Friday, August 28, 2015

Friends of Science in Medicine 2015: Integrative Medicine "Academic Prostitution" Does NOT Belong in Universities

here, some refreshing language from Down Under ["where women glow and men thunder"]:

001. at, we're told in "'Integrative Medicine' Has No Place in Universities":

"[presumably authored by] Loretta Marron [...] Chief Executive Officer of Friends of Science in Medicine [...and] three-time winner of Australian Skeptics’ Skeptic of the Year award [...and]  a recipient of an Order of Australia Medal 'for service to community health' in 2014 [...] universities accept that they face long-term sustainability problems [...] chiropractic, osteopathy, naturopathy and traditional Chinese medicine associations target debt-ridden universities that do not have medical faculties. These pseudoscience-based courses are run by academics, many with inferior qualifications and vested interests in the promotion of AltMed [...]";

I LIKE where this is going.

"while arguing that their courses are based on bioscience, they include unscientific interventions and deliberately avoid undertaking credible research that could challenge their belief systems [...]";

and the nail gets hit squarely on the head.  Take naturopathy, for instance: insisting that science includes supernaturalism and the hugely science-ejected, and their amount of experimental evidence?  Nothing.   They have forgotten that science comes about by a methodology, not a decree.

"with public opinion turning against them, the AltMed industry is fighting back [...] they are moving into our most prestigious universities to introduce medical and pharmacy students
to 'integrative medicine' [...] referring to it as a holistic approach to patient care [...] integrative medicine also includes a wide range of implausible interventions including homeopathy, naturopathic medicine, reflexology and energy therapies [...]":

roger that.

"the recent National Health & Medical Research Council review into a range of 'natural' therapies failed to find any evidence from systematic reviews that any of them worked [...]";

hear, hear.

"Australians will not thank universities for teaching pseudoscience, which will only degrade health care and waste taxpayer’s dollars. Courses that include pseudoscience also harm universities by devaluing bioscience. It is nothing less than academic prostitution – and should be recognized for what it is [...]":


Changelog 2015-08-28 and ND Video

here, I summarize recent additions to my public naturopathy database.  I also link to an ND's video each changelog, quote from, and tag the video in some detail:

[Mission emphasis: I do this continuous exercise to expose the inherent fraud that naturopathy is logically, academically, commercially, legislatively / politically and clinically.  Hugely misleading category labels such as "science based" and "evidence based" "nonsectarian" are being placed upon what truly is science-exterior and even more so disproven sectarian / quack nonsense!  Then, the largest of betrayals toward the public occurs with highly orchestrated '.gov' endorsements of naturopaths as "licensed" and "professional."  Beware, the naturopathic licensed falsehood racket marches on!]

001. added:

the vitalism [science-ejected subset naturopathy] claims of:

NDs Gignac, Smith, Worts;
NDs Grewal, Jackson, Miller, Roberts, Stokes;
NDs Grieder, Mann;

the 'science subset naturopathy' category claims of:

NDs Cooper, Flattery;

ND Handford;

ND Nager;
ND Naumes;
NDs Nortman, Ormerod;

ND Roberts;

'the scientific rejection of the supernatural':

 the AAAS;
the Geological Society of America;
PBS's Nova;
the Science Teachers Association of Texas;

Thursday, August 27, 2015

The Pacific Northwest Reversal of Values: NCNM, Where "Top Tier" is Falsehood

here, nonsense, in partnership with the State of Oregon:

001.'s Lynne Terry reports in "Naturopathic Clinic Designated as Top Tier Primary Care Facility" (2015-08-26):

"state health officials have certified a clinic at the National College of Natural Medicine as a top-tier primary care facility."

really, the State of Oregon STILL after all this time getting away with nonsense. See 002., below.

002. my favorite site in Oregon to employ is by the State of Oregon, ISYN, which states in "Naturopathy":

"naturopathic medicine is a distinctively natural approach to health and healing that recognizes the integrity of the whole person. Naturopathic medicine is heir to the vitalistic tradition of medicine in the Western world, emphasizing the treatment of disease through the stimulation, enhancement, and support of the inherent healing capacity of the person. Methods of treatments are chosen to work with the patient’s vital force, respecting the intelligence of the natural healing process [...] naturopathic Medicine emerges from six underlying principles of healing. These principles are based on the objective observation of the nature of health and disease, and are continually reexamined in light of scientific analysis. It is these principles that distinguish the profession from other medical approaches: [#1] the healing power of nature, vis medicatrix naturae: the body has the inherent ability to establish, maintain, and restore health. The healing process is ordered and intelligent; nature heals through the response of the life force."

the falsehood here is that a vital force survives scientific scrutiny.  What kind of profession is based on falsehood?  The not professional kind.  All in partnership with as State in the Pacific Northwest.  WHAT IS WRONG WITH THIS PICTURE, FEDS? on Homeopathy: "An 18th-Century Fairy Tale [...] Bogus Methods"

here, a quote from Jim Woodgett, director of research at the Lunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research Institute, in Toronto, Canada:

001. Paul Jump reports, at, in "Offering Homeopathy Waters Down University of Toronto’s Reputation, Critics Claim" (2015-08-27):

"it is probably fair to say that only a vanishingly minuscule concentration of scientists believe that homeopathy is effective [...]";

yes, the limping zombie corpse still roams the town at night.

"[the] employee health plan [of] the University of Toronto has also decided to add naturopathy, acupuncture and osteopathy [as well as homeopathy] to the treatments available on its plan in 2015-16 [...]";

"Jen Gunter, a Canadian obstetrician and gynecologist who highlighted the issue on her blog earlier this month, writes that it is 'hard to reconcile homeopathy being covered…at a place of employment with a medical school and department of physics' [...]";

well, as I'd stated when covering naturopathy in Episode 010 of the Naturocrit Podcast recently, 'higher education ain't so high or ethical.'

"Jim Woodgett, director of research at the Lunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research Institute, a medical research institute affiliated with Toronto [...asks] 'how many employees asked for coverage and was the pseudoscientific nature of homeopathy explained to them? [...] Toronto should be setting a clear example, not legitimizing bogus methods that can cause real harm through delay of effective therapy [...] homeopathy has thrived because it stays below the medicinal radar [...] but it’s well past time that it is shown for what it is — an 18th-century fairy tale' [...]":

good question, great labeling.