Until not too long ago, ethnographic descriptions of traditional healing practices were welcomed by experts as ancient jewels of human behaviour that had to be preserved in records before they became extinct. It was taken for granted that such traditional ways of preventing or handling illness would eventually disappear as people became enlightened by the concepts and effectiveness of modern medicine.

However, as the query on how different communities deal with disease continues and more evidence is collected, the premiss on the extinction of traditional health practices can no longer be accepted (Leslie, 1976; Klemman, 1984). Indeed, the study of traditional ways to treat and cure disease has evolved from being the curious subject of a few erudite scholars to the theme at the forefront of health care analysis by a wide range of disciplines. Cost-benefit analysis, geographical, sociological, and anthropological studies suggest that traditional healing practices have survived the competition of modern medicine.

Studies documenting the survival of traditional health practices substantiate the argument advanced by Gusfield (1973). He identified a set of six fallacies on the study of tradition and modernity, four of which are fully corrected by the evidence from the dual utilization of traditional and modern health services. These four fallacies are: “old traditions are displaced by new changes”; “traditional and modern forms are always in conflict”; “tradition and modernity are mutually exclusive systems”; and “modernization processes weaken traditions” (Gusfield, 1973: 335-39).

This book addresses the dual utilization of traditional and modern medical systems as it takes place in societies undergoing rapid modernization, and seeks to document the premiss that traditional practices are not merely “surviving” but, rather, they are “established” traditional ways of healing actively interacting with modern practices in health-related behaviour. By analysing the situation of five Asian nations at various stages of development and with diverse cultural settings, we will be able to compare the pervasiveness of the dual use of systems of health care, and the accommodations that have taken place in recent years on the part of traditional and modern medical systems to coexist and to meet the health needs of consumers in these countries.