Complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) is making waves all over the world nowadays. The National Institute of Health started an office of alternative medicine in 1992 and established the National Center for CAM (NCCAM) in 1998. The annual budget has increased to 113.3 million dollars. The NCCAM has founded the Office of International Alternative Medicine (OIHR), to support collaborative work with countries other than USA. In 2003, 10 international planning grants were awarded which included a collaboration with Keio University in Japan.
In most of Asian countries except for Japan, the government supports promotion of its own traditional medicines. When European medicine came from Holland to Japan, in the Edo period, Japanese doctors quickly adopted European ways and mixed them with traditional Kampo medicine. For example, Seishu Hanaoka combined surgery with Kampo, for the benefit of his patients.
Taro Takemi pointed out Kampo drugs should be used in Kampo ways, and not in western medical ways. To globalize Kampo, first of all, Kampo should be more visible both in Japan and in the world. Secondly, the government's support is essential. Thirdly, public enlightenment concerning Kampo is necessary. Many people actually confuse Kampo, with dietary supplements. Fourthly, we need faculty members in universities, who can introduce Kampo as a part of Japan's medical culture. Lastly, Japan should contribute more to the development of traditional medicine in Asia.
Kampo is a definitive model of integrative medicine in our world. We must introduce this traditional heritage and treasure, globally.

Objectives
 Vietnam, where leprosy used to be highly endemic, through governmental implementation of MDT in 1983 and nationwide disease control efforts, has achieved WHO's leprosy elimination goal at a national level since 1995.
 However, a number of patients who suffered from leprosy prior to the governmental control programme remain institutionalised. Although these patients have severe physical disabilities, social services provided to improve their quality of life appear inadequate.
 The purpose of this study is to report the findings of an investigation of the current state of leprosy and to clarify the problems of leprosy control in Vietnam.
Methods
 402 leprosy patients from two leprosy hospitals and four leprosy resettlement villages in Vietnam were investigated their disabilities on upper limb, inferior limb, and facial appearance. And their disabilities classified according to the WHO classification scheme for disabilities in leprosy patients.
Results
 The group “Visible deformity or damage present” (G2) made up 70.1% of the study participants; the group “Anaesthesia present, but no visible deformity or damage” (G1) made up 18.9%; the group “No anaesthesia, no visible deformity or damage” (G0) made up 10.9%. More than half of those with visible physical disabilities were in their 60s or 70s. The level of disability of pre-MDT leprosy sufferers was significantly more severe than that of the post-MDT group.
Conclusions
 The effect of MDT for prevention of occurrences of physical disability was reaffirmed, but for many patients who contracted the disease prior to the implementation of MDT in Vietnam, the after-effects of leprosy are ongoing and they are forced to live in resettlement villages due to their disability. Vietnam has reduced the prevalence rate, but there are still a number of former patients who are not receiving adequate help. Providing help that is needed to raise their quality of life is the next step.

  We performed a comparative analysis of 98 residents trained in our hospital from April 2003 through March 2012. Assessments of residents performed with interviews and a written test at entry to the training course showed a good correlation（r＝0.4 ; p＜0.005）with the final assessments performed by instructing physicians when the 2–year training course had ended. In contrast, the directing nurses’ summative evaluations were not correlated with entry assessments（r＝0.071 ; p＝0.485）. Evaluation of the attitudes of residents by nurses differed considerably from that by physicians. The physicians seemed to have successfully performed the entry examination using good selection criteria, such that residents with superior evaluations at entry achieved excellent results at the end of training; in contrast, the evaluation by nurses was not so straightforward.
  The physicians tended to assess residents’ attitudes from the viewpoint of performing practices, whereas the nurses evaluated residents mainly from the standpoint of receiving practices; therefore, differences in the assessment scores between physicians and nurses were understandable. Considering this difference and the results of this study, we suggest that the residents’ attitudes in light of professionalism should be evaluated from multiple directions, from both the “giving” and “receiving” vectors.