James’ guest on this episode is Dr. Andrew Weil, the founder and leader of a fellowship program for integrative medicine through the University of Arizona. In this role and others, he has significant influence on future generations of integrative medicine practitioners.

In this conversation, Dr. Weil discusses the current state of integrative medicine and his vision for the future. Integrative medicine is becoming more mainstream in the United States, with many medical schools teaching some form of it. However, there is still a long way to go in changing the paradigm of conventional medicine and fully integrating health-promoting practices.

Dr. Weil believes that history is on the side of integrative medicine and that it will eventually become the standard of care. Listen to the full show to discover what is needed going forward to evolve medicine from our guest’s perspective.

This dynamic conversation also touched upon the following topics:

  • The role of psychedelics in integrative medicine
  • A vision of the future where allopathic medicine is a subspecialty focused on critical care, trauma and terminal care
  • The lack of financial incentives for health-promoting and preventative medicine
  • The need for studies that compare conventional and integrative medicine in terms of patient outcomes
  • And much more!

This interview was also featured in the January 2024 Functional Forum, which kickstarted the Evolution of Medicine’s year of unity.

The Future of Integrative Medicine: A Conversation with Dr. Andrew Weill | Episode 326

Dr. Andrew Weil: I think what we really need is we need outcomes and effectiveness studies to compare conventional medicine with integrative medicine in common conditions that now absorb most of our health care dollars. So, what I’d like to see is make a list of, say, the 12 conditions that fit that, things like chronic pain, back pain, GERD, allergies. There’s a whole list we could come up with, where I think integrative medicine really shines.

And then I’d like to see matched patients, matched for age, gender, diagnosis. One goes to conventional medicine. One goes to integrative medicine. And then we track outcomes, medical outcomes, cost outcomes, patient satisfaction. That’s the kind of data that we need. We don’t need more randomized controlled trials to see whether Saint John’s Wort works better than a placebo.

We need this kind of outcomes and effectiveness data that we can take to the people who pay for health care and show them that it’s in their interest to pay for integrative treatment that’s going to save them money. And I’m quite sure that we can get that data, but the problem is, who’s going to do those studies? They’re expensive to do. They require large populations. NIH doesn’t do them. Who’s going to pay for them? So, that’s a real challenge now to figure out how to do that.

James Maskell: Welcome to the Evolution of Medicine podcast, the place health professionals come to hear from innovators and agitators leading the charge. We cover the latest clinical breakthroughs and health technology, as well as practical tools to help you transform your practice and the health of your community.

This podcast is brought to you by the Lifestyle Matrix Resource Center, who provide a range of options to help you deliver successful, effective functional and integrative medicine. To find out more and to get started, go to goevomed.com/lmrc. That’s goevomed.com/lmrc.

So, a warm welcome to the Evolution of Medicine platform for the first time, Dr. Andrew Weil. Welcome, Doctor. So, glad to have you here.

Dr. Andrew Weil: Thank you. Glad to be here.

James Maskell: So, the theme for this year is unity. And maybe a good place for us to start is, you’ve been a leader in the field of integrative medicine and pushing that idea forward, which is really taking the best of conventional medicine and complementary medicine, alternative medicine, and fusing it together for the betterment of the patient. And it seems like a good way to kick off our Year of Unity. So, you want to give us your thoughts on the state of play of integrative medicine today?

Dr. Andrew Weil: I think, in the US, integrative medicine is rapidly becoming mainstream, that the majority of US medical schools have joined the academic consortium for integrative medicine. There are many textbooks published of integrative medicine. I think most medical schools are teaching some form of it. I think there’s still a long way to go.

The term integrative medicine has become mainstream. It’s widely used in academic discourse. I think a lot of people still don’t know what it means, and people still confuse it with alternative medicine, which it isn’t. And I think our goal is much, much larger than simply bringing alternative practices into the mainstream. My goal has always been to try to change the paradigm from which conventional medicine operates, and that touches on some of the things that you’re very interested in.

