Allopathic medicine is a not so polite name used by purveyors of holistic and/or alternative medicine to define western modern biomedical model of treatment. Under this treatment regimen, diseases and illnesses are considered to be specific to a certain segment or aspect of the body (Roy, 2015) . The causation of disease under this model is limited to biological factors such as pathogens, genetics, and somatic abnormalities. Therefore, targeted treatment is focused on that particular part mainly through medical prescription and administration. On the other hand, the biopsychosocial model approach to diseases and ailments considers a more holistic approach to sickness which includes three factors. These are biological factors, psychological factors such as personality, conduct, and moods as well as social factors such as culture, family, and economic situation (Crosby et al., 2015) . The biopsychosocial model approach does not consider the biomedical approach to be wrong but rather incomplete as it factors only one aspect in the complex arena of health, which fact makes the biopsychosocial model exponentially superior to the biomedical approach.
Whereas it is factual that all diseases and ailments that require the attention of a physician have a biological or physical manifestation, biological will not generally fully explain their advent or proliferation (McLaughlin et al., 2014) . For example, the flu is among the most common illnesses in America and come mainly between October and May. During this season, most people are exposed to the pathogen that causes the flu and a good number of them are not vaccinated. Yet some people will contract the flu and others will not. Similarly, several people will be exposed to a similar carcinogen yet only some will develop cancers and other will not. This confirms that biological factors alone do not control the advent of disease. Further, several people may contract the flu but only a few will develop complications. The healing process with or without pharmacological processes will also vary from individual to individual despite the fact that they are suffering from the same ailment (McLaughlin et al., 2014) . This is further evidence that over and above biological factors, there are other secondary factors that affect the advent and development of disease and ailment in the body.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
The way the human body is, physiologically and biologically is determined by more than just biological factors. The mind, through the brain controls all physiological and psychological process actively or passively (Barker et al., 2015) . Therefore, when there is a problem that affects the mind, it will eventually affect physiological and biological processes leading either to illness, susceptibility to the illness or high probability for developing complications from the illness . A good euphemism of the body and the mind is a car and the driver. Even the best of cars can have an accident or mechanical problem based on a driver’s error. Social and physiological factors may not affect the body biologically directly but will affect the mind. The adverse effect on the mind will gradually be reflected in the body since the operationalization of the body is mind-controlled (Barker et al., 2015) .
Treating the biological factors relating to a disease, therefore, amounts to partial and temporary treatment that masks the sickness without essentially healing it (Pincus et al., 2013) . With the psychological and social aspects remaining unresolved, the treatment will eventually recur or a kindred sickness arises. The best approach to disease, therefore, lies in seeking to understand what caused it through the tripartite approach of biological, physiological and social factors. It is only after this holistic understanding that all these factors can be substantively handled and the disease cured (Pincus et al., 2013) . Almost half the monies spent on healthcare in the world, is spent in the USA, yet the populace is still generally unwell. The problem lies in the focus placed on Allopathic medicine which provides temporary relief to the patient who will keep on coming back for more treatment, sometimes throughout life. A change to biopsychosocial model approach would, however, ensure a healthier populace.
References
Barker, V., Gumley, A., Schwannauer, M., & Lawrie, S. M. (2015). An integrated biopsychosocial model of childhood maltreatment and psychosis. The British Journal of Psychiatry , 206 (3), 177-180
Crosby, L. E., Quinn, C. T., & Kalinyak, K. A. (2015). A biopsychosocial model for the management of patients with sickle-cell disease transitioning to adult medical care. Advances in therapy , 32 (4), 293-305
McLaughlin, K. A., Sheridan, M. A., Alves, S., & Mendes, W. B. (2014). Child maltreatment and autonomic nervous system reactivity: identifying dysregulated stress reactivity patterns using the biopsychosocial model of challenge and threat. Psychosomatic medicine , 76 (7), 538
Pincus, T., Kent, P., Bronfort, G., Loisel, P., Pransky, G., & Hartvigsen, J. (2013). Twenty-five years with the biopsychosocial model of low back pain—is it time to celebrate? A report from the twelfth international forum for primary care research on low back pain. Spine , 38 (24), 2118-2123
Roy, V. (2015). Time to sensitize medical graduates to the Indian systems of medicine and homeopathy. Indian journal of pharmacology , 47 (1), 1
