The ND M.O. in MT - Naturopathy's Science-Based Nonscience Context Via Troy, L. (ND Bastyr 2004):

here, I do the typical: illustrate ND nonsense. An ND claims that the naturopathic is science [see 001.a., below], codes vitalism [see 001.b. and oo1.c., below] and warns the public that if ND beliefs aren't followed they'll be harming themselves, and I reveal the ill-logic / figmentation / ruse [see 003., below]:

001. Montana ND Troy, L. (Bastyr 2004) states:

001.a. in "Licensure":

"a licensed naturopathic physician (N.D.) attends a four-year graduate level naturopathic medical school and is educated in the same basic sciences as medical doctors [...NDs are] professional leaders and pioneers in science-based natural medicine."

Note: so we have this claim of typical science upon 'the naturopathic'.

001.b. in "Naturopathic Principles":

"principles of naturopathic medicine: [#1] the healing power of nature - vis medicatrix naturae [HPN/VMN...] naturopathic physicians respect and work with the vis medicatrix naturae in diagnosis, treatment and counseling, for if this self-healing process [SHP] is not respected the patient may be harmed."

Note: so we have the premise HPN / VMN / SHP.

001.c. in "Homeopathy":

"homeopathic medicines stimulate and encourage the body’s own natural healing forces [BONHF...] the individual’s innate healing powers [IIHP] are encouraged."

Note: so we have the premise BONHF / IIHP.

002. obviously, HPN / VMN / SHP / BONHF / IIHP have be labeled science by this ND.

003. don't you believe it:

003.a. VMN or whatever other euphemism / disguise NDs use to describe their 'healing context' is the science ejected concept of vitalism.

Note: this is NDs' M.O., claim science as a context while hiding naturopathy's actual nonscience context. Since the concept of vitalism is as scientific as the Tooth Fairy, warning people that if they don't respect a just-as-imaginary 'purposeful life spirit' that supposedly runs one's physiology [VMN] is as dangerous as a dentist warning a patient that if they don't make offerings to the Tooth Fairy, they are in serious trouble.

When is typical science NOT science at all: naturopathy.

004. so, though two articles by NDs were recently published in Montana's Great Falls Tribune newspaper on 2009-10-05 (Arnold, Oleynik), I'd be wary about ND claims of medical expertise.

Trust in Nonsense: Naturopathy's 'Science-Based Therapeutic Order' - A Free Chapter Courtesy of Elsevier's naturalmedtext.com:

here, I link to 'the essentially naturopathic', a freely offered chapter out of the Textbook of Natural Medicine [3rd ed., a.k.a. TNM3] as provided by, I'll assume, publisher Elsevier [see 001., below] wherein the nonscientific is ridiculously labeled science; and, I cite the claim that TNM3's principal, ND Pizzorno, can be trusted [see 002.,below]; and I point out that vitalism is hugely science-ejected [see 003., below]; and then I provide a bit of advice [see 004., below]:

001. TNM3's “Chapter 3: A Hierarchy of Healing: The Therapeutic Order, The Unifying Theory of Naturopathic Medicine” by NDs Zeff, Snider, and Myers states (archived here):

001.a. naturopathy's essential vitalism:

“this is the removal of the obstacles to cure, which allows the action of the vis medicatrix naturae [VMN], the vital force, the healing power of nature [HPN p.034...treatment must] harmonize with your life force [p.035...] to stimulate the overall vital force [...] the entire physiologic system [...includes the] life force [ p.036].”

Note: I regard this as the Rosetta Stone for 'decoding naturopathy's coded vitalistic context'. E.g., here's a typical iteration of 'the essentially naturopathic'. NDs Lai [ha! 'NDs lie!!!'] and Sinclair, both graduates of SCNM, state in “What is Naturopathic Medicine?”:

“N.D.s treat disease and restore health by implementing therapies based on the following naturopathic principles […#5] the healing power of nature.” And that's all you get. What's so fascinating is that these ND s do not in any manner that I can find express VMN for what it is, a science-ejected sectarian article of faith / belief. They're not even slightly hinting at the 'belief' actuality that vitalism is. Instead, HPN is mentioned in naturalistic language and never defined contextually, while their frakking web site name is “healingpowerofnature.com”!

001.b. claimed as science:

“[naturopathy is] 'science-based natural medicine' [SBNM p.028...the] definition of naturopathic medicine [...states naturopathy is a] science [...based on] vis medicatrix naturae [p.032].”

Note: so, the 'essentially naturopathic is to claim that within science is VMN. Now, it should be noted that Pizzorno claims to have “coined” this status of SBNM based upon VMN. What's so fascinating about that is that he didn't do any science to establish the scientific basis of naturopathy's contextual premise [VMN]. As near as I can tell, he wrote some words... and voila!!! Pizzorno didn't do any ACTUAL science and then publish that science in science journals and establish the scientific basis of vitalism & kind. It seems it's easier to just use INK! I call this 'science by decree'.

