(guerrilla-skeptical-musings upon the 'science subset nonscience' absurd meme known as naturopathy / naturopathic medicine / natural medicine aka 'the naturoPATHillogical')
here, I point out the central oxymorony [the burning stupidity!!!] of naturopathy, through an ND's 2009 letters to the Vancouver Sun: the claim that naturopathy is essentially scientific [see 001., below] while, when you look acutely, you find that the naturopathic is essentially 'science-ejected figmentation centered' [see 002., below]. The absurdity is: for naturopathy, a scientific fact is the same thing as an evidenceless figmentation / article of faith [see 003., below]:
"[in response to McKnight's {excellent!!!}] 'Naturopathy's Main Article of Faith Cannot Be Validated' [...] he is mistaken to suggest naturopaths' belief in the 'vital force' is unscientific. There is a scientific name for it -- homeostasis [...] naturopaths are a pragmatic lot [see ***, below in 002.c.] and are trained and licensed to diagnose disease and refer onward for allopathic intervention as necessary [...] MDs have their comfort zone and aren't necessarily open to new options, scientifically supported or not. Valerie Farina. Vancouver."
Note 01: unfortunately, we are not informed by this document that Farina is [apparently] an ND, and therefore quite invested in the matter.
Note 02.a.: some research at the Vancouver Sun web site reveals that an ND named "Valerie Farina" had written in "More Powers For Naturopaths" (2009-02-13):
"I completed a naturopathic doctorate and can attest that the training was rigorous and the schools fully accredited. Valerie Farina. Vancouver."
***the Roget's II thesaurus states, per pragmatic: "having or indicating an awareness of things as they really are." A pragmatic lot...me arse!!!
003. so, in sum, for this ND, the word homeostasis [a concept, by definition, hugely science-supported when within the knowledge structure known as modern biology, aka within a scientific context] can be employed as equal to an imaginary figment within a truly science-ejected context.
here, I cite an accusation by the British Columbia Naturopathic Association [BCNA] that the British Columbia Medical Association [BCMA] is being deceptive when describing naturopathy's scientific basis [see 001. & 002., below]; yet, if you look at what is 'essentially naturopathic' -- their vitalism, supernaturalism, autoentheism & kind -- you find that such 'articles of faith' are well-without scientific support [see 003.a.-003.c., below]; also, I offer a diagnosis of naturopathy's 'knowledge typification retardedness' -- what I've termed 'epistemic conflation' [see 003.d., below]; and, regarding the actual ethical high ground, I take a look at a statement concerning why it is improper to label naturopathy a "profession" [see 004., below]:
"the BC Medical Association: misinformed [i.], and spreading deceptive [ii.] and disingenuous [iii.] comment not in the interest of patient care."
Note: some definitions [courtesy of the AHD 4th ed.]: i. "to provide with incorrect information"; ii. "the use of deceit [falseness]"; iii. "not straightforward or candid; insincere or calculating." So, BCNA says that BCMA is basically being misleading, false, and acting in bad-faith.
"[in spite of the BCMA's contention] there is no 'ND biology' or science education that is any different than the science education MDs receive [...& quoting Pelletier, NDs have] 'solid grounding in biomedical sciences' [...naturopathy is a] profession [also, BCNA's Cassie states naturopathy & its principles are "science based" here {yes, they've spelled naturopathy wrong in that web address}]."
Note: specifically, BCNA is accusing BCMA of lying about naturopathy's scientific foundation. BCNA is stating that naturopathy is scientific, and that their science is in fact mainstream science. Also, BCNA is stating that they live up the ethical strictures of the professions. I beg to hugely differ: it is naturopathy that is in fact not scientific, essentially [they have unlimited the boundaries of science to include, absurdly: the science-ejected, the science-unsupported, and the unscienceable!!!], and it is in fact naturopathy that is engaging in deceit, incorrect information, and bad-faith [see 003., below].
Note: as a supernaturalism / theism of a particular stripe, this sectarian premise is also hugely unscienceable.
