I appreciate this response, although I notice that some posters have responded with humor... and it concerns me that there might not be as high a regard for the holistic approach as I would hope.
As RnVt seemed to indicate, the psycho-social issues that people present with affect how patients experience their disease process. For example, if a person gets a stage IV colon cancer diagnosis, they may need all kinds of treatments... But in addition to whatever medical technology can bring to bear on the problem, there is also the loss of control, the anticipatory grief, the shock, the depression, etc to consider. Holistic medicine sees a person and recognizes that they carry a story. We are, each of us, an ongoing narrative. We have many layers, and we are more than whatever our presenting issue is. I'd imagine a good diagnostician would want to have as comprehensive an assessment as possible.
Now, this sounds pretty wishy washy... But think about what kind of care you would like. Empathy alone isn't enough for good medicine as far as I can see, but good science + a recognition of and skillfulness in responding to the multi-layered concerns of patients will be very helpful.
As a chaplain (definitely a non-trad pre med here), I have some limited experience here. I have seen patients writhing in agony, in some part because of family conflict, spiritual guilt, or anxiety. Thank goodness there are wonderful medications that help with this... but being able to navigate complex family dynamics, or to hear a patient ventilate their worries, will augment whatever pharmacalogical interventions available. Besides being useful, a willingness to bring a holistic aspect to medical practice is just simply the right thing to do.
Maybe someday, if they let me practice medicine, I will have an epiphany and realize what a namby-pamby philosophy it is that I hold... but I truly hope not. Until then, I think the holistic approach (read: all encompassing) would be the most effective.
