No abstract

No abstract

Around 40% of patients with cancer in some Western countries (1) to over 80% of patients in some Asian countries (2) use traditional, complementary, and alternative medicine (TCAM). Its increasing popularity has sustained global efforts to integrate TCAM into national healthcare systems, and integrative oncology-the use of TCAM alongside conventional cancer therapies-is a field born from this movement. Integrative oncology, however, remains elusive for most patients in low-and middle-income countries (LMICs), where many seek TCAM despite concerns about regulation, safety, and financial toxicity (3). Given this steady patronage amongst patients with cancer, there is a need to examine socio-cultural drivers of TCAM use vis-à-vis the landscape of health systems in LMICs. We write from the Philippines, a lower-middle income country in Southeast Asia, where cancer is the fourth leading cause of death (4) and where TCAM remains popular among patients and families dealing with cancer.As in other resource-challenged LMICs, Filipino patients with cancer face geographic obstacles to healthcare, unaffordable conventional therapies, and underdeveloped palliative and survivorship care (2,5). These barriers, compounded by low socioeconomic status and poor health literacy, drive patients to seek alternative forms of treatment, such as TCAM. However, structural and health system barriers are only contributory drivers of TCAM usage. Deeply ingrained historical and sociocultural influences heavily impact health attitudes and behaviors among Filipinos and, in particular, the role of TCAM in cancer care in the Philippines.As a nation with a strong agrarian profile, many traditional theories of illness causation in the Philippines revolve around balance and harmony of humans with the natural environment, as well as mystical and supernatural

No abstract

No abstract