Ardolf & Kruzel - Naturopaths Advocating Pediatric Homeopathic Immunization [I Kid You Not]:

here, I share with you two NDs' ALARMING claim that homeopathy is a viable choice in lieu of conventional vaccination against -- and for treatment of -- infectious diseases in children, and I detail their protocol [see 001., below]; then, I cover some of the basic statements common to ND sites including their claim that homeopathy is effective for pandemics [see 002., below], that naturopathy has a "scientific basis" [see 003., below], that homeopathy treats a wide variety of illnesses and emergency situations [see 004., below], that naturopathy is better than conventional pediatric care [see 005., below], and that naturopathy's essential principles survive scientific scrutiny [see 006., below], and their explicit verbiage concerning the science-ejected vitalism that is essential to naturopathy [see 007., below]:

001. NDs Ardolf, D.A. (SCNM ) and Kruzel, T.A. (NCNM) state:

001.a. in "Natural Remedies":

"homeopathic immunization schedule – as more and more parents are opting out of conventional immunizations because of the increased risk of an adverse reaction and the large number administered, having a viable and effective alternative is better than not immunizing at all. This schedule lists all of the available homeopathic nosodes but not all are administered. Parents wishing homeopathic immunizations [!!!] are given a reading list prior to starting the program so that they can make an informed decision. Immunizations by this method may also be done with children who have already received some conventional vaccines."

Note: since homeopathy does not invoke any scientifically supported immune response, it is quite false to claim that this treatment of NOTHING in an immunization. To be immunized is to be protected. NOTHING is not protective / prophylactic.

001.b. in "Homeopathic Immunization Schedule":

"disease, [homeopathic] immunization [respectively]: diptheria [therefore homeopathic] diptherinum; pertussis [therefore homeopathic] pertussin; polio [therefore homeopathic] Lathyrus sativa rubella [therefore homeopathic] rubeola [etc....but it gets even worse] anthrax [therefore homeopathic] anthrocyanum [...] botulism [therefore homeopathic] botulinum [...] rabies [therefore homeopathic] Lyssin [...] syphilis [therefore homeopathic] Syphilinum [...] protocol: 1. begin at age 6 months [...] 2. administer the remedy 1X per day for 2 days, then wait an additional 5 days before administering the next nosode [...] 3. during the administration of the homeopathic vaccinations, supplement with extra vitamin C and thymus extract. 4. Repeat the series each year at the same time until the child is 12 years old. 5. If the child is exposed to one of the diseases, administer a dose of the corresponding nosode to re-stimulate the immune system. Additional homeopathic medicines may also be utilized following exposure."

Note: this is quite scary stuff, indeed.

002. Kruzel also informs us that homeopathy is effective for swine flu in "Swine Flu: Natural Medicine Approaches to a Possible Pandemic", stating:

"natural medicines have had an excellent track record in the treatment of influenza in general, but also pandemic outbreaks in particular, such as the influenza pandemic of 1918, which was responsible for the deaths of over 50 million people worldwide. The most successful treatments during this outbreak were homeopathic and herbal medicine therapies."

003. in Services, apparently both NDs inform us of:

"the art and scientific basis of natural medicine [...which is a] profession."

004. in "Homeopathy"apparently both NDs inform us that:

"homeopathic medicines can be used to treat a wide variety of illnesses and works well with other therapies to affect healing. Many of our patients have experienced lasting changes from homeopathy, allowing them to discontinue use of prescription medications [...] many of our patients have home remedy kits in order to treat every day routine medical emergencies."

005. in "Pediatric Medicine"apparently both NDs inform us that:

"many naturally derived medicines are available to treat the numerous childhood illnesses encountered, often working faster and better than conventional drug therapy. Naturopathic physicians are trained to recognize childhood illnesses and provide the best natural therapy available."

006. in "Frequently Asked Questions"apparently both NDs state:

"what is naturopathic medicine? [It's] founded upon a holistic philosophy [...] naturopathic medicine is appropriate for the management of a broad range of health conditions affecting all people of all ages [...] 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."

Note: that 'we survive scientific scrutiny' claim.

007. it should be noted that in "Naturopathic Philosophy", naturopathy's essential science-ejected vitalism is described:

"naturopathic medicine is built upon a number of principles. The first is vis medicatrix naturae which means the healing power of nature or the vital force as the driving impetus behind healing disease. This concept is derived from the vitalist tradition of medicine [...] modern naturopathic medicine has continued the tradition of evaluating therapeutic modalities which aid the vital force and the healing power of nature."

Note: vitalism is completely science-ejected. So, naturopathy is in the completely absurd position of claiming that within science is nonscience.

The Center For Consumer Freedom - On Naturopathy's Science-Rejected Status:

The Center For Consumer Freedom states in "The Naturopathy Movement":

"naturopathy refers to a doctrine of 'natural medicine' that teaches that the body’s 'vital force' is the most important factor in healing and maintaining health. The approach has been criticized as largely pseudo-scientific, relying on dogma rather than data [bravo...] in other words, naturopathy has a lengthy history of being rejected by the scientific community."

Note: visit the whole article for more. It quotes prime skeptical sources. I don't know much about CFCF, but there's a Wikipedia article that may shed some light.

MMS - Naturopathy A "Large Assortment of Erroneous & Potentially Dangerous Claims":

here, I quote from a Boston Herald article regarding a current naturopathic licensing push, and what the Massachusetts Medical Society had to say [see 001., below]; then, I detail naturopathy's typical absurdity [see 002. & 003., below]:

001. the Boston Herald reports in "Doctors Slam Midwife, Naturopath Bills" {2009-08-04; McConville, C. (? ?)}:

"Massachusetts legislators are considering bills that would establish separate boards [...including one for] naturopaths [...] the Massachusetts Medical Society [MMS] is taking aim [...because it isn't] good medicine [...they're] fighting efforts to make naturopaths licensed health-care providers in Massachusetts. Naturopathic medicine is a small, but growing, form of holistic health care [...] naturopaths say bills currently before the House and Senate would require that all naturopathic practitioners in Massachusetts be held to the highest standards of education and training [...] the medical society denounced the move, calling the practice of naturopathy a 'large assortment of erroneous and potentially dangerous claims [hear, hear!] mixed with a sprinkling of non-controversial dietary and lifestyle advice.'"

