Those trying to stop the integration of CAM into universities point out that allowing integration "give[s] such ideologies undeserved credibility." And that such undeserved credibility could lead to greater problems:
"The great danger . . . [is] that people who have chronic health problems or who have been persuaded that doctors do not have the answers are delaying the 'proper investigation and treatment' of their illness by instead seeking help from therapists offering alternative medicine."On the other side the article quotes a Dr. Wardle,("a NHMRC Research Fellow at the University of Queensland’s School of Population Health and co-director of the Network of Researchers in Public Health and Complementary and Alternative Medicine (NORPHCAM), an international group promoting clinical research in CAM").
Dr. Wardle's primary argument for integrating CAM into universities is that CAM practitioners who are university trained won't be quite as dangerous as the "fringe element" who lack university training. Wardle himself admits that there is "a lot of crap" practiced in CAM. However, Wardle ignores the underlying complaint of his opponents that Universities promoting CAM may cause the public to rely on these "crap" treatments because, as he argues, at least the treatments won't be quite as crappy.
