Naturopathy's Essential Vitalism Irrationality – ND Kellerstein in NDNR 2010-01:

In “Why Waste Time?” (Naturopathic Doctor News and Review 2010-01, p.019), Kellerstein, J. (DC CMCC 1980, ND CCNM 1984), “the first Chairman of the Department of Homeopathy with the Canadian College of Naturopathic Medicine", states:

“[regarding] today's homeopathic education […student question] Hahnemann continues to expound that the vital force [blah blah blah...Kellerstein] the vital force can only be sustained [blah blah blah...Kellerstein directly quoting Hahnemann] aphorism 9: in the healthy human state, the spirit-like life force (autocracy) that enlivens the material organism [blah blah blah...Kellerstein] the mind (in-dwelling rational spirit) and the vital force are very different [...] Hahnemann's idea of the vital force was not spiritual but spirit-like. This means immaterial or invisible […] the footnote to the first aphorism is testimony to the view of Hahnemann. He wanted a practice of medicine founded only on the fully observable with no speculative filters in the way of pure observation.”

Note: such vitalistic-spiritism, as I call it, is profoundly science-ejected.  Science has rejected vitalism for several decades, and supernaturalism for a few hundred years.  The larger issue here, though, is the lack of sanity within naturopathy's calculus.   NDs apparently do not think cogently:

a) since when is the immaterial and invisible [immeasurable figmentation] also fully and purely observable [actual]?

b) but, then again, the school I went to in Connecticut is no less irrational / absurd [cultic], wherein the vitalistic and supernatural are falsely labeled science.

Futuyma's "Evolution" - No Supernaturalism or Teleology in Science - ISBN 9780878932238:

here, I point out the simple fact that supernaturalism and teleology (both cosmic and physiological) are exterior to science [see 001., below]; meanwhile, naturopathy claims that its supernaturalism and physiological teleology [see 002., below] are indeed scientific [see 003, below]:

001. Futuyma, D.J. (PhD{zoology} UM) states in "Evolution" (2009, 2nd ed.):

"'Darwin’s dangerous idea' as the philosopher Daniel Dennett (1995) has called it [...] explains the apparent design of the living world without recourse to a supernatural, omnipotent designer [p.279...] supernatural processes cannot be the subject of science [...] Darwin offered a purely natural, materialistic alternative to the argument from design, he [...] brought every aspect of the study of life into the realm of science [...per] the completely mindless process of natural selection [...] this process cannot have a goal [that is, it is not teleological...] for the future cannot cause material events in the present [...] the concepts of goals or purposes have no place in biology (or in any other of the natural sciences), except in studies of human behavior [p.282...] evolution does not have goals [p.299]".

Note: obviously, legitimate life science excludes supernaturalism and cosmic teleology.  For this textbook's homepage, click here,  This chapter is available courtesy of NCSE and Sinauer. Click here for their blogpost, and here for the chapter as pdf.

002. meanwhile, naturopathy is based upon supernaturalism and 'physiological teleology'.  Naturopathy's essential belief is an amalgam of vitalism, spiritism, and teleology. As Gerstmar, T.J. (ND Bastyr 2008) states in:  

002.a. "FAQ":

"vitalism is the philosophy that guides naturopathic care. In this philosophy, spirit (intelligence) is the basis of life. We are spirit that gives rise to atoms and molecules [!!!]. The body possesses an innate intelligence [and is therefore physiologically intelligent, and therefore purposeful / goal capable] and ability to heal itself [the goal...] imbalances on any level (physical, mental, emotional, or spiritual) can lead to disease [...] as natural healers we follow a vitalist philosophy that says that your body has the power and intelligence to heal itself [a purposefulness / goal-directedness towards healing]. We use natural therapies that remove blockages to that healing power and stimulate the body to heal itself. We avoid methods which suppress or distort that healing power."

Note: so we have vitalism conflated with spiritism and physiological teleology.

