| This study was originally designed to investigate the usefulness of alternative methods of medical diagnosis in working with three complex, difficult-to-diagnose patients. Alternative-type diagnoses were to be provided by a nonphysican practitioner residing in the Eastern U.S., utilizing a "radionic" approach. Traditional diagnoses and treatment were to be provided by a California physician specializing in difficult cases. The original research design involved at-a-distance diagnoses by the radionic practitioner; the physician was to evaluate, utilize if appropriate, and determine value, accuracy, and collaborative possibilities. Research was designed to initiate exploratory investigation of diagnostic methods of "radionics," not formally studied previously. The physician, however, was unable or unwilling to carry out his part of the study. He did not become familiar with materials provided concerning the nature, concepts, or vocabulary of the alternative approach, and was, therefore, unable to find useful, or meaningfully evaluate, diagnostic information from the alternative practitioner. Once the study was underway, the physician further indicated a preference for the alternative practitioner's use of at-a-distance "radionic" treatment to determine possible effect. The study then shifted to a treatment outcome case study. When one of the three subjects failed to provide data, and a second failed to follow treatment protocols, the researcher and committee decided to shift the emphasis and nature of the study to a qualitative descriptive study of the process. Following a detailed presentation and analysis of diagnostic/treatment descriptive data, and the nature of the interactive process itself, the study concluded with observations and suggestions for future research concerning how traditional medicine and alternative approaches such as "radionics," can forge new liaisons, cooperation, and mutual learning in working with clients. Future research issues involve the differences in attitudes, philosophical languages, goals of treatment, possible benefits of a collaborative, interfacing relationship of medical and alternative practitioners. Patient involvement and responsibility in the healing process, the importance of the mind-body connection, and the need to include psychological factors as inherently involved in the healing process, must also be addressed. Only with adequate funding, will traditional and alternative practitioners commit to this much-needed research as 21st-Century medicine evolves. |
