$ For Vitalism: Two Natural Therapist Student Papers per ANTA 2009:

here, I cite the academic vitalism of two winners of the $1000 [AU] Australian Natural Therapists Association's "ANTA National Student Bursaries" [see 001., below] -- Greta Leonard [see 002., below] & John Potter [see 003., below]:

001. ANTA states:

001.a. in "ANTA National Student Bursaries" [pdf]:

"to be eligible you must be a student currently enrolled in a course recognized by ANTA on a full time or part time basis in undergraduate or postgraduate studies [...] to apply for an ANTA Bursary of $1000 send us assignments you have completed as part of your studies."

Note: so, obviously, these winners are exemplars of natural therapy scholarship.

001.b. in "[2008] Bursary Winners":

"congratulations to all recipients of an ANTA Bursary Award of $1000. The quality of the submissions for the ANTA Bursary have been outstanding and confirms [that?] the future of the national [sp., natural?] therapy professional [sp., profession?] is in good hands [...the] 2008 ANTA National Bursary Winners [...include] Greta Leonard (VIC): 'Vitalism is a Central Concept of All Traditional Health Systems'."

Note: I'm not sure what school Leonard is from, but the paper is naturopathic.

001.c. in "Past Bursary Winners":

"[the] 2007 ANTA National Bursary Winners [...includes] John Potter (SITCM) [...] 'Compare and Contrast the Philosophy and History of WM and TCM'."

Note: SITCM is the The Sydney Institute of Traditional Chinese Medicine. Obviously, both an N.D. and an L.Ac. [to use U.S. credentials] are considered to be "natural therapists." What makes such so interesting are the supernatural premises that are essential to both disciplines. How long ago in human thought was it when no distinction was made between the natural and the supernatural, 500 years?

002. the Leonard paper "Vitalism is a Central Concept of All Traditional Health Systems" [pdf] states:

"[instructor's assigned task] 'vitalism is a central concept of all traditional health systems. Discuss the value and relevance of this concept to modern naturopathy' [...student's argument, regarding naturopathy's] vitalism and the beliefs [!!!] it embodies [...per] a vitalistic approach to health is crucial for the efficacy of modern naturopathy as a healing modality [...its] an essential component of modern naturopathy [...we hold that] a person does not become ill simply because they have come into contact with a pathogen. Rather, disease results from an 'imbalance in the vital force' [...] naturopathy works at re-establishing this balance [...this] vitalistic approach [of naturopathy...] facilitate[s] the innate healing capacity of the body, the vis medicatrix naturae [...per] the energetic and spiritual side of health and healing [...per] 'life-supporting cosmic forces' [...] this idea of a vital force permeating and giving life to humans is neither foreign nor new in traditional health systems [...] in the philosophy of ayurvedic medicine it is believed that 'prana' gives life to the physical body, and connects the body with the mind and spirit. Traditional Chinese medicine also refer[s] to a life force they call 'qi', that flows through the body in particular channels, or meridians that serves to 'maintain the health and vitality of the individual' [...overall, vitalism] claims that living matter is [so] complex and [that it] cannot be adequately explained by a set of chemical and physical processes [that is, the laws of nature...something else is there that enspirits!!!...this is] a theory that sits outside of the current mechanistic world view [that is, science and its evidence...which the author calls] the narrow margins of scientific validation [...and admits] vitalism is currently immeasurable [...] it is precisely because of this inability to prove the existence of a 'vital force' that vitalism continues to be attacked and discredited [...so,] trying to validate naturopathic principles using methods from a completely different paradigm simply does not make sense [!!!...] it does not matter that the theory cannot be scientifically validated [!!!...] vitalism cannot be measured within the scientific paradigm. This essay accepts that fact [...but, we still stubbornly believe -- without evidence -- that] healing is a mysterious force."

Note: this drips with absurdity. If naturopathy is so different in 'paradigm' than science, why do they continue to trade on the lie that they are science-based and not a belief system? Hmmm, this is junk thought, minimally.