Note: the fact is that there aren't high standards at the supposedly highest of standards naturopathic colleges [I know, I went to such a school], the AANMC schools of the AANP and FNPLA [see 003., below].

002. naturopathy's definition of "holistic" with their false claim of science upon that, per their central "highest standards" school, NCNM which states in "Principles of Healing":

"these principles stand as the distinguishing marks of the profession [professions claim; the essentially naturopathic follows]: [#1, first and foremost] 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 [teleology claim]; nature heals through the response of the life force [vitalism claim...] the process of healing includes the generation of symptoms, which are, in fact, expressions of the life force attempting to heal itself [vitalism claim...] the practice of promoting health through stimulation of the vital force [vitalism claim...] these principles are based on the objective observation of the nature of health and disease and are examined continually in light of scientific analysis [survives scientific scrutiny claim...] causes may occur on many levels, including physical, mental-emotional, and spiritual [supernaturalism claim...] health and disease are conditions of the whole organism, involving a complex interaction of physical, spiritual, mental, emotional, genetic, environmental, and social factors [supernaturalism claim...] the physician must also make a commitment to her/his personal and spiritual development [supernaturalism claim...] homeopathic medicine is based on the principle of 'like cures like.' Clinical observation indicates that it works on a subtle, yet powerful, energetic level, gently acting to promote healing on the physical, mental, and spiritual levels [supernaturalism claim...this is] a medical model that is more patient-centered and holistic."

Note: the holistic is vitalistic, supernaturocentric, teleological, and falsely claims that the science-unsupported is in fact objective & scientific. Naturopathy is the height of academic and pseudomedical absurdity. Naturopathy is sectarian beliefs falsely postured as legitimate science. Yeah, lets license crappola / junk thought like this, to protect the public. Makes sense [not!].

003. some of 'the grossly erroneous essentially naturopathic' [misrepresenting as scientific fact the actually science-ejected]. Naturopathy's claim that [and I won't, in this post, hypertext-link the following, as this blog has piles of such 'from the inside' linkages already]:

003.a. vitalism survives scientific scrutiny [no, it doesn't];

003.b. supernaturalism survives scientific scrutiny [no, it doesn't];

003.c. teleology survives scientific scrutiny [no, it doesn't].

004. I applaud the MMS. It is their duty to take such a stance.

Randi on Acupuncture II - A "Mythology of Pseudoscientific Mumbo-Jumbo":

James Randi recently stated in "More Evasion":

"so, to the NCI [National Cancer Institute] and the NIH [National Institutes of Health]: here's the answer to my question, which is: 'is there any scientific, double-blind research that shows acupuncture is effective?' No, there is not. Acupuncture is a well-developed mythology of pseudoscientific mumbo-jumbo that ranks high in the quackery constellation, fails carefully-designed tests, and makes fortunes for the practitioners largely because of the reluctance - no, the refusal - of the NCI and NIH to level with the citizens of the USA. [hear, hear]."

Note: and acupuncture is part of naturopathy, which in my view is quite the "quackery constellation". NCI also has a horrid definition of naturopathy, but it does speak to naturopathy's inclusion of acupuncture:

"a system of disease prevention and treatment that avoids drugs and surgery. Naturopathy is based on the use of natural agents such as air, water, light, heat, and massage to help the body heal itself [coded vitalism]. It also uses herbal products, nutrition, acupuncture, and aromatherapy as forms of treatment."

From this definition, you will not be informed that naturopathy is absurd, since it labels the profoundly science-ejected as scientific, e.g. that naturopathy is based upon vitalism, which is several decades [generously] DECEASED in terms of science. Nor does it speak to the requisite supernaturalism that is bound up with naturopathic vitalism, also labeled absurdly as science. I can only hope that cancer patients stay away, and ignore NCI's quasi-endorsement / misinformation.

CNME's Central Textbook ISBN 1897025254 - Naturopathy's Homeopathic-TCM Vitalism:

here, I quote from THE textbook for CNME-type ND programs in North America which details naturopathy's essential homeopathic-TCM vitalism [see 001, below];

001. Smith, F. (ND CCNM), "Assistant Dean of Naturopathic Medicine at National University of Health Sciences" [as per my blog mission, truly "from the inside"], states in:

001.a. "An Introduction to Principles and Practices of Naturopathic Medicine" (ISBN 1897025254; 2008):

"homeopathy [...its founder] Hahnemann taught that disease was due to the 'untunement' of the vital force, the part of the organism that allowed it to respond and adapt to life. Whether that meant shivering in response to cold or experiencing fear in response to a threat, the vital force was a dynamic aspect of the human being [p.095...] disease began when that dynamic principle became stuck [p.096...{lest we think all this past-tense verbiage means that naturopathy has discarded this science-ejected idea, NOWADAYS}] naturopathic medicine [...] is a primary healthcare system using therapies that support the person's self-healing potential [...it is] 'vitalistic' [...] the vitalistic tradition is based on the premise that the body has an inherent ability to heal, a premise referred to in Latin as vis medicatrix naturae (healing power of nature), and that the human being is a dynamic creation of body, and and spirit [{naturopathy's requisite supernaturalism, which is bound-up with vitalism}...per] the self-healing ability of the whole being [p.018...] the vis is the core focus of the Foundations of Naturopathic Medicine [{see that vitalism there, too}...] the discernment of the necessity of working with the vis medicatrix naturae is what makes naturopathic medicine a distinctive field [p.019...naturopathy's] protocol for treatment can be simplified into three stages [...#2] stimulate the vital force [...with] vitalistic therapies including homeopathy, hydrotherapy, and traditional Chinese medicine [{TCM} p.037...e.g.] promote self-healing processes by using a homeopathic medicine to stimulate the vital force [p.039...] TCM is founded in the principle that energy in the body flows along specific pathways called meridians. This energy is known as qi. Qi enters the body at conception and remains the vital force in the body [p.100...{and lest we forget how dangerous naturopathy is}] homeopathic treatment of children is valuable for both prevention and treatment of many conditions [p.319]."

