AANMC Informs Us of UBCNM's "Science" status - 2009-12:

here, I cite from a recent Association of Accredited Naturopathic Medical Colleges [AANMC] publication labeling naturopathy "science" [see 001., below]:

001. the AANMC recently published "UBCNM Increases Efforts in Integrated Medical Care" which states:

"the University of Bridgeport School of Naturopathic Medicine is one of the AANMC schools [...] UBCNM has partnered with St. Vincent’s Medical Center [...per] Dr. David M. Brady [is] vice provost of the University of Bridgeport Health Sciences Division [...] UBCNM professors' research published [...] UBCNM’s Dr. Jody Noé recently authored an article [...in] Integrative Cancer Therapies [...] ICT is the first journal to spearhead and focus on a new and growing movement in cancer treatment, a movement that emphasizes the scientific understanding of alternative medicine [...] UBCNM faculty member, Dr. Jared Skowron, will also be published this month. Fundamentals of Naturopathic Pediatrics [...] is a reference text for diagnostics and treatment of common pediatric conditions [...] it documents the scientific proof that natural remedies have been studied and are a safe and effective option when treating children [...] Coquina Deger.  Managing Editor, AANMC.  www.AANMC.org."

Note: so, we're told that naturopathy is academically "science", that it is "scientific", and supported by "scientific proof".

002. naturopathy loves to label itself scientific . [e.g.:

].

003. naturopathy is fundamentally based upon ideas that are science-ejected.

004. you could blow a brain gasget trying to get a handle on this absurdity.

ISBN 0738710776 - The Nonscientific Status of Vitalism - Forciea 2007:

recently, I added the following citation to my appendix titled "The Scientific Rejection of Vitalism".  The author admits that vitalism thoroughly lacks scientific support [see 001., below], but then promotes an analogous figmentation that to me resembles science-fiction and science-illiteracy [see 002., below].  Then, I quote from Richard Dawkins [see 003., below] and the National Center for Science Education [see 004., below]:

001. the newest appendix addition:

Forciea, B. (DC Parker) states:

.

[in "Unlocking the Healing Code: Discover the 7 Keys to Unlimited Healing Power"(2007)]

.

[Note: a woo-proponent's argument for sCAM]

.

"in the philosophical camp called vitalism, vitalists believed in a vital force, a life force that permeated all living beings.  The vital force is what kept things alive, but no one was ever able to measure this mysterious force [p.013...] believers in vitalism believe [!!!] in a vital force that permeates all life.  Some call it chi, others prana, still others energy.  The presence of the vital force is what separates the living from nonliving.  Alternative systems of healing work to support the vital force [e.g., naturopathy].  Science has a problem with vitalism.  Science has never been able to measure the vital force or even a vital energy […] this energy is not in any form known to science [yet energy, by definition in terms of science, is quantifiable!!!].  Scientists have yet to measure a vital force […] science's view of life is founded on a different philosophy [!!!] than vitalism.  At the core of science and medicine is mechanistic materialism [!!!].  In this view life emerged from matter.  There is no hidden vital force, no living energy.  Life is seen as a self-sustaining process that produces complex structures [p.003]";

.

(ISBN 0738710776)

 Note: I'm highly enjoying the verbiage "believers in vitalism believe".  Vitalism is, after all, nonfactual.  It is also quite a strain to state that 'how science collectively explains its factual collection is merely a philosophy', as if all ideas / ideations / views are of equal epistemic status.

002. the author's leap into science-fiction and -illiteracy:

"science does have an answer to the mystery of the vital force […there's] a ubiquitous field of information […] the zero-point field […] a sea of subatomic particles popping into and out of existence [(i.e. dark matter) p.003...so] the essence of the vital force is [this] information […] information is the link between mechanistic materialism and vitalism [p.004...whereby] living beings actually thwart the immutable law of entropy [p.013].”

