[arkey]

Well that's a bit too much of a generalisation maybe?

Yes, there are old ways that have been proven wrong, which were based on ignorance at the time, but there are also old ways which are totally legit and are little known or accepted nowadays based on today's ignorance.

[__alexs]

Take turmeric for example. It contains curcumin, a chemical that has quite good evidence for anti-inflammatory properties. However curcumin is not present in turmeric in clinically relevant quantities. People taking turmeric medicinally are not actually interested in the curcumin, if they were they would be taking a concentrated extract. They are interested in the ritual and cultural associations of turmeric.

In most cases when we do find evidence for something clinically relevant in traditional medicine we either discover that the effect is something other than it is traditionally associated with and/or that you need to take it at extreme doses for it to do anything at all.

[arkey]

Fair enough. Two points here, then:

- From a strictly scientific standpoint, wouldn't it be interesting to properly understand why and how it works?

- From a purely practical standpoint, who cares about any of that if not only it works, but is also better and healthier than what you might get prescribed at the doctor's?*

* yes, in some cases, not all.