First, compared to conventional medicine, using alternative medicine to cure an illness costs more for the patient. Hollenberg (2006a) mentions that most CAM users are women who earn more money and obtain higher education. This indicates that wealthier people can access a good health service more easily. For example, according to a case study whose respondents were Canadian and British ovarian patients, more than forty percent of patients claimed to have already used alternative approaches. Among them, more than sixty percent of respondents used more than one means (Sweet, 2013e). Additionally, a simple allergy treatment in German would cost around over forty euros per time, and it's the same in the US and UK. Therefore, one would predict that treating a serious illness could cost more if one knows the cost of the allergy. What's more, medical care is extremely crucial for any society. The public deserves good health and access to qualified doctors. For some poor people, not only can they not afford such high therapy costs, but the treatment outcome may pose uncertain danger. Second, more and more funds are being invested in alternative medicine. According to a survey, Hollenberg (2006b) predicts that the consumption of alternative medical methods could exceed $13.5 billion in the United States and more than £1.5 billion in the United Kingdom, representing a significant income for a country. This means that research into alternative complementary medicines can waste many of the country's funds. A lot of money should be invested in traditional medicine rather than alternative medicine to provide more opportunities for poor patients to treat their illness. Therefore, for these two elements, the high costs of alternative medicines can lead to some serious patients not being able to