002. naturalmedtext.com's homepage states (archived since 2007):

“[regarding the editor] you can trust Pizzorno [...and that the book is] unsurpassed in its authority and scope […it's] the most thoroughly researched and carefully referenced text on natural medicine […] with Pizzorno: Textbook of Natural Medicine […] e-edition, you'll have a textbook that stays updated throughout the life of the edition, so you always have access to the latest evidence-based information on natural medicine.”

003. now, vitalism is hugely science-ejected. Here's one of my favorite quotes, by Crick:

"when facts come in the door, vitalism flies out of the window". And he wrote that in the mid-1960s.

004. so, don't trust Pizzorno. Or naturopathy. That's my advise. When is a groundless figment a 'theory' and 'science'? Naturopathy. When are you asked to trust in nonsense? Naturopathy:

E.g.: that Lai and Sinclair practice also claims in “Homeopathic Medicine”:

“[homeopathy is] a powerful system of medicine [...that] effectively treat[s] both acute and chronic disease […by] stimulating the body's natural healing response [coded vitalism].”

Homeopathy, of course, is empty sugar pills.

Nobels in Physiology or Medicine For 3 Americans - But Where is ND Pizzorno & NCNM's?

here, I ponder a great mystery. Three Americans have been awarded Nobels today for their work in genetics [see 001., below]; but, why haven't ND Joseph E. Pizzorno (NCNM 1975) [JEP] & his ND-granting alma mater National College of Natural Medicine [NCNM] similarly been awarded Nobels in physiology or medicine for HUMONGOUS discoveries that are MUCH MORE Earth-shaking? [see 002., below]; oh [see 003., below]:

001. the New York Times reports in "Three Americans Share Nobel Prize for Medicine" (2009-10-05):

"the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine was awarded this year to three American scientists who solved a problem of cell biology with deep relevance to cancer and aging [...] the three winners are Elizabeth H. Blackburn of the University of California, San Francisco, Carol W. Greider of Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine and Jack W. Szostak of Massachusetts General Hospital."

Note: kudos.

002. the hugely science-ejected decreed as science by JEP and NCNM:

002.a. naturopathy is labeled overall as science by both:

002.a1. JEP on this 2007 archived WebMD blog post per:

"my basic beliefs [...#4] health care decisions should be made on the basis of good scientific evidence [...] when starting Bastyr University in Seattle, WA, in 1978, I coined and implemented the concept of science-based natural medicine. I knew that for this medicine [naturopathy, natural medicine] to be accepted, it had to have a strong scientific foundation [...I] coauthored the Textbook of Natural Medicine, the most widely read definitive work on science-based natural medicine."

Note: so, science-science-science!

002.a2. and NCNM in their 2009-2010 catalog:

"[the] principles of naturopathic medicine. 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. These principles stand as the distinguishing marks of the profession ['professional ethical status' claim]: [#1] the healing power of nature, vis medicatrix naturae [VMN]. The body has the inherent ability to establish, maintain and restore health. The healing process is ordered and intelligent [teleological!]; nature heals through the response of the life force. The physician’s role is to facilitate and augment this process [p.024...#2] respect and cooperate with the vis medicatrix naturae in diagnosis, treatment and counseling [p.025]."

Note: the [absurd] claim is that VMN [& supernaturalism & teleology] survives scientific scrutiny, and since science is self-testing and self-correcting, what is implied is that this set of principles are not DOGMA / CREED, but continuously and especially current scientifically supported fact.

002.b. both JEP and NCNM also describe how, within that science, are the naturopathic concepts of:

002.b1. vitalism (for JEP, see "Homeopathy: Where Less is More?" in Vegetarian Times, 1992-03 {books.google.com has it for free}). E.g. specifically for NCNM [in addition to what I've cited in 002.a2.], by way of p.035 in that catalog, fused into an ND is:

"homeopathic medicine [...per the course] HOM 510 – Introduction to Homeopathy (2 lecture credits). This course introduces students to the principles and philosophy of classical homeopathy. Students will learn about vitalistic medicine [VMN aka 'the essentially naturopathic'], the history of vitalism, the vital force in health and disease, the nature of medicines, and ways to affect the vital force. Prerequisites: NPH 410 [Naturopathic Med History & Phil & Ther I]."

Note: interesting how this supposed "science" area called naturopathy doesn't mention that several decades ago vitalism was thumped to death by science.

002.b2. supernatural spiritism (JEP). E.g. specifically for NCNM, we're told in that same catalog:

"[homeopathy] promotes the return to health on physical, mental and spiritual levels [p.027]."

Note: interesting how this supposed "science" area called naturopathy doesn't mention that supernaturalism was thumped to death by science a few centuries ago.

