Tuesday, September 28, 2010
here, I cite from the 2010 submission by the Canadian College of Naturopathic Medicine [CCNM] to the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario [CPSO] regarding CPSO's 'Complementary Medicine' policy which asks for scrutiny of naturopathy [see 001., below]; and then I scrutinize, analyze and share their essential nonsense [see 002., below]:
001. CCNM states in "Complementary Medicine Consultation Feedback: Responses from Organizations […] Canadian College of Naturopathic Medicine" (2010-07-29; vsc 2010-09-27):
"thank you for the invitation to comment on the current College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario (CPSO) policy [titled] 'Complementary Medicine' […] given the focus of the Ontario government on fostering more collaborative healthcare in support of better patient outcomes, this review is as timely as it is important [...] the growth in complementary medicine [...] the collaboration between naturopathic doctors and members of the CPSO […] CPSO’s Duties to the Patient include Collaborating with Patients and Others, this is an inadequate framework to address the nature of collaboration required for effective patient care […] we improve the collaboration between professions in order to provide the quality of care that patients in Ontario expect and deserve. CCNM is Canada's premier institute for education and research in naturopathic medicine. The college offers a rigorous four-year, full-time doctor of naturopathic medicine program [...requiring] standard premedical prerequisites and strong academic transcripts [...] program graduates must pass North American-wide entrance-to-practice examinations [...question] does the policy provide useful guidance? [...answer] within the field of complementary medicine it is critical to distinguish between the highly educated and regulated practitioners, and others […] the policy needs to distinguish between regulated professionals within the complementary field and others. In particular, with respect to naturopathic doctors the policy should state that 'it is not misconduct to refer' […] the policy requires physicians to 'act honestly and always in their patients’ best interests' our hope would be that the requirement should be that they 'act honestly and without bias' [...question] are there any issues not included in the current policy that should be addressed? [...answer] the policy provides far too little direction with respect to the interaction with respect to other medical practitioners […] naturopathic doctors are experts in [...such things as ] homeopathy [and] traditional Chinese medicine […] the policy should explicitly forbid the discontinuance of care to a patient based solely on the patient’s choice to see a regulated health professional providing complementary care […] the policy should also make it clear that many areas of complementary medicine require extensive education and training for safe and effective practice [...question] how could the policy be improved? [...answer] physicians should consider referring to naturopathic doctors as specialists in naturopathic medicine just the same way they refer to other medical specialists […] in arriving at a diagnosis and determining appropriate treatment plans naturopathic doctors rely upon laboratory reports in the same manner that physicians do […] naturopathic doctors possess a unique expertise […] given the long history of naturopathic medicine as a regulated health profession in Ontario […] any examination of a policy on complementary medicine must by necessity look closely at naturopathic medicine […] that policy review must focus most of all on approaches to collaboration between physicians and naturopathic doctors, as well as other regulated health professionals […] we appreciate the opportunity to provide input and we encourage the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario to develop a policy in support of effective and efficient patient-centered care that recognizes the value of naturopathic medicine in healthcare. We would be pleased to meet with the committee that is conducting the review to provide detailed information with respect to the practice of naturopathic medicine in Ontario."
Note: where do I begin?