Note: this textbook is published by CCNM Press. This is 'the essentially naturopathic' / 'their foundation'. It states on its back cover "this is the first textbook published for use in introductory courses in naturopathic medicine [...at] naturopathic colleges affiliated with the Council of Naturopathic [Medical] Education (CNME) [{yes, they forgot a word in that title}...and it] provides a strong foundation for required upper-year courses [...that include] homeopathy [and] traditional Chinese medicine."

002. the vitalism of naturopathy:

poses an "energy", "force" or "power" responsible for health and disease, and life itself. It is not merely acknowledging that a human being can repair / heal, and it is not merely descriptions of the phenotype. Boil it down, and what you get is a belief in a 'purposeful life spirit' animating the human organism. This is a combination of supernaturalism, teleology, and vitalism. And it is pure superstition falsely claimed as within science. All three facets of the naturopathic belief amalgam are exterior to science / what science bases. They are articles of faith claimed as something they are not: scientific fact.

When I was in ND school, I was told that that vital force was also "the god power within you." This is after I was told it was science-based and not a belief system. So, in terms of belief, I've labeled that autoentheism: the belief that god is within oneself.

Their homepage states: "the FNM Project has its academic home at NCNM in Portland." And NCNM is in the ridiculous position of claiming that which is nonscience is science.

Same old naturopaTHICK.

Randi on Acupuncture 'Primative Mystical Idiocy', & Extended To Naturopathy-Homeopathy-Acupuncture "SCIENCE" at UB:

here, I quote something Randi recently wrote about acupuncture [see 001., below]; and I extend it into the realm of UB nonsense [see the rest, below]:

001. James Randi recently wrote in "We Should Be Insulted":

"the 'complimentary and alternative medicine' [sCAM!] business brings in some $34 billion a year in direct out-of-pocket spending from American consumers [...] I recently came into possession of a 62-page full-color booklet produced and distributed by the National Cancer Institute, part of the National Institutes of Health. This comprehensive publication - in its 'Words To Know' glossary, begins with a definition of what is possibly the only form of quackery that outranks homeopathy for idiocy: acupuncture [...] acupuncture is only a notion, a colorful way of looking at the human condition, a mystical and primitive concept of how the human body works and survives. It has no basis in fact or in observation. It is a dangerous myth. For the US National Institutes of Health to support it - though in an uncertain, luke-warm fashion - is farcical. The JREF has consistently offered its million-dollar prize to any and all acupuncturists."

Note: I don't think that that $35 billion includes the amount of money people spend on degrees encompassing CAM idiocies.

002. along the lines of "idiocy" and "mystical and primitive" mythical concepts [and academic malpractice, of a most blatant kind!], I give you naturopathy at the University of Bridgeport, which includes both homeopathy and acupuncture in its curriculum, and labels nonscience science and takes money for such, as a fully sanctioned degree granting entity [farcical to the thousand power]:

002.a. at UB, naturopathy's requisite homeopathy & acupuncture are readily apparent:

"a licensed naturopathic physician (N.D.) attends a four-year graduate level naturopathic medical school and is educated in all of the same basic sciences as an M.D. [...] the basic medical sciences [...] naturopathic education includes [...] homeopathy [...] the naturopathic physician is required to complete training [...] acupuncture [and] homeopathic medicine";

Note: the claim of science as a basis / umbrella, regular ordinary basic science like at all other colleges and universities in this day and age.

002.b. per acupuncture, UB states in "Acupuncture Institute":

"the Master of Science in Acupuncture degree."

Note: again, the categorical label of science upon...idiocy.

002.c. UB's 'vitalism is health science', overarching all of this:

002.c1. UB naturopathy's essential vitalism is readily apparent. And I've collected a preponderance of naturopathy vitalism ludicrously labeled scientific fact by .gov entities;

002.c2. and UB's label upon all of this, "health science".

003. and that is akin to stating that 'science is the nonscientific' or 'p and not-p', and it is madness:

to quote a particular set of logical rules, "the law of non-contradiction: a conjunctive proposition [...] cannot be both true and false at the same time and in the same respect. Thus the proposition 'p and not-p' cannot be true. For example, the proposition 'it is raining and it is not raining' is a contradiction, and must be false."

004. NYU physicist and UCL mathematician Alan Sokal says it best in "Archaeological Fantasies. How Pseudoarchaeology Misrepresents the Past and Misleads the Public" (ISBN 0415305934; 2006):

"for my own part, I have been struck by the fact that nearly all the pseudoscientific systems to be examined in this essay are based philosophically on vitalism [...a.k.a.] 'life energy', elan vital, prana, qi [...] mainstream science has rejected vitalism since at least the 1930s for a plethora of good reasons that have only become stronger with time [p.347]."

Perfect. I've a preponderance stating that vitalism is hugely not science.

Ad Hominem Defamatory Blather In My Direction - A Portland Business Journal Commenter:

recently, NCNM put up a listing in the Portland Business Journal [see 001., below]; and I commented, and somebody commented upon my comment [see 002., below]; and I share some ACTUAL FACTS [see 003., below]:

001. NCNM states in "National College of Natural Medicine":

"NCNM offers two exceptional degree programs [including the] Doctor of Naturopathic Medicine (ND) [...] established in 1956, NCNM represents the heart of natural medicine [...] natural health care [...] NCNM meets or exceeds all pertinent regulatory standards [...] the content of this listing was provided by a representative of National College of Natural Medicine."