002.b. "Introduction":

"we believe that people are composed of body, mind, and spirit and that problems arising in one area affect the other areas [...] our philosophy and approach allows our patients to live to their fullest capacity: mentally, emotionally, spiritually, socially, and physically."

Note: again, supernaturalism.

002.c. "Why See Us?":

"because we practice holistic medicine, medicine that is oriented to the physical, the emotional, the mental, the energetic, and the spiritual."

Note: again, supernaturalism.  I'd also argue that the "energetic" is a code for naturopathy's vitalistic and physiological teleology aspects.

003. and of course, naturopathy ridiculously places the label "science" upon all this science-exterior sectarianism.

Homeopathy As "Unscientific, Absurd" - The Daily Mail 2010-01-22

the UK's Daily Mail reports in "Skeptics Plan 'Mass Overdose' in Protest Against Homeopathic Medicine" (2010-01-22):

"hundreds of homeopathy skeptics are planning a 'mass overdose' of [these] pills in protest at the continued marketing of these 'useless' medicines by high street chemist Boots [...] to prove that the medicines are ineffective [...] 10.23 has accused Boots of profiting from what is an 'unscientific and absurd pseudoscience' [...] the remedies have literally nothing in them [...] in October [...] Boots' professional standards director Paul Bennett told a committee of MPs [...of the] House of Commons Science and Technology Committee [...] that there was no medical evidence that homeopathic pills and potions work [...per] 'I have no evidence to suggest that they are efficacious'".

Note: meanwhile, naturopathy claims that this "unscientific" junk and "absurd pseudoscience" is a clinical science.

New 2010 CSI Fellows Announced!

here, I briefly quote from an email I received from the Committee For Skeptical Inquiry regarding induction of new Fellows [and Fellas]:

In "Sixteen Notable Figures in Science and Skepticism Elected CSI Fellows", CSI writes:

"the Committee for Skeptical Inquiry (CSI), publisher of Skeptical Inquirer science magazine, announced today the election of 16 new Fellows, chosen for 'distinguished achievement in science and skepticism' [...per] Kimball Atwood IV, physician, author, Newton, Massachusetts; Robert T. Carroll, emeritus professor of philosophy, Sacramento City College, writer; K.C. Cole, science writer, author, professor at the University of Southern California’s Annenberg School of Journalism; Christopher C. French, professor, department of psychology, and head of the Anomalistic Psychology Research Unit, Goldsmiths College, University of London; Luigi Garlaschelli, chemist, Università di Pavia (Italy), and research fellow of CICAP, the Italian skeptics’ group; Maryanne Garry, professor, School of Psychology, Victoria University of Wellington, New Zealand; Harriet Hall, retired family physician, writer, Puyallup, Washington; Stuart D. Jordan, NASA astrophysicist emeritus, science advisor to Center for Inquiry Office of Public Policy, Washington, D.C.; Kenneth R. Miller, professor of biology, Brown University; Jan Willem Nienhuys, mathematician, Waalre, The Netherlands; Steven Novella, assistant professor of neurology, Yale University School of Medicine; Jay M. Pasachoff, Field Memorial Professor of Astronomy and director of the Hopkins Observatory, Williams College; Massimo Pigliucci, professor of philosophy, City University of New York-Lehman College; Philip Plait, astronomer, lecturer, and writer; James 'The Amazing' Randi, magician, CSICOP founding member, founder, the James Randi Educational Foundation (JREF); Seth Shostak, senior astronomer, SETI Institute, Mountain View, Calif."

Note: hmmm, no naturopaths...go figure!  Oh, you actually have to be for rationality and science integrity!  Seems the 'big skeptic schism' has truly ended, with JREF and CSI cross-pollinating one anothers' upper membership quite abundantly.

Coyne on Naturopathy: "Anti-science", "Pre-scientific" - Mcleans 2010-01-07:

here, I briefly cite from a Mcleans.ca article written by Andrew Coyne that touched on naturopathy:

Coyne, A. (? ?) states in Mcleans.ca's "Coyne on Climategate: The Truth is Out There Somewhere" (2010-01-07):

"science has pushed the boundaries of human knowledge to limits never before imagined.  Yet all sorts of anti-scientific, indeed pre-scientific beliefs are flourishing at the same time, from the enduring appeal of naturopathy and other folk cures to the hysterias over childhood vaccines and genetically modified foods, all the way to the dreadful pseudoscience of 'intelligent design'."

Note: wow!

Naturopathy as 'the Future of Healthcare': Irrationalism and Absurdity Posed as Professionalism, Integrity and Physicianship - the AANP's Howard 2010

here, I quote from the American Association of Naturopathic Physicians' [AANP] 2010 "Natural Medicine Journal" article recently authored by AANP's executive director Karen Howard celebrating naturopathy's new Department of Labor [DOL] definition [see 001.a., below]; then, I decode the quite coded essential premise of naturopathy within that DOL definition using naturopathy's own ".gov" and ".edu" primary sources [see 001.b., below]; and finally, I muse upon these "metaphysicians" [see 002., below]:

001.a. in "The Future of Naturopathic Medicine: A Message from Karen E. Howard, Executive Director of the American Association of Naturopathic Physicians", she writes:

"the AANP’s vision is to transform the healthcare system from disease management to health promotion by incorporating the principles of naturopathic medicine. The mission of the AANP is to serve our members by advancing the profession of naturopathic medicine and preserving its integrity [...] this fall, the US Department of Labor released a new definition of 'naturopathic physician' [...per] 'a system of practice that is based on the natural healing capacity of individuals [NHCI...] sample job titles include naturopathic physician, naturopathic doctor, physician, and doctor of naturopathic medicine' [...] this is a monumental success for the naturopathic profession."

Note: so, we have the claim of "profession", galore, [7 instances] in the article. Howard's NHCI -- naturopathy's coded vitalism m.o. -- will be fleshed out below.

001.b. regarding "the principles of naturopathic medicine" and "a system of practice that is based on the natural healing capacity of individuals":

001.b1. the foremost sources, in my mind, for iteration of naturopathy's "principles" are ".gov" and a ".edu" web site.  Both are based in Oregon, because that region is the 'trunk of the naturopathic tree', so to speak.  Oregon has the oldest AANP ND-granting school, and that State's ND apparatus has codified naturopathy's principles on the State of Oregon's website.

001.b1.a. per the ".gov", the Oregon Board of Naturopathic Examiners states in "Naturopathy":

"naturopathic physicians (N.D.) are primary care practitioners [...] they are educated in conventional medical sciences [...] a naturopathic physician has a doctorate of naturopathic medicine degree from a four-year graduate level naturopathic medical college [...] the practice of naturopathic medicine emerges from six underlying principles of healing. These principles are based on the objective observation of the nature of health and disease, and are continually reexamined in light of scientific analysis [(this is naturopathy's kooky claim that the science-ejected survives scientific scrutiny)...principle #1] the healing power of nature, vis medicatrix naturae [HPN=VMN...] nature heals through the response of the life force [LF...principle #3] the process of healing includes the generation of symptoms, which are, in fact, an expression of the life force [LF] attempting to heal itself [...overall] methods of treatments are chosen to work with the patient's vital force [VF], respecting the intelligence [!!!] of the natural healing process [INHP...] naturopathic medicine is heir to the vitalistic tradition [VT] of medicine in the Western world, emphasizing the treatment of disease through the stimulation, enhancement, and support of the inherent healing capacity of the person [IHCP...a.k.a.] the body’s healing and immune response [BIIR...] the body’s innate healing response [BIHR]."

