What is Integrative Medicine
An increasing number of people find that the standard medical approach with pharmaceutical drugs does not always provide solutions to certain problems. In fact, more and more bodies of research show that there are valid options other than medical pharmaceuticals and what is termed ‘mainstream’ that may be more successful to correct metabolic, hormonal, immune, detoxification and deficiency disturbances.
The options include medical investigation and natural therapies based on the INTEGRATIVE MEDICINE concept, which Dr Bill Reeder offers. What he does is popularly known as alternative medicine in Hamilton—but perhaps the best term would be “FUNCTIONAL MEDICINE”.
The old term ‘alternative medicine’ is inappropriate.
It should be about efficacy and safety. This must apply not only to ‘natural’ or biomedical treatments but also EQUALLY to medical drugs.
In essence, Dr Bill Reeder treats conditions many patients struggle to find help to resolve.
As a caveat, it would be very unwise nevertheless to withhold pharmaceutical treatments where they provide a better and safer resolution – especially in life threatening situations. Hence the term ‘integrative’. Common sense must prevail.
Please note that Dr Reeder is not a regular GP. He does not provide services pertaining to standard healthcare guidelines. Patients typically have conditions for which standard treatment modalities have not been helpful or not tolerated. Dr Reeder can assist where possible with other options as evidence-based as possible.
In his Integrative Medical Practice regard to safety applies just as it should to the prescribing of pharmaceutical drugs.
To read more about the legal requirements and conduct guidelines for medical practitioners go here>>
Dr Bill Reeder
Hippocrates couldn’t have said it better –
“Ultimately, medicine has a single aim: to relieve human suffering and promote wellness. When measured against this benchmark, different therapies should be seen on a spectrum ranging from effective to ineffective rather than as ‘orthodox, mainstream’ or ‘unorthodox, non-mainstream’. More so, any therapy choice should cause least, preferably, no harm.These two themes must influence treatment choices.” Prof Marc Cohen
Any person may consult with Dr. Reeder. You still retain your usual general practitioner and other health providers. All consultations are private and confidential. A report to your general health practitioner may be provided but only if requested by you – there may be an additional fee for the time required.
Please note that by coming to this clinic it is assumed you have explored main-stream treatments based on standard ‘Best Practice’ guidelines and wish to review other valid options.
Dr Reeder, whilst a registered medical practitioner, is not a regular GP or medical specialist and therefore does not offer general practice services or pharmaceutical treatments. Please refer to the ‘About’ page for more information.
It is standard medical policy to judge treatments based on EBM, or ‘evidenced based medicine’. This term is laudable and reflects the need to protect the patient from potential harm and to provide proven, safe treatments. However the unintended consequence divides treatments into EBM, which works and non-EBM therefore by erroneous implication “doesn’t work”. I think the reader will see the flaw in that reasoning. Evidence can be ranked in degrees of strength according to experts.
Unfortunately the EBM concept can also be used by parties with opinions to shut down treatments which have an excellent record of benefit, minimal if any harm – but lack RCT (randomised clinical trials hence not EBM). Such trials are extremely expensive and almost exclusively confined to pharmaceutical chemicals as a result.
So the EBM model is a good concept but must be used wisely.
Small trials, experience, evidence from case studies and observation over time can be valid parameters of evidence. We are only too aware of many EBM drugs that have taken a toll on morbidity and mortality – to be eventually withdrawn from the market and not too promptly I should add. Whilst the majority or clinical trials and evidence is valid, more often we are seeing ‘statistical gymnastics’ or ‘creative statistics’ to exaggerate a medical drug’s benefits and downplay harms.
For example a certain well known drug has a much acclaimed 30-50% benefit for reducing a heart risk – sounds impressive. But in real terms, it means only 1% of those taking it will get any benefit at all.
So the EBM model is a good concept but must be used wisely – not as a political, marketing or controlling device.
Many advances in laboratory investigations exist internationally but are rarely available to doctors via regular laboratories – at least in New Zealand. These ‘functional’ tests are designed to assess how systems are coping, where faults exist and how interventions can be applied. Examples of these biomedical tests are available on this website on the ‘Downloads’ page.
- Hormone imbalances – Female Menopause, Male Andropause, Thyroid, Adrenal, PMT
- Intravenous vitamin treatments – High Dose Vit C, micronutrients, glutathione
- Back and other joint pain/injuries – Prolotherapy, Prolozone, Neurofasciotomy
- Chronic Fatigue, Fibromyalgia
- Gastro-intestinal-digestive disorders
- Heart disease – risk factors – options
- ECP for heart disease – refer to External Counter Pulsation
- Toxic metals assessment – mercury, lead, cadmium, arsenic
- Detoxification, IV metal chelation
- Cancer support – integrating with existing treatments
- ENJO home and commercial – advanced fibre cleaning system. Fully chemical free. ReferENJO Fibre website