Note: the claims of being exceptional / exceeding, & being central per "heart" within the ND [mis]educational world. I do agree with the latter.

002. my comment, and a response:

002.a. I commented:

"isn't NCNM the HEIGHT of pseudointellectual absurdity [naturopathy]? E.g., labeling as 'scientific fact' the IN FACT science-ejected vitalistic, supernatural, teleological & kind! naturocrit.blogspot.com."

002.b. someone anonymously responded:

"Rob Cullen, face it, you were asked to leave Bridgeport because you're a horrible clinician and now that you're bitter, you're continuing to burn more bridges. Get a life! With all this hate a [and?] negativity, no wonder you couldn't cut it. Naturoapthic [sp.] medicine is about positivity and optimism. You clearly did not belong. NCNM is the top Naturopathic school, working hand-in-hand with MD's, DO's, DC's and LAc's in the community providing preventive primary care at the highest levels... It's a 4-5 yr doctorate program with the highest standards of any other naturopathic program in the entire world. NCNM rocks! :)."

Note: first, my criticisms were substantively addressed. This is likely because they are true, and therefore unassailable. Instead, my character is attacked with falsehood and name-calling. This is not relevant to my criticism. I've no idea who wrote this, but I'd like to remind all that naturocrit is open to commentary and I'd only edit comments that are grossly without merit in regards to the blogpost commented upon.

003. some actual facts:

003.a. it is an actual fact that NCNM claims that that which is profoundly science-ejected in fact survives scientific scrutiny

- which is ABSURD, insane, & academically and professionally impossible to adhere to. That is what I specifically mean by "pseudointellectual absurdity". I don't see how such "exceeds" and is "exceptional". I would say that such thinking is typical of naturopathy: dumb-assed. I don't see how the rigorous standards of professionalism can be accomplished from a basis of falsehood: the scientific science-ejected. I don't see how the rather easier standards of fair trade can be accomplished when the trade occurs from a position of falsehood. In other words, caveat emptor isn't even being met, never mind credat emptor.

003.b. it is an actual fact, as regards UB:

003.a. I was not asked to leave Bridgeport by ANYONE. I left due to the unethical position I found myself in: being an ND, if I had stayed and graduated. One necessary hoop I'd have had to have jumped through was to treat patients with homeopathy, and complete required homeopathy courses, and then have to take board exams that include such CRAP.

Giving people NOTHING, and telling them it is medicine is REPUGNANT.

003.b. I am not a clinician of any kind. I am an educator and autodidact.

003.c. the rest, well, is blather and I don't care to comment further on it. I'll guess that this is a current NCNM student, but that's just a guess.

Commentary is invited.

***update 01: all of a sudden [7:20 pm EST], the web page is no longer active:

***update 02: all of a sudden [1:21 am EST] it's back up.

2 NDs Coding Naturopathy's Essential Science-Ejected Vitalism & Claiming Science Expertise: Ferguson, T. & M. (NDs Bastyr):

here, I quote from a Youtube video wherein an ND discusses the difference between naturopathy and homeopathy, and codes the central treatment goal of both [see 001., below]; furthermore, I show how web pages at that ND's practice also employ coding, while claiming science-expertise, AND I decode that ND central vitalistic premise by using a 2008 ND textbook [see 002., below];

Ferguson, T. (ND Bastyr 2007) states in:

001. "Naturopathy vs. Homeopathy":

"[interviewer] I'm wondering what's the difference between naturopathy and homeopathy? [...ND of Dynamic Healing Center] people usually equate the two, but the difference is homeopathy is a distinct form of medicine and you could say naturopathic medicine is a much broader term. Under naturopathic medicine would include [{sic.}...] homeopathy [...] there are lot of different things that are part of the naturopathic doctor's training [...] one of them is the system of medicine of homeopathy [...which is] one part of what we do [...homeopathy assists] the body's natural healing mechanisms toward health [{vitalism, coded}...] it follows the philosophy of naturopathic medicine which is the same [{vitalism!}...interviewer] it's only one system that you use [...ND] correct."

Note: the lack of specific reference to the vitalistic basis of both homeopathy and naturopathy, and instead the coding of that context with naturalistic language. But, ND schools teach that homeopathy is fundamentally based on vitalism. That's what they taught me at UB. Interesting that the name of this ND's business includes the word "dynamic", because ND schools teach that another word for that vitalistic premise is "dynamis".

002. with Ferguson, M. (ND Bastyr 2005) states:

002.a. in "Therapeutic Order":

"naturopathic practitioners use the therapeutic order [TO] to maximize a person's natural healing process and minimize harm [...#2] stimulate the vis medicatrix naturae (i.e. the innate healing process of the body) [vitalism, coded] - using [...] homeopathy [amongst other things...] therapies utilized in our practice [...include] homeopathy."

Note: the author of the TO, Zeff, does state the actual vitalistic basis of naturopathy. See Zeff et al. states in the textbook "Naturopathic Physical Medicine" (ISBN 0443103909, 2008):

"that first principle is vis medicatrix naturae 'the healing power of nature', which establishes naturopathic medicine as a vitalistic medicine [p.002]."

Vitalism is profoundly science-ejected, of course.

Yet, this textbook is categorized by Elsevier as an Elsevier Health Science book.

Ha.

002.b. in "Naturopathic Philosophy":

"the healing power of nature (vis medicatrix nature) [vitalism, coded]. Naturopathic medicine recognizes an inherent ability in the body which is ordered and intelligent [teleological]. Naturopathic physicians act to identify and remove obstacles to recovery and to facilitate and augment this healing ability [{vitalism, coded}...] since total health also includes spiritual health, naturopathic physicians encourage individuals to pursue their personal spiritual path [supernaturalism]."

002.c. in "Naturopathic Education":

"board certified naturopathic doctors attend 4 years of post-graduate doctoral medical training at an accredited school where they are trained as primary care physicians integrating traditional healing methods with modern scientific medicine [...] the curriculum involves the standard classes of basic sciences [...] to be licensable, the naturopathic doctor must pass a set of science boards."