003. the Potter paper "Compare and Contrast the Philosophy and History of WM and TCM" [pdf] states:

"the vitalists like Galen, Paracelsus, Bichat and Stahl imitated Plato by believing [!!!] in the concept of 'pneuma', 'anima' or [a] vital integrating 'life force' of living creatures which distinguishes them from non-living and/inert matter, and they opposed mechanistic principles [...per] Platonic idealist spiritualism [...] Galen [...] saw a dynamic functional activity or controlling life force directing [per a 'goal directed entelechy'] a body process toward a specific end [a 'telos'] which he called 'faculty'. Like Hippocrates he believed in concepts of the harmony of the four humors, elements and life force [...] even though Western medicine has been built on both idealistic and vitalist principles [that is, used to contain!], today it is primarily materialistic [it uses rigorous knowledge achieved through the scientific method, not archaic woo -- because it isn't mired in antiquated dogma]. It looks at structure, form and anatomy and relies on technology, hard data, and clear and definite etiology [that's horrible?!?!?...and we get that old canard] science was the new 'religion' [...while] meridians are intangible [they don't exist] and unexplainable by Western science [{a lot more religious than evidence & reason!}...TCM] emphasizes the spiritual and philosophical aspects of disease [...] explain[ing] the relationships between individuals['] body, mind and spirit [...yet, even with all this TCM supernaturalism, we're told] nearly four thousand years ago the Yellow Emperor Huang-Di broke through thousands of years of belief in supernatural healing by introducing science and other arts of civilization [per establishing TCM]."

Note: truly hilariously absurd. Science didn't exist then, and that's an historical fact. "Qi" shows up 27 times in this essay, "spirit" 5 times.

004. this is the antiscience & antiintellectualism -- in claiming that nonsense is in fact sense -- that such [AU] 'natural therapist' schools teach students in this year 2009, e.g. such vitalism is completely scientifically-ejected.

BINM Naturopathy's Occult Essential Science-ejected Vitalism, & Nonprofessionalism:

here, I decode naturopathy's latinized principles [in part] from the homepage of the Boucher Institute of Naturopathic Medicine [BINM], a recently "accredited" Canadian ND-granting school that, par for naturopathy, does not inform us honestly about the central / essential science-ejected, sectarian premise / foundation of naturopathic medicine -- the vitalistic, spiritistic, teleological article of faith known as "the vis", a 'purposeful life spirit bioagency' -- instead such belief kind is falsely postured, par for naturopathy, as scientific fact & misrendered in naturalistic language:

001. BINM states in 'homepage':

"[as part of a jpg] primum non nocere, vis medicatrix naturae [VMN], tolle causam, tolle totum, docere [...] the naturopathic physician will be a leader in a cultural transformation [...] the physician of the future [...] will be a visionary [...adhering to] the belief in the natural healing power [NHP] of the body, mind and spirit [BMS...and will be] immersed in science."

Note: Latin -- per the listed ND principles -- is so sophisticating! And it is a great opportunity to obscure. NDs do this well. The public is told, quite falsely, that naturopathy's "belief" amalgam -- VMN-NHP & BMS -- is all is within "science." Nowhere on this page is VMN actually, explicitly illuminated.

002. lets decode / unobscure that second phrase particularly, VMN, 'from the inside':

002.a. the Textbook of Naturopathic Medicine states, per [pdf version] "The Textbook of Natural Medicine. Chapter 03. A Hierarchy of Healing: The Therapeutic Order, The Unifying Theory of Naturopathic Medicine" (ISBN 0443073007; 2005):

"the uniqueness of naturopathic medicine is the way the naturopath thinks about illness and healing [...this is] based upon the first defining principle: vis medicatrix naturae. It is based on the understanding that disease can be seen as a process, as well as an entity [...] working definition of naturopathic nutrition [...] naturopathic medicine is distinguished by the principles that underlie and determine its practice. These principles include the healing power of nature (vis medicatrix naturae) [...] the vis medicatrix naturae, the vital force, the healing power of nature [VMN=VF=HPN...] the therapeutic order [...directive #2] stimulate the healing power of nature (vis medicatrix naturae): the self-healing processes [...] the underlying recognition of the vis medicatrix naturae, the tendency of the body to be self-healing [...#3] harmonize with your life force [...] many naturopathic modalities can be used to stimulate the overall vital force [...] entire physiologic system [includes] (immune, cardiovascular,detoxification, life force, endocrine, etc.)."

