{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.018365472910927456, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.374269005847953, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
The Myth of Medical Pluralism: A Critical Realist Perspective

It is widely assumed that there is a high level of medical pluralism in contemporary society. For example, both orthodox and non-orthodox medicines are simultaneously available to the public. What forms the boundaries that demarcate orthodox medicines from non- orthodox ones? These issues arise when examining medical pluralism from a critical realist viewpoint. The aim of the paper is to argue that: firstly, orthodox and non-orthodox medicines reflect political economic aspects of the social context in which they are located. They do not exist in a social vacuum ensuring their ontological distinctiveness. Secondly, there are more similarities between orthodox and non- orthodox medicines than distinctly different features. In contemporary capitalist societies the key structuring/generative mechanism affecting the form and content of medical systems derives from the commodification of health care. This pervades both orthodox medicine and its various alternatives. Thus the reality of medical pluralism is illusory.