002.c. and here are some aggregations of these naturopathic claims:

their science claim, their vitalism reality, their supernaturalism reality.

Note: the obvious absurdity is naturopathy's claim that science and nonscience are the same thing.

002.c1. SO, naturopathy is claiming itself collectively science, vitalistic, and supernaturalistic.

003. these discoveries by naturopathy are EARTH-SHAKING:

wait. Oh. My bad. Turns out that vitalism is hugely science-ejected; supernaturalism is hugely science-ejected; and naturopathy is indeed considered a cultic pseudoscience.

Note: you see, naturopathy is false and they are making a lot of money off of false labels. Labeling what is hugely not science as a science degree is ethically and morally repugnant. And so on. JEP had said that health care decisions should be made using good science. Hmmm.

004. a Venn diagram, of my creation, that entails much of this:

Naturopathy [mis]Labeled a "Profession" - ND 'Doc' Gunther in the CT Post, 2009-10-04:

Burgeson, J. (? ?) writes in the Connecticut Post article "'Doc' Gunther: A Lifetime of Service" (2009-10-04):

"George 'Doc' Gunther of Stratford [CT...] holds the record as Connecticut's longest-serving legislator [...] he retired from the legislature in 2006 [...] Gunther gets his 'Doc' nickname from his profession -- he's a naturopathic physician."

Note: I severely disagree with that 'professional ethical status' label. It's as true as the scientific basis of the essentially naturopathic.

SBM on NCNM's 'Wrongness' - Oregonlive.com 2009-09-30:

I recently added a comment to a Science-Based Medicine post by Mark Crislip titled "What's Wrong With This Picture?" regarding this Oregonlive.com article. Many of the comments are a hoot. Here's mine:

daijiyobu on 02 Oct 2009 at 3:24 pm

Coincidentally, I’m holding in my hand right now a USPS mailing I received from NCNM’s admissions department on 2009-10-28.

I like to keep up with NCNM’s postal fraud: the labeling of the completely science-ejected as science, and the coding of their sectarian belief set in manipulative / deceptive naturalistic language.

It has some nice examples of such in it, too:

“[NCNM's] three exceptional degree programs [...] in the art and science of natural medicine [...the] ND [...the] MSOM [...the] MAc [...all based on] NCNM philosophy [...centered upon] the intrinsic healing power of nature [...] the human body is in tune with a natural force that moves living things toward a healthy state [(coded vitalism)...within a] body, mind and spirit [(supernaturalism)...and] Rita Bettenburg, ND. Dean of Naturopathic Medicine [...says] ‘the medicine is proving itself [...] in science’.”

I’m a junkie for the naturopaTHICK [my term for their stupidity / absurdity].

The oregonlive.com article’s picture may pertain to these THICKnesses:

a) NCNM’s MSOM, “Master of Science in Oriental Medicine”:

at http://www.ncnm.edu/admissions-home/school-of-classical-chinese-medicine.php we’re told that the “science” is “holistic life science” that “will take you outside the Western concept of science” and that Oriental Medicine is — ISYN — “an independent science that has its own parameters and does not require validation by other scientific systems” ["THICK" enough for you?].

b) NCNM’s ND, “Doctor of Naturopathic Medicine”:

at http://www.ncnm.edu/admissions-home/school-of-naturopathic-medicine/about-naturopathic-medicine.php we’re told that the hugely nonscientific survives scientific scrutiny ["THICK" enough for you?].

These degrees are truly EXCEPTIONAL: as in ‘except your science isn’t science at all’!

Perhaps their answer: ‘oh, you thought we were science! No, we’re not science, we’re science.’

-r.c.

ANMA ND Millie Hinkle's Camel Milk Cure-All Therapy:

here, I quote from a recent Salisbury Post article covering an ND's assertions about camel milk [I highly recommend visiting the article for some REALLY ODD pictures; see 001., below]; and I visit that ND's commercial web-site to see what else she's claiming [see 002., below]:

001. the Salisbury Post's Shavonne Potts (? ?) writes in
"Practitioner of Natural Medicine Researching Camels' Blood, Milk, Urine as Potential Cures":

"Millie Hinkle says camels are good for what ails you. In fact, Hinkle, who practices natural medicine as a doctor of naturopathy [an ND!], says the animal's milk, blood and even urine may have healing properties that can help people with a host of medical problems [a cure-all claim!...] 'camel's antibodies can go into the blood, the body and the brain and destroy toxins,' Hinkle said [really!]. Hinkle said the milk and blood have properties that can cure diseases or disorders from autism to diabetes. She and other proponents even tout its benefits for treating cancer. But some scientists are skeptical [yeah, baby!]. Dr. Wei Jia, who researches the health effects of certain foods, said he would not believe any animal's milk or blood would have significant anti-cancer effects on humans. 'We know it does not cure these diseases,' said Jia, co-director of the University of North Carolina at Greensboro Center for Research Excellence at the N.C. Research Campus in Kannapolis [...] Jia said he wouldn't think an animal's milk, blood or urine would have health benefits for humans. 'That's far from being likely. It's probably not true,' he said [hooray for PLAUSIBILITY!...] Hinkle says camel antibodies are smaller than any other mammal antibody, which means they can enter tissues and cells that other antibodies can't [...] the goal is to put the blood and urine in pill form or a concentrated amount in capsule form [$$$]. 'From that, they can rehabilitate an immune system,' Hinkle said."

