Paper short abstract:

Integrative medicine attempts to merge different therapies, for example, traditional Chinese medicine and homeopathy with evidence-based medicine. I present results from a multi-sited ethnography which looks at knowledge production practices of Finnish researchers in integrative medicine.

Paper long abstract:

Integrative medicine attempts to merge different therapies, for example, anthroposofic medications, traditional Chinese medicine and homeopathy with evidence-based medicine. In public debate, this integrative endeavour is often seen to challenge and to necessitate change in the research practices of evidence-based medicine. For example, such groups as the scepticism movement hurry to show that integrative medicine does not apply the guidelines of good research and good scientific conduct. These groups claim that the integrative approach is humbug and unscientific. This well-known and persisting debate holds onto the differences between the research practices of evidence-based medicine and those of integrative medicine. These differences are seen as self-evident and taken for granted. However, what kind of knowledge is produced in integrative medicine and its actual knowledge making practices are in fact hidden from the eyes of the sceptics and the society at large.

The focus of the presentation is the social world of integrative medicine. I use the tradition of the social worlds framework in STS (Clarke & Star 2008). I present results from a multi-sited ethnography study (Marcus 1995) which looks at integrative medicine from the inside - from the perspective of people who do research in integrative medicine in Finland. The research questions are:

- How do people (or groups of people) who conduct research in integrative medicine understand knowledge production as philosophy and practice?

- What negotiations of different knowledge traditions, cultural meanings and identities are involved in their processes of knowledge production?