Note: so, VMN = VF = HPN -- an "entity" labeled with the science terms "force" and "power" is responsible for healing.

002.b. the Federation of Naturopathic Physician Licensing Authorities states in "Philosophy" [the 2002 archived page is here]:

"[these ideas are what licensure requires of an ND IN PRACTICE] naturopathic medicine emphasizes 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 [INHP...] 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 [LF]. The physician's role is to facilitate and augment this process [...#3] first do no harm. Primum no nocere. Illness is a purposeful [teleological] process of the organism. The process of healing includes the generation of symptoms which are, in fact, an expression of the life force attempting to heal itself. Therapeutic actions should be complimentary to and synergistic with this healing process [THP]. The physician's actions can support or antagonize the actions of the vis medicatrix naturae."

Note: VF = INHP = HPN = VMN = LF = THP.

002.c. BINM in "Natural Selections" (2008-10; vol. 1, iss. 1):

"[per BINM ND student Long, M. (? ?)] we all have an innate ability to heal [IAH],called the 'vital force'. When this force is weak you are susceptible to disease [...& the sidebar states that the] principles of naturopathic medicine [...include #3] vis medicatrix naturae, the healing power of nature."

Note: IAH = VF = VMN = HPN. I think it's safe to assume that Long has been taught this within the last couple years as a student pursuing an ND at BINM. And WOW, calling 'the naturopathic' after the scientific fact of "natural selection" is devious.

003. and lets look at vitalism's nonscientific status via eminent scientist Richard Dawkins in "The Oxford Book of Modern Science Writing" (ISBN 0199216800; 2008):

"what neither Mendel nor anyone else before 1953 knew was that genes themselves are digital, within themselves [...] life is the execution of programs written using a small digital alphabet in a single, universal machine language [DNA!; it's not a force or entity!]. This realization was the hammer blow that knocked the last nail in the coffin of vitalism and, by extension, of dualism. The hammer was wielded, with undisguised youthful relish, by James Watson and Francis Crick [p.030...] for me, the greatest achievement of Watson and Crick was to turn genetics from a branch of wet and squishy physiology into a branch of information technology, in the process slaying, as I suggested above, the ghost of vitalism [p.226]."

Note: yet, naturopathy maintains dualism [vitalism, spiritism & kind], per entities that inhabit the physical body -- and claims such articles of faith are "in fact" scientific.

004. the false professional posture of BINM:

004.a. BINM claims, in "BINM Research Department, Research Fellowship, Call for Applicants - February, 2009":

"BINM is committed to educate students in the art and science of naturopathic medicine premised on the ethical foundations of responsibility, integrity, professionalism, respect for persons and benevolence [...] the successful candidate will assist the director of research and work on initiatives aimed to enhance evidence based practice for naturopathic medicine."

Note: me arse! The naturopathic is postured as scientific & caring a frak about evidence & rigor, but the essentially naturopathic is HUGELY actually science-ejected. Naturopathy's incompetence, manipulation, and overall deception therein cannot be claimed to met the ethical standards of the "professional." As the recent paper "How Can Chiropractic Become a Respected Mainstream Profession? The Example of Podiatry":

"one of the problems that we encounter frequently in our interaction with chiropractic educational institutions is the perpetuation of dogma and unfounded claims. Examples include the concept of spinal subluxation as the cause of a variety of internal diseases and the metaphysical, pseudo-religious idea of 'innate intelligence' [a synonym for vital force, in sCAM] flowing through spinal nerves, with spinal subluxations impeding this flow. These concepts are lacking in a scientific foundation and should not be permitted to be taught at our chiropractic institutions as part of the standard curriculum. Much of what is passed off as 'chiropractic philosophy' is simply dogma, or untested (and, in some cases, untestable) theories which have no place in an institution of higher learning [...] 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 [...] 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. 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) [...] 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 [...] patients place their faith in the professional, and trust that they will not be subject to fraud, abuse or quackery. This is the social contract as it applies to chiropractic physicians [as part of 'medical professions'...the naturopathic!!! &] the chiropractic profession[s] has [have] an obligation to actively divorce itself from metaphysical explanations of health and disease as well as to actively regulate itself in refusing to tolerate fraud, abuse and quackery [...] in this way the profession can fulfill its responsibility to the social contract."

