Facebook Fun with the AANMC's 'We Are Science-Based' Mislabeling, 2009-11:

here, I share some communication between myself and the Association of Accredited Naturopathic Medical Colleges [AANMC] per their Facebook page [see 001., below (I've screen-captured it [sc], in case they decide to expunge)]; and, I share my take on AANMC's 'we are CERTAINLY science-based' false self-labeling, particularly based upon what actual, scientific, academic, national organizations say about the essentially naturopathic [see 002., below]:

001. the AANMC:

001.a. has a Facebook page that states:

“considering a career in health care [?…] AANMC schools: Bastyr U., BINM, CCNM, NCNM, SCNM, UBCNM, NUHS.”

.[sc]

.

Note: this is, essentially, an advertisement.  They are attempting to increase their market with certain claims.  This is a commercial page for a claimed 'of the professions consortia' on a social networking site.

001.b. so, I asked this simple question on that AANMC page:

“I'm wondering, is naturopathy based upon science? I've heard different things, and I'd want my medicine to be science-based.”

.[sc]

.

Note: I asked this question based upon 'naturopathy is science' claims made by AANMC on their web pages, e.g. “Naturopathic Medicine - FAQs”, which states:

“q: which classes or literature would be helpful prior to enrollment in a naturopathic physician program A: for a basic science foundation and overall exposure to help prepare you for naturopathic medical studies, consider the following: read the 'Textbook of Natural Medicine' [TNM] – a very comprehensive and often-used reference among NDs and MDs as well.”

001.c. AANMC answered:

“NDs must actually spend more hours studying the sciences than in some allopathic [yikes!  a sectarian label!] medical schools. So the answer to your question is a resounding 'YES!' - naturopathic medicine definitely has its basis in science.”

.[sc]

.

Note: my jaw dropped when I read this...the confident certainty, the absoluteness!  The specific label, in terms of commerce and supposed 'professionalism'!

001.d. my comment to this [false] claim was:

“naturopathy is based upon vitalism and supernaturalism, essentially. I have the textbooks, that's a fact [e.g., TNM!]. Both concepts are in-fact-science-ejected, and therein not science based. And that's a fact.”

.[sc]

.

Note: simply put, facts. And, to quote that great line that Eugenie Scott recently wrote in the U.S. News and World Report article "Scientist Genie Scott's Last Word to Creationist Ray Comfort: There You Go Again" (2009-11-03):

"[per blogmaster Gilgoff] here's the final post in a God & Country debate between scientist Eugenie Scott, who heads the National Center for Science Education [...per Scott] 'anyone who honestly examines the data supporting evolution [& kind] — even a young-earth creationist [or other such sectarian kind] — concludes that the science is strong. If you reject evolution [& kind], you are doing it for religious reasons [& kind]. You're entitled to your religious opinions—but not to your own scientific facts' [a modification of a line often attributed to Daniel Patrick Moynihan]."

002. what I think, knowing what I know [this label of “science” upon the essentially naturopathic, by AANMC & kind, is bullshit]:

002.a. let's look at what the TNM & co. says. Naturopathy is based upon vitalism & supernaturalism [the hugely science-ejected]:

a) the TNM site has the chapter up for viewing titled "Chapter 3" [a pdf by NDs Zeff, Snider, and Myers; to be archived here].  It states:

"Dr. Sensenig [my UB instructor in 1998, here are my notes on naturopathy's essential premise, from when I was a UB ND student of his] presented 'Back to the Future: Reintroducing Vitalism as a New Paradigm' [very old vinegar, 'new wine' label -- quite egregious poison! p.004...] vitality (properties beyond physiochemical constituents) [supernatural!!!, p.032...] vis medicatrix naturae, the vital force, the healing power of nature [VMN=VF=HPN; and per Sensenig, VMN = autoentheism = a.k.a. god power within]. This is the first step in the hierarchy of healing and what naturopathic physicians may call the overarching clinical theory of naturopathic medicine [therein, the 'essentially naturopathic!']: the therapeutic order [p.034...] address weakened or damaged systems or organs [...e.g.] the life force [p.035...] many naturopathic modalities can be used to stimulate the overall vital force [...] an entire physiologic system (immune, cardiovascular, detoxification, life force, endocrine, etc.) [p.036]".