So, our center at the University of Arizona, our main educational offering is a two-year intensive fellowship. We’ve graduated almost 3,000 physicians from that now. And the main purpose of that is to remedy the deficiencies in conventional training of physicians, starting with whole fields like nutrition, which are just left out.

James Maskell: Yeah. I’ve had the pleasure of meeting a number of your graduates over the years, popping up in very interesting situations, either in private practice or in businesses, or actually in larger health systems now popping up, and they’re doing great work and getting the word out. How much of a barrier do you think it is that this has to be postgraduate education as opposed to just part of the education that doctors go through?

Dr. Andrew Weil: Well, I think, in some ways, it’s not worth trying to get it into undergraduate medical education because that curriculum is just so top-heavy. It’s very hard to get anything else into it. And we’ve tended to focus on residency training because I think that’s where a lot of attitudes and practice habits are formed.

We have a condensed curriculum that have acquired accredited part of residency training. It’s been adopted by over a hundred residencies now and in various fields. And the goal is eventually that all residencies will include education in this area. So, whether you go to a gastroenterologist or a psychiatrist or a dermatologist, that person will have learned the basics of nutrition, mind-body interactions, the strengths and weaknesses of other systems of medicine, information about botanicals and dietary supplements and so forth.

James Maskell: It’s interesting that in this time where integrative medicine has… You started its journey into the mainstream, the need for this unity seems to only get bigger. Obviously, you have, for the first time now, a decrease in life expectancy, which is unprecedented in human history. How do you think about that?

Dr. Andrew Weil: Well, I think one reason that integrative medicine has made such advances in the US is that our health care system is more in shambles than anywhere else in the world. And looking back on my own career, I’ve been writing and saying the same things about medicine and medical education for almost 50 years. And it’s only relatively recently that I’ve been paid attention to by my colleagues. And I traced that to the time when the economics of health care here really began to go south. And as long as it was business as usual, it was very easy for doctors to ignore what patients were asking for. And so I see a definite correlation with economics. And as the health care system deteriorates, more and more institutions are opening up to integrative medicine than the kinds of training that we’ve been doing.

James Maskell: It’s interesting. I’ve been in a few conversations this year, where I’ve heard people say things that I’ve never heard before, where they would say, “Hey, leaders of health systems say, ‘Hey, we’re losing too many patients to integrative and functional medicine doctors.'” It’s registering at a new level when it makes an economic impact, I think, right?

Dr. Andrew Weil: Yes. Also, there is, as you know, growing unhappiness of not only patients but physicians with the nature of health care and medicine. When I went to medical school long ago, medicine looked like a very attractive profession. And now, I have heard so many doctors say they wish they’d gone into another field, or they wouldn’t let a son or a daughter of theirs go into medicine today. I think the unhappiness of practitioners along with the unhappiness of patients and the impossible economics of health care are really driving this movement.

James Maskell: Absolutely. One other area of unity, I know that a central tenant of integrative medicine is sort of this unity between mind, body, and spirit. And obviously, we have a mental health crisis. You might say we have a spiritual health crisis as well. So, what need for integrative medicine, and how do you think we’re doing in those areas?

Dr. Andrew Weil: Well, I have a lot to say about that. One of the major philosophical planks of integrative medicine is whole-person medicine, that human beings are more than physical bodies. We’re also mental, emotional beings, and spiritual entities, and community members, and medicine has to pay attention to those other dimensions of human life in order to be effective.

I think the inability of conventional medicine to pay attention to the mental, spiritual components of people and their relevance in health and illness, it’s something that arises out of the materialistic paradigm that now dominates Western science and medicine. And that is a very tough nut to crack, that conventional science does not believe in the reality of anything that’s not physical.