003.d. overall, naturopathy's 'epistemic pathology' is this retardation [science has progressed, they developmentally haven't!]:
***the conflation of the scientific and the nonscientific then all labeled scientific aka epistemic conflation.
Note 01: now, BCNA lists naturopathy's principles on the Cassie page I cited above, stating after them "embracing these tenets [003.a. particularly], on a science-based platform." The primary principle, "vis medicatrix naturae" [003.a.] isn't even honestly described on this page as being the actual 'purposeful life spirit / god power within you' woo that it actually is! So, therein, it is BCNA that can be best described as misleading, false, and acting in bad-faith. Naturopathy does not accurately describe themselves, they falsely label themselves, and then they have the nerve to posture from an supposedly ethically righteous position.
Note 02: as a result, naturopathy's self-labeling of "science" is really meaningless, because for naturopathy, science is no longer science at all. This seems like thought from 1000 years ago, when any kind of knowledge could have been labeled science [the Latin 'to know' -- the NDs don't seem to acknowledge that science isn't just a stick-on label that can be applied to any kind of knowledge]. But, truly, an article of faith isn't even processable through science, and naturopathy's ultimate claim that an article of faith is the same thing as the science-based is hugely science-illiterate.
004. the strictures of the professions. Ironically, the university that ripped me off -- I was a UB ND student 1998-2002 -- has a current faculty member who recently coauthored a very useful paper concerning the professions and sectarian medicine:
"the professions, which classically included medicine, law and the ministry, are vocations whose members 'profess' to have knowledge that the laity do not comprehend. Given the asymmetry of knowledge between professionals and the laity, society has granted to the professions a certain degree of autonomous control over themselves. However, this social contract demands that each profession, and each professional, place the well-being of society and the patient, client or parishioner ahead of the profession and professional [fiduciary duty]. Lay persons put their faith in the professional following the dictum credat emptor (let the buyer have faith) rather than caveat emptor (let the buyer beware). This social contract imparts great freedom on all professions, but with this freedom comes great responsibility. When an individual consults a member of any of the medical professions, it is reasonably expected that the advice and treatment that he or she receives is based in science, not metaphysics or pseudoscience. In addition, it is reasonably expected that the services he or she receives are being provided for the primary purpose of benefiting the patient, and not for any other reason. The financial benefit to the professional is secondary, and results from the degree of clinical benefit received by the patient. Patients place their faith in the professional, and trust that they will not be subject to fraud, abuse or quackery."
Note: self-labeled science but essentially HUGELY not science, naturopathy doesn't even meet the legal standards of regular commerce per 'caveat emptor' -- you do not get what they claim they are selling [as a patient, as a person going to one of their schools etc.]. Therein, it is absurd to call this fraudulent area 'professional'.
here, I cite a canada.com article that describes naturopathy...without blinking ... via an absurd / irrational definition [see 001., below]; and, going to the college guide entry and web page of 2 schools of naturopathy, we find out more UNBRIDLED naturopathic irrationalism / absurdity [see 002., below]:
"naturopathic medicine [(a)] is a distinct primary health care system that blends modern scientific knowledge with traditional and natural forms of medicine, according to the Canadian Association of Naturopathic Doctors [CAND...(b) is a] health profession [...] under the College of Naturopathic Physicians of B.C. [...(c)] when it comes to treatment, their objective is to try get the maximum effect by the gentlest of means with the use of botanical medicines and clinical nutrition [...(d) ] Trevorrow has completed a four-year postgraduate degree in naturopathic medicine at Bastyr University in Washington State."
Note on (a):
CAND tells us that naturopathy is categorically science-based [via youtube]:
How can something CATEGORICALLY in terms of knowledge-type be both a distinction and a blending? Important: the description basically says that naturopathy is both something and nothing; that it is specially something scientific and also that it is specifically NOT that same stuff -- nonscientific. In sum it states that the scientific is also the nonscientific: this is absurd / irrational, hilarious blather -- the blended-distinct, the scientific-nonscientific. This is a kind of language from naturopathy and a kind of journalistic charity towards naturopathy that is grossly unprofessional; using language itself in manners that are truly nonsensical, logically speaking.