Note: ironically, one of the authors is a former University of Bridgeport professor I had, a Connecticut institution which claims that science includes the science-ejected!!!

004.b. yet, BINM states in "2008-2009 Academic Calendar":

"naturopathic medicine is a distinct, primary health care profession [!!!] founded on the time-honored belief in vis medicatrix naturae, 'the healing power of nature' [...] naturopathic physician[s] must [...] be visionaries who know we must return to our roots in nature, to the belief in the natural healing power of the body, mind and spirit [{vitalism, spiritism & kind} p.003...] our mission statement: to provide an outstanding and distinctive education in the art and science of naturopathic medicine [p.004...] our goals: to be faithful [!!!] to the principles of naturopathic medicine and to recognize and validate the contributions of the sciences [...] biomedical science provides a common language for describing the structure and functioning of the human body. The rigor of science has, through inquiry based on the scientific method, produced a valuable representation of occurrences in the body [p.017...] History and Philosophy of Naturopathic Medicine. Several models of health and disease are explored, and the unique philosophy of naturopathic medicine is introduced and traced from its historical origins through modern science-based theory and practice. The vis medicatrix naturae is discussed in depth as the basis for naturopathic concepts of health and disease and principles of practice, and as the unifying principle that distinguishes naturopathic practice from other forms of medicine and underlies naturopathic therapeutic modalities [p.019...] it is recommended that students take the NPLEX part I basic sciences licensing examinations prior to clinic entry but it is not required."

Note: the root "scien" shows up 81 times in this document; "medicatrix" twice; "force" never; "Naturopathic Clinical Arts & Sciences" 25 times; "profession" and kind, 59 times.

Caveat emptor, folks.

Decoding Naturopathy's Occult-Sectarian Vitalism Woo: Klearman, E. (ND NCNM):

here, I decode naturopathy's essential science-ejected sectarian premise since an ND -- surprise, surprise -- on her web page doesn't transparently communicate naturopathy's essential science-ejected sectarian premise:

001. Klearman, E. (ND NCNM 2004-ish) states in "Naturopathic Medicine":

"naturopathic doctors are guided by the following six principles: [#1] the healing power of nature [HPN], the body has an inherent wisdom to maintain a balanced and healthy state. The naturopathic doctor recognizes this process as intelligent and uses medicines and techniques to support, maintain, and augment this healing process by identifying and removing any obstacles to health and recovery."

Note: that's all we're told. Nowhere on this web page is the ACTUAL context of naturo.'s HPN premise succinctly explained -- it is disguised. Therein, the public is not able to make an informed decision. You wouldn't know this, unless you know what naturopathy's actual context / essential HPN premise is,

002. so, let me help out:

002.a. the Oregon school she graduated from, NCNM clearly states in "Principles of Healing":

"these principles stand as the distinguishing marks of the [naturopathic supposed!!!] profession: [#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 physician’s role is to facilitate and augment this process [...] the process of healing includes the generation of symptoms, which are, in fact, expressions of the life force attempting to heal itself [...] these principles are based on the objective observation of the nature of health and disease and are examined continually in light of scientific analysis."

Note: the premise is essentially supernatural, yet the college is of "natural" medicine supposedly 'science-based'.

002.b. the Oregon '.gov' Board that oversees NDs clearly states in "Naturopathy":

"naturopathic physicians (N.D.) [...] are educated in conventional medical sciences [...] methods of treatments are chosen to work with the patient’s vital force, respecting the intelligence of the natural healing process [...] it is these principles that distinguish the profession from other medical approaches: 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 physician’s role is to facilitate and augment this process [...] illness is a purposeful process of the organism. The process of healing includes the generation of symptoms, which are, in fact, an expression of the life force attempting to heal itself [...] these principles are based on the objective observation of the nature of health and disease, and are continually reexamined in light of scientific analysis."

Note: your tax dollars at work, Oregonians -- promoting pseudoscience -- because, actually, scientifically speaking, vitalism is profoundly science-ejected. And, it is naturopathy's definitive/essential sectarian premise.

