Inspirations: terms
One of the inspirations at IGVF were discussions on the concept of TCIM, which I had gradually started to use instead of the concept ‘complementary and alternative medicine’ or CAM (or its more comprehensive and inclusive form ‘traditional, complementary and alternative medicine’ or TCAM). The terms CAM and TCAM are perhaps used most often among sociologists of health and medicine (e.g. Gale 2014, Brosnan et al. 2018), the work which forms the backbone of my research.
However, a sociologist needs to be sensitive to the terms used in the field she studies and be ready to adapt to concepts used by the research participants and even create new concepts. When my visit to IGVF took place, I was in the middle of fieldwork trips in Germany, analysing fieldwork in Norway and as well as continuing the close-up analysis of the Finnish discussions, and simultaneously preparing my fieldwork for Sweden and Switzerland. I had felt that the concept CAM or even TCAM was too limited and not used by the participants of my research.
Instead, many of them preferred to talk about ‘integrative medicine’ and indeed, also IGVF focuses its research on integrative medicine, or, more specifically (but not limited to), mind-body medicine and its integration to primary healthcare settings. So, it seemed to be fair to talk about TCIM instead of CAM or TCAM. 
However, at IGVF it seemed that there was no problem about complementary in TCIM, but integrative was the preferred term. The subtle inconvenience that I sensed here was with ‘traditional’. However, I try to find concepts that would align to international health sociological and anthropological research on the phenomenon as well as somehow fit into discussions about its European and global governance. This is why the term TCIM seems rather good, at least for now.

Inspirations: boundary making
More inspirations came from discussions about what was to be included in TCIM (in case this concept was to be used). In Germany, there are German-originated TCIM traditions, such as anthroposophic medicine and homeopathy, but also Asian-originated ones, such as Chinese and ayurvedic medicine, and North American-originated ones, like mind-body medicine. 
When discussing with IGVF researchers, it was evident that there exist many division lines between these traditions. Namely, the traditions may be valued differently, and some of the researchers may see some traditions as more scientific and others as less scientific, even unscientific. 
For me as a social scientist, it is important to recognize and identify such boundary making, because it helps me understand TCIM’s potential internal tensions and debates. Drawing boundaries on what is to be included and what excluded are typical for new scientific fields, and an essential part in forming their image in the academic community (Vuolanto 2013).

Inspirations: research environment
Also, an inspiring element about visiting IGVF was the team’s commitment to forming a good research environment for themselves and their visitors. Established in 2018, IGVF is comprised of about 10-12 researchers. Some of them are full-time researchers, some part-time, some with permanent contracts, some with temporary ones. IGVF seemed a supportive and inspiring research environment.
Sense of community is very important for new research fields, especially to handle pressures and expectations to knowledge production from the outside. For TCIM as a research field, societal, professional and healthcare system level expectations seem very strong (Danell 2018). 
These expectations could influence many aspects of research, such as research funding opportunities, career advancement of young scholars and continuation of research centers. Some societal actors, like the skepticism movement, may try to undermine TCIM’s position in the academy (Vuolanto and Kolehmainen 2020). At IGVF, focusing their research on mind-body medicine, researchers also include relaxation and mindfulness exercises in their daily routines, which I see as a community building activity that could help with managing the everyday pressures of academic life. I thank the IGVF community for the warm, welcoming and inspiring research stay!

Author Contributions: Vuolanto is the sole author of this text.
Funding: The research is funding by the Research Council of Finland.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflicts of interest.