And also, the materialistic paradigm does not allow for nonphysical causation of physical events. If you see a change in a physical system, the cause has to be physical. And that’s why we’ve never been able to really make sense of placebo responses and see the reality of the usefulness of hypnotic suggestion, for example. There are so many mind-body therapies that are cost-effective, time-effective, even fun for both practitioner and patient, and that they’re very underutilized in medicine.

And just to give you one glaring example, the opioid crisis has now forced people to realize that opioids are simply not appropriate stand-alone treatments for chronic pain. And a lot of entities, one is the state of Oregon, the Veterans Administration have mandated integrative treatment for chronic pain syndrome. But when you look at how they define integrative treatment, they list modalities like yoga and nutrition, acupuncture, massage, never mentioned mind-body interventions. Now it’s just a blind spot. And I don’t know that we’ve made great strides there. I think that’s going to take some time and constant rethinking.

James Maskell: Yeah. One of the things that had quite a strong influence on me was the film, Escape Fire, and that was looking at particularly opiates, particularly in the VA. It seems like the VA is an area where there has been progress. And I guess one of the things that I’ve thought is that, perhaps, group delivery of care by its very nature stimulates a sort of area of mind-body medicine by itself. Obviously, Jim Gordon’s been on the front lines of working out those kind of groups. What are your thoughts on that?

Dr. Andrew Weil: I think, in practice, that’s a very useful strategy. One of the problems we have is that we train people so well, and then we graduate them into a world where everything’s stacked against them. And one of the things mainly stacked against them is priorities of reimbursement. And they have to really figure out, how can they be paid fairly for what they do? We happily pay for interventions, for drugs. We don’t pay for a doctor to teach a patient a breathing technique or advise about how to eat. But one strategy that has worked is group visits, especially in areas like around nutrition, diabetes control, hypertension control. And that allows for a kind of billing that provides fair reimbursement.

James Maskell: Yeah. It’s been an interesting journey for sure. I do think the billing piece of it is interesting, but also being in community with other people, whether—

Dr. Andrew Weil: Definitely.

James Maskell: —that’s a short period or whether that’s living in community, sort of pushes buttons for you that don’t get pushed when you’re in relationship with a private physician that no one else talks about. And I think some of that is where the healing occurs as well because you’re sort of forced to confront some things in a healthy, supportive way.

Dr. Andrew Weil: Yup. I agree with that. Definitely.

James Maskell: That was really interesting. Yeah, I think, definitely, the mind-body piece is huge. When you go into these conventional medicine areas, is there one part of integrative medicine that you think is sort of like the easiest place for doctors to get their head around, integrating some of what comes into integrative medicine?

Dr. Andrew Weil: I think what we really need is we need outcomes and effectiveness studies to compare conventional medicine with integrative medicine in common conditions that now absorb most of our health care dollars. So, what I’d like to see is make a list of, say, the 12 conditions that fit that, things like chronic pain, back pain, GERD, allergies. There’s a whole list we could come up with, where I think integrative medicine really shines.

And then I’d like to see matched patients, matched for age, gender, diagnosis. One goes to conventional medicine. One goes to integrative medicine. And then we track outcomes, medical outcomes, cost outcomes, patient satisfaction. That’s the kind of data that we need. We don’t need more randomized controlled trials to see whether Saint John’s Wort works better than a placebo.

We need this kind of outcomes and effectiveness data that we can take to the people who pay for health care and show them that it’s in their interest to pay for integrative treatment that’s going to save them money. And I’m quite sure that we can get that data, but the problem is, who’s going to do those studies? They’re expensive to do. They require large populations. NIH doesn’t do them. Who’s going to pay for them? So, that’s a real challenge now to figure out how to do that.

James Maskell: Yeah. Well, I’m glad you mentioned that, actually, because it’s something that I’m thinking about a lot. This year, into 2023, we had content around sort of the shift in payment modalities towards value-based payment. I think we all can see that integrative care is more valuable than conventional care, just to be paid for like that. And I think, potentially, there’s a unity or convergence of those two things there, where at the same time, health care moves towards, essentially, you doing better when you keep people healthy for the minimum possible cost, then in arrives the medicine that is designed for that.