003. questions:

why is it so hard for NDs to be succinct regarding this central naturopathic article of faith, so that the public can make truly informed decisions? Truthfulness is a basic principle of commerce -- never mind professionalism.

why do NDs have to pose what is hugely not scientific as scientific, and engage in commerce under such a misleading label?

Pseudoprofessionalism means claimed to meet professional ethical standards but doesn't.

Pseudoscience means claimed as science when not.

004. now, Dr. K. tells us in the Vail Daily entertainment section article "Vail Natural Path: Ins and Outs of Insomnia":

"there are, thankfully, many vitamins, herbs and acupuncture protocols to treat the underlying cause of your insomnia and help you sleep better overall."

Note: this is entertaining?

This ND couldn't honestly communicate 'the underlying central ND belief' [which basically is that the 'underlying cause of physiology is a purposeful life spirit' figmentation], yet, this ND claims she will find the 'underlying cause' for the diagnosis known as insomnia.

This ND seemingly cannot distinguish, as NCNM and OBNE cannot either, between a scientific fact and an article of faith that has been science-ejected, for, generously, several decades -- but, more like a few hundred years.

I, therefore, have no confidence in the 'actual causality sensitivity' of NDs, since science is meaningless in their world.

healthy.net's 'ND Superscience Claim', & Absurdity 2009:

here, I list the NDs on healthy.net's advisory board [see 001., below], & I quote from their 'Morton article' that makes the 'ND superscience claim' [see 002., below]; then, I use a healthy.net article by ND Pizzorno, who sits on that board, to 'decode naturopathy's central article of faith'; & finally, I issue a warning regarding this absurdity:

001. the advisory board of healthy.net includes NDs:

Leon Chaitow; Carolyn Dean; Thomas Kruzel, "past president of the American Association of Naturopathic Physicians"; Joseph Pizzorno, "co-author, A Textbook of Natural Medicine and Encyclopedia of Natural Medicine"; Judyth Reichenberg-Ullman.

Note: Chaitow, with Pizzorno, recently published, under Elsevier's "health sciences" imprint [ISYN!!!] "Naturopathic Physical Medicine" (ISBN 0443103909; 2008), which states:

"the naturopathic therapeutic order [...] tonify weakened systems [...] harmonize with the life force [p.011...] chi, prana, or the naturopathic 'vital force' is seen as an intelligent, organizing energy [see 003., below for my 'decoding']"

002. the healthy.net article "Naturopathic Medicine" states:

"Bastyr University of Natural Health Sciences, a naturopathic medical school [...] graduates of accredited naturopathic medical colleges are required to have more hours of study in basic sciences and clinical sciences than graduates of Yale or Stanford medical schools [...] the underlying principle of the naturopathic system of medicine [...] to support the natural healing potential of the human body as validated by modern scientific research [...a] combination of the healing power of nature [HPN] and scientific methods [...] naturopathic medicine's basic principles are: 1. utilize the healing power of nature [...] vis medicatrix naturae [VMN...governing] the healing mechanisms of the body and mind [...] these inherent healing systems [...these] natural processes."

Note: this specific current page has been indexed by archive.org since 2001 and healthy.net is archived since 1996.

003. decoding VMN-HPN via Pizzorno:

003.a. Pizzorno states at healthy.net in "A Systems Approach to Wellness":

"[main tenet] Live in Harmony with Your Life-Force. Our beliefs, spiritual values [...] our life-force (or spirit) [...that regulates] our body's healing mechanisms [...] each of us needs to become more aware of the activity of the vis medicatrix naturae (life-force) deep within us."

Note: a summary label for what is at the center of naturopathic belief could be expressed like this: 'a purposeful life spirit governs the body'. This is an amalgam of: supernaturalism, vitalism, dualism, and teleology.

003.b. none of these beliefs have ACTUAL scientific support, while naturopathy claims that they are objective scientific fact.

004. so, when is:

something entirely not scientific falsely labeled scientific;

the supernatural labeled natural;

a claimed 'superscience status' totally bogus
because overlying it all is a sectarian belief amalgam?

Naturopathy.

Would you let someone diagnose and treat you when their entire worldview doesn't reasonably distinguish between a figmentation / superstition and what is actually real?

