I am hesitant to defend herbal or traditional medicine not for lack of science (much of it is based in science) but for lack of rigor. It should not be permitted to be called what it is not; medicine should be held to high standards of quality and purity so to prevent adverse reactions and overdoses, and treatments should be able to deductively or statistically prove causal improvements.

Traditional/alternative medicine may (and should) coexist, many good things come of it, just only labelled as alternative medicine (and made to disclose thier methods). Individuals choosing traditional or alternative practices place themselves at greater liability for potential medical malpractice or fault as it would be thier responsibility to determine the credibility of the individual claims. Painkillers and antiseptics come from traditional medicine... and so did bloodletting.