Naturopathy's Essential Vitalism Commitment - NCNM's President & CEO Schleich, D.J. (PhD UT):

here, I quote from a "Naturopathic Doctor News & Review" [NDNR] article written by NCNM president & CEO Schleich regarding naturopathy's essential vitalism commitment:

001. the NDNR article "Towards an Epistemology of Naturopathic Medicine" [2009-04] by Schleich, D.J. (PhD UT) [who is not an ND, BTW, and whose article is rather 'without direction'] states:

"[that] the holistic [aka naturopathic] practitioner's spiritual and physical worlds are [quoting Boon] 'not separate, but manifestations of a single life force' [{naturo.'s requisite supernaturalism & vitalism belief amalgam'; and since a life force is an a priori figment and the physical world is a posteriori real, wow -- obviously, naturo.'s don't distinguish between either epistemic type, they conflate / blend them!!!; aka, naturo.'s knowledge claims are muddled nonsense / highly suspect}...and speaks of] the myth of the basic sciences [huh?] or 'physico-chemico-reductionism' [{they're not the same thing; their equation is WRONG}...and speaks of modern medicine as that of] the allopathic or biomedicine doctor [{modern medicine isn't allopathy};...who is supposedly of] a biomedical model which reduces all pathology to a cellular or molecular level [{is this even true, 'reduces'?}...whereby] the scientific method is the route to curing a disease [{that's horrible?}...per] the reductionism of a strictly biomedical perspective [{again, reductionism?}...and speaks of questioning] the unassailable position of science in health design and delivery, and also in the education of doctors [{are you nuts?}...] and a biomedical knowledge which the allopathic professions claim inappropriately as their own [huh?]."

Note: Schleich is described as "president and CEO of NCNM [...and] former CEO and president of CCNM." I call such knowledge-type blending "the epistemic conflation of a school of thought claiming to be scientific."

002. meanwhile, vitalism is science-ejected; supernaturalism is science-ejected -- yet, absurdly, NCNM claims that such survives scientific scrutiny.

002. NCNM's committment to vitalism:

002.a. NCNM states in "Principles of Healing":

"the practice of naturopathic medicine emerges from six principles of healing [...] these principles stand as the distinguishing marks of the profession [{!}...#1] the healing power of nature -- vis medicatrix naturae [...which is the] life force [...#3] the process of healing includes the generation of symptoms, which are, in fact, expressions of the life force attempting to heal itself [...overall, naturo. is] the practice of promoting health through stimulation of the vital force [...and we're told] 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: again, science-ejected figmentation claimed as 'objective / in fact'.

002.b. and Schleich states in "Welcome to the National College of Natural Medicine: A Message From Our President, David J. Schleich, PhD":

"we will continue to advocate for the extraordinary presence of the vis medicatrix naturae, the healing power of nature, in patient care."

Note: naturo. is obviously STRONGLY committed to this sectarian belief, and, while antiscientific, claims a scientific status.

Extraordinarily wacko.

Naturopathy's 'Supernatural Cause of Disease' - Ian, H. (NMD SCNM), Pizzorno, J.E. (ND NCNM):

here, I principally quote from a Naturopathic Doctor News & Review [NDNR] article by an NMD that states that all disease is due to a "spiritual" / supernatural cause, first & foremost [see 001., below]; and from a similar position held by Pizzorno [see 002., below]:

001. Ian, H. (NMD SCNM) states in "The Nature of the Counseling Relationship: Within the Naturopathic Philosophy" [NDNR 2009-04, p.014-015]:

"the counseling relationship provides a vehicle to approach the symptoms of illness through recognition of and reverence for the blueprint of the human [{huh?}...] the physician will understand and address the cause of illness [...] act[ing] with the vis medicatrix naturae [VMN...per] the creator's purpose [{theism?}...] the architect of the human has created a complex design consisting of emotional, psychological and spiritual components [{theism?}...that are] inseparable [...] all disease originates from a basic crisis of spirit [...] all physical dysfunction being manifest by the body is a reflection of deeper, unresolved spiritual issues [...per] the crisis of spirit that preceded and accompanied the manifestation of disease [...per] the inner emotional and spiritual experience of the human precedes and, in fact, determines all that is experienced at the physical level of life [...this is apposed to] the current cultural attitude that disease originates from unseen forces that invade and take over the physical body [{huh?; what culture is that, paleolithic man?}...Shealy & Myss] identified eight dysfunctional patterns in people who become sick [...#2] negative belief patterns that have control over a person's reality."

Note: the irony is killing me -- in naturoland, nature is supernatural, superstition is elevated to the status of fact. There's nothing "in fact" about a BELIEF that disease is entirely of supernatural origin -- it is an article of faith. Calling such in fact is truly 'the negative belief pattern', because faith and fact are different, and conflating them is absurd. I hazard to guess that such righteousness plows over others' freedom of conscience.

Meanwhile, similarly,
SCNM -- Ian's alma mater -- claims that naturopathic figmentation survives scientific scrutiny.

002. this parallels Pizzorno, J.E. (ND NCNM 1975)'s claim that the 'purposeful life spirit' bioagency NDs call VMN is a 'physiological system' / spirit:

"[page three:] seven underlying, health-sustaining systems of our body must function effectively to ensure our well-being, prevent disease, and allow a full life: the immune system, the detoxification system, the inflammatory system, the metabolic system, the regulatory system, the regeneration system, and our life-force (or spirit). Weakness in any of these seven systems results in susceptibilities that allow most common diseases to develop [...page four:] live in harmony with your life-force [...] each of us needs to become more aware of the activity of the vis medicatrix naturae (life-force) deep within us."