Note: I commend the author for obtaining expert opinion on this matter.

002. ND Millie Hinkle writes at "About Camel Milk USA and Dr. Millie Hinkle":

002.a. per her biography:

"Millie Hinkle, ND, DH, HHP, has been in practice since 1987. Having received her training in the U.S., Germany, and France, she is board-certified by the American Naturopathic Medical Association. Other certifications include a Holistic Health Practitioner through the American Association of Drugless Practitioners. She also holds a nursing degree, has training in radiology, and an associate degree of applied science in dental hygiene. She also holds a Bachelor of Science degree and a Bachelor of Health and Physical Education. She has also held memberships in the National Health Federation, the American Preventative Medical Association, and the Coalition for Natural Health."

002.b. and per the section "Facts About Camel Milk":

"here are some interesting medical facts about camel milk [...it's] easily digested [...] antibacterial and antiviral [...] anti-tumor [...having] apparent positive effect on breast cancer [...it] has been used for centuries to treat liver disease, and studies have been performed for hepatitis and liver cancer with promising results [...it] protect[s] against types of cancer [...] camel milk has been used to cure the following illnesses [...] autism [...] milk allergies [...] tuberculosis [...] Crohn's disease [...and this ND has said] 'the health benefits for diabetes, autism, cancer and many more illnesses are endless' [and that's a cure-all!]."

Note: these are quite incredible cure-all claims.

SFC & SPI on an ND's Swine Flu Expertise - Reporter Robbins on NCNM ND Peters (2009-09-21):

here, I cite and comment on some of the canards that are used when journalists uncritically promote naturopathy [see 001., below]; and I delve particularly into this article's coding of naturopathy's science-ejected vitalistic context [see 002. & 003., below]:

001. Robbins, N. (? ?) states in the San Francisco Chronicle article which mostly deals with naturopathic swine flu treatment [yikes!] "Naturopath Bridges Gap in Treatment, Prevention" [also in the Seattle Post-Intelligencer](2009-09-21):

[the title itself is a canard - a gap? what problem is not being addressed that NDs can better assist with? oh, see below - vitalistic & supernatural fantasies in the place of scientific knowledge and honesty / misrepresented as science and frankness];

"like most doctors [ND] Karen Peters is gearing up for a flu season [but, NDs are far from 'like most doctors' - for instance, NDs' education and collective creed falsely labels that which is profoundly science-ejected as science - which is quite dishonest / absurd]";

"as a licensed ND - [a] doctor of naturopathic medicine - Peters believes that the body has an innate ability to heal itself [more on 'BIAHI vitalistic coding' in 002., below]";

"when it comes to promoting mass flu vaccinations, she pauses [wow!...] 'we cannot always count on science to solve all our health problems,' she says [wow, just simply WOW! but NDs are not shy about labeling themselves 'science, medicine & prevention experts']";

"she cautions against trying too hard to lower fevers [...] taking heavy doses of medicine to reduce fevers may work against the body's virus fighting power [really! - prove it. sounds like a delay in care, when time is critical and ACTUAL expert advise highly warranted]";

"naturopathic medicine [is] geared to prevent illness, and more conventional medical protocols [are] devoted to treating illness [really! oh, so our modern medical and public health systems don't prevent and only treat, and the ND takes up the 'prevention slack'. but, seeing as she doesn't expressedly support science or vaccination...hmmm.]. Naturopathic medicine is a personalized, not a mass, approach to health care [in other words, relativistic]. She tells her patients there is no one-size-fits-all flu fighting formula [actually, science provides actual answers, not antiscience relativistic 'answers from my ass']. What buffers one body against the onslaught of flu symptoms may not work for others [really! if knowledge is so relative and science doesn't have the best answers, how can we trust that she knows ANYTHING actual!]";

"Peters considers herself an old-fashioned family doctor [really! well, if you as an ND are based on what is in 002., below, which is true, then yes you'd be quite old-fashioned - which NDs are]";

"patient Crystal Paul, 28, of Pinole, said [...] 'she listens to me, and gives me hope and confidence in my body's ability to heal itself' [again, regarding 'BAHI vitalistic coding', see 002., below]";

"to find a naturopathic doctor [the reporter recommends]: California Naturopathic Doctors Association: www.calnd.org";

Note: the author's web page is http://www.noellerobbins.com/, her bio. is http://www.noellerobbins.com/bio.html

002. regarding BIATI / BATI:

if you delve into the context that underlies naturopathy, you find that NDs' 'body's healing blah-blah-blah' is the science-ejected concept known as vitalism. What's really sad is that the patient is being given FALSE HOPE: in a vitalistic fantasy not being fully / transparently explained.