002. some skeptical analysis and scrutiny:
-"better patient outcomes," really. How do outcomes improve when naturopathic archaic crap is blended with much-better-vetted modern medical knowledge [e.g., like mixing placebo therapies like homeopathy and acupuncture with things which are actually having a specific effect]? And since naturopathy confuses the public immensely by labeling that which is hugely science-ejected as science...[ah, the absurdity];
-"growth," and popularity doesn't justify legitimizing and cooperating with nonsense, otherwise known as "collaboration";
-"an inadequate framework," recalls, for me, the entire naturopathic framework, wherein the hugely science-ejected sectarian is falsely labeled as able to survive scientific scrutiny;
-"between professions", "a regulated health profession", "other regulated health professionals", "to provide detailed information with respect to the practice of naturopathic medicine in Ontario", except naturopathy isn't ethically able to be 'of the professions.' Here's an example of manipulation and a lack of informed consent: an Ontario ND stating naturopathy's basis without actually / clearly stating naturopathy's science-ejected basis [oops, that's not an ND, my mistake, that's ALL OF THEM IN ONTARIO];
-"quality of care" and "regulated health professional" and "the same manner that physicians do", hmmm. Is this quality of care: pseudodiagnostics and crap therapeutics? Who deserves that? And who expects such crap from a supposedly 'regulated profession?' It's like a dentist using a Ouija board to determine which tooth is actually the one that is hurting you, and then using a fairy wand to fix it;
-"rigorous"? Well, a CCNM education is blatantly archaic and sectarian, e.g. "homeopathic medicine: NDs use diluted doses of natural substances (plants, animals and minerals) to stimulate the body’s vital force and promote self-healing";
-"standard premedical prerequisites" and "strong academic transcripts," what's the point? You'll enter an ND program with high academic standards only to be, quite truly, mind-fucked: e.g., health science with be taught as equivalent to that which is exterior to science;
-"North American-wide entrance-to-practice examinations", which is the NPLEX, falsely labels homeopathy [empty pills postured as profoundly medicinal] as "clinical science";
-"highly educated and regulated practitioners, and others" and "unique expertise", but as we see [as I personally went through], ND education sucks and is a long, expensive road ending up in absurdity, nonsense, and irrationality;
-"regulated professionals", yeah, sure. "Being is doing" and I don't see such;
-"it is not misconduct to refer", well, it IS. CPSO is right to regard participation with NDs as misconduct. Naturopathy itself is misconduct on so many levels;
-"act honestly and always in their patients’ best interests", hmmm. Since when is it in someone's interest to participate in wacko archaic pseudomedicine or plain old pseudotherapeutics & pseudodiagnostics? Aka naturopathy;
-"act honestly and without bias", when, actually, naturopathy is honestly and objectively NOT HEALTH SCIENCE. The honest / non-biased evaluation of naturopathy is that it is a not-modern belief system from the 1800s that doesn't properly label itself;
-"other medical practitioners" and "other medical specialists", where we go with the 'we're medical' just like naturopathy's false self-labeling as a "branch of medical science";
-"experts", experts in nonsense and absurdity;
-"forbid the discontinuance of care", well naturopathy makes a mockery of physicianship and I can understand doctors' frustration;
-"extensive education and training for safe and effective practice" and "effective and efficient patient-centered care", but as we've seen, since naturopathy conflates scientific knowledge with archaic 'beliefy-stuff' and then labels the whole thing "science", how could they know what is safe and effective in such a knowledge-type muddle? It is a mockery of professional education and training;
-"look closely at naturopathic medicine", yes, and see the nonsense;
Monday, September 27, 2010
here, I cite from some recent snail mail I received from the Council on Naturopathic Medical Education [CNME]:
001. CNME states in this 2010-09 letter:
"CNME [is] the accrediting agency for naturopathic medical programs in the U.S. and Canada [...] I want to see naturopathic medicine gain its rightful place as a licensed medical profession [...] I'm writing to ask you to join me in supporting the Council my making a generous financial donation [...] CNME sets high standards for naturopathic medical programs and ensures that colleges in our field meet these standards [...it is] quality education [...and] extensive professional education [...] financial support provided by naturopathic doctors like you is essential to the CNME [...] Nancy Scarlett, N.D. Member CNME Board of Directors, Faculty Member, NCNM."
Note: well, I'm not an ND. I merely went to UB's ND program for four years and left it IN DISGUST because of its absurd crap and the fact that based upon the number of patients I was seeing and the needed quota to graduate, I would have had to be there for some ten years worth of tuition. So, I'd practice crap medicine after being hugely gouged.
002. some criticism of the above language:
-naturopathy is essentially based upon absurdity and deception, therefore it is not and can't be a profession;
-I wouldn't ever give naturopathy money to continue such an agenda;
-"high standards"? "Quality"? No. I don't see that at all.
