Draft:Modern vs. traditional medicine

• Comment: It is difficult to see how this could become an article – please see this policy to understand why. bonadea contributions talk 11:30, 23 September 2024 (UTC)

---

Modern vs. traditional medicine

Korean traditional medicine

According to Han (1997), Christian missionaries introduced Western medicine to Korea in the late 19th century. It was the time when there was an increased exposure to Western influences and imperialist pressures in Korea, which led to a rapid adoption of Western medical practices. During the Japanese colonial period, the suppression of Hanbang reinforced its decline, and it was treated as a secondary and behind Western medicine. However, the late 20th century witnessed a revival of Hanbang, and there was a growing nationalistic sentiment and affluence at that period.

Criticism

The primary criticism of the integration of Western medicine into Korean society is its impact on accessibility because the benefits of medical development were mostly available to urban and wealthier parts of the population. This inequality was intensified by the commercialisation of healthcare, where both Western and traditional medicines were marketed aggressively, often prioritising profit over patient care. Furthermore, the overshadowing of traditional practices by Western medicine led to the marginalisation of Korean identity and culture. Despite this criticism, there have been undeniable advancements in public health, including better disease control and medical technologies that have significantly improved the quality of life. Additionally, the establishment of medical schools and training programs has professionalised and standardised healthcare, thus elevating the overall health condition of the nation.

Kazakh traditional medicine

While reading and analyzing Han’s article, similarities between the Western invasion of Korea and the Russian invasion of Kazakhs were noticed. In the 19th century, with the expansion of the Russian Empire into Central Asia, Russian researchers began documenting the Kazakh way of life, including their medical practices. While Russian researchers acknowledged the practical aspects of Kazakh medicine, such as their knowledge of herbs, they also viewed many practices with skepticism. There was also a tendency, like in Korea, to treat Kazakh medicine as backward and less effective compared to the Russian scientific approach.

Soviet Period

After the establishment of Soviet power in the early 20th century, traditional Kazakh medicine faced even more systemic repression. Soviet authorities promoted centralized, scientific medicine and saw traditional healers (such as báqsy, znakhari, and kostopravy) as remnants of a feudal and superstitious past. These healers were often politically disenfranchised and subject to repressive measures. For instance, shamans, who played a significant role in Kazakh healing practices, were stripped of their rights, marginalized, and their practices were declared unscientific and primitive.

Independent Kazakhstan

After Kazakhstan gained independence in 1991, there was a resurgence of interest in Kazakh traditions, including folk medicine. Researchers and historians began to reexamine traditional healing methods, thanks to which folk healers regained some recognition. In 1997, Kazakhstan passed a law regulating folk medicine and allowed licensed practitioners to offer traditional treatments alongside modern medical services. In modern Kazakhstan, there is an effort to integrate useful elements of traditional Kazakh medicine with contemporary medical practices. Herbal treatments, for example, are now sometimes studied in a scientific context, and traditional healers can legally practice, considering they meet certain regulatory standards.