Note: the claim of science expertise.

AP on Homeopathy Theory: "Unverified By Mainstream Science" (2009-07-30):

In "Consumers Pay $34 Billion for Alternative Medicine" reporters Marchione and Stobbe state:

"a whopping $3 billion [annually] was spent on homeopathy -- highly diluted drugs made from natural ingredients. It is based on a theory unverified by mainstream science: that substances that create certain symptoms in healthy people are effective in treating the disease that causes the same symptoms."

Note: bravo.

Andy Lewis - Homeopathy is Untenable / Absurd [So I'm Wondering Why NANAA Falsely Calls It Science?]:

here, I quote from the Quackometer regarding homeopathy's nonscientific status [see 001., below]; and, drawing on my familiarity with naturopathy, I cite NANAA's as absurd position [see 002., below]:

001. the Quackometer Blog [Andy Lewis] recently wrote in "Homeopaths: Do You Really Want Statutory Regulation?" (2009-07-29):'

"homeopaths [being unregulated in the UK] have been free to indulge in whatever delusions they fancy [...free from the constraints of] plausibility and reliable evidence for anything [...encompassing] absurdities [...] homeopathy has failed in two hundred years to make any progression in showing that it is nothing other than a inert treatment based on pre-scientific and magical thinking [...] in the two hundred years since homeopathy was invented, our scientific understanding of medicine, chemistry and physics has moved on enormously and it clearly shows that homeopathy is not just implausible but is utterly contradicted by everything we know about the world. Homeopathy lies outside of reason and science. It is a pseudo-medicine and is just a placebo therapy. It is just not tenable to hold any other position [...it's] absurd treatment [...much like] the non existent foundations of much of chiropractic care [...that] vestigial remnant of Victorian back cracking quackery [...] chiropractors [now regulated] find themselves being held to the highest forms of professionalism and practice without an evidence base for pretty much anything they do."

Note: it is absurd to pose homeopathy as scientific [and naturopathy!].

002. the 'North American Naturopathic Absurdity Apparatus' [NANAA] labels their requisite homeopathy "clinical science", "medical science", "firmly science-based" and "health science":

002.a. "clinical science" per the North American ND licensing exam, NPLEX, in "About NPLEX";

002.b. "medical science" per the Association of Accredited Naturopathic Medical Colleges in "About Naturopathic Medicine"; also, the American Medical Student Association in "Welcome to AMSA's Naturopathic Medicine Interest Group!";

002.c. "firmly science-based" per Bastyr University states in "Naturopathic Medicine";

002.d. "health science" per the University of Bridgeport states in "UB Spotlight: Health Sciences Programs";

002.e. and just for S&G, Coward, S. (ND SCNM), Lewis, K. (ND SCNM) state in "Misconceptions Aside, Homeopathy Has Stood Test of Time" (2009-06-25), specifically regarding homeopathy:

"homeopathy is a 200-year-old medicinal science."

003. amazing.

Naturopathy's "Conventionally Trained Medical Professional" Claim - Fox, S. (ND NCNM):

here, I quote an ND who recently stated an ND is a "conventionally trained medical professional" [see 001., below]; and, I elucidate NDs' "philosophical grounding" in vitalism claimed as scientific when HUGELY not -- YES, that's how ABSURD naturopathy is!!! [see 002., below]:

001. naturopath Fox, S. (ND NCNM) states in "Naturopathic Physicians: Up and Coming Partners in Diabetes Care" (2009-07-24):

"although they [NDs] are conventionally trained medical professionals, naturopathic physicians are distinguished by their extensive post-graduate outpatient and clinical experience, and deep trust [faith!] in the body’s ability to heal itself [BATHI...] naturopathic medicine differs from conventional Western medicine in its deep grounding in a set of philosophical tenets [...] their philosophical grounding [...] foremost among them a profound trust [faith!] in the body's ability to heal itself [BATHI...per] the body's innate self-healing design [BISHD...] the body's self-healing mechanisms [...per] the self-healing mechanisms [SHM...NDs are] a licensed medical professional [s...] primary care physicians [...and] medical experts [...] trained in four-year accredited postgraduate medical programs [...] naturopathic physicians are well-trained [...with a goal of] empowerment of people to make beneficial choices for themselves, naturopathic physicians are often an excellent choice [...] accredited programs in naturopathic medicine are currently offered at National College of Natural Medicine in Portland, OR, Bastyr University near Seattle, WA, Southwest College of Naturopathic Medicine in Phoenix, AZ, and the University of Bridgeport in Bridgeport, CT."

002. now, what MUST the specific context of BATHI-BISHD-SHM premise be to particularly an NCNM graduate such as Fox? Vitalism claimed a scientific when hugely not [a.k.a. ABSURDITY]:

002.a. the vitalism that dare not speak its name [coded]:

002.a1a. [as spoken at the source / alma mater, NCNM] NCNM states in "Principles of Healing":

"the practice of naturopathic medicine emerges from six principles of healing. These principles are based on the objective observation of the nature of health and disease and are examined continually in light of scientific analysis [SS]. These principles stand as the distinguishing marks of the profession: the healing power of nature -- vis medicatrix naturae [HPN-VMN]. 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...] symptoms [...] in fact [are] expressions of the life force [LF] attempting to heal itself [...we're all about] the practice of promoting health through stimulation of the vital force [VF]."

Note: vitalism [HPN-VMN, LF, VF] is claimed as able to survive SS, in fact. But, vitalism is PROFOUNDLY science-ejected, in fact. Now, NCNM is the trunk of the tree of the this sectarian movement. As NCNM recently stated in "National College of Natural Medicine":

"National College of Natural Medicine (NCNM) is the oldest accredited naturopathic college in North America. Its graduates have gone on to establish all of the accredited naturopathic colleges now operating in North America [...] NCNM meets or exceeds all pertinent regulatory standards."