003. an example of CNME-naturopathy's low quality & absurdity, direct from NCNM, ND Scarlett's institution [and the trunk of the North American naturopathy tree] from NCNM's own web page "Principles of Healing" [vsc 2010-09-27]:
"[we are told that] 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 [...including #1] the healing power of nature, vis medicatrix naturae: the body has the inherent ability to establish, maintain, and restore health. The healing process is ordered and intelligent; nature heals through the response of the life force [vitalism, which is science-ejected]. The physician’s role is to facilitate and augment this process [...#3] first do no harm, primum no nocere: the process of healing includes the generation of symptoms, which are, in fact, expressions of the life force [again, vitalism, claimed as scientifically in-fact when in-fact science-ejected] attempting to heal itself. Therapeutic actions should be complementary to and synergistic with this healing process [...aka] the practice of promoting health through stimulation of the vital force [more vitalism...] the physician must strive to inspire hope as well as understanding. The physician must also make a commitment to her/his personal and spiritual development [some kind of supernaturalism-religiosity, also science-ejected...] causes may occur on many levels, including physical, mental-emotional, and spiritual [more science-ejected supernaturalism...] health and disease are conditions of the whole organism, involving a complex interaction of physical, spiritual [and more supernaturalism], mental, emotional, genetic, environmental, and social factors [...and] homeopathic medicine is based on the principle of 'like cures like.' Clinical observation indicates that it works on a subtle, yet powerful, energetic level [bullshit], gently acting to promote healing on the physical, mental, and spiritual levels [again, more supernaturalism-religiosity]."
Note: so, we have a claim that the science-ejected vitalistic, supernatural, and homeopathic survive scientific scrutiny. That is fundamentally irrational. The overall absurdity: science no longer requires evidence, it is merely a marketing label that can be placed falsely upon 'that which hugely isn't science supported.' Or, to put it another way, that that which is scientific is the same thing as that which isn't and it's all good. Such quality! That is not legally or morally tenable. I'm all for freedom of conscience, wherein a person is allowed to believe or not believe what they please. But, this is commerce, this is a postured professionalism, wherein money is taken for something falsely labeled and trust is abused.
As Moynihan once stated, "everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts."
Friday, September 24, 2010
here, I cite from a recent blog post by scientist Larry Moran on his Sandwalk blog here on blogspot:
"I really don't know much at all about the differences between 'naturopathic medicine' and quackery [...until I] look[ed] at an authoritative source, the Canadian College of Naturopathic Medicine right here in Toronto [...from their definition] now I know the difference between naturopathy and other forms of non-evidence based medicine (i.e. alternative medicine, quackery). There isn't any."
Note: yes! I must credit the Richard Dawkins Foundation web page for this lead.
Sunday, September 19, 2010
here, I cite the five first-page pro-craniosacral therapy [CST] naturopathic hits that google.com yields [see 001., below]; then, I summarize a recent ASA [UK] dismissal of this pseudotherapy [see 002., below]:
001. a 2010-09-19 google.com web search with the parameters >naturopathic craniosacral< results in such top results as:
001.a. Wiener, J.M. (ND Bastyr 1998) of Massachusetts who states in "Additional Services" [vsc 2010-09-19]:
"craniosacral therapy: this hands-on method enhances the craniosacral system, which is comprised of fluids that surround and protect the brain and spinal cord. Using a soft touch, this method releases pressure and improves the functions of the central nervous system. This therapy is increasingly used as a preventative measure against disease and a variety of medical problems."
Note: Wiener tells us in her bio., as NDs are apt to do: "[she] received her doctor of naturopathic medicine degree from Bastyr University in Seattle, Washington, one of the country's four medical schools specializing in science based natural medicine and research."
001.b. Skinner, D.A. (ND Bastyr 2002) of California who states in "Craniosacral Therapy" [vsc 2010-09-19]:
"craniosacral therapy gently stimulates the body’s natural healing abilities [...] for decades (since the early 1900’s) various forms of cranial manipulation have been used to treat a range of conditions, from headaches and ear infections to stroke, spinal cord injury and nervous system disorders [...it] encourage[s] and enhance[s] the body’s own self-healing and self-regulating capabilities, even in the most acute pathologies [...it] uses very light touch and is suitable for people of all ages, including babies, children and the elderly, and can be effective in acute or chronic cases [and a host of diseases are listed]."