Note: so, the essentially naturopathic is based upon the vitalistic, and a form of theism [minimally] -- when you boil it down.

b) UBCNM, where Sensenig taught me in 1998 under what I consider completely false labels [UB labels naturopathy science, still / to this day -- a page to be archived here ASP], states

in "Six Guiding Principles [#3]" [archived here]:

"illiness [illness!!!] is a purposeful process [teleological!] of the organism. The process of healing includes the generation of symptoms which are, in fact [a claimed fact!], an expression of the life force [vitalism!] attempting to heal itself [...] this healing process [...] he [the!] viz [vis!] medicatrix naturae."

c) and the supernatural.  The TNM chapter cited above also states regarding the essentially naturopathic supernatural:

"[the TNM also speaks of] mental/spiritual remedies [p.029...] part of the reason for the failures within modern medical science is the mechanistic basis of it, with its fundamental ignorance of and disrespect for [...] the natural laws of physiology governing health and healing, and especially for all things spiritual [p.032...] psycho-emotional/spiritual state [p.033...] the naturopathic physician evaluates the patient with these areas in mind, looking for aspects of disturbance, first in the spirit [p.034...] spiritual integrity. Humans are spiritual beings. They are spirits that reside within bodies. Though the general purview of the physician is the body, that instrument cannot be separated from the spirit, which animates it. If the spirit is disturbed, the body cannot be fundamentally healthy [...] disturbance in the spirit permeates the body and eventuates in physical manifestation [...] at colleges of naturopathic medicine in Australia and North America, faculty work with naturopathic medicine students to develop their ability to perceive the spiritual nature of an individual [p.035...] as [NDs] Pizzorno and Snider wrote: 'we are natural organisms, our genomes developed and expressed in the natural world. The patterns and processes inherent in nature are inherent in us. We exist as part of complex patterns of matter, energy, and spirit' [p.036...] the patient as a whole being: spiritual, mental/emotional, and physical [p.038]."

Note: so, the essentially naturopathic, per AANMC member school UBCNM, is based upon the teleological and vitalistic.  We also get a glimpse of UB naturopathic supernaturalism in "Six Guiding Principles [#4]", and a requirement for supernaturalism from UB NDs in "Six Guiding Principles [#5]".  Vitalism is hugely science-ejected.  As well as supernaturalism. According to the National Center for Science Education [NCSE] hosted page "Appendices: Science; Transitional Fossils; and Embryos":

"by now it should be clear that vitalistic and supernatural hypotheses that invariably postulate vague and amorphous mechanisms whose workings are beyond human comprehension are untestable and uninformative and hence not scientific. In fact they are not even explanations, but statements of unsolvable mysteries beyond the powers of scientific investigation."

002.b.  Pizzorno, J.E. (ND NCNM 1975), that self-proclaimed "science-based natural medicine" dean of this naturopathy revival, sums up the 'sectarian absurdity amalgam' which is the 'naturopathic belief system mislabeled as science' in his article "A Systems Approach to Wellness" excepted from his book "Total Wellness":

"[to be well, you must] live in harmony with your life-force [...] each of us needs to become more aware of the activity of the vis medicatrix naturae (life-force) deep within us [...] seven underlying, health-sustaining systems of our body must function effectively to ensure our well-being, prevent disease, and allow a full life [...including] our life-force (or spirit). Weakness in any of these seven systems results in susceptibilities that allow most common diseases to develop. Follow the recommendations below, strengthen all of these seven systems, and total wellness is yours."

Note: quite a promise.  That naturopathy is science-based is quite a false promise, and in fact absurd. I summarize this fundamental naturopathic science-ejected premise as 'purposeful life spirit', to encapsulate its teleological, vitalistic, and supernatural-spiritistic sectarian characteristic.  The fact that it is mislabeled as science and often disguised is unforgivable.

003. it has been fun playing with AANMC on Facebook.  I look forward to more exchanges.

An Invitation From an Academic Mislabeling Racket: AANMC's NUHS-Centered Webinar, 2009-11-12:

I recently received an email from the Association of Accredited Naturopathic Medical Colleges [AANMC] inviting me to a webinar, wherein naturopathy is labeled as science and professional [see 001., below]; I then look at what AANMC says about naturopathy, and what NUHS's ND lead, who is part of that webinar, says in his 2008 naturopathy textbook [see 002., below]; and, then I THINK about this falsehood in terms of academic loans [see 003., below]:

001. AANMC states:

001.a. in "November 12 Naturopathic Medicine Informational Webinar":

"for this event, the AANMC is proud to introduce Rachel Marynowski, a fourth-year student at National University of Health Sciences (NUHS) [...] our webinar will also include presentations by naturopathic medicine professionals [...] including 'An Introduction to Naturopathic Medicine' presented by Dr. Fraser Smith, assistant dean of the NUHS naturopathic medicine program."