Bastyr NDs Burnett x2 a testament to this 'trunk of naturopathy' fact, as they employ NCNM's language in "Naturopathic Medicine":

"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."

I will state this as simply as possible: engaging in commerce under the guise of legitimacy [science as a marketing label] when actually nonsensical [calling the nonscientific science] MUST violate basic strictures of commerce regulatory standards [we don't even have to go to the even higher strictures of professionalism regulation, which cannot be met until lower, easier strictures are met].

002.a.1b. vitalism at two of NCNM's other branchings, UBCNM and SCNM:

UB states explicitly in "UB Spotlight: Health Sciences Programs":

"health science programs [...] the University's professionally accredited health sciences programs [...include] the College of Naturopathic Medicine."

Note: the claim of professionalism and science per the naturopathic.

But, also at UB is "Six Guiding Principles: Guiding Principle #1" which states:

"the healing power of nature, viz 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."

Just like NCNM, the nonscientific is stated as scientific.

SCNM states in "What is A Naturopathic Physician?":

"the principles of naturopathic medicine are based upon objective observation of the nature of health and disease, and are continually re-examined in the light of scientific advances [...] the degree of doctor of naturopathic medicine requires four years of graduate level study in the medical sciences [...] the major belief is in the healing power of nature (vis medicatrix naturae)."

And SCNM states in "2004 SCNM Fall Newsletter":

"this therapy fits well with one of the basic principles of naturopathic medicine: 'the healing power of nature'. The healing power of nature or vis medicatrix naturae is based on the principle that the body has the inherent ability to establish, maintain, and restore health [IATEMARH]. 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."

Again, vitalism [IATEMARH-LF] claimed as science, but also acknowledged as belief.

00.2b. do NDs sound:

002.b1. conventionally trained?

when the profoundly science-ejected is STRANGELY labeled science, I don't think so.

002.b2. professional?

when does a professional disguise and manipulate, and when is a profession based upon the completely false?

002.b3. extensive post-graduate & medical?

how are sectarian concepts that for several decades have been science-ejected [NDs' vitalistic belief amalgam], portrayed falsely as science, of post-graduate caliber education and medical?

003. overall note:

crazy like a Fox ND? [irresistible].

Also note, NCNM, Bastyr and SCNM were part of the 'education robbers science not belief' AANP-Alliance BIG LIE that I've discussed elsewhere.

CA Likely Eliminating Their .gov Naturopathy Board - Yeah, Baby! [No More Coded Deceptive Propaganda?]:

here, I cite a recent article that states that California's Bureau of Naturopathic Medicine is getting the axe [see 001., below]; and I flesh out some reasons why this is good because they [NDs] are so bad [at science, for one thing; see 002., below]; so do it [see 003., below]:

001. the Sacramento Business Journal reports in "Budget Bills Go to California Assembly" (2009-07-24):

"the California State Senate finished passing 31 bills early Friday morning to close a $24.2 billion gap in the state budget. Added to $921 million in reserves, state lawmakers claimed to have solved a $25.3 billion budget problem [...] the Integrated Waste Management Board and the Bureau of Naturopathic Medicine are singled out for elimination."

Note: this would be a very good thing in terms of consumer protection. It would stop their racket: because they are the health and education robbers. I flesh a little of this out below.

002. California's Department of Consumer Affairs Bureau of Naturopathic Medicine tells us:

002.a. in "California Department of Consumer Affairs: A Consumer's Guide to Naturopathic Medicine" (archived here):

"naturopathic medicine [...] stimulate[s] the body's self-healing process [BSHP...per] the healing power of nature [HPN...aka] the body's inherent wisdom to heal itself [BIWTHI...using] complementary and alternative therapies [CAM...per a] holistic approach [HA...per] a natural approach [...NDs training is] graduate-level [&] accredited [...including] science and clinical courses [...and they are a] health care profession [...] licensure ensures that naturopathic doctors have met the professional standards [...per] professional practice [...and we are referred to] the California Naturopathic Doctors Association [CALND...and] the American Association of Naturopathic Physicians [AANP]."

Note: this is the State of California participating in, plain and simple - deception / the naturopathy racket. California's nondisclosure of naturopathy's essential science-ejected sectarian premise is repugnant. Informed consent is the basis for the physician-patient relationship, in these here modern times. Yet, instead of information that is accurate and complete, the State of California acts as an echo chamber for that same old slimy, coded, false and incomplete ND propaganda [see my examples below: in their own words, per this blog's mission of 'from the inside'].

002.b. let me explain, a little:

002.b1. the terms BSHP-HPN-BIWTHI:

are actually representing the fundamental / essential naturopathic precept / context: vitalism. This is clearly stated at one of their schools, the University of Bridgeport. Notice that California's language does not clearly state "life force" or "vital force" or accurately or completely label BSHP-HPN-BIWTHI as vitalistic / vitalism. This is important because the vitalistic is HUGELY science-ejected.

Are you informed of this? No, not there.

Do you want a supposed primary care doctor:

a) basing her / his entire worldview regarding 'the medical' on Tooth Fairy premises mislabeled as science and posed as medically relevant?

b) not disclosing that in fact he / she represents an unethical sectarian pseudoscience taking your money under false pretenses?

This is the modus operandi of this CAM-HA: claiming to be professional and scientific, when professionalism is bound by the stricture "credat emptor" [let the buyer have faith] yet deceiving the patient with science-ejected junk. This is ethically repugnant. Professions-level and graduate-level science? Hmm, they can't even get straight a basic logical premise from elementary school: something cannot be what it is different from [more on this below].

002.b2. CALND states:

002.b2a. in "Frequently Asked Questions":

"[for] a naturopathic doctor (N.D.) [...] the training consists of a comprehensive study of the conventional medical sciences [...] they learn how to integrate the principles of naturopathic medicine into clinical practice [such as vitalism]."