002. Bastyr's& the University of Bridgeport's [UB] irrational / absurd epistemics, per the conflation of the supernatural extrascientific [that means 'outside of science', for those not into etymology], science-ejected, and the scientific:
002.a. Bastyr states [the ND in (d) went there; Trevorrow, M. (ND Bastyr 2006)] in their Peterson's College Guide entry "Bastyr University":
"founded as a naturopathic medical college in 1978, Bastyr has since expanded its offerings [...] Bastyr University is the first step on a path leading to a richly rewarding future in the dynamic field of science-based natural health. Bastyr's unparalleled programs are based on a mind-body-spirit approach to wellness, with a challenging curriculum that prepares students to further their goals in scientific, medical, and wellness-related fields [...] in each degree program at Bastyr, students learn to integrate the pursuit of physical health with the mental, spiritual, and environmental factors involved in wellness [...our] a progressive focus on the relationship between health and the body, mind, and spirit [...including] naturopathic medicine [...] the foundation of Bastyr University’s entire curriculum rests on the integration of modern science with traditional healing methods."
Note: epistemic blending / conflation / integration [mixing!!!] reflects directly upon naturopathy's 'knowledge sensitivity / knowledge demarcation': as in, 'we ain't got none', WHILE claiming to be "science-based" is itself a 'knowledge type demarcation'.
But, you have to have a standard of comparison concerning what can truly be labeled science, I understand:
luckily, there's the National Center for Science Education [NCSE] to tell us about these ND schools that supposedly teach actual science. At NCSE, we are told that the supernatural is PROFOUNDLY not within science, through the article "Review: Of Pandas and People":
"selling the supernatural. The book attempts to convince the student (and teacher) that a basically supernatural view can be made scientific through word manipulation and conflation with scientific concepts. Thus, the argument from design is dressed up in information theory and passed off as science. This selling of the supernatural is pertinent to understanding why this book is not science, but pseudoscience."
"the University's professionally accredited health sciences programs are housed in the Fones School of Dental Hygiene, the College of Chiropractic, the College of Naturopathic Medicine, the Acupuncture Institute, and the Nutrition Institute."
"Principles and Practice 521: Introduction to Natural Therapeutics [...] nature acts powerfully through healing mechanisms in the body and mind to maintain and restore health. Students will receive a more in-depth utilization of naturopathic methods and medicinal substances which work in harmony with the human system, thus facilitating long-lasting health and recovery. In addition to employing various natural medicines, students will gain an important perspective of the vital force [for more such 'naturopathic essential vitalism', see here] and its role in the healing process, when used in conjunction with naturopathic principles."
Note on 002.a. & 002.b.: naturopathy is labeled categorically as "science" by UB & Bastyr, and naturopathy's essential vitalism & supernaturalism is therein labeled science by UB & Bastyr, while UB has conveniently edited-out supernaturalistic language in my example [they employ such supernaturalism here].
"nonscientific notions such as geocentricism, flat earth, creationism, young earth, astrology, psychic healing and vitalistic theory, therefore, cannot legitimately be taught, promoted, or condoned as science in the classroom."
Note on (c): there is, scientifically speaking, no 'purposeful life spirit' / vital force governing health-disease and physiology. Naturopathy's treatment target, 'the maximum effect upon the vital force' -- when you uncode all this, which doesn't take much leg-work; but, few journalists ever seem to go beyond opening their own mouths and letting naturopathy fill it with its dumb-assed-ness -- is simply a fantasy.
003. Note on '(b), 002.a. & 002.b.' and naturopathic absurdity:
here, I cite naturopathy's 'self-labeling as science' [see 001., below]; and then point out that naturopathy is self-defined preponderantly as centered around vitalism & supernaturalism [see 002. below]; and finally, I link to what science says preponderantly about vitalism & supernaturalism [see 003., below]:
001. Vegetarian Times (1986-09; p.109) has this Bastyr University ad, stating:
"Bastyr University is an internationally recognized independent university of natural health sciences [...per] the science of nature [...including their degree program in] naturopathic medicine."
Note: this 23 year-old statement is viewable now through books.google.com. I suggest the search > bastyr science date:1986-1986 <, specifying magazines. 12 years later, I began naturopathy school at the University of Bridgeport, particularly due to their labeling of their naturopathy doctorate as nonsectarian "health science."
"six principles of healing form the foundation for naturopathic medical practice: [#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 [...] methods of treatments are chosen to work with the patient's vital force, respecting the intelligence of the natural healing process [...] symptoms [...] in fact [are] an expression of the life force attempting to heal itself [...] causes may occur on many levels including physical, mental, emotional, and spiritual [...] the physician must also make a commitment to his/her personal and spiritual development in order to be a good teacher [...] the whole organism [...is] a complex interaction of physical, spiritual, mental, emotional, genetic, environmental, social, and other factors."