003. what ND Karen Peters's web site says:

003.a. in "Naturopathic Medicine" we're told:

"naturopathic doctors (NDs) complete a four-year postgraduate level training [...] the curriculum covers traditional medical science [...] the latest in conventional health sciences [...] and in addition, coursework is infused with holistic philosophy [...] extensive training in holistic medicine [...e.g.] natural healing therapies such as [...] homeopathy [(empty pills!)...] six principles guide the naturopathic practitioner [...including the] healing power of nature [HPN...] what distinguishes naturopathy from conventional medicine [...] for patients, working with a naturopath often requires a paradigm shift [(I'll say)...] a flexible state [I'd say gullible state, with wallet out & open] that allows for optimal function to sustain the body and develop the spirit [supernaturalism]. The belief that the body uses the healing power of nature -- its innate ability to heal -- is inherent in naturopathy."

Note: but, there is no transparency to what exactly HPN is here, either.

003.b. in "Meet the Doctor" we're told:

"[that she's a graduate of NCNM and that] a cornerstone of Dr. Peters’ practice is her confidence in the body’s innate ability to heal [(coded vitalism, again)...and that this is] progressive medicine."

Note: if you have any doubts about her alma mater NCNM's false portrayal of the science-ejected vitalistic and kind as science and kind, see it blatantly expressed here.

So, I'm supposed to trust someone to treat me medically for serious things who does not distinguish between what is in fact scientific and what isn't [it's something an NCNM graduate is obligated towards!] -- and who can't tell me straight what they're all about [an NCNM tradition!]?

Now, calnd.org also, in "Naturopathic Medicine - The Basics" states naturopathy's supposed science expertise while coding vitalism: "naturopathic doctors are trained at accredited, four-year, post-graduate, residential naturopathic medical programs. The training consists of comprehensive study of the conventional medical sciences [...with] a commitment to state-of-the-art scientific research [...and] vis medicatrix naturae -- 'the healing power of nature' [...] remains one of the central themes of naturopathic philosophy today [coded vitalism]."

No thanks - progress is not backwards into medieval thinking. And it is quite absurd to claim that you are science when your central / defining context is a belief that is hugely science-ejected. Wacko.

PalMD on HuffPo's Homeopath Dana Ullman - 'A Dangerous, Idiotic Twit':

PalMD writes in "A New Low At HuffPo":

"Dana Ullman [...] has started blogging at the Huffington Post [...] the stupid truly burns brightly in this one [...that's] certainly an appropriate venue for his brand of cult medicine belief [...and his] stunning level of ignorance of basic human biology [...we know] there is a science to medicine -- our instincts and hunches often betray us, and only by studying the body systematically can we form valid conclusions. Or, if you're lazy or deceitful, you can just make shit up. Which brings us to Dana Ullman [...and his] ignorant load of horse shit [...] one can view the human body in one of two fundamental ways: as a typical biological organism that is subject to the usual laws of physics, chemistry, and biology, and therefore understandable through systematic investigation; or as some sort of mystical thing infused with an elan vital, subject to the whims of the supernatural and fundamentally mysterious. It's pretty easy to verify which is a better model of reality, and which is a fundamentally arbitrary fantasy [...] confounding a reaction with a purposeful, beneficial response is idiotic [...it's a] type of teleologic[al] thinking [that] is child-like [...] Dana Ullman is an ignorant twit who leads a fringe medical cult which promulgates dangerous falsehoods [...per] his pet medical cult, homeopathy."

Note: one of the central reasons I left naturopathy was due to its cultic, vitalistic & teleological supernaturalism falsely postured as 'science not belief'. The retardedness known as homeopathy is actually labeled a science by naturopathy.

Decoding Naturopathy's Science-Mislabeled Vitalism - Meyer, M. (ND UBCNM):

here, I analyze the verbiage of a University of Bridgeport College of Naturopathic Medicine ND graduate Melanie Meyer who disguises naturopathy's essential vitalism and mislabels the naturopathic as scientific [as she was trained / miseducated to do]:

001. Meyer, M. (ND UBCNM) states in "About Naturopathic Medicine":

"there are six principles that serve as the foundation of naturopathic care [...#2] the healing power of nature - vis medicatrix naturae [...this is] at the core of naturopathic philosophy is the belief that human beings have an innate ability to heal [...] education: naturopathic doctors [...are educated within] a basic biomedical science foundation."

002. lets analyze this:

002.a. VMN, according to this ND's alma mater, UB, is the concept of vitalism.

Note: here's a larger collection.