Note: again, we're led to believe that the essentially naturopathic is scientific, that they are science experts. En masse, they posture that there's a firm scientific basis to science-ejected principles such as vitalism. Hilarious, if it wasn't so despicable and moronic. And insane.

002.b2b. in "Education":

"the naturopathic medical profession's infrastructure includes accredited educational institutions, professional licensing, national standards of practice, peer review, and a commitment to state-of-the-art scientific research [...] the training consists of comprehensive study of the conventional medical sciences [...] naturopathic doctors are guided by six principles [...including] the healing power of nature [...which] forms the foundation of this distinct health care practice."

Note: again, we have the claim of professionalism, science [and requisite vitalism]. Both are false, as their fundamental premise HPN indicates: naturopathy is based upon the profoundly science-ejected, and they disguise that premise, and they mislabel it science. This is unprofessional in the sense of breaching fidelity in two major areas: the trust of the patient and the public, in terms of being truthful and competent overall which is minimally required from a professional, and naturopathy's complete hijacking of "science" to support sectarian woo-woo. There are K-12 science textbooks that clearly state that vitalism is science-ejected [e.g.]!

002.b3. AANP and I go way back. They are the HUGE charlatans, and I know about this personally.

003. so ELIMINATE THEM.

Naturopathy's "Firmly Science-Based" Bullshit: Roxas, M. (ND NCNM) 2009:

here, I cite the words of an ND who claims that naturopathy is firmly scientific [see 001., below]; while naturopathy, as defined by that ND's own alma mater, is clearly based upon vitalism, teleology, and supernaturalism [see 002., below]; which ALL are PROFOUNDLY NOT SCIENCE [see 003., below]; and I give the Irish salute to all these rogues [see 004., below]:

001. Roxas, M. (ND NCNM) states in "What is Naturopathic Medicine?":

"while firmly science-based, modern naturopathic medicine [etc.]."

Note: the claim is that 'the naturopathic' is quite science-established.

002. National College of Natural Medicine [NCNM] states in "Principles of Healing":

"the practice of naturopathic medicine emerges from six principles of healing. These principles are based on the objective observation of the nature of health and disease and are examined continually in light of scientific analysis [{science claim}...] these principles stand as the distinguishing marks of the profession: [professions claim; #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 [{teleology claim}]; nature heals through the response of the life force [{vitalism}]. The physician’s role is to facilitate and augment this process [...#3] first do no harm -- primum no nocere. The process of healing includes the generation of symptoms, which are, in fact [fact claim], expressions of the life force [vitalism claim] attempting to heal itself. Therapeutic actions should be complementary to and synergistic with this healing process. The physician’s actions can support or antagonize the actions of vis medicatrix naturae [vitalism...#2] causes may occur on many levels, including physical, mental-emotional, and spiritual [supernatural claim...#4] health and disease are conditions of the whole organism, involving a complex interaction of physical, spiritual [supernatural claim...#5] the physician must also make a commitment to her/his personal and spiritual development [supernatural claim...] homeopathic medicine [...] promote[s] healing on the physical, mental, and spiritual levels [supernatural claim]."

Note: NDs claim that within 'objective scientific fact' is the teleological, vitalistic, and supernatural - obviously!

003. what science says:

003.a. teleology is HUGELY science-ejected, and so is vitalism [see 003., here].

003.b. supernaturalism is HUGELY science-ejected.

004. when is a 'firmly scientific fact' simultaneously HUGELY science-ejected...

naturopathy. Beware. They are the education robbers. When is a profession completely absurd...

naturopathy [therefore not a profession at all].

I want to thank all those involved for visiting this upon me as a consumer and citizen of the modern era:

the AANMC ND colleges and universities, the State oversight apparati [particularly CT], the Federal Dept.s of Education and of Trade.

As this whole consortia demand $ from me I answer:

pogue mahone.

Naturopathy's Essential Superstitious Teleological Vitalism - Sensenig 2007 in UE:

here, I quote from a 2007 Unified Energetics [UE] article that reveals the teleological vitalism that is essential to naturopathy [see 001., below]; while naturopathy labels itself science [see 002., below]; while teleology and vitalism are PROFOUNDLY science-ejected [see 003, below]:



001. the Foundations of Naturopathic Medicine Project [I consider this 'of the preponderant naturopathic'] states in "The Heart of Naturopathic Medicine":

"[per ND Sensenig] there are words or phrases that we have borrowed from our predecessors that we use interchangeably: vis medicatrix naturae [VMN], vitality [V], simple substance [SS...] dynamis [D...] qi [Q...] energy [E...] vis medicatrix naturae [VMN...] vis is this tendency in nature towards organization, order and purpose [P...] towards the ideal [I] or perfection [P...a.k.a.] homeostasis [H...] the direction of order [DO...] this vis [VS...] the organizational tendency in nature [OT...] vitalism [VT]."

Note: so, we have -- at the heart of naturopathic medicine, a.k.a. 'the essentially naturopathic' BY THEIR OWN DEFINING -- VMN = V = SS = D = Q = E = VMN = VS = VT in terms of vitalism, and P = I = P = H = DO = OT in terms of teleology [with the two intertwined {inseparable in naturo.}; for science's position on these two DEFUNCT ideas, see 003. below]. Here's an important note on ND luminary Sensenig: he was my instructor at UB in 1998 and spewed similar 'cultic mystical weirdness' [a label I'd applied to my UB naturopathy experience in a sworn deposition], and here is a handout from that course. Sensenig is second from right in this Foundation's group picture.

002. for naturopathy's self-labeling of "science", click here.