Note: the vitalistic and supernatural foundations / essential premises of naturopathy.
here, I cite a recent Vancouver Sun article regarding naturopathy -- by Timothy Caulfield, Allan Becker, Susan Elliott, Susan Waserman and Judah Denburg -- which argues that 'turf is not the issue, it's actually about science':
"the naturopath issue [...per BC] officially endorsing and legitimizing a practice via government action [...] is not [...] a 'turf' war among professions [...e.g.] it is not [...] one set of health care professionals (medical doctors) trying to exclude another group [naturopaths...and] it is also not solely about choice [...] a much bigger issue is at play: what type of evidence are we as individuals, and as a society, going to consider in making health policy decisions? [...this issue concerns] the very nature of evidence and knowledge [...specifically] do we want a system based on scientific principles that can be counted on to be reproducible and predictable [modern medicine], or one based on anecdote and belief [{naturopathy}...because, truly] naturopathy still resides on the fringes of conventional scientific inquiry [and that's generous!]. In fact, it is often held up as the archetypical anti-science practice [{that's more like it!}...] the practice of medicine is based on science, not on a particular immutable faith or worldview [naturopathy's belief system / dogmatic 'science-ejected / -unsupported ideology']. Yes, there are issues with the practice of medicine, but since it is based on science it is capable of changing, evolving and defining best practice for all of our benefit. If naturopathy were held to the same generalizable scientific principles would naturopathic schools be teaching homeopathy and naturopathic manipulation? No [...] we simply need to ask if the B.C. government has made an explicit decision to drift further from the use of scientific principles in its assessment of health care."
here, I cite the 'science-expertise' words of two NDs regarding their naturopathy education [see 001.a., below]; and then show how this claim is completely bogus [see 002., below]; with emphasis that the 'math of the sCAM' is obvious:
001. NDs Burnett, M. (ND Bastyr 2003) and Burnett, R. (ND Bastyr 2004) state in "Naturopathic Medicine":
"naturopathic physicians (NDs) are the highest trained practitioners in the broadest scope of naturopathic medical modalities [...having studied] the basic medical sciences [...] naturopathic medicine [...is a] science [...] naturopathic medicine is distinguished by the principles which underlie and determine its practice. These principles are based upon the objective observation of the nature of health and disease, and are continually reexamined in the light of scientific advances [...our methods include the] scientific [...we study] the same basic sciences as an M.D. [...] naturopathic medical education comparative curricula [...per the] curriculum directory of the Association of American Medical Colleges [...] basic and clinical sciences [comparison...] NCNM: 1543; Bastyr: 1639; JH: 1771; YL: 1420; ST: 1383 [...] naturopathic medicine [...is] as new as the latest discoveries in biochemical sciences [...we have] an ongoing commitment to state-of-the-art scientific research [...] naturopathic philosophy serves as the basis for naturopathic practice."
Note: NDs claim that the principles of naturopathy -- their basis -- survive scientific scrutiny [are scientific], and that overall, NDs have 'science expertise', as measured by 'science course hours' GREATER than many Ivy League MD programs. Science, science, science!!!
001.b. in this same web document, these NDs also state -- after having stated that naturopathy's principles survive scientific scrutiny -- the PRIMARY premise of naturopathy, per:
"naturopathic principles: [#1] the healing power of nature - vis medicatrix naturae [HPN-VMN]: naturopathic medicine recognizes an inherent self-healing ability in the body that is ordered and intelligent [...] this healing ability [...#3] stimulate the healing power of nature: support the bodies [sp., body's] natural healing mechanisms [...] homeopathic medicine [...] works on a subtle yet powerful electromagnetic level [!!!], gently acting to strengthen the body's healing and immune response [BHIR]."
Note: though this is naturopathy's central premise, nowhere on this page is an ACTUAL / TRANSPARENT definition of naturopathy's central premise given -- in CONTEXT. Instead, these NDs choose to CODE vitalism in other-than-honest language.
so, you ARE NOT being INFORMED HONESTLY and by no means scientifically, while these NDs state on this web page that they have studied "ethics" in addition to their supposed EXTREME science-expertise.
003. the math:
naturopathy is a complete sCAM in stating that 'the vitalistic [coded] science-ejected' is scientific!!!