002.b. also according to UB, naturopathy essentially is science.

002.c. but, most interesting, national science organizations such as the National Center for Science Education and the National Association of Biology Teachers emphasize that vitalistic theory is OUTSIDE of science / NOT science.

Note: this consensus statement was made before UBCNM opened / was approved by the State of Connecticut.

003. so, again, naturopathy falsely labeling as science what is hugely the science-ejected.

BCMA vs. BCNA - Somebody's Position is False (Guess Who?):

here, I cover some ground concerning the [bogus] scientific commitment of the British Columbia Naturopathic Association [BCNA] and the [actual] scientific commitment of the British Columbia Medical Association [see 001., below]; and I quote from a recent Naturopathic Doctor News and Review [NDNR] article regarding this matter, and cite NDNR's explicit iteration of naturopathy's essential science-ejected vitalism sectarian belief [see 002., below]:

001.a. the BCNA has stated, regarding naturopathy, [archived since 2006 for posterity], in "About Naturopathic Medicine: The Nature of Naturopathic Medicine" by Cassie, G. (? ?):

"naturopathic medicine is science based natural medicine [...] the philosophy of naturopathic treatment [...] is threefold: [#]1. [first and foremost!] vis medicatrix naturae [VMN]: the body has the inherent capacity to heal in the proper therapeutic environment. NDs believe in the recuperative power of the organism [this is naturopathy's vitalism, coded and claimed as science]."

Note: fascinating. So, VMN is science. Except, of course naturopathy is not being transparent / honest, since VMN is actually their vitalistic context which in fact is science-ejected. This is the typical naturopathic falsehood - claim science, hide the sectarian belief system you actually are beneath naturalistic language.

So, in the absurd land of naturopathy, lies of omission and obscurity are ethically fine, and the science-ejected is the same thing as the science-based. I find it ethically repugnant.

Additionally, BCNA has emphasized (here) :

"there is no 'ND biology' or science education that is any different than the science education MDs receive."

Note: my answer - bullshit. NDs have a complete lack of integrity when it comes to what is truly science -- e.g., the school I attended claims that within the scientific is the vitalistic and teleological, and supernatural. That's idiotic. It's also fraudulent trade. They have redefined science to the point of idiocy.

001.b. the BCMA has stated, regarding its goals, in "The BCMA Submission to Minister George Abbott on Proposed Amendments to the Naturopathic Physicians Regulation" (2009-02-19) :

"the BCMA has a track record of successful collaboration with government to achieve our shared objectives of improving health care access and quality. We share the objective of providing the citizens of BC with access to health practitioners with adequate training who are able to offer assessment, advice, and services supported by scientific knowledge."

Note: I do not have knowledge of the BCMA stating such outright absurdities as the BCNA. So, I have a higher degree of trust in their scientific integrity - BCMA seems mainstream and does not appear to be an entity dedicated to promoting cultic health sectarianism.

002.a. the NDNR article "British Columbia Association: Scope of Practice Update" (NDNR 2009-09, Vol. 5, Iss. 9) written by BCNA President Kind, C. (ND NCNM) states:

"in April 2009 the British Columbia Ministry of Health Services formalized regulations for licensed NDs that recognize the education, training, expertise [!!!] and historical and contemporary practice of naturopathic physicians [...] the announcement formalizing regulations for NDs is a result of an extensive review of the evidence and benefits of science-based naturopathic medicine by the provincial government [{wow, what a thorough job -- now the nonscientific is scientific}...] the announcement recognizes the benefits to patients of allowing NDs to practice to a greater extent of their education and training, while streamlining and improving the delivery of healthcare [...] naturopathic medicine has been a licensed profession in BC since 1923 [...a] health profession [...] the organization representing BC’s medical doctors, British Columbia Medical Association (BCMA), refused to meet with us during the negotiation process and decided, instead, to spread comment that was both unconstructive and often false. There were many instances of egregious and even malicious media comment [...] the intent of the new legislation is to remove barriers to interdisciplinary practice which are not generally in the public interest [...and speaks of] the benefit of patients [...] although the BCMA seems unwilling to openly embrace the shared scopes model it benefits patients and provides better health options [...] for over 50 years, members of the profession, staff, family and patients have participated in an effort to [mis!!!]inform politicians and bureaucrats of what naturopathic medicine is and what it has to offer."

Note: so, we have the claim that the naturopathic is science-based, meets the ethical strictures of professionalism, and overall that naturopathy's 'ways' are a benefit to the public. I say 'more bullshit' - this severely harms the positions of professionalism and science. It's HUGELY absurd that the 'false ones a.k.a. naturopathy' can claim -- with impunity, while they hold a false position with impunity a.k.a an education racket -- that they have the higher ground regarding 'the scientific' and 'medical'.

It is an interesting question as to whether BCNA has libeled BCMA.

002.b. that same NDNR issue states naturopathy's essential science-ejected sectarian vitalism per publisher and SCNM ND Tallman, and kind.

003. what naturopathy has to offer, overall - falsehood, exploitation and the degradation of standards [the hugely science-ejected falsely labeled scientific, traded to a trusting public both clinically and educationally].

Naturopathy's Essential Cultic Vitalism, NDNR 2009-09 - Co-Author Loomis, M. (ND NCNM) & Publisher Talman, D. (ND SCNM):

the current issue of Naturopathic Doctor News and Review [NDNR] has two interesting statements regarding naturopathy's essential vitalism [a science-ejected concept]:

001. the NDNR article "Nurturing the Child's Well-Being [...]" (Vol. 5, Issue 9) by Loomis, M. (ND NCNM) and Luvmour, J. (PhD ?) states:

"the organizing principle [OP]. There is an organizing principle in each stage of childhood [...] the organizing principle is a life force [vitalism] that determines the general ways in which human energy, capabilities, inclinations, and interactions are structured and act. The goal of each organizing principle [p.001] is optimal wellness [p.004]."

Note: so we have OP = LF.

002. in this same issue, NDNR publisher Tallman, D. (ND SCNM) states:

"the axiom 'the faith of a child' has its place in medicine as physicians rely on faith in the vis [vitalism] while making therapeutic decisions [...] physicians [should] understand and have child-like faith in the vis [p.003]."

003. I don't know about you, but I don't believe that a supposed physician [ND] should be approaching a supposedly fundamental premise of a supposed profession with the mentality of a child:

Vitalism -- naturopathy's vis medicatrix naturae / life force: some call it faith, some call it belief - I call it ignorance. Naturopathy mainly calls it a scientific fact, which it isn't.

I caution: overall, to take one's mentality into such an credulous realm resembles the thought-control of so many cults, which infantilize and subjugate call critical thought.

This is thought reform, and it is pernicious.

As A Follow-Up -- 12 Fraudulent Years On:

here, I reiterate the fundamental falsehood that is University of Bridgeport Naturopathic Medicine -- wherein, a label of science [see 001., below] is put upon the profoundly science-ejected [see 002., below]:

001. UB labels naturopathy and kind science:

obviously.

Note: simultaneously, UB states naturopathy's essential vitalism (and here) [and teleology, and supernaturalism].

002. the scientific status of the vitalistic [teleological and supernatural]:

vitalism and such is science-ejected.

003. note:

I call this "12 Fraudulent Years on" because around 1997 is when I was lured into UB's naturopathy program -- a new program, labeled science, based upon the for several decades and for a few centuries science-ejected.

The exploitation by this stinking pile of horseshit continues.

CT Complaint Archive -- Venn Diagrams Concerning Naturopathy & Science, 2003:

here, I post a scan of part of a complaint I filed with the State of Connecticut a few years ago that the State of Connecticut has apparently ignored, and I comment on CT from 6 years distance:

001. the 2003 Venn diagrams & verbiage:

Note: I'd titled this "the obfuscation." Literally: "the concealment of intended meaning in communication, making communication confusing, intentionally ambiguous, and more difficult to interpret." The "front stage" is subtitled "compatibles claim", by which I mean that naturopathy claims it is science, and therein that the naturopathic is scientific. Some of the labels they use [CT, UB, AANP & co.] are "health science", "nonsectarian", and "the modern science-based primary care physician". These are "the claims that drew me in" -- an inducement, under false pretenses. The science is claimed to be actual / "mainstream" since it is at a university, and overall naturopathy claims a "science-basis".

But, in actuality, underneath, this is their reality: "the back stage" or "incompatibles reality" is what's really going on. This is "the reality I discovered" in attending the University of Bridgeport and in researching. What we have is "sectarian science" a.k.a. "actual pseudoscience" which is 'science on the side' embedded within a belief-system not science supported in any manner and actually science-ejected. The essentially naturopathic is exterior to science. Particularly, their actual vitalism and teleology, and their metaphysicalisms [including their supernaturalisms]. This includes their pantheism, which when combined with their vitalism which they equate theistically, I have termed autoentheism.

I regard all this as vulgar, still -- "a mind-fuck". Yes, the whole racket is AANP "profession"-centered, by oath and degree. But, of course, to actually be a profession, you have to tell the truth and you have to be right.

002. my opinion of the State of Connecticut and accessories:

CT will not incriminate 'naturopathy's obvious education fraudulence' because CT approved the whole racket. By incriminating naturopathy, the State of CT incriminates themselves: particularly for not doing due diligence in the first place, and then not responding to complaints like mine. So, the case continues to be built, but I'm pretty sure that it will have to occur Federally. CT approved the UB program about 1997. They've [CT, UB, AANP & co.] too much to answer for financially since so much money has been spent and loaned towards a hugely fraudulent education program. Damages include those expenditures, and also the diversion from other accurately labeled education venues / careers.