003. and here's my favorite science quote regarding teleology and vitalism:

"[per biologist Ernst Mayr in "What Makes Biology Unique?: Considerations on the Autonomy of a Scientific Discipline"(2004; ISBN 0521841143)] I did not want to fall into a trap like vitalism or become a teleologist [...] the biology for which I wanted to find a philosophy had to qualify as a genuine, bona fide science [p.002...] occult forces (vitalism and teleology) [...] vitalism was an invalid approach [p.017...] the refutation of certain erroneous basic assumptions [...] certain basic ontological principles that later were shown to be erroneous [...] certain basic explanatory principles not supported by the laws of physical sciences and eventually found to be invalid. The two major principles here involved are vitalism and a belief in cosmic teleology [...] an invisible force, lebenskraft or vis vitalis. Those who believed in such a force were called vitalists. Vitalism was popular from the early seventeenth century to the early twentieth century [p.022...] generations of vitalists labored in vain to find a scientific explanation for the lebenskraft until it finally became quite clear that such a force simply does not exist. That was the end of vitalism [p.023...] biologists [...by 1866] now rejected vitalism and cosmic teleology [p.025...] after vitalism had become obsolete [p.069...] genetic programs occur only in living organisms [...] naturalists [...] have been aware of this fundamental difference for thousands of years, but their explanation for it was invalid. They tried to attribute life to the occult force of vitalism, as vis vitalis, but eventually is was determined that such a force does not exist [...] this was finally made possible in the twentieth century by the discoveries in cytology, genetics, and molecular biology. The sciences finally provided us with a naturalistic explanation of life [p.090...] glossary [...] vitalism: the now thoroughly refuted belief in the existence of an occult invisible force in living organisms responsible for the manifestations of life in any living organism [p.225]."

004. so, when is the HUGELY science-ejected [teleological vitalism] falsely labeled science?

Naturopathy. There ain't nothing so CONTINUALLY stupid and false.

E.g: at UB, where I believe Sensenig still teaches, they still label their naturopathy science, while vitalistic and teleological.

I think the Federal Trade Commission has a word for this.

More Naturopathic Misinformation?: The 1st AANMC Informational Webinar 2009-07-16:

here, I point out the Association of Accredited Naturopathic Medical Colleges' [AANMC] claim / promise that they will, next week via web conference, provided reliable [I'm reasonably presuming that's what people will assume] information regarding AANMC naturopathic education so that the public will be able to [I'm reasonably presuming] make an informed decision regarding attending naturopathy school [see 001., below]; meanwhile, naturopathy falsely labels the profoundly science-ejected vitalistic and supernatural as scientific, without a single disclaimer [see 002., below]; so, I say instead of "for you", naturopathy exists "for themselves" [see 003., below]:

001. the AANMC states in “AANMC 2-Minute E-News […] Attend the 1st AANMC Informational Webinar!” (2009-07):

“[per Deger, C . (? ?) - AANMC managing editor] the Association of Accredited Naturopathic Medical Colleges is very excited to debut a new way to learn about naturopathic medical education without leaving home […] we will bring you an interactive, online experience that will help you in the process of selecting and applying to naturopathic medical school [...via our] experts in naturopathic medical education […our] leading professionals in the field of naturopathic medicine [...] this event is sponsored jointly by the seven accredited colleges of naturopathic medicine comprising the Association of Accredited Naturopathic Medical Colleges (AANMC) [including the University of Bridgeport].”

Note: notice the claim that they will be “informational”, that the public will “learn”, that they have educational / academic expertise, and that naturopathy meets the ethical strictures of a profession. Can AANMC actually help you? Is AANMC actually looking out for YOU? [No, not in my book. I relate to this 'not for you' reality below (see 003.)].

002. [how naturopathy's recent past speaks volumes] debunking naturopathy's educational / academic / professional science expertise claim, a.k.a. 'how they label as science that which is PROFOUNDLY not science and therein do not fulfill a professions-level ethical role':

002.a. AANMC claims that naturopathy is science in "What is Naturopathic Medicine?":

"naturopathic physicians cooperate with all other branches of medical science".

Note: for a larger collection of 'naturopathy's science self-labeling', see here.

002.b. naturopathy's essential vitalism can be found from one of the AANMC's member schools, the University of Bridgeport, per “Six Guiding Principles. Guiding Principle #1”:

"the healing power of nature [HPN]. Viz [sp., vis] medicatrix naturae: the body has the inherent ability to establish, maintain, and restore health. The healing process is ordered and intelligent [purposeful; goal-directed]; nature heals through the response of the life force. The [naturopathic] physician's role is to facilitate and augment this process."

Note: for a larger collection of 'naturopathy's essential vitalism', see here. Yet, vitalism is completely science-ejected.

Overall note for 002: notice that there is no disclaimer / no warning regarding AANMC's actually very FALSE, very actually ABSURD position that that which is fundamentally nonscientific is being improperly labeled as scientific. Instead, AANMC mainly codes their 'sectarian underneath' in naturalistic language, per “The Six Principles”:

“naturopathic medicine celebrates the healing power of nature [HPN]. Naturopathic medicine is dedicated to the study and celebration of nature’s healing powers […] a dynamic philosophy as well as a profession [...] naturopathic medicine is defined by principles rather than by methods or modalities. Above all, it honors the body’s innate wisdom to heal […] naturopathic physicians practice the six fundamental principles of naturopathic medicine: [#1] the healing power of nature: trust in the body’s inherent wisdom to heal itself […#6] treat the whole person: view the body as an integrated whole in all its physical and spiritual dimensions.”

Note: this is the vitalism context that dare not speak its name. Instead, a naturalistic facade / veneer is presented. That's misinformation of a most sophisticated type. Also, notice that after labeling naturopathy “science”, supernaturalism is of primary concern to them. Yet, supernaturalism itself is science ejected. That's misinformation of a most crude type.

003. overall, AANMC is first and foremost FOR THEMSELVES, not for you:

a.k.a., not by a long shot of the highly stringent ethical condition credat emptor [let the buyer have faith -- of the professions in ethical caliber]

but instead,

not even able to pass the less ethically stringent condition of caveat emptor [let the buyer beware; falseness, 'bait and switch', deceit -- which is even of lower ethical caliber than legitimate commerce].