Dr. Andrew Weil: Right. So, one of my thoughts is if we could engage the private sector in some of this because corporations are hobbled by health care costs, and they’re not constrained by ideology. They just want to know what works. So, if we could get them to fund at least some of the pilot studies, that we could then go to larger studies that will produce that kind of data.

James Maskell: Absolutely. Yeah, that’s valuable. I really want to go back to the thing you said about materialism because, on the last Functional Forum, we were covering a conference on mitochondria. There was an education piece there where it was sort of saying, that the doctor was saying, “Look, here’s all the history of vitalism,” the history of vitalism, 1850 to today.

And then, on this other side, he’s now using metatranscriptomics to, in some cases, measure the energy that is coming from mitochondrial genes. And the supposition was that, potentially, what they’re seeing is that the way that mitochondria communicate, not just within the cell but between the cells, that energetic spectrum is measurable. And in people with severe chronic illness, CIRS, and those kind of illnesses, you could see how low it is. And the idea was, is this the vital force? Is this vitalism happening? And I just thought, because if it is, I mean, I don’t know if it is, but if it is, you could see that scientific materialism and vitalism could unify, and I think that would be healthy.

Dr. Andrew Weil: That would be terrific. That’s new to me. I’ll have to look up that research on mitochondria. But one of the challenges with talking to conventional doctors about traditional Chinese medicine, for example, is that it all is about circulation of subtle energy of qi. Well, if you don’t believe in subtle energy, you’re not going to get anywhere with that. And that’s very difficult to talk with scientific materialists about. So, to be able to document that there are these kinds of energies, biofields, biophotons, all of that, I think that’s a frontier that I hope we’re approaching fairly rapidly.

James Maskell: I listened to this thing recently on the interstitium and talking about how the interstitium was missed by conventional medicine. It’s 25% that extracellular matrix. And in the podcast, they made note of the fact that the interstitium was understood by Chinese medicine for a thousand years. And it was kind of like the first moment that I’d heard on mainstream education saying, “Hang on a minute. We’ve got this completely wrong. These guys somehow knew about it. What else do they know?” And it was really a nice moment for the listener because you don’t often get that message through the corporate media.

Dr. Andrew Weil: Right. Well, that reminds me, one thing that I’ve written about and often like to talk to audiences about is that traditional Chinese medicine knew nothing about the immune system as we understand it. They didn’t know anything about what those organs did. But they had an awareness that the body had a defensive function. And they searched the world to find things, mostly natural substances that could enhance the defensive function of the body. And they came up with various mushrooms and ginseng and so forth.

In the West, we were looking at the anatomy of the body, which the Chinese didn’t, and we saw these organs but didn’t understand what they did. So, we said they were functionless organs. When I was in medical school, the adenoids and tonsils were considered functionless vestigial, and that gave doctors license to take them out. When I was growing up, you couldn’t get to adolescence with your tonsils and adenoids. They were considered useless. Appendix was considered a useless organ and often taken out without people’s consent when they had any kind of abdominal surgery.

I mean, the worst offense is the thymus gland. When I was in medical school, I was taught that that had no function, that it got large in adolescence and then shrank. And this was considered proof that it was somehow functionless. I don’t follow that logic. In the 1950s, American doctors invented a disease that every child had, called thymic hypertrophy, that was treatable by bombarding the thymus with X-rays. And that caused the thymus to shrink immediately. So, unbelievable that we were destroying the thymus, not understanding its function at a time when Chinese medicine… I’ve just lost you on-

James Maskell: I’m here.

Dr. Andrew Weil: You’re here? Let me see if I can get you back to my… Just a second.