Note: Skinner's bio. states: "[she is a] licensed naturopathic doctor / certified craniosacral therapist [...] she has further focused her education in craniosacral technique [...and] is a certified craniosacral instructor." Also of note, the NDs Skinner, who practice together, have stated in "Constitutional Hydrotherapy for Home Application" [vsc 2010-08-06]: "constitutional hydrotherapy [...] the purpose of this treatment is to stimulate a more rapid improvement in health [...] it is tonifying to the digestive system, helps to normalize circulation, soothes the nervous system, and stimulates the eliminative processes and the 'vital force' [which is a figmentation]."
001.c. Shah, S. (ND CCNM) of Canada states in "Craniosacral Therapy" [vsc 2010-09-19]:
"craniosacral (osteopathic) therapy (or cranial therapy) is a gentle non-invasive therapy [...] American osteopathic physician, Dr. William Garner Sutherland, discovered that there was a movement of the bones of the head (cranium) [which are actually FUSED in an adult...] at birth it is possible that some distortion or warping pattern of the cranial bones can result in possible misalignment of the spinal bones. This misalignment of the spine almost always follows on from the cranial area, to which the spine is joined [...] this discovery and the osteopathic therapeutics to be able to correct this problem has undoubtedly been [a] great contribution to health restoration [...] it is therefore probably one of the most significant advances in healthcare delivery to have taken place in many years."
Note: really! And we're told on her page "Naturopathic Medicine" [vsc 2010-09-19]: "naturopathic medicine is 'vitalistic' in approach [that is, again, based upon figmentation]."
001.d. Montague, G. (ND ICNHS 1988) states in "Services":
"craniosacral therapy is an extremely gentle and subtle form of hands-on bodywork in which a highly trained practitioner is able to sense the innate rhythmicity of the central nervous system through all the body tissues. This movement is known as the craniosacral rhythmic impulse, and can be felt anywhere on the body, although the head (cranium) and the base of the spine (sacrum) are usually key areas of attention by the practitioner. Because craniosacral therapy is a hands-on approach to energy work, it is a useful method of integrating the hysical/ biomechanical and the energetic/emotional aspects of the whole person."
Note: really! I love the coding of vitalism / supernaturalism per "energetic" and then its conflation with emotion. WTF is "hystical" anyway?
001.e. Abrin, T. (ND NCNM) states in "Naturopathic Treatments":
"craniosacral therapy is a gentle bodywork technique [...per] the rhythmic movement of the craniosacral system [...] craniosacral therapy is performed on a person fully clothed. Using a light touch, the practitioner monitors the rhythm of the craniosacral system to detect potential restrictions and imbalances. The practitioner then uses delicate manual techniques to release those problem areas and relieve undue pressure on the brain and spinal cord. Craniosacral therapy can help alleviate a range of illness, pain and dysfunction."
Note: I should add something about my own experience with CST. In 1999, while in ND school in CT, the school had a 'conference' and CST was part of the workshop set. So, I'd never heard of it before, and did that workshop, and lay as a patient while someone held my head in their hands and was told what to look for etc. I came away from that experience with the sinking feeling that I was now in a cult.
002. the National Council Against Health Fraud's "Consumer Health Digest #10-37" (2010-09-16) states:
"[the UK's] ASA Nixes Craniosacral Therapy Claims [complaint reference #125766]: the Advertising Standards Authority has concluded that a Craniosacral Therapy Association (CTA) leaflet was misleading because it contained claims that could not be substantiated [...] craniosacral therapy (also called cranial therapy) is based on the notion that a rhythm exists in the flow of the fluid that surrounds the brain and spinal cord and that diseases can be diagnosed by detecting aberrations in this rhythm and corrected by manipulating or lightly touching the skull [...] there is no logical reason why pressing the skull should influence the course of ailments throughout the body [...not-in-evidence] claims included [...that CST] assists the body's natural capacity for self-repair [...] is often beneficial for fragile or acutely painful conditions, as well as during pregnancy, after an operation, accident, fall or injury, and for young babies [...that it] aid[s] people with almost any condition [...that it is] helpful for 40 different conditions [...] the ASA determined that 'a body of robust scientific evidence, such as clinical trials, would be required' [...and that] even if craniosacral therapy could relieve symptoms, the ad could discourage readers from seeking essential treatment for serious medical conditions from a qualified medical practitioner."