Salzberg & Novella: Defund NIH's NCCAM Pseudoscience & Illigitimate Treatments -- Washington Post 2009-03-17:

here, I quote from a recent Washington Post article concerning CAM's NCCAM as a bastion for pseudoscience & illegitimate therapy, & also from NIH's statement concerning the nonscientific status of much of naturopathy's core belief-set [see 001., below]; & I point out the huge absurdity of naturopathy stating a nonscientific article of faith / belief is equivalent to an objective scientific fact / the science-based [see 002., below]; & finally, I direct you regarding any absurdy-induced emesis due to these mindfrakers [see 003., below]:

001. Brown, D. (? ?) reports in "Critics Object to Pseudoscience Center":

"critics say that alternative medicine (also known as 'complementary' and 'integrative' medicine, and disparagingly labeled 'woo' by opponents) doesn't need or deserve its own home at NIH [here, here...] the notion that the world's best-known medical research agency sponsors studies of homeopathy, acupuncture, therapeutic touch and herbal medicine has always rankled many scientists [...e.g.] Steven Salzberg, a genome researcher and computational biologist at the University of Maryland, said last week 'one of our concerns is that NIH is funding pseudoscience.' Salzberg suggested that NCCAM be defunded on an electronic bulletin board that the Obama transition team set up [here, here...] critics of alternative medicine say the vast majority of studies of homeopathy, acupuncture, therapeutic touch and other treatments based on unconventional understandings of physiology and disease have shown little or no effect. Further, they argue that the field's more-plausible interventions -- such as diet, relaxation, yoga and botanical remedies -- can be studied just as well in other parts of NIH, where they would need to compete head-to-head with conventional research projects [...] 'what has happened is that the very fact NIH is supporting a study is used to market alternative medicine,' said Steven Novella, a neurologist at Yale School of Medicine and editor of the Web site Science-Based Medicine, where much of the anti-NCCAM discussion is taking place. 'It is used to lend an appearance of legitimacy to treatments that are not legitimate' [...] many of NCCAM's critics view complementary medicine as nothing more than the placebo effect dressed up in a dozen different costumes."

Note: this is, in part, what NCCAM currently states regarding naturopathy in "An Introduction to Naturopathy":

"a number of beliefs [e.g. their central 'purposeful life spirit' / 'god power within you' article of faith!!!] and practices [like detoxifying the body through the feet!!!] in naturopathy do not follow the scientific approach of conventional medicine."

002. that's quite a revelation / condemnation, since this domain [naturopathy] claims at a university, doctorate, fully-accredited, State-sanctioned level to be based upon objective scientific fact:

isn't it interesting that one part of our government, on their [shouldn't I say OUR!!!] own web pages can:

002.a. state that the naturopathic is in fact 'nonscientific belief-centered' [NIH], and;

002.b. another part of our government can wholly endorse 'naturopathy's beliefs falsely labeled scientific fact' [e.g., OBNE]?!?!?!

Note: a long time ago I planned my future career around a particular naturopathic lie:

note1: that naturopathy was "science based" and "not a belief system";

note2: while it's actually a belief system that is based upon nonscientific ideas falsely claiming a scientific status.

003. barf-bags are on the backs of the seats in front of you, in case this has been too large a dose of fraking absurdity.

Naturopathy: Science by Mislabel, Vitalism By Oath, Diagnosis by Woo -- Pincott, I. (ND NCNM 1985):

here, I detail the 'naturopathy is scientific' claims of ND Pincott [see 001., below]; and her iteration of naturopathy's oath to a vitalistic premise [see 002., below]; and her quite wacko devices that NDs use for diagnosis and treatment [see 003., below]:

Pincott, I. (ND NCNM 1985) states:

001.: naturopathy's science bona fides in:

001.a. "The ‘Turf War’ Over Prescriptions" (2009-03-09):

"[Dr. P. says, regarding changes to] regulations for NDs [...such] will improve patient choice in the delivery of quality health care [...] by proposing these changes, Premier Gordon Campbell and Health Services Minister George Abbott have recognized science over spin and patients will benefit [...Julie] in one letter from an MD I read, he accused naturopathic medicine lacking in science calling it 'faith based.' Dr. P: it’s unfortunate, but some individuals are perpetuating a professional 'turf war' and misleading the public with spin. The scientific education and training that naturopathic physicians receive is no different than the scientific training medical doctors receive. It is the philosophy behind the application of that science that differentiates NDs and MDs."

Note: the ND claims that, essentially: naturopathy is beneficial to the public, "science [...] scientific", "quality health care", guided by philosophy, and professional while medicine is threatened in terms of turf, "misleading the public" with "spin", and guided by philosophy.

001.b. in "FAQ's" :

"a 'naturopathic physician' is educated in all of the same basic sciences as an M.D."

Note: yet, vitalism is hugely science-ejected.

002. and naturopathy's essential 'vitalism by oath':

002.a. Pincott states naturopathy's essential vitalism in "Naturopathic Medicine Comes to Campbell River":

"Dr. Pincott believes that in most cases, the body has an inner ability to heal itself when obstacles to cure are removed and therapies are given that stimulate the vital force (the healing force of the body). Naturopathic principles: [#1] the healing power of nature."

002.b. and naturopathy's oath to that premise in "Naturopathic Physician's Oath":

"[quoting the oath] according to my best ability and judgment, I will use methods of treatment which follow the principles of naturopathic medicine [...#2] to act in cooperation with the healing power of nature [...] with my whole heart, before this gathering of witnesses, as a doctor of naturopathic medicine, I pledge to remain true to this oath."

003. wacko devices:

003.a. her powerful diagnostic device in "Assessments":

"allergy testing - electrodermal test method EDS (Vega type) testing is a non-invasive energetic evaluation using a galvanometer, developed in Germany over 35 years ago by Dr. Voll and Dr. Schimmel. The machine that is used in our practice for this purpose is the MORA III and is used to evaluate the presence of food sensitivities in the body. This is not a true 'allergy' test as the word 'allergy' refers to a life long reaction to substances or foods. What EDS identifies are 'food sensitivities' through the evaluation of acupuncture point on the hands. Eliminating these substances gives the immune system a chance to heal and symptoms improve more readily [...] electrodermal testing. The diagnostic machine Dr. Pincott uses to measure the stresses in the body is the EAV (electroacupuncture according to Voll) machine. This machine has been used for the past 30 years to measure acupuncture points on the hands and feet that correspond to the organs in the body. This is one of the many tools Dr. Pincott uses to diagnose as well as evaluate her treatment programs."

Note: for an analysis of such, visit "Quack 'Electrodiagnostic' Devices".

003.b. and her powerful therapy in "Therapies":

"detox foot bath. This Ion Wave Detox Foot bath is a safe and painless tool used to detoxify and balance the energy meridians of the body and is a wonderful adjunct to any detoxification program."

Note: for an analysis of such, visit "The Detoxification Myth".

Naturopathy's 'Firm Scientific Foundation' Is Simultaneously An 'Article of Faith Figmentation' - ND Farina 2009:

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]:

001. Farina, V.J. (ND Bastyr 1997) [I'll assume, see note 02., below] states in "Naturopathy is Based On A Firm Foundation" (2009-03-07):

"[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."

Note 02.b.: plus, a search of Bastyr University's alumni web page provides this information:

"alumni. Find a Bastyr Practitioner. Valerie J. Farina, ND:

DEGREE(S) EARNED .................................MAJOR ......................................YEAR

Doctor of Naturopathic Medicine...............Naturopathic Medicine.............1997."

002. lets dig even deeper, and actually be thorough:

002.a. naturopathy claims a science foundation / basis;

002.b. naturopathy is obligated by oath to a vitalistic foundation;

002.c. vitalism is HUGELY not scientific.

***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.

To quote Phil Plait & originator plognark: the stupid, it burns.

CAND NDs Falsely Claim the Ethical High Ground: BCNA Accuses BCMA of Deception 2009:

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]:

001. the BCNA's homepage states {2009-03-09}:

"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.

002. BCNA then links to this pdf which states:

"[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].

003. naturopathy's nonscientific essential principles:

003.a. vitalism:

naturopathy is essentially vitalistic.

Note: vitalism is in fact hugely nonscientific.

003.b. supernaturalism:

here are some examples.

Note: supernaturalism is in fact hugely unscienceable.

003.c. autoentheism [the belief that the "life force" within oneself is god; self-divinity & kind]:

see my notes from ND school.

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'.