Australia’s peak professional body for doctors has acknowledged practitioners need to recognise that their patients may be using complementary and alternative treatments.
The AMA released its position statement on these treatments in January, in which it warned that accessing them without professional medical guidance introduced potential risk to patients.
In its statement, the AMA defined complementary and alternative treatments as “the wide range of therapies and treatments with therapeutic claims not currently considered part of conventional medicine.”
These may include nutritional supplements, homeopathic formulations, some vitamin and mineral supplements, herbal products, massage, chiropractic, osteopathy, naturopathy, and energy healing, as well as herbal, ayurvedic and traditional Chinese medicines.
Due to the risk of interactions, the AMA urged GPs to include questions on the intention or use of alternative therapies when seeing patients, to appropriately manage medical treatment, particularly where it was determined a patient had concurrent health conditions.
“Discussions with patients must be undertaken in a way that is respectful and not dismissive, otherwise there is a risk the patient may not disclose their use of complementary and alternative treatments,” the position statement outlined.
The statement recognised medical practitioners may be required to discuss the potential benefits and associated risks of alternative and complementary treatments in relation to a patient’s own healthcare situation to enable them to make informed healthcare decisions.
It also reminded doctors that as well as carrying direct financial costs for patients, complementary and alternative treatments could also incur indirect costs in cases where a patient may choose to defer or delay conventional treatment.
The AMA is also concerned patients are often insufficiently aware that a majority of complementary and alternative treatments lacked adequate scientific evidence for effectiveness.
“While some complementary and alternative treatments, such as St. John’s Wort and fish oil have evidence supporting their use in specific contexts,” the statement read.
“Due to the varying degree of scientific literature on these treatments, there is need to distinguish between evidence-based complementary and alternative treatments and those without scientific backing to ensure transparency in consumer information.”
The association supported medical practitioners having access to education about such treatments in their undergraduate, vocational and further education in order to be able to provide appropriate advice.
The association called for clearer distinctions between medical doctors and those providing complementary and alternative treatments and urged “registered health practitioners must not depart from the scope of practice regulated by the relevant registration board”.
“Use of the title ‘doctor’ by nonmedical health practitioners should always be accompanied by information stating they are not medical practitioners, so members of the public are able to distinguish when they are consulting a medical practitioner and when they are not.”
The AMA also acknowledged that some medical practitioners choose to undertake additional training in complementary and alternative treatments and include them as part of their everyday practice.
Complementary Medicines Australia’s (CMA) latest industry snapshot forecast the complementary medicines sector in the country to be worth $6.3 billion in 2025.
In the November 2025 document, CMA’s chief executive officer John O’Doherty said such products were no longer “on the margins of healthcare” as 74% of Australians used them, mostly as part of a “prevention first mindset.”
Want more news, clinicals, features and guest columns delivered straight to you? Subscribe for free to WA’s only independent magazine for medical practitioners.
Want to submit an article? Email editor@mforum.com.au