Friday, September 18, 2009

Wikipedia on Naturopathy's Pseudoscience & Quackery (2009-09-18):

here, I cite Wikipedia's entry for naturopathy that is currently up:

"[naturopathy's] homeopathy is often characterized as pseudoscience or quackery [...] homeopathy is highly disputed, and is often cited as 'quackery' or 'pseudoscience' [...] certain naturopathic treatments, such as homeopathy and iridology, are widely considered pseudoscience or quackery [...] K. C. Atwood writes, in the journal Medscape General Medicine, 'naturopathic physicians now claim to be primary care physicians proficient in the practice of both conventional and natural medicine. Their training, however, amounts to a small fraction of that of medical doctors who practice primary care. An examination of their literature, moreover, reveals that it is replete with pseudoscientific, ineffective, unethical, and potentially dangerous practices'."

Note: oh, snap! Yet, they still maintain that the essentially naturopathic, like homeopathy, is science-based.

Post a Comment