003. so, there is quite a contrast:
NDs love CST [better to call it CSPT -- craniosacral pseudotherapy] and it lacks any kind of substantive evidence or even that most important kind of initial evidence to even warrent further consideration: plausibility.
Like so much within naturopathy, that falsely labels itself a "branch of medical science", there simply isn't any substance to the 'science-supported' claim.
Saturday, September 18, 2010
here, I cite from an Association of Accredited Naturopathic Medical Colleges [AANMC] web page that claims that the scientific method is overemphasized and an impediment to naturopathy's advancement:
Rubin, D. (ND SCNM 1997) states in "Alumni Career Spotlight: Daniel Rubin, ND, FABNO" [vsc 2010-09-18]:
"[his] area of focus/specialty: oncology [...] career highlights and contributions: naturopathic oncology practice (board-certified in naturopathic oncology); board of directors, Naturopathic Physicians Board of Medical Examiners, Ariz.; founding president, Oncology Association of Naturopathic Physicians (OncANP); founding vice-chairperson, American Board of Naturopathic Oncology (ABNO) Board of Medical Examiners [...] AANMC: what is the biggest challenge in your work? [...his answer:] one of the greatest challenges we face is the widespread public belief in the scientific method [...] we’re too reliant on the scientific method, and it stands in our way of forging ahead."
Note: ISYN. Just when I think I've nothing left to write about in terms of naturopathic absurdity, I stumble across a supposed oncologist who doesn't care for use of the best kind of knowledge available in terms of the practice of medicine and a very serious disease. There's also the absurdity on this particular page wherein the label "science" is within the name one of the AANMC schools. In the top right corner, the AANMC's schools are listed, including "National University of Health Sciences."
So, science but not science, a label but not an actuality. Absurd antiscience-science. Rubin's alma mater SCNM, by the way, has employed the 'science label' for years and years. And, of course, AANMC claims the same.
In all actuality, naturopathy forges ahead by pretending science.
Thursday, September 16, 2010
here, I revisit the absurd claim by the Association of Accredited Naturopathic Medical Colleges [AANMC] that 'the essentially naturopathic [which is science-ejected] is science based':
001. AANMC writes in "Today's Naturopathic Doctors" [vsc 2010-09-16]:
001. AANMC writes in "Today's Naturopathic Doctors" [vsc 2010-09-16]:
"today’s naturopathic doctors (NDs) believe in understanding patients from the cellular level up [and] they actively pursue the latest biochemical findings relating to the workings of the body and the dynamics of botanical medicines, nutrition, homeopathy and other natural therapies. Their diagnoses and therapeutics are science based and increasingly evidence based.".
Note: this science claim is crap. And homeopathy is a placebo therapy, though naturopathy calls it a clinical science.
But, I'll reiterate what's being claimed: biological science as a basis, biochemical expertise, a scientific basis, and an evidence basis.
Yet, naturopathy essentially defines itself -- simultaneously, mind you -- with requisite vitalistic and supernatural science-ejected concepts.
It's nuts. Here they are as a consortia taking people's money without truthful disclosure.
Wednesday, September 15, 2010
here, I cite an ND's expressed vitalistic and supernatural premises [which are science-ejected!]:
001. Shelby, T.J. (ND Bastyr 2008) states in "Tara Johnie Shelby, ND, LM" [vsc 2010-09-15]:
001.a. naturopathy's vitalism per:
"naturopathic principles: [#1] the healing power of nature (vis medicatrix naturae). The healing power of nature is the inherent self-organizing and healing process of living systems. Naturopathic medicine recognizes this healing process to be ordered and intelligent [teleological!]. It is the naturopathic physician's role to support, facilitate and augment this process [...and now comes the contextualization] naturopathic therapeutic order: stimulate the vis medicatrix naturae [...aka] 'qi', 'prana', 'life force' [...] the force that moves us towards health; it is the essence that invigorates us. Some modalities that we utilize to stimulate the 'vis' include hydrotherapy, exercise, yoga, mediation, craniosacral therapy, energy medicine and homeopathy [powerful stuff!]."
