<unk>  or<unk>  health care is the behavioral, nutritional and health care practices, hygiene included, performed in the household and transmitted from one generation to the other. Such knowledge is complementary to the specialized skills of doctors and nurses. Consisting of preventive and curative tools, often related to first aid and medical herbs uses, the concept of<unk> , was first made popular in Western countries by Scottish physician William Buchan in the 18th century, and was spread by<unk>  economy manuals through the following two hundred years. A prime example of this was Buchan's own<unk> , a manual for at home health care, broken into sections regarding infant health and general diseases. The purpose of developing this concept was to expand the reach of medicine so every person can understand it and is able to follow it. An example of such a manual was written by English homeopath John Henry Clarke in the 19th century, A Dictionary of<unk>  and Homeopathic Treatment. During the late 18th century, after the publication of William Buchan's<unk> , the concept of<unk>  explored new ideas that changed the way most people perceived medicine. This was an era in which the majority of health care was provided by individuals who were not considered physicians. These people were often close friends, neighbors, or family relatives of the patient. They were not formally trained by modern medical standards of the time but gained their knowledge of medicine by learning from their predecessors. Therefore, the spread of<unk> l practices served as a resource for better health care for those who could not afford a physician or did not have access to more technologically advanced practices of medicine. Yet this does not mean that<unk>  was born with the publication of<unk> .<unk>  has been in practice from as far back as the early colonial era but Buchan's publication distributed this knowledge out of the hands of the few and to the general public. This was a significant trend as medicine previously had been physician-centered.<unk>  provided a platform for the public to easily access medical care. People from the lower, working-class, in particular, fell under this subgroup of the population who reaped most of the benefits from this style of medicinal practices. Whether it be due to economic reasons, personal preference, or just the fact that no person in their proximity had been trained in modern forms of medicine, they relied on the care from people they trusted. Hence,<unk>  prompted common folk with a limited knowledge of medicine to care for others using the resources available to them. In many cases, these care givers were mothers as they were in charge of caring for the home and household. Thus, the expansion of<unk>  played a key role in education not only for the commoner but also women, a group that had previously been limited in their medical involvement. Ironically, though Buchan's book ended up empowering women, his personal views towards them were less encouraging. He particularly opposed nurses and midwives for prohibiting physicians to treat children or attend births until. He mentioned, “the good women had exhausted all their skill and his the physicians attendance could only serve to divide the blame and appease the disconsolate parents.” In addition,<unk>  encompassed a factor which the traditional medical practices ignored. Instead of curing a disease once it has been contracted, this idea of medicine incorporated strategies that promoted health preservation and disease prevention. The belief was that if people could maximize hygiene and cleanliness, they could avoid any type of sickly state and, thus, there would be no need for arduous or uncomfortable remedies. Practices such as frequent hand washing, herbal remedies, washing clothes, good ventilation, and overall cleanliness in the home and occupational settings were widely encouraged. Health was regarded as a natural state in which the human body was in sync with nature; therefore, preserving health was a constant goal of<unk> . Yet, this is not to say that<unk>  discouraged treatment from physicians. Even though it provided a large number of treatments for different diseases,<unk>  also knew its limits. When patients contracted diseases that involved more severe symptoms such as extreme fevers or diarrhea,<unk>  advised patients to go seek professional treatment. This approach worked well as patients would be incentivized to care for daily health and also resort to professional medical treatments when the need arose. It would serve as a balance between everyday disease prevention and professional disease treatment in certain circumstances. Thus, in theory,<unk>  both empowered individuals and physicians by allowing them to concentrate in separate aspects of healthcare. Another benefit that resulted from the use of<unk>  was the improvement in the population's education. Early estimates of literacy in the early 1800s show that nearly a quarter of the U.S. citizens in the north and nearly half of the citizens in the south could not read or write. However, by 1840, this number had shrunk to nearly 9%. The widespread increase in literacy that aided in the distribution of<unk>  material was substantiated by a separate philosophical thought, called Thomasonian medicine. Unlike<unk> , Thomasonian was a more centralized medical concept in which practitioners used herbal remedies and kits only sold by the leaders of the movement. No matter the case, the coevolution of<unk>  and Thomasonian medicine incentivized reading and writing to the masses. Another proponent of self-diagnosis of medicine was William Buchan, who authored<unk> , a widespread book empowering individuals to implement their own care. One aspect of the book that led to its prominence was its novel form. Previous medical texts fell into two categories: practical use and philosophical implications of bad health. Buchan's work was able to combine these two genres into a single book meant for common class citizens. William Buchan's book also aided in the consolidation of medical knowledge as it allowed people to rely on written knowledge rather than knowledge passed by word of mouth. Since the mid 20th century the success of scientific medicine, associated to the rise of public and private medical services, disrupted most family self-care traditions, decreasing the transfer of most<unk>  skills from parents to children. Positive characteristics can be summarized as: * effective, as preventive and complementary to scientific medicine practices; * an option for those who can't afford to pay the price of synthesis drugs; * they fit a set of external environmental conditions that their users are part of, including solidarity networks; * they assimilate modern medicine or other traditions, continuously evolving. Conversely, they are bounded and hampered by lack of resources and remedies are usually bio-chemically mild substances only known and available in small geographical areas.<unk>  and non scientific medicines are locally rooted.<unk>  and scientific health care systems, as well as in a patient medical treatment, can harmoniously coexist. The knowledge gap between generations has reduced the appeal of<unk> , although its resilience can be ascribed to its links with a "spiritual dimension" of human health.<unk>  can reduce the cost of medical treatments, more expensive than prevention, and the risk of side effects from pharmaceutical drugs, and time and cost associated with care recovery.
Domestic medicine
Venoms in medicine
Travel medicine
Cunning folk
Counterfeit medicines online
Jewish medicine
Disaster medicine
Military medicine