Note: so, 'the vital force figmentation' is claimed to be essentially "information" which is comprised of dark matter, and life is claimed as able to defy nature's physical laws.  I've often gotten the impression that nebulousities like vitalism, when not able to claim tangible evidence in direct support of their supposed existence, then veil themselves in another nebulousity / mysticism layer.  Dark matter is that new veil, here.  Also, like creationists who want to supernaturalize biology, vitalists often claim that life defies physical laws and therefore vitalists are minimally indirectly categorizing life as a supernatural event / phenomena.  The vital force is about as mysterious as the Tooth Fairy, or fairies under the garden.

003. regarding vitalism and information in terms of the life science / biology, biologist Richard Dawkins states [coincidentally on that same appendix page I've linked to above]:

[in "The Oxford Book of Modern Science Writing"(2008)]

.

"what neither Mendel nor anyone else before 1953 knew was that genes themselves are digital, within themselves [...] life is the execution of programs written using a small digital alphabet in a single, universal machine language. This realization was the hammer blow that knocked the last nail in the coffin of vitalism and, by extension, of dualism. The hammer was wielded, with undisguised youthful relish, by James Watson and Francis Crick [p.030...] for me, the greatest achievement of Watson and Crick was to turn genetics from a branch of wet and squishy physiology into a branch of information technology, in the process slaying, as I suggested above, the ghost of vitalism [p.226]";

.

(ISBN 0199216800)

Note: true information, in the sense of biology and its phenomena, is genetic.  And that is biochemical.

004. and regarding misconceptions surrounding life and thermodynamic law, the National Center for Science Education has this interesting explanation here:

"if the earth were a closed system, then every living organism on earth would be defying entropy on a daily basis. But, the earth is not a closed system; thus, respiration, growth, reproduction, and evolution happen on earth on a daily basis without violating the second law of thermodynamics."

Note: when looked upon as a whole, in terms of our solar system, life does not defy physical law.

University of Bridgeport's "Health Science" Advertising 02 [pictoral] - 2009-12:

here, I share a picture I took today along I-95 in Stratford, CT of a billboard advertising the University of Bridgeport's “Health Science” division [see 001., below]. Now, it may shock the uniformed to know that: a) within this supposed “science” category, UB includes naturopathy [see 002., below] because b) naturopathy has, as 'it's essential worldview', a context exterior to science since naturopathy REQUIRES -- by its own definition -- the science-ejected concepts of vitalism [see 003., below] and supernaturalism [see 004., below]. So, WOW [see 005., below]:

001. this is a shot I just took this afternoon along I-95 in Stratford, CT with my Pentax K-1000 [go chemical image media!; sorry for the support wires, but this was the safe way to get the shot, as opposed to roadside]:

Note: it says "UBelong Here.  www.bridgeport.edu. UB.  Our degrees in Health Science make everyone feel better.  University of Bridgeport.  Opening doors.  Building futures."

002. here is where UB includes naturopathy in their "science" academic category, stating in "UB Spotlight: Health Sciences Programs":

"the University's professionally accredited health sciences programs are housed in the Fones School of Dental Hygiene, the College of Chiropractic, the College of Naturopathic Medicine, the Acupuncture Institute, and the Nutrition Institute."

Note: we have the claim that naturopathy is ethically 'of the professions' and epistemically of 'science'.

003. UB states, explictly, the science-ejected concept of vitalism that undergirds naturopathy ESSENTIALLY here, in "Six Guiding Principles.  Guiding Principle # 1. The Healing Power of Nature":

"nature heals through the response of the life force. The physician's role is to facilitate and augment this process."

Note: if anyone is in doubt about naturopathy's essential science-ejected vitalism, visit their primary textbook's sample chapter here. Page 30 has the gem statement: "Dr. Sensenig presented 'Back to the Future: Reintroducing Vitalism as a New Paradigm'".  Dr. S. was my teacher at UB, the founding dean of that naturopathy school, and the founding president of the AANP.  Here are Sensenig's notes equating this "life force" with the notion of 'god power within' -- an article of faith that I've termed autoentheism.

004. and, of course, supernaturalism runs rampant in naturopathy, supposedly a "science" here, in "A Systems Approach to Wellness [by] Joseph Pizzorno N.D.":

"the routes to total wellness [...per our] seven underlying, health-sustaining systems of our body [...include] our life-force (or spirit) [...] the vis medicatrix naturae (life-force) deep within us."