Note: and, of course, the ND speaks of the "science-based nature of the medicine [...having] studied the medical science [...having] knowledge in conventional medical sciences [...and reveals] these principles, along with the medical science, are what guides my own medical practice today." Bastyr itself, her alma mater, is well-know for this nonsense statement: "Bastyr's international faculty teaches the natural health sciences with an emphasis on integrating mind, body, spirit and nature [yes, supernaturalism and vitalism]."
Yes, the cultic thought of naturopathy claims that within science is nonscience.
002. of course, though vitalism is science-ejected and defines naturopathy / naturopathy couches itself in the science-ejected, it falsely labels its entirety "science."
Shelby also falsely places supernaturalism within "science" on the above web page. We're told by the ND:
"my tools range from herbs, nutrition, homeopathy, physical manipulation, supplementation, awakening one's spirit as well as pharmaceuticals and surgery [!!!...and per naturopathy's defining principles, #4] health or disease comes from a complex interaction of mental, emotional, spiritual, physical etc."
So, I reiterate my overall label:
"the epistemic conflation of a school of thought claiming to be scientific / the science that ain't science."
Would one want SURGERY if the surgeon cannot tell the difference between a scientific fact / concept and a sectarian figmentation / delusion / fallacy?
Monday, September 13, 2010
TBM Investigates Naturopath Ben-Joseph and Texas MDs Say Naturopathy is 'Faith-Based, Lacking Evidence'
here, I cite from an El Paso Inc. piece regarding a reported Texas Medical Board [TMB] investigation of naturopath Eliezer Ben-Joseph [see 001., below]; and then I suggest what else should be investigated about naturopathy [see 002., below]:
001. Timothy Roberts writes in "State Medical Board Investigates Radio 'Doc'"(c2010-09-13)[vsc 2010-09-13]:
"Eliezer Ben-Joseph [is] a radio talk show host and naturopath [...experiencing] an investigation of his natural medicine practice by a state licensing board [...] the Texas Medical Board is investigating a complaint that he calls himself a doctor, even though he has no traditional medical degree [...he claims] 'in 14 years I have never called myself an M.D. I am a naturopath' [...] on his radio show, he calls himself 'a naturopath of the first order' [...] his website [...] further explains that 'he holds degrees of MD (MA) Medicina Alternativa, and a D.Sc., (doctor of science) from the Open International University for Complementary Medicines in Sri Lanka' [(impressive!)...] Dr. Raj Marwah, an El Paso rheumatologist who serves as a spokesman for the El Paso County Medical Society [...said] claims by naturopathic practitioners 'are blatantly off track' [...] of Ben-Joseph in particular, he said, 'he has a concoction for every symptom that you have' [(snake-oil salesman?)...and] Ben-Joseph 'gives the impression that he’s a medical guy [...] he should be transparent about this.' [...] Armando Meza, M.D., associate dean of graduate Medical Education at the Texas Tech University Paul L. Foster School of Medicine in El Paso said [...] 'there is no real evidence that (many of these treatments) work,' he said. 'It requires a lot of faith' [...while medicine] is evidence-based."
Note: some of the language that stands out is "blatantly off track", "transparent", "no real evidence", and "evidence-based".
002. what also should be investigated about naturopathy [their education racket]:
002.a. concerning the "blatantly off track" and of "no real evidence":
You get the claim that within science is the profoundly science-ejected. For instance, the UBCNM nonsensical claim that within "science" is the supernatural and vitalistic. This is an absurdity that I've illustrated ad nauseam.
002.b. concerning the non-"transparent":
When NDs describe the essentially naturopathic, they should be forced to state that it is nonsense to label what is outside of science as science and then posture as a physician who literally holds your life in their hands based upon such knowledge-blending irrationality.
002.c. concerning the "evidence-based":
I'd love to see actual, science-vetted evidence to support 'the naturopathic profoundly science-ejected' -- but, that's a long wait for a train that ain't coming. It' is as likely that there will be scientific evidence to support a vital force or a spirit within the human frame as there will be evidence that the earth is the center of the universe.
Yet, naturopathy's MO -- falsely labeling a mixture of science and profound nonscience as science and perniciously trading upon it [academically, clinically] -- unfortunately won't be what the TMB bothers looking at.
