I read someplace recently that Officially, doctors are taught they should only use a Pharmaceutical for treatment after all other avenues of treatment have been tried.

I cannot find this reference now and wish to know exactly what publication it is found in as well as the exact wording.

If this is true, and could be proven, wouldn't this help force the insurance companies to pay for alternative treatments, because doctors are supposed to exhaust those first before tying dangerous drugs?

2nd thought on this:

Vitamins, minerals, herbs while cheaper and safer than drugs can get expensive too. If there were an insurance company that would Only cover these items and not drugs, they would make lots of money and be a thriving business while helping people that need natural healing.

There may be a time when professional medical advice or treatment can cure something that cannot be treated with natural means and this is fine, if caught in time but the patients right to try natural means first should be upheld. There needs to be a balance and working together of these two fields for best optimum health benefits of the patient.

You can comment on the 2nd thought above and I'd like to hear your input, but the main thing I need is that citation. Thanks.

I am not aware of any such requirement, maybe others here might have heard of it, naturally such a requirement would make sense. This is why it probably does not exist.

In reality doctors are trained to use only officially approved pharmaceuticals. For them to use some �unapproved� drug/herb or procedure would opened then up legal and ethical problem and could cost them the loss of there license.