James Maskell: I’m hearing everything on my end in case that’s-

Dr. Andrew Weil: Okay, I’m trying to get… Here we are. For some reason I am not… I can’t see you anymore, so-

James Maskell: Okay. I could see you. If you’re okay with me, not seeing me, I’m-

Dr. Andrew Weil: Yeah, that’s all right. So, what I was saying is at a time when Chinese medicine, which was really a system of function rather than a form, understood that the body had a defensive function, even though they didn’t understand the individual organs. And in the West, we labeled these organs as useless and actually removed them or damaged them. So, I think that illustrates the advantages of thinking in a functional way.

James Maskell: Absolutely. I agree with that. Actually, as you say, functional way, it brings up a question. Something that came up for us last year was, what is it about the language of what we do that… Is there something in the language that is holding back? So, integrative medicine has taken some incredible strides, the academic consortium, some of the things you mentioned there. Functional medicine has made some incredible strides. The Cleveland Clinic stuff, I mean, the number of doctors that are doing that every day. And then you look at something like lifestyle medicine that has really taken off in the last year in other ways too.

And I guess I would just love to get your thoughts on, we’ve had some conversations of, would a unifying nomenclature help to move this thing forward or this standard of care forward that was a vital-focus, lifestyle-first, root-cause approach, which I think all of them are interested in? I’m not sure what your thoughts on that are.

Now it’s gone mute. Now you’re on mute. Sorry. I can see the little red line across your microphone. On mute. Still mute. Yeah, I can ask to unmute there. I can click the button here. There you go.

Dr. Andrew Weil: Is that better? Okay. So, I’ve always said that one day we’ll be able to drop the word integrative, and this will just be good medicine. It’s what medicine should be. It’s what medicine can be in the future. So, I feel quite confident about that.

James Maskell: And how close are we to that, do you think?

Dr. Andrew Weil: I think time is on our side, and it’s going to be economic necessity that drives this forward. In the past, this has been a consumer-driven movement. But now I think it’s really hard economic considerations that are driving this because the current health care system is simply economically unsustainable.

James Maskell: Absolutely. Yeah. It’s interesting you say that because I foresaw that actually 18 years ago and why I got into the industry because I was a health economist, and I saw the exponential cost curve can only go so far before it causes other problems in society. And I think you’re absolutely right. That will be the next economic imperative. I guess, just more broadly speaking, what are your hopes and dreams and also concerns about the future of integrative medicine?

Dr. Andrew Weil: Well, I could see allopathic medicine becoming a subspecialty that will be for the management of critical illness, trauma, terminal care. I think it may be that a lot of smaller and community hospitals aren’t going to be there anymore, and that large urban centers will have one academic hospital that’s the only one that can afford the hardware that will deal with that kind of critical illness. And there may be new kinds of health care institutions that will spring up to take the place of the ones that don’t survive.

I’ve always wanted to see healing centers come into existence, which I would think would be managed or directed by integratively-trained physicians but would have teams of practitioners of all different kinds of training, working under the same roof. And these institutions would not be for critical care or terminal care. People could go there if they were well, who wanted adjustment of lifestyle. You could go there for the management of all the routine kind of complaints and lifestyle-related diseases that conventional medicine doesn’t manage well.

And that when you came out of these places, whether you went for a weekend or a week, you’d know more than when you went in about how to eat, how to maybe cook, how to grow some of your own food, how to use natural remedies, how to take advantage of different kinds of health practices. And I would see stays in these institutions being paid for in whole or in part by insurance. So, that’s one of my fantasies. I’d love to see that come about.

James Maskell: What about on the other side of the coin? I mean, obviously, we’ve just been through the pandemic. You could argue that our medicine perfectly lined up for preventing, reducing the effect of, and dealing with that. It did seem like, during the pandemic, there were some somewhat existential threats to integrative medicine in just the way that the government chose to deal with people speaking about it or otherwise. What are your thoughts now post-pandemic on what we learned from that and anything that you learned particularly on the state of the game?

Dr. Andrew Weil: Well, first of all, there’s still a lot of COVID around. In fact, at the moment, I know more people that have it than had it some months ago, so it’s still with us. Secondly, I think it showed us how unprepared we were for dealing with something like that. And this was not a terrible disease as pandemics go. We, I think, are still quite vulnerable, and something else could come around that had a much higher mortality rate. And I hope that, in the future, we’ll be much better prepared to deal with that.

And I think integrative medicine was able to make some great contributions to prevention, to adjunctive treatments, and so forth. And I think we will continue to look for that. But I think it made me realize how vulnerable we are, given the factors that drove this one. We mix populations up very effectively today, much more so than we did in the past. The much more international travel, there is much more mixing of people. And I just think we’re quite vulnerable to infectious disease.

James Maskell: If you started the pandemic with the knowledge that you have now about what it was, the age gradient, how it affected people, so forth, do you see any different plan, this time, the second time around?

Dr. Andrew Weil: Well, in the US, I think we really blew it at the beginning. I think we could have stopped or greatly reduced this if, right at the beginning, we’d seen what it was and didn’t deny that something like this was happening and took steps to reduce the entry of that into our population. But we had a person in the White House who was absolutely not the right person to be managing this and really denied what was happening for some time. But I think if we’d taken steps to isolate and quarantine early on, we would not have had it to the extent that we have.

James Maskell: Do you really think that was… I mean, I see New Zealand and whatever. I mean, New Zealand has parts of entry from three places in the world. If we need to shut down, I mean, there’s enough… I don’t see how America could have ever done that. I live near San Francisco. We were in, I don’t know, Chinatown in January 2020. There’s 15 direct flights from Wuhan every day. I don’t know how we could’ve done that. But I hear you.

Let me ask you this. So, another big area that you’ve obviously been at the forefront of is, that is emerging into health care right now, and I guess I’d love to get your thoughts as to whether you think it’s a part of integrative medicine, is psychedelic medicine. Lots of interests. I don’t know if there’s a profitable psychedelic clinic in the country yet. But certainly, there’s a lot of interest because of the incredible outcomes through that, in some of the early MAPS trial. What are your thoughts about the place of psychedelic medicine in integrative medicine and generally in medicine?

Dr. Andrew Weil: Well, I think that’s where it belongs. I think it is ultimate integrative treatment. The demand for training in this area has been overwhelming at our center, in the general population, so it clearly is coming. And I think the potential for therapeutic use of psychedelics is vast, not just in psychiatric medicine but in physical medicine as well. And I wish there was more attention paid to that. It is not just about the drug-resistant depression and PTSD and OCD. I’ve seen amazing results of psychedelics in autoimmune disease, in chronic pain, and a whole variety of illnesses. And I think the safety profile of them is very great. I think there’s a great need for people who are well-trained in their use. I don’t know how this is going to play out with all the commercial interest in it, and this concern, and that concern, but clearly, they’re here to stay. And I would love to see psychedelic therapy embraced by integrative medicine. I think it will be.

James Maskell: Yeah. It’s interesting because, in other countries, I’ve been in Mexico and met with some of those doctors, they don’t really see a gap between them. But I think the lifestyle medicine and MAPS couldn’t be more separate. We tried in a certain way, and one of the things that we saw, we’ve done some pilots in groups, in treatment-resistant depression in Utah with ketamine therapy, one of the things that I recognized is that it actually stimulates… The one thing it generally does is stimulate people to want to take better care of themselves post-experience. And I think given what a challenge that is to us as a population in general, there’s value there even on top of the value of the treatment itself. Is that something you’ve-

Dr. Andrew Weil: Yeah, absolutely. And I think that goes at a central problem we have with health in this country, is that most of the diseases that conventional medicine is trying to manage and is managing very poorly are lifestyle-related diseases. And if people early enough in life made better choices about eating, exercise, handling stress, and so forth, we would not be faced with this problem. So, I think that’s a big challenge. How can we do a better job at health promotion and disease prevention? And I think that comes down to the fact that they don’t pay. Unless we can figure out how to make health promotion and disease prevention pay, we’re not going to get anywhere. And the vested interests that now control things and are making vast amounts of money from the health care system don’t want anything to change.

James Maskell: Yeah, for sure. Well, I’d love to just, I guess, end on the legacy that you have. Obviously, your work has meant a lot to a lot of people. And obviously, the more directly you’ve been involved with them, let’s say, your fellowship, it’s significant. It’s life-changing. It probably changes the course of almost everyone’s career who goes through that process. Obviously, there’s books and other things that you implement through people. There’s restaurants and all the different kind of things that you’ve been involved with.

I guess part of the thing that I’ve been reflecting on is like, “Hey, I’ve been trying to do the best I can for 18 years, but it’s not getting better yet. That impact has still not reached enough people to actually turn the corner.” And I guess, I’d love to just get your thoughts on what it means to have a legacy in health care, and what kind of effort, for what kind of sustained period of time do you think it’s going to take for us to, I hate to use the word win, but for health to spring eternal?

Dr. Andrew Weil: Well, I am optimistic. I think that as I tell all of our graduating classes, time is on our side, that the deterioration of the health care system is only going to accelerate. The costs of conventional medicine are only going to increase. We have an aging population, and the older people are, the more they become drains on our health care resources. We have an epidemic of fat kids who are getting hypertension and diabetes at early ages. It was something we never had to deal with before.

We are much too reliant on expensive technology. And we do a very poor job at managing most of the epidemic diseases that are out there now. So, all that’s going to get worse. And as it gets worse, the wisdom of what we are doing becomes more and more apparent. So, it’s just very clear to me that this is the future, has to be the future. And as I said, one day, we’ll be able to drop the word integrative. I’m not going to give a timeline on when that will be, but I think, in the next 10 years, we’ll see very significant change.

James Maskell: Beautiful. Well, this has been great on the theme of unity, actually, because this is the first time that you’ve been on the show. And I typically at the very beginning, 10 years ago, I would ask this question of people when they came on for the first time. When I say the words, the evolution of medicine, what does that bring up for you?

Dr. Andrew Weil: Well, I think we are evolving out of an era of extreme dependence on technological solutions for all health problems. And maybe getting back to some of our roots, I am amazed at the wisdom of Hippocrates in the 5th century BC who really was the father of lifestyle medicine and gave very specific advice about ways of eating and being physically active in accordance with the seasons and so forth, and who urged us to revere the healing power of nature, and first do no harm. And those principles, I think, have really been lost in this era of fascination with technology.

James Maskell: Absolutely. Well, Doc, I just want to share my appreciation here. This has been an incredible way to kick off our Year of Unity. My hope through this year is that we’re able to share clinical insight that can bring unity amongst the different clinical paradigms, drive interest in nomenclature that drives unity, and I’m also hoping for political and economic unity, actually, around this to become a standard of care. And I just want to share my appreciation for all the work that you’ve done, all the people you’ve inspired, and it’s now really exciting to see those people stepping into themselves and going out and making change. And I think you’ve started something that is an unstoppable force. And it’s just a question of when it will land across the country and across the world. So, thank you.

Dr. Andrew Weil: You’re welcome. Thanks for having me on.

James Maskell: All right. This has been the Evolution of Medicine. This has been the Functional Forum, beginning of the year, the year of unity with Dr. Andrew Weil. Thank you so much for tuning in. And we’ll see you next time.

Thanks for listening to the Evolution of Medicine podcast. Please share this with colleagues who need to hear it. Thanks so much to our sponsors, the Lifestyle Matrix Resource Center. This podcast is really possible because of them. Please visit goevomed.com/lmrc to find out more about their clinical tools, like the Group Visit Toolkit. That’s goevomed.com/lmrc. Thanks so much for listening, and we’ll see you next time.


RSS Feed


Click here to download this podcast

music provided by intomusic.co