Note: my graduate school debt increases on a daily basis. The graduate schools include: NYU [which I left, to go to UBCNM], UB / UBCNM [that big racket], the State University of CT, and other schools [where I continued research on all this]. These are loans that are not going to expire, and will follow me to my grave -- an amount in the six-figures. So, I'm guessing there's no statute of limitations on all this. I also refuse to pay towards any education loan. New York State has gotten involved because when I consolidated all these graduate school loans, that aggregate became the obligation of the State I'd first taken out a Federal loan in.

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

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

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

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

Bastyr's Invitation to Study 'The Scientific' - 2009-09:

a Bastyr U. email that I received 2009-09-15 titled "Natural Directions: A Bastyr University Office of Admissions Newsletter" (2009-09) states:

"[we're] supporting your choice for a nature-inspired, science-based career [...at] Bastyr University [for Bastyr's archive of these newsletters, with this claim, click here; for archive.org's, click here]"

Note: this includes their naturopathy program, and other woos. Since naturopathy is hugely based on the science-ejected, it's really strange that that therein it is then falsely labeled and traded by Bastyr as 'the science-based'.

Danger, Will Robinson.

Utter Nonsense Labeled as Science, Compassion & Caring - Utter, N.L. (ND Bastyr 2003):

here, I muse upon naturopathic miscommunication and outright unethical twistedness:

001. the Durango Herald's article "Bringing Compassion Back into Medicine" (2009-09-14), topically labeled "Green Medicine", by Bastyr naturopath Nancy Utter, states:

"I have a dream that health care in this country [etc....] in my dream, every person has access to health care that heals the whole person - body, mind and spirit [...] one place to start is to rekindle compassion in medicine [...a.k.a.] 'the sincere wish to alleviate the suffering of another' [...by] creating a setting in which doctors can be more caring and let their innate compassion show [...per] practicing good medicine [...] one of these models is practiced by naturopathic doctors [(really!)...] the essential premise of naturopathic medicine is that doctors must support the mind and the spirit as well as the body to promote full healing [...] it creates trust [...] it helps to lessen suffering [...] join me in my dream of putting the 'care' back into health care [...] Nancy Utter is a naturopathic doctor who completed a five-year training program at Bastyr University in Seattle."

Note: hold on while I VOMIT in my own mouth.

002. how compassionate and caring are Bastyr NDs? Compassionate and caring enough to totally misrepresent the scientific enterprise and not abide by the typical duty of "informed consent" that binds the physician-patient relationship:

002.a. naturopathy's misrepresentation of science:

Bastyr has this nonsense description of their programs and of naturopathy therein in "Bastyr University":

"Bastyr's international faculty teaches the natural health sciences with an emphasis on integrating mind, body, spirit [supernaturalism] and nature [vitalism]."

Note: so, we've an outright science label placed falsely upon the supernatural and coded vitalistic science-unsupported / science-ejected. How is it caring and compassionate to pretend that that which is in no way scientific is science? How do people benefit from such so-called compassion? How is this "good"?

002.b. not relating naturopathy's actual nonscientific position and therein violating informed consent:

to me, it is not permissible to misrepresent [per 002.a. above] the actual "nature" / context of naturopathy, literally -- which is the science ejected concept of "vis medicatrix naturae" aka vitalism.

003. this is quite a twisted version of compassion and care, in my view. It victimizes and exploits. It abuses the relationship between practitioner and trusting patient. It seems to me that NDs care much more about maintaining their sectarian, deceptive agenda than rationality, accuracy and patient autonomy.

004. Utter tells us at her own web page "Medicine by Naturopathic Physicians":

"naturopathic physicians (NDs) take a holistic approach to healing, and aim to cure disease by taking advantage of the body's self-regenerative powers and harnessing the restorative power of nature [(vitalism coded)...] naturopathic physicians work to identify and eliminate the cause of disease, and are guided by seven basic principles [...#1] the healing power of nature - facilitate each individual's own healing processes [(again, vitalism coded)...NDs are] educated in all of the same basic sciences as an M.D. [...a.k.a.] the same basic sciences as allopathic physicians [...] a naturopathic physician takes rigorous professional board exams [...] naturopathic physicians cooperate with other medical professionals [...] naturopathic physicians are rigorously trained [...] during 4 years of intensive study the curriculum includes all basic and clinical science courses offered in traditional medical education [...] students of naturopathic medicine use the Western medical sciences as a foundation."

Note: so, we're not told of the actual vitalism that defines naturopathy [though we are told of the actual supernaturalism that does] with any kind of transparency, but we are told falsely that there's this 'foundation of science' to the naturopathic. And we get the 'trust us' claim of 'professionalism' and supposed 'rigor'.

But, the scientific basis of the nonscientific is -- Utter nonsense [irresistible!].