Note: meanwhile, similarly,
NCNM -- Pizzorno's alma mater -- claims that such naturopathic figmentation survives scientific scrutiny.

NYU's LMC Drinks the AANP's Kool-Aid - "Medical Science" Nonscience, 2009:

here, I cite New York University's Lagone Medical Center Urology web page [NYULMC] for mislabeling naturopathic medicine "science" [see 001., below]; because, when you know what is essential to naturopathy, the label is WRONG [see 002., below]:

001. NYULMC states in "Naturopathic Medicine FAQs":

"naturopathic physicians cooperate with all other branches of medical science [...] an ND cooperates with all other branches of medical science."

002. but, since the essentially naturopathic is essentially nonscientific, the "science" label is WRONG.

Note: it's so wrong it isn't even wrong.

Naturopathy's Scientific Claim - Barker, J.E. (ND SCNM 2001):

here, I cite a recent article that quotes an ND stating that naturopathic is scientific:

the Highlands Ranch Herald's Lydick, R. (? ?) reports in "Is There A Naturopathic Doctor in the House?" [2009-04-14]:

"a licensed naturopathic doctor would have to graduate from one of the five residential schools in the United States that offer the degree [ND/NMD]: Bastyr University in Washington, National College of Naturopathic Medicine in Oregon, University of Bridgeport College of Naturopathic Medicine in Connecticut, National University of Health Sciences in Illinois and Southwest College of Naturopathic Medicine & Health Sciences in Arizona [...] Dr. Jason Barker [...] has degrees from Colorado State University, Southwest College of Naturopathic Medicine & Health Sciences and Oregon Health & Sciences University. He sees naturopathy as an evolving, scientific treatment method. 'We subscribe to the same science as M.D.s,' Barker said."

Yeah, right.

Decoding Naturopathy's Essential [often] Hidden Vitalistic Premise - Lisanti, F. (ND NCNM):

here, I quote from the web pages of Lisanti, F. (ND NCNM 2004) who: explains the underlying premise of naturopathy without actually stating the underlying premise explicitly [see 001., below]; claims naturopathy is science [see 002., below]; does state naturopathy's essential vitalism premise explicitly when discussing therapies [see 003., below]; and we can verify this premise at his alma mater, NCNM [see 004., below]:

001. Lisanti, F. (ND NCNM 2004) states in "Naturopathic Medicine: How It Works":

"the following principles are the foundation of naturopathic medical practice [...#1] the healing power of nature (vis medicatrix naturae) [HPN-VMN...an] inner wisdom [IW] that guides internal physical processes that lead to health and wellness. Naturopathic medicine calls this internal wisdom [IW] the healing power of nature, in Latin: the vis medicatrix naturae. Naturopathic medicine recognizes that this inherent self-healing process [ISHP] in the person is ordered and intelligent [!!!...] this inherent self-healing process [...#3] acknowledge, respect and work with the individual's self-healing process [ISHP]."

Note: so, we have HPN-VMN=IW=ISHP. But, we're not told with transparency what exactly all this means to NDs: the science-ejected premise of vitalism [see 004., below]. These terms are aliases: and therein, 'I decode'.

E.g., HPN also means BNIHI per this ND's "IMS Philosophy":

"we start with the premise that your body already knows what it needs [!!!]. Our job is to facilitate that information rising to the surface of your consciousness and to encourage the body's natural instinct to heal itself [BNIHI]. "

002. and this ND states in "Definition of Naturopathic Medicine":

"naturopathic medicine is distinguished by the principles upon which its practice is based. These principles are continually re-examined in the light of scientific advances [...it is a] science [...it is] scientific [...it is] the science of natural healthcare."

Note: science, science, science.

003. and this ND states in "Therapies":

"naturopathic medicine is distinguished by the principles that determine its practice [like vitalism...] naturopathic medicine encompasses a broad range of therapeutic systems [...including] acupuncture [...and] homeopathy [{both are vitalistic}...] acupuncture is a form of classical Chinese medicine that focuses on balancing the body's energetic flux [I've never heard qi / life force specifically called that - interesting!], called qi [...] when this flow is constrained, disharmony and illness can occur. By inserting fine, hair-thin needles into the skin and so redirecting the movement of energy, acupuncture can restore harmony and balance to mind, body, and spirit [{supernaturalism}...] according to the principles of classical Chinese medicine [CCM], a person's health is determined by having a balanced flow of energy circulate through the body [{actual energy, in science, actually exists measurably! -- qi doesn't}...] homeopathic medicines, when properly prescribed, affect the body's vitality [life force] and strengthen its innate ability to heal."

Note: vitalism is inherent to naturopathy and acupuncture, it's just more explicitly stated here. BTW, the CCM degree is labeled by NCNM a master's in science, just as naturopathy is claimed to be a branch of science.

004. this ND's alma mater, NCNM, states in "Principles of Healing":

"these principles stand as the distinguishing marks of the profession: 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 [...and of course] 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: stating that vitalism survives scientific scrutiny is, simply, bull___.

005. the big question is:

why doesn't naturopathy often directly express its essential science-ejected vitalism when supposedly directly explaining its essential premise?

[What does this say about their regard for informed consent? And why does naturopathy label such nonscience science?]