用的意义。总体而言,作者建议在这一领域需要创新的专业监管方法,以解决安全、护理质量和可及性作为关键的公共利益问题,同时优先考虑纠正历史不平等,保护不同的土著知识,并向服务不足的人群提供护理。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Statutory Regulation of Traditional Medicine Practitioners and Practices: The Need for Distinct Policy Making Guidelines.

The World Health Organization (WHO) has called for the increased statutory regulation of traditional and complementary medicine practitioners and practices, currently implemented in about half of nations surveyed. According to recent WHO data, however, the absence of policy guidelines in this area represents a significant barrier to implementation of such professional regulations. This commentary reviews several key challenges that distinguish the statutory regulation of traditional medicine practitioners and practices from biomedical professional regulation, providing a foundation for the development of policy making parameters in this area. Foremost in this regard are the ongoing impacts of the European colonial encounter, which reinforce biomedicine's disproportionate political dominance across the globe despite traditional medicine's ongoing widespread use (particularly in the global South). In this light, the authors discuss the conceptual and historical underpinnings of contemporary professional regulatory structures, the tensions between institutional and informal traditional medicine training pathways, and the policy challenges presented by the prospect of standardizing internally diverse indigenous healing approaches. Epistemic and evidentiary tensions, as well as the policy complexities surrounding the intersection of cultural and clinical considerations, present additional challenges to regulators. Conceptualizing professional regulation as an intellectual property claim under the law, the authors further consider what it means to protect traditional knowledge and prevent misappropriation in this context. Overall, the authors propose that innovative professional regulatory approaches are needed in this area to address safety, quality of care, and accessibility as key public interest concerns, while prioritizing the redress of historical inequities, protection of diverse indigenous knowledges, and delivery of care to underserved populations.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信