Perhaps the FTC will.
Sunday, September 12, 2010
here, I contrast labels concerning homeopathy. There's is the skeptical, science-minded person who regards homeopathy as pseudoscience [see 001., below] and there's the credulous, sectarian, science and nonscience conflating pseudoprofession [naturopathy] that regards pseudoscience as science [see 002., below]:
001. Andy Lewis writes on his Quackometer blog in "Can Homeopathy Cure Mastitis in Cows?"(2010-09-12):
"a new study has been published in The Journal of Dairy Research looking at if you can use homeopathy to treat mastitis in cattle. The paper fails to demonstrate that you can. And as such, that is not a surprise. These cows will have been given water drops as if it is medicine: homeopathy is a superstitious hang-over from 18th Century ways of thinking about health. Of course it does not work. What is surprising is that the homeopathic world is again leaping on this negative study as if it is proof of the positive benefits of homeopathic pseudoscience [...] this paper will be added to the large pile of junk science that is used to promote the nonsense of ultra-dilutions [...] this is how homeopathy continues. Weak or non–existent evidence is trumpeted as success."
Note: hear, hear.
002. meanwhile, in naturopathyland, naturopathy's licensure test-administration wing, the North American Board of Naturopathic Examiners, claims in "About NPLEX" [vsc 2010-09-12]:
"the first NABNE administration of the Part I - Basic Science Examinations was in January 2000, and the first NABNE administration of the Part II - Clinical Science Examinations was in August 2000 [...] the Core Clinical Science Examination now required by every state and province that regulates the practice of naturopathic medicine [i.e., U.S. and Canada]. The Core Clinical Science Examination is a case-based examination that covers the following topics [...including] homeopathy."
Note: so, there we have quite opposite labels upon what truly is archaic nonsense [pseudoscience, science]. I find naturopathy's labels of 'science, science, science' to be quite nonsensical: after all, naturopathy, by its own definition, does not make a distinction concerning what is within and what is exterior-to science, and yet naturopathy is quite happy to falsely label that thought-muddle science and trade upon the misrepresentation.
Friday, September 10, 2010
Newsbiscuit.com, in "Forensic Homeopathologist Offers Police 'Alternative' Evidence, Suspects", states:
"even when standard police-work makes adequate progress in a case, DI King often calls on his forensic homeopathologist for a second opinion, or a list of complementary suspects to interview [...] forensic homeopathologist Simon Yates [...] homeopathology is based on the 'law of similars' formulated by Samuel Hahnemann in late 18th century Germany, and involves serial dilutions of substances in water or alcohol, followed by forceful shaking in a process known as 'succussion' [...] Yates applies this to substances found at the crime scene – a drop of blood, the victim’s tears – it could even be powdered glass from a broken window. After preparing the solution and drinking the 'potentized' remedy, Yates will roam the vicinity guided by its power until one or more suspects have been identified. They are then also asked to drink the solution while in police custody until a conclusion is reached [...] he will admit, though, that forensic homeopathology has its limits and that some cases are beyond its reach [...then] 'I would recommend aroma-inquiry with perhaps a course of naturopathy to enhance the crime's ability to solve itself.'"
Monday, September 6, 2010
here, I cite from a recent noncritical promotion of naturopathy in Ireland's Independent [see 001., below]; then, I quote from the mentioned ND's school to get at naturopathy's essential, science-ejected 'nature' [see 002., below]:
001. reporter Phelan, A. (? ?) writes in "Fit To Be Tried: Naturopathy" [vsc 2010-09-06]:
"if you suffer the occasional bout of anything from anxiety to insomnia, stress, eczema, food cravings or nicotine addiction, the cure could be as close as your kitchen cupboard. Naturopath Roisin O'Kelly says a combination of Irish herbs, a healthy diet and even the power of prayer can shift common health complaints [really!...] herbs for common complaints that might be in your pantry include cayenne for poor circulation; garlic to fight colds; devil's claw for arthritis; tea-tree oil for fungal infections [because you so love to make those tea tree cup cakes and cookies!]; cinnamon for high cholesterol; hawthorn essence for cