Abstract
The aim of this paper was to evaluate lay books on complementary medicine with a view to answering the question whether such literature has the potential to enhance or jeopardise the health of the reader. A sample of six books published in 1997 was chosen at random. Their contents were independently assessed by both authors according to pre‐defined criteria: information on adverse effects of selected therapies, information on invalid or insufficiently tested methods, information on the treatment of potentially serious conditions. The results show that the information provided is both incomplete and misleading. If followed by the reader, it is conceivable that such information may do considerable harm. This pilot project leads to the hypothesis that the lay literature on complementary medicine is far from adequate and has the potential to put the health of the reader at risk. The hypothesis now requires testing with adequate methodology.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.