Note: so, we have the label of science and professional upon the naturopathic.  And, we have Smith. The webinar agenda can currently be accessed here, where AANMC tells us: "this event is sponsored jointly by the seven accredited colleges of naturopathic medicine comprising the Association of Accredited Naturopathic Medical Colleges (AANMC)."

001.b. in "Student Profile: Rachel Marynowski, Naturopathic Medical Student, Class of 2010":

"prior to entering naturopathic medical school, Rachel attended the University of Georgia, where she received a bachelor of science degree in public health [...] Rachel plans on returning to Georgia, where she was born and raised, to practice traditional naturopathy in an integrative setting."

Note: again, AANMC explicitly links naturopathy to SCIENCE, and I'd argue 'typical academic science' at that.  Also, this person will be a 'typical ND' per "traditional naturopathy."

002. what does AANMC & Smith say about naturopathy [and is it honest & true]?

002.a. AANMC states on their web site:

002.a1. that they are comprised of, per their homepage: "Bastyr University, Boucher Institute of Naturopathic Medicine, The Canadian College of Naturopathic Medicine, National College of Natural Medicine, Southwest College of Naturopathic Medicine, University of Bridgeport [UB, where I did most of an ND], National University of Health Sciences."  True enough.

002.a2. that naturopathy is science-based.

Note: AANMC states that this is typical science.  This isn't true, or honest.  Now, because they claim professions-level ethical status, they must be held to the highest of ethical strictures.  It is not at all difficult to research the scientific status of what is the naturopathic, and to find that such is indeed hugely not science.  This false 'due diligence' of 'scientific professionalism', therein, I consider a deliberate ruse.

002.a3. that naturopathy is based on the "healing power of nature [HPN]".

Note: now, HPN is not being honestly contextualized here.  You are not being informed.  You are being, in my view, manipulated and deceived. The language is falsely naturalistic and is quite incomplete. HPN is mentioned three times on the page, yet AANMC never here shares the in fact sectarian belief that HPN is: vitalism, which I usually encapsulate as a belief in a 'purposeful life spirit' running the body.  Also, at UB, I was taught not only that HPN is a "life force", but also that it is a concept which I have termed 'autoentheism', that that HPN / life force is, as they call it there, "god power within".  This AANMC page disgusts me with its huge level of deceit, since naturopathy's HPN ['the vis'] is hugely science-ejected, and they don't reveal that at their upper-most echelon academic consortium's supposed definition webpage.

002.b. Smith's 2008 naturopathy text:

002.b1. so, Smith of this supposed SCIENCE university that contains presumably the SCIENCE degree known as naturopathy has written the naturopathic textbook "An Introduction to Principles and Practices of Naturopathic Medicine" (ISBN 9781897025253; 2008).  Smith states, regarding 'the vis', in the chapter "Naturopathic Philosophy and History":

"naturopathic medicine [...uses] therapies that support the person’s self-healing potential. Naturopathic medicine is the embodiment of a tradition in medicine that could rightfully be called '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 [HPN], and that the human being is a dynamic creation of body, mind, and spirit, more than the sum of its parts [p.018...] vis medicatrix naturae. Co-operate with the healing power of nature. The concept of a healing power of nature [...] a healing power inherent in the organism [...] this power [...] this healing power [...] the vis [...] the flexibility and open-ended nature of this concept is a good thing. The bounded rationality of any particular individual or group cannot capture the entire meaning [...] the vis is the core focus of the Foundations of Naturopathic Medicine, the most elaborate guide to the profession available. The discernment of the necessity of working with the vis medicatrix naturae is what makes naturopathic medicine a distinctive field. In practical terms, the principle of vis medicatrix naturae means that we work with the self-healing systems of the body [...] the self healing drive [...] a dynamic, intelligent, and adaptable system to restore function, integration, and dynamism. This healing force is not a separate entity from us that 'inhabits' our body and 'heals' us; rather, we are talking about the very nature of the human being. The vis is the inborn power of the individual to adapt and to heal [...] this power [...] our power to adapt and heal [...] all physicians rely on the vis [...]  the vis medicatrix naturae [...] the vis medicatrix nature - the healing power of nature [p.019...] supporting, stimulating, or unchaining the vis [p.022]."

Note: so, the vitalistic HPN is the essentially naturopathic.  Included in the concept is a form of supernaturalism, per "spirit".  "Intelligence" implies purpose which implies goal-directedness, a.k.a. teleology.  Therein, 'purposeful life spirit'. Again, AANMC has said that naturopathy is science-based and HPN based at the same time.

002.b2. and Smith also states, regarding naturopathy as 'of the professions' level scientific':

"[per NUHS's president Winterstein] the [naturopathic] profession needed this textbook of fundamentals to help standardize naturopathic curriculum in health science colleges [preface...and per Smith, the] science [...] of naturopathic medicine [...] may we all better understand the art of medicine, the science of the human organism [p.008...] this book is also designed for patients with a basic health-science education [p.010]."

Note: so we have the professions claim, and the science label.

003. so, overall:

naturopathy claims that within science is the vitalistic and the supernatural, while both are outside of science.  The absurdity is obvious: naturopathy claims that something is what it is not.  I consider this an 'academic mislabeling racket', minimally.  I can only imagine the huge amount of money going into these seven North American ND granting schools under false pretenses / labels.  I believed naturopathy's mislabelings way back, and those education loans are going to be with me for the rest of my life.  So, I can't imagine there being a statute of limitations for anyone carrying loans from pursuit of an ND, as it is oftenmost Federal debt that cannot be dismissed.  Yet, I anticipate a day of reckoning.

An ND's 'Science Expertise Claim' & Homeopathic Vaccination - Fullerton, K. (ND CCNM):

here, I cite from an article about [aboot!] Canadian ND Fullerton written by Lawson in the Barrie Advance of Ontario, Canada which labels naturopathy professional, of a science pedigree, and offers guidance [ha!] regarding 'homeopathic vaccination' which apparently is as efficacious as actual vaccination [see 001., below]; then, I show from her own web page that she codes naturopathy's essential vitalistic premise [see 002., below] and also on another page expressly states naturopathy's essential vitalistic premise [see 003., below]:

001. reporter Lawson, M. (? ?) states, regarding Fullerton, K. (ND CCNM), in "Vaccine Not Solution For All: Naturopath" (2009-11-04):

"proponents of alternative medicine may be surprised to know local naturopathic doctor (ND) Kerri Fullerton doesn’t encourage everyone to turn their back on flu clinics [!!!...as an ND she is a] regulated and licensed professional [...] with at least seven years of post-secondary education in medical sciences [...] Fullerton explains her general opposition to vaccinations of any kind (pharmaceutical or homeopathic [!!!]) is their one-solution-fits-all approach to health care. 'It’s not the way I was taught homeopathy' [...and then says regarding whatever treatment, GENERALIZING!] 'that most people can benefit from them' [...] she stresses the importance of keeping the germs from taking hold  [...] 'the more you disrupt their terrain, the less likely they are to take hold'".

Note:

Loving the supposed 'professional' and 'science expertise' claims.  

So, in terms of her "general opposition to vaccinations", does she merely encourage MOSTLY EVERYONE then to avoid them?  How can herd immunity occur if that is the case? We know that vaccines work and are safe.  Opposing them?  For what?  Mostly everyone NEEDS TO GET THEM!

Ha, the illogic of staying 'generalizations are not what I do' and then stating, 'this is what I'd generally do'!

And regarding 'homeopathic vaccination', what are the ethics of treating someone with NOTHING a.k.a. homeopathy, and then telling them that they are protected from future infection?  All the while claiming professionalism and a science pedigree!  And what is "terrain"?  I can only assume it is the human body, because that's what's mentioned as the place to stop the germs from taking hold.  Is that what hand-washing is...disrupting terrain?  I thought it is about washing germs off the skin.  Merely disrupting hand terrain wouldn't do that; clapping your hands together would do that. 

In terms of an ND education, in fact, on Fullerton's own biography page, she writes "Kerri Fullerton, BSc, ND".  So, that BSc with her ND amounts to about 8 years of 'science'.  Science, science, science. 

And on her "Frequently Asked Questions" page, we're informed that "naturopathic doctors have a minimum of seven years post-secondary education. An undergraduate degree with a focus on human sciences is a pre-requisite to acceptance at a naturopathic school. Naturopathic doctors receive extensive training in basic medical sciences [...] naturopathic doctors speak the same language as your MD [...] any medical condition is something that an ND could treat."

 And in "Naturopathic Medicine", she tells us:

"naturopathic doctors (ND) [...are] integrating scientific research with the healing powers of nature [coded vitalism...] ND’s have a variety of treatment options that are designed to work with the body’s inherent ability to heal itself [coded vitalism...] by looking at the whole person [...per] physical, mental and spiritual aspects [supernaturalism...] training for naturopathic doctors includes several different treatment modalities [...including] botanical medicine, clinical nutrition, homeopathy, hydrotherapy, lifestyle counseling, traditional Chinese medicine and acupuncture [TCM]."

It is not strange that NDs don't honestly reveal their vitalistic context [to me], nor that of homeopathy or TCM: pretending science is naturopathy's m.o.

002. following up on naturopathy's essential homeopathy, she states in "Homeopathic Medicine":

"homeopathy [...] these remedies stimulate the body’s inherent ability to heal itself [coded vitalism...] no two people experience an illness in the same way."

Note: the coded vitalism is typical of naturopathy.  The idea that illnesses are so absolutely unique flies in the face of the science, and homeopathy.  How is any knowledge possible if illnesses are so idiosyncratic?  And anyway, homeopathy generalizes remedy types from COMMONLY SHARED symptoms.  Hilarious.

003. following up on naturopathy's essential vitalism, she expressly states on her page "Traditional Chinese Medicine and Acupuncture":

"traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) [...] this system of medicine recognizes that blocked energy (chi) leads to pain, disease and impaired organ function. The role of acupuncture in TCM is to remove blocked energy by inserting needles at specific points along energy meridians. This allows the chi to move through channels with ease."

Note: energy, a scientific concept, is being used here to represent "chi", a vitalistic superstition.  Chi simply doesn't exist, just as its pathways don't exist. So do you wonder: why is a supposed science expert unable to tell the difference between what's 'in evidence' and an archaic figmentation?

Vitalistic Oncology - CTCA's Naturopathic Medicine:

here, I quote from Cancer Treatment Centers Of America's Naturopathic "Bone Cancer" web page [see 001., below]:

001. CTCA states in "Bone Cancer Treatments - Naturopathic Medicine":

"naturopathic medicine centers on using the least invasive, most physiologically supportive methods possible to treat illness and diseases such as bone cancer [...] to assist in maintaining your physical well-being, building strength, and reducing the side effects of conventional bone cancer treatments [...] the naturopathic scope of practice [...is based on] the[se] six naturopathic principles of healing [...] the practice of naturopathic medicine is based on the following principles: [#1] the healing power of nature.  Your body is designed to inherently establish, maintain, and restore health. The healing process is ordered and intelligent; nature heals through the response of the life force. The role of the naturopathic practitioner is to facilitate and augment this process [...] naturopathic practitioners respect and work with the healing power of nature in bone cancer diagnosis, treatment and counseling [...] naturopathic therapies seek to leverage the inherent ability of the body to achieve wellness [...] the practitioner must strive to inspire hope as well as understanding."

002. what's so interesting about all this is that this "life force" premise is hugely science-ejected, a huge fiction & superstition.  Yes, the human body can heal -- but, that's not how.  The same page tells us that homeopathy is powerful.  Enough said.

Popularizing Pseudoscience & Opacity -- David Suzuki and the Ontario Naturopaths:

here, I reflect on the upcoming opening address that hyperscientist-biologist David Suzuki [see 001., below] will give at the Ontario Association of Naturopathic Doctors [OAND] annual conference [see 002., below].  It doesn't get more absurd: 

001. Suzuki's 'hyperscience' credentials:

001.a. according to Wikipedia:

"Suzuki received his B.A. from Amherst College of Massachusetts in 1958, and his Ph.D. in zoology from the University of Chicago in 1961 [(so he is a biologist)...] for his work popularizing science and environmental issues, he has been presented with 22 honorary [science] degrees."

Note: the most common honorary science degree of those 22 that Suzuki has been awarded is the D.Sc.. According to Wikipedia:

"[a] Doctor of Science [...] usually abbreviated Sc.D., D.Sc., S.D. or Dr.Sc., is an academic research degree [...] Sc.D. (or D.Sc.) is recognized by both the United States Department of Education and the National Science Foundation to be equivalent to the more commonly awarded Ph.D."  So, to a large extent, Suzuki is a scientist of the 23rd doctoral degree!  A hyperscientist.

001.b. now, on Suzuki's own web site, apparently or supposedly, "Science Matters".

001.c. and apparently, Suzuki is held in high regard by large science-advocacy academic professional organizations, like the California Science Teachers Association,  who recommend him.

002. OAND's pseudoscience credentials & opacity, and DTS as their keynote:

002.a. the blatant pseudoscience that is naturopathy [once you peel away the facade]:

002.a1. naturopathy is obligated to science-ejected or 'exterior-to-science' ideas / premises which cannot truthfully be labeled science or scientific.  But, naturopathy does that anyway -- academically & clinically.  I have collected examples of naturopathy's essential vitalism premise usually stated as "healing power of nature" [HPN], and vitalism's not-science nature.  HPN is, overall, a supernatural premise being disguised in naturalistic & scientific language. I have collected examples of naturopathy's explicit supernaturalism.  And, I've collected naturopathy's self-labeling as science.

002.b. here's an example from a newspaper-published naturopath, Johnson, L. (ND ?) in the Alamogordo Daily News, who's article "What Is a Naturopath?" (2009-10-29) states:

"naturopathy draws from many modalities that promote the body's natural healing process [coded vitalism...] this health science has been recognized since the late 1800s [...] the following are fundamental principles that set naturopaths apart from conventional medicine. We believe in the healing power of nature [coded vitalism....I] will take you through knowledge of sciences that have been used for more than 5,000 years [...and her diagnostics and therapies include such gems as] iridology, live cell analysis, oxygen/ozone therapy, lymphatic decongestion, biological terrain analysis."

Note:  I'm exceptionally fascinated when an ND doesn't fully disclose the fundamental principle of naturopathy in easily understood language and then labels the whole nonscientific muddle science.  Iridology (and kind) is nonsense as a diagnostic tool, much like labeling the profoundly science-ejected as science is absurd.  Now, Johnson is apparently an ANMA type ND, not an AANP-CAND type.  But it doesn't matter: they all label the nonscientific science, from their academic institutions to the exam room to their political entities.

002.c. at OAND's web site, we are told in:

002.d. "About Us", four times that naturopathy is a profession, that OAND advocates for science, and seeks "to develop guidelines and standards of practice for excellence in patient-centred care".

Note: not sure how professionalism, science, and excellence can happen from a basis of absurdity and false-labeling.

002.e. "Frequently Asked Questions":

"naturopathic medicine is regulated and licensed in Ontario [...] naturopathic doctors are the only regulated health professionals in the field of natural medicine in Ontario [...] the Naturopathy Act will move the regulation of Naturopathic Doctors under the Regulated Health Professions Act, joining all other regulated health professions  [...] naturopathic doctors are highly educated  [...having] training in basic medical science courses [and] clinical sciences [...] NDs obtain comprehensive and rigorous training in an educational structure similar to that of medical doctors [...] following the completion of their program, NDs must successfully complete the Naturopathic Physicians Licensing Examinations (NPLEX) in order to qualify for licensing in Ontario. NPLEX is the standard examination used by all regulated provinces and states across North America [...] as outlined in the educational requirements above, becoming a Naturopathic Doctor requires intensive and rigorous training comparable to that of medical doctors."

Note: the NPLEX is so good that it labels homeopathy a "clinical science".  What is happening is that just as science is being turned upside down by naturopathy, professionalism is as well.  And the government of Ontario is party to this labeling of the absurd as science, professional, intensive and rigorous.

002.f. "Principles of Naturopathic Medicine":

"support the healing power of the body [coded vitalism]. The practice of naturopathic medicine recognizes an ordered and intelligent self-healing process that is inherent to every individual [coded vitalism]. NDs work to identify and remove obstacles to healing and recovery and to facilitate this natural self-healing process [coded vitalism...] acknowledge, respect and work with the individual self-healing process [coded vitalism]."

Note: that's all you get.  And that's not enough - because naturopathy's actual vitalistic nature isn't transparently revealed.

002.g. "Modalities of Naturopathic Medicine":

"homeopathy. Based on the principle of 'like cures like', homeopathic medicine uses minute amounts of natural substances to stimulate the self-healing abilities of the body [coded vitalism...] Asian medicine & acupuncture.  Based on balancing the flow of chi (energy) [vitalism] through the meridian pathways, Asian medicine includes the use of acupuncture and Oriental herbs."

Note: homeopathy is a joke, period -- presented to the patient as medicine when EMPTY essentially.  Chi, of course, is not energy in any scientific sense.  It doesn't exist.

002.h. "Dr. David Suzuki Event":

"this [electronic] presentation by Dr. David Suzuki will mark the opening of the [2009] OAND annual convention."

Note: well, overall, I find anyone's participation with these science charlatans ethically unacceptable.  Naturopaths are, after all, essentially out to destroy the domain of science, to increase their commerce by means of false science labels, and to disseminate in a very opaque manner their science-ejected belief system.  In that sense, in participating with them and therein promoting their agenda with his science status, Suzuki is implying that science doesn't matter -- that science can be anything, which is nonsense, and that the public doesn't deserve the truth from supposed professionals.  What's most absurd is that you have an eminent biologist lending support to vitalists and supernatualists who falsely label such overall as science, while biology and science ejected those ideas decades and hundreds of years ago, respectively.

University of Bridgeport's "Health Science" Advertising 01 - LAMAR 2009-10:

Wow.  Was driving today along I-95 in Stratford.  The University of Bridgeport [UB] has a LAMAR billboard [or something like that -- see this follow-up post http://naturocrit.blogspot.com/2009/12/university-of-bridgeport-health-science.html ] up that invites the public driving by towards their "Health Science" academic programs:

001. those "health science" programs include naturopathy, chiropractic and acupuncture.

Note: woo galore.

002. now, naturopathy per UB is based upon the vitalistic, which is science-ejected.

Note: this is a fact.

003. again, wow.  Such predatory falseness still, to this day, drops my jaw.
 

PZ Meyers on University of Minnesota's Support of Naturopathy: 'I Despise Such Quacks at U.M.' (2009-10):

here, I cite some words between myself and PZ Meyers from his Pharyngula blog which is hosted by scienceblogs.com.  He was not pleased with the University of Minnesota's [UM] response to a recent incident, which reminded me of 'UM's big support for naturopathy without a single disclaimer' on the page.  I thought a scientist's opinion would be interesting.  It was: 

001.a. PZ Meyers recently wrote in "Shame on the University of Minnesota!":

"during some football game, our mascot, Goldy the Gopher, [supposedly] mocked a player on the opposing team who thought it was appropriate to ostentatiously kneel down and publicly pray [...] the real disgrace is our [U.M.'s] craven PR flacks [...] I think it ought to be a Minnesota tradition to point and laugh loudly at any player who thinks he gets holy credit with a deity for catching a ball."

Note: UM is where PZ Meyers teaches.

001.b. I'd commented:

"[#125] posted by: daijiyobu | October 23, 2009 11:08 AM.  Speaking of disgraceful acts at the University of Minnesota... PZ, what's your opinion of UM's support for the sCAM called naturopathic medicine (see http://www.takingcharge.csh.umn.edu/explore-healing-practices/naturopathy ) where, disgracefully, we're told: 'naturopathic medicine is a science-based tradition [...whose principles are] continually re-examined in the light of scientific advances [...and we] cooperate with all other branches of medical science.' Yet the actually naturopathic [vitalism, supernaturalism & kind] is hugely science-ejected, AND UM and AANP etc. label homeopathy 'science'. This web-page based absurdity is apparently authored by ND Ratte (see http://www.takingcharge.csh.umn.edu/our-experts/paul-ratte-nd ). -r.c."

Note: a sCAM is a "so-called complementary and alternative medicine". UM's article makes some severely strong science-claims concerning the naturopathic.  It states the naturopathic is indeed science.  Ratte is an ND graduate of NCNM, 1997.  You can go to that school and similarly see the profoundly science-ejected labeled science [here].

001.c. PZ's response:

"posted by: PZ Myers Author Profile Page | October 23, 2009 11:14 AM. Don't get me started. I despise the quacks infesting the UM's medical and nursing schools. The Center for Spirituality and Healing [CFSH] recently invited Deepak Chopra to speak on campus. I'd go, except I know I'd be unable to resist rising up in the middle of his talk and shouting 'YOU'RE FULL OF SHIT!' [FOS]."

Note: so, what I found disgraceful, PZ found despicable.  It's all good.

002. naturopathy's as FOS:

my basic formulation is that naturopathy falsely postures the profoundly science-ejected [their vitalism, supernaturalism & kind] as able to survive scientific scrutiny [here] and falsely postures a 'professional ethical' status [here].  

003. naturopathy's central premise -- 'the essentially naturopathic' -- is truly FOS [absurd & insane!]:

disgraceful: yes.

despicable: yes.

A Search Sample of Naturopathic Contextual Coding and Mislabeling via 'accessmylibary.com', 2009:

here, I do an experiment of sorts and search the Gale database 'accessmylibrary.com' with the search parameter >naturopathic medicatrix<. I got 11 hits, 9 of which were useful. What I am most interested in here is whether the actual vitalistic premise [a.k.a. VMN] of naturopathy is communicated clearly to the reader, i.e. whether that premise is honestly explained as a hugely nonscientific sectarian belief, or instead, naturopathy miscommunicates and misleads [take a guess, most of the time, what happens!]:

001. so, this is them:

001.a. "Epistemology of Naturopathic Medicine [...]", from the Townsend Letter for Doctors and Patients [TLDP] 2005, by then NCNM student Krebs, R.M. (ND NCNM 2005) which states:

"[naturopathy's] six philosophical tenets [were] developed with the 1985 formation of the American Association of Naturopathic Physicians: 1. vis medicatrix naturae [VMN] (the healing power of nature)."

Note: there is no clear communication of naturopathy's essential vitalism.  There is no clear communication of vitalism's science-ejected status.

001.b. "Naturopathic Medicine: What Can Patients Expect? [...]", from the Journal of Family Practice 2005, by NDs Dunne (ND NCNM 1989), Kim (ND ?), Mittman (ND NCNM 1985), Barrett (ND NCNM 1986), Snider (ND Bastyr 1982), and Pizzorno (ND NCNM 1975), which states:

"[there are supposedly!!!] inherent organizing forces underlying known physiologic processes [...] naturopathic medicine calls this primary principle the vis medicatrix naturae, or the healing power of nature [...] the goal of naturopathic medical education is to prepare clinicians for the challenges of general practice with a foundation in current medical science."

Note: again, VMN's context is not transparently communicated, while science, particularly medical science, is claimed as a foundation of the naturopathic.

001.c. "Naturopathic Medicine", from American Fitness 2004, by ND Wotton, B. (ND Bastyr 1995), which states:

"treatment plans recommended by NDs are based on the six guiding principles of naturopathic philosophy: [#1] the healing power of nature (vis medicatrix naturae). NDs support the inherent healing wisdom of the body to promote, maintain or restore normal function [...] naturopathic doctors complete a four-year, graduate-level, accredited naturopathic medicine program to receive a doctorate of naturopathy (N.D.) [...] this program is similar to conventional medical education, with the first two years concentrating on medical sciences."

Note: again, VMN is not contextually explained and medical science expertise is claimed.

001.d. "Naturopathic Medicine, Integrative Medicine and Women's Health", from TLDP 2001, by ND Hudson, T. (ND NCNM 1984), which states:

"[there are] seven principles are the foundation for Naturopathic medicine: 1. the healing power of nature (vis medicatrix naturae).  The body has the inherent ability to establish, maintain and restore health [...] natural medicine has also matured, particularly in the areas of scientific research, educational institutions, virtual numbers of licensed practitioners, and professionalism, and is now poised to serve those who seek its gentle ways [...it is a] vitalistic holistic healing art [...based on] our vitalistic philosophy."

Note: now, we get some transparency, but I completely disagree with the label "profession" and "science" upon the essentially naturopathic.

001.e. "Healing Communities", from Alternatives Journal 2005, by ND Meyer, M. (ND ?), which states:

"naturopathic medicine bases itself on the principle vis medicatrix naturae, the healing power of nature [...and later mentions] the vital force [VF]."

Note: but, there is no mention of where VMN/VF stands in relation to science.

001.f. "Naturopathy: Prevention Before Cure [...]", from Natural Life 1997, by Gervais, R. (ND Bastyr 1993), which states:

"vis medicatrix naturae -- the healing power of nature. Fundamental to the practice of naturopathic medicine is a profound belief in the ability of the body to heal itself, given the proper opportunity [...] vis medicatrix naturae, the healing power of nature, to denote the body's ability to heal itself  [...] the first two years concentrate on the standard human biological sciences [...] the second two years are oriented towards the clinical sciences [...] the therapeutic sciences."

Note: again, no explanation of VMN as being essentially science-ejected.

001.g. "William (Bill) Mitchell, Jr. ND [ND NCNM] (in memoriam)", from TLDP 2007, by ND Reichenberg-Ullman, J. (ND Bastyr 1983), which states:

"Bill had an unfailing belief and confidence in the power of nature, vis medicatrix naturae (the healing power of nature)."

Note: ditto.

001.h. "Botanical Solutions [...]", from TLDP 2002, by Walker, M. (? ?), which states:

"the human body holds a restorative capacity, the vis medicatrix naturae."

Note: ditto.

001.i. "Whole Foods [...]", from TLDP 2003, by NDs Meletis (ND ?) and Barker (ND SCNM), which states:

"our understanding of vis medicatrix naturae [...] Dr. Meletis [...] sits on scientific advisory boards."

Note: ditto.

002. I'm not surprised.  Generally, science is claimed by naturopathy and their nonscientific vitalistic premise isn't transparently communicated -- lets call this misinformed consent.  And lets call all this SLIMY.

Note: a lot of the NDs listed above are NCNM or Bastyr grads.  You can go to NCNM's web page where they explicitly state the essential vitalism [and supernaturalism] of naturopathy and tell us all that such survives scientific scrutiny, which is false.  You can go to Bastyr's page where they state that naturopathy is "science based natural medicine", which, again, is false.