Note: obviously, vitalism is the cardinal premise of naturopathy, per HPN=VMN= LF=VF=INHP=VT=IHCP=BIIR=BIHR. Howard's NHCI is synonymous but, NHCI is 'vitalism coded' and therefore not honest / transparent in the way it should be in order to be 'of professional ethical status' [IMO]. OBNE and the State of Oregon has just told us that a "life force" is "in fact" an objective scientific fact.  Hilarious: claiming that vitalism survives scientific scrutiny is INSANE. Vitalism is profoundly science-ejected. Science that hugely isn't science is not-at-all conventional.

001.b1.b. per the ".edu", the National College of Natural Medicine states in "Principles of Healing":

"the practice of naturopathic medicine emerges from six principles of healing. These principles are based on the objective observation of the nature of health and disease and are examined continually in light of scientific analysis. These principles stand as the distinguishing marks of the profession: [#1] the healing power of nature -- vis medicatrix naturae [HPN-VMN]. The body has the inherent ability to establish, maintain, and restore health. The healing process is ordered and intelligent [!!!]; nature heals through the response of the life force [LF...#3] first do no harm -- primum no nocere. The process of healing includes the generation of symptoms, which are, in fact, expressions of the life force [LF] attempting to heal itself [...] the practice of promoting health through stimulation of the vital force [VF]."

Note: so, again the VERY WRONG continuous commercial activity of labeling as 'scientific fact' the 'in fact science-ejected vitalistic' [minimally].  This is what "natural medicine" is in AANP-land -- trading upon what is false, and known to be false 'by the preponderance of science' for several decades. Also, there's the quite wrong claim of professionalism [7 times on that page], because you cannot be hugely insanely premised and still be of credat emptor status.  What's also fascinating about the "new" AANP DOL definition of naturopathy is that naturopathy is still 'cultically coding' their essential premise.  Naturopathy is not being transparent: its supernatural, vitalistic and teleological premise / 'the science-ejected sectarian' is being falsely presented as naturalistic, science-supported, objective fact when in fact such is science-ejected / science-unsupported.  In fact, such misleading and opaque activity by naturopathy is not new; it is naturopathy's same old deceptive m.o.  Notice that they are grabbing for more generalistic titles, like "physician".  This sets up a Federal precedent that further allows AANP to achieve more State licensure laws for itself by saying "we're already Federally recognized" as _________.  I would argue that naturopathy is still quite incompletely, opaquely and falsely Federally described.  But,  why be surprised!  Naturopathy already has ".gov" support per Oregon to posture and trade upon the quite false-absurd: the idea that the scientific is what is not scientific.  I have termed this "epistemic conflation" [EC], the blending of knowledge type. EC illogically claims that something is equal to that which it is different from.  Yet, after thoroughly muddling knowledge type, naturopathy then superabsurdly-falsely represents that mingled heap as an 'epistemic delineation', per [supposedly] truly "science".  That is INSANE; and instead of this being 'a doctoral-level, scientific, professional physician context', I've termed the whole thing a fraudulent racket.  I will be blogging next post about naturopathy's goals towards expansion of all this insanity and absurdity.

002. regarding "physician", "the future of healthcare", "integrity" and "profession":

integrity's usage is, according to the American Heritage Dictionary 4th ed.: "steadfast adherence to a strict moral or ethical code [...] the state of being unimpaired; soundness [...] the quality or condition of being whole or undivided; completeness."  Now, the claim of "profession" is similarly a claim of trustworthyness, thoroughness, soundness.  Naturopathy claims professionalism and integrity while being completely unsound and opaque in its basic premise.

In fact, as I've said, I think naturopathic 'thinking' is INSANE: claiming that what's inside of the scientific is the same as what's outside of the scientific, that figmentations are the same as what is in-evidence / rigorously scientifically vetted.  At its core, naturopathy is simply nonsense in the 'sense' that naturopathy claims that 'something is the same as something it is profoundly different from'.  It other words, naturopathy claims that that which survives scientific scrutiny is that which has actually been ejected from science.  What is "conventional" about this kind of science?  What is even rational about it?  The fact is that such 'kind' of science, if I can be allowed such an absurd statement, is "pseudo" -- as in fake.  And such kind of 'thinking' is junk thought.