Note: notice how the science-ejected concept of vitalism equated with supernaturalism, by JEP, the don of naturopathy per his self-label as "one of the world's leading authorities on science-based natural medicine".  And supernaturalism is science-ejected.

005. so, my response to this "science" label upon naturopathy is UB is WOW:

as in "Danger, Will Robinson, unethical sectarian pseudoscience."  How do they get away with this?

What's rather ironic about his whole this is the name "Barrett" in the billboard.  Barrett, in another context, has much to say about these "muddleheads".

Skeptic North vs AANP Alliance - Naturopathy, "Science" & "Belief System":

here, I cite from a recent Skeptic North [SN] post regarding naturopathy, wherein naturopathy is labeled 'a nonscientific belief system' [see 001., below]; meanwhile, the AANP Alliance, which drew me into naturopathy in 1996, falsely labels naturopathy 'scientific' and 'not a belief system' [see 002., below]:

001. in "A Skeptic North Response to the Naturopaths' Rebuttal"(2009-11-30), Jonathan Abrams and Steve Thoms write:

"the rebuttal clearly demonstrated that naturopaths are not science-based medical practitioners, and that they lack the training, understanding of science, and qualification to prescribe [...] it's time to take a stand for medical care based on science [...] naturopathy is an unscientific practice of medicine [...] naturopaths do not respect science [...] for decades they have derided science-based medicine [...] the authors seem to want it both ways: science is bad for being reductionist, and yet, naturopathy is a totally legitimate science [...] there is no evidence that any treatments offered by naturopaths, but rejected by medicine, have any effect on disease [...] four years of specialized education is also meaningless if the subject is meaningless [...]  naturopaths often use homeopathy, a placebo treatment [...] four years learning about the details of homeopathy is of no use if homeopathy does not work [yet NDs call it a clinical science on their boards!...] naturopaths turn to pre-scientific views of healing such as 'medicatrix naturae' [vitalism, which is science ejected...] it was a textbook example of the typical circular reasoning and self-defeating logic that naturopaths use to justify their particular belief system."

Note: SN clearly states that naturopathy is a nonscientific belief system.

002. in "The Alliance Legislative Workbook" (1997) (archived here), the AANP Alliance, composed of "the AANP, Bastyr University, National College of Naturopathic Medicine and the Southwest College of Naturopathic Medicine and Health Sciences", states:

"naturopathic physicians are the modern day science based primary care doctor [...] it is not a belief system."

Note: so, AANP Alliance claims the polar opposite of SN.  If you look at the current AANP schools list, it includes National University of Health Sciences and they have an AANMC ND program there -- so, therein again we get this huge science label upon the nonscientific-naturopathic.

003. since naturopathy clearly states its beliefs (here, here) which are not scientific facts but are articles of faith [hugely], yet naturopathy states such falsely as scientific fact / able to survive scientific scrutiny [ISYN], I'd not believe them since they are patently ABSURD.

Note: it is a basic human right / freedom that people may choose to believe or not believe that which is a matter of 'belief or conscience'.

My take on naturopathy: their beliefs are foisted upon the vulnerable [patients, students] as [false] objective fact, and therefore naturopathy has no sensitivity for basic human rights.

In fact, when I was at UB and told 'this is science', and told by the first AANP president and the school's first dean Sensenig that what runs my body is a 'purposeful life spirit' otherwise known as 'god power within', my human rights were violated.

Why?

Because matters of faith are choices, and objective scientific facts aren't.

Yet, in naturopathy, there is no distinction [look at OBNE, as linked too!]. 

Literally, the science-ejected is falsely labeled scientific fact -- naturopathy is nonsense of the highest order.

When a choice is no longer offered as a choice, but instead you are mindfucked into thinking it is 'all there is to choose from and therefore no choice at all', your basic human rights have been seriously abused.

What's more disgusting is that this occurs clinically and academically, primarily.

Part of the Naturocrit project is to advocate for a procedure -- likely through the United States Department of Education, the Connecticut Department of Education & kind [they are accomplices in all this, so don't hold your breath] -- that will compensate for damages due to the quite sophisticated false inducements [unfair trade?] implemented / administered by these pseudomedical pseudoprofessionals / naturopaths.

An ND Teaches Us About Science [!] - Macart, T. (ND CCNM) at PQBNEWS.com:

here, I cite from a recent article in the Parksville Qualicum News by ND Macart who there poses as a science-expert. I then show how naturopathy is essentially nonscientific, while, en masse, they keep claiming otherwise:

001. British Columbia CCNM ND Macart tells us in “Making Sense of Science” (2009-11-16):

“jumping to conclusions is a mistake made by many researchers and readers when it comes to interpreting science. Initially, a hypothesis is put forward so it may be evaluated by the scientific method. An experiment is designed to support or disprove the hypothesis and then the discussion section deals with any flaws in the experiment that could confound the decided conclusion. In fact, very little science is truly definitive [...and] science begets science.”

And we are warned, and advised:

“[there may be] mercury contamination in our food supply […and to consider] detoxification via chelation [...which is] worth considering and incorporating into one’s healthcare plan […] Dr. Tara Macart owns OPti-Balance Naturopathic Medicine.”

Note: the irony here is killing me. We have an ND posing as an expert in science, and advising from that position about our health. Macart, coincidentally [!], provides chelation therapy at her practice, where it is touted as a virtual panacea.

002. naturopathy's essential vitalism & science expertise claim:

002.a. Macart states in “Naturopathic Medicine”:

“what is naturopathic medicine? […] our goal is to stimulate the body’s natural healing abilities [coded vitalism!…] an individualized treatment plan is proposed to facilitate the healing process [coded vitalism!…] naturopathic principles. [#1] vis medicatrix naturae (the healing power of nature). Based on a tradition of vitalism [yup, vitalism IN THE FLESH], naturopathic medicine evokes the healing power of nature. We all have an inherent capacity to heal ourselves. Naturopathic doctors help patients tap into this power in order to improve their health […and we are assured] with consent, naturopathic doctors support open lines of communication.”

Note: vitalism is HUGELY science-ejected (see here for my collection).  If communication were truly open, we'd be getting informed by naturopathy of what they really are: an unethical sectarian pseudoscience.  Without that information, consent cannot happen [see below].

002.b. the British Columbia Naturopathic Association states in “General FAQs”:

“homeopathy is a highly systematic, scientific method of therapy that respects the wisdom of the body [coded vitalism]. It is a method based on the implementation of a pharmacological law called similars [which doesn't actually exist]. A German doctor, Samuel Hahnemann first pronounced this law, in 1796 [scientific laws are not decreed, they are a preponderance based upon scientific evidence…] homeopathy stimulates the body's natural healing mechanisms [coded vitalism].”

002.c. the American Association of Naturopathic Medical Schools claims that naturopathy is assuredly scientific.  This claim was made personally to me.

003. overall, I will reiterate my usual warning regarding naturopathy:

“danger, Will Robinson...unethical sectarian pseudoscience.”

Naturopathy's Essential Vitalism in NDNR 2009-11 - Misak, D. (ND NCNM 2000):

here, I highlight naturopathy's fundamental sectarian belief as recently stated by an NCNM ND in the publication Naturopathic Doctor News and Review [a.k.a. NDNR (or Naturopathic Doctors Are Not Rational!); see 001., below]; and then, I quote from NCNM's quite irrational web page concerning the essentially naturopathic [see 002., below]:

001. Misak, D. (ND NCNM 2000) states in "Holding on to Our Truths: Let's Keep Our Focus on the Patient" [NDNR 2009-11, p.010]:

"[in] our profession [...] we all [NDs] hold to vis medicatrix naturae [VMN] with the recognition that each person has an individual vital force [VF...and we're also told] iridology [is] a science [...and] as we hold to the natural laws inherent in our principles, I think our profession should use science to prove and validate our theories."

Note: so, there's the "profession" claim, and obviously naturopathy's VMN=VF.  Now, such vitalism is not anything like science's laws of nature, or science's idea of what a theory is.  Vitalism is not in any way evidence-supported, and nor is iridology.

002. if you go online to NCNM [National College of Nonsense Medicine!], Misak's alma mater, you are told in "Principles of Healing":

"the practice of naturopathic medicine emerges from six principles of healing [...which] are based on the objective observation of the nature of health and disease and are examined continually in light of scientific analysis [these principles are claimed able to survive scientific scrutiny...#1] the healing power of nature -- vis medicatrix naturae [HPN=VMN...] the healing process is ordered and intelligent [purposeful]; nature heals through the response of the life force [LF...] the process of healing includes the generation of symptoms, which are, in fact, expressions of the life force [LF] attempting to heal itself [...naturopathy is] the practice of promoting health through stimulation of the vital force and the rational use of natural agents."

Note: obviously, naturopathy is centered upon vitalism and claims that such in fact survives scientific scrutiny.  But, that is not so.

Therein, naturopathy is hugely irrational / absurd / false, at its foundation.

Blogger Fun with the AANP - 'Science & Profession, Huh?!' (part 1):

so, the American Association of Naturopathic Physicians [AANP] have a blog titled "Physicians Who Care" [PWC], and I asked a simple question there:

001. in the AANP PWC post "Diversity and the Changing Face of Naturopathic Medicine", Alschuler, L. (ND Bastyr) states:

"it is true that with each passing year, I find myself settling a little further back into the proverbial armchair and surveying the profession [...] for many years, I have been alternatively disappointed and alarmed and [sp., at!] the lack of racial and ethnic diversity in the naturopathic profession [...] it only makes sense that the naturopathic profession, as a part of its inexorable emergence, embrace diversity [...] naturopathic medicine, itself, is color blind."

Note: we have naturopathy's 'of the professions status' claim GALORE, and a "color blind" claim. 

By the way, a 2009-11-17 press release "Expert Naturopathic Oncologist and Teacher, Lise Alschuler, ND, FABNO Joins Emerson Ecologics as Vice President, Quality and Education":

"Emerson Ecologics looks to bring quality and education within the industry to a new level with Dr. Alschuler's leadership and experience [...] Emerson Ecologics, LLC announces the addition of Lise Alschuler, ND, FABNO to the newly created role of Vice President, Quality and Education [...] Dr. Alschuler is currently president of the American Association of Naturopathic Physicians. 'Lise is passionate about education and quality,' said Fran Towey, CEO of Emerson Ecologics. 'Combined with her experience, she will confirm Emerson's position as a pioneer in the industry for the advancement of quality and education. We are very fortunate to have such an accomplished and recognized professional join our team.'"

So, we have the label again of 'of the professions', and we have this emphasis on education and quality GALORE.

002. well, I asked simply this, in my comment:

"'per: 'naturopathic medicine [...] is color blind.' Might naturopathy also be blind to the parameters of science?" -r.c. naturocrit."

003 because:

naturopathy is not a profession [when exploitative, manipulative & kind] and is blind to the preponderant parameters of science [truly pseudoscientific, sectarian & kind].   In past posts and complants to governing bodies, I've covered this.  

It's as simple as this: ND granting schools falsely label the nonscientific and science-ejected as science.  They are members of the governing AANP, who sets the epistemological perspective and doctrinal creed overarching naturopathy.  How, therein, is the AANP president an expert in education when AANP education is ABSURD?

"Physicians Who Care?"  I don't think so.  What's the point in going to someone who claims the status of physician and 'science-based', and their science is allowed to be ANYTHING?

Scary.  And I say that as a former UBCNM [an AANP school] ND student.

Perhaps, instead of surveying this supposed 'science-based profession', the AANP president should survey what actual science and professionalism are [oh, snap!].

004. just in case my comment or the entire blogpost disappear, I've screencaptured:

005. by the way:

it is AANP & company  whose false descriptors induced me into studying naturopathy at UB.  Naturopathy was labeled 'science not belief' when in fact it is 'nonscientific and belief-centered'.  And UB, to this day, still falsely labels naturopathy science and nonsectarian, when in fact naturopathy is centered upon the science ejected sectarian.