Abstract

Scott Waterman's reflection on his experience with chronic pain and alternative treatments raises a fundamental question in medical epistemology: How can we know that an intervention will help people who are suffering?Waterman's details his trial of an alternative therapy with a dubious pathophysiological rationale. Despite the lack of research demonstrating its efficacy, and a lack of therapeutic benefit for him in particular, he acknowledges its benefit to others who were more attitudinally predisposed to it. This leads him to conclude that one's personal beliefs and explanatory hypotheses play a role in the healing process. From this he concludes that data from clinical studies conducted according to...