To believe in figmentation / what lacks evidence as a central premise, and to set it up as 'the truth about nature's workings' rings of metaphysics and sectic ideology.  So, I regard the 'epistemic position' of an ND not as that of a physician but that of a metaphysician, per 'the metaphysical merged with physicianship'.

The other appropriate term is sectarian medicine, as opposed to scientific medicine / modern-enlightened thought.

Naturopathy is as much "the future of healthcare" as the hugely science-ejected is the future of science.  Naturopathy is as much the future of healthcare as flat-earth theory is the future of geography.

The Florida Connection - A Really Old and New Naturopathy Science Claim - St. Petersburg Independent 1910-10-22, NUHS 2009-12-29:

here, I cite from the St. Petersburg [Florida] Independent concerning naturopathy as "science" [see 001, below].  And then, I cite from the National University of Health Sciences recent press release [see 002., below].  Then, I make 'the Florida connection' [see 003., below]:

001. in their local news, per "A Modern Method of Practice Without the Use of Medicine", we are told in the St. Petersburg Independent:

"among our late arrivals is Dr. J.H. McGilvary, naturopathic physician, a graduate of the Texas College of Science [...] naturopathy is not a faith cure, nor a suggestion cure, nor a hypnotic cure.  It is a practical and scientific treatment of all curable diseases [...] although the Dr. has lost his eyesight, it does not handicap him in the least, but rather adds to his senses of touch and hearing, and makes them more acute, which enables him to diagnose more correctly [!]."

Note: this is accessible through books.google.com.  What interests me most is the claim of "science" placed over the naturopathic at both the subject-matter and institutional levels.

002. chiroeco.com tells us in "NUHS Awards First ND Diplomas Since 1952" [2009-12-29]:

"in historic commencement ceremonies on Dec. 17, National University of Health Sciences awarded three graduates the institution’s first doctor of naturopathic medicine degree (ND) since 1952 [...] National’s current ND program opened its doors for the first class of students in the Fall of 2006 [...] NUHS is the only naturopathic medical school in the Midwest and one of only two universities in the country to offer degrees in naturopathic medicine, chiropractic medicine, acupuncture, and oriental medicine on the same campus [UB is the other...] source: National University of Health Sciences, www.nuhs.edu."

Note: again, what interests me is the label "science" placed over the naturopathic.  The institution claims to be a "science" institution.

003. the Florida connection:

003.a. at NUHS's web site, "DC in St. Petersburg, Florida", we are told:

"National is now part of the University Partnership Center of St. Petersburg College (SPC). This [...] allows NUHS to offer its doctor of chiropractic (DC) degree on site at the St. Petersburg college campus. When you earn your DC degree from National University of Health Sciences St. Petersburg Campus [etc....this is] primary care chiropractic medicine. We prepare you to become a first contact physician with a strong foundation in basic sciences [...] National University of Health Sciences (NUHS) offers a doctor of chiropractic degree program in Lombard, Illinois, which has been accredited by the Council on Chiropractic Education (CCE) since 1971 and by its predecessor, the American Chiropractic Association Committee on Accreditation since 1966. [...] on April 20, 2009, National University of Health Sciences (NUHS), Lombard, Illinois, received approval from the Higher Learning Commission of the North Central Association of Colleges and Schools to offer the Doctor of Chiropractic Medicine degree at the University Partnership Center at St. Petersburg College in Florida. The Higher Learning Commission of the North Central Association of Colleges and Schools may be contacted at 30 N. LaSalle, Suite 2400, Chicago, Illinois, 60602-2504, or 1-800-621-7440."

Note: science, science, science.  Coincidentally, 001. and 003. above are all about St. Petersburg, Florida.  And what happened the last time a DC program was attempted in Florida, you may ask?  Nice skeptical activism: a public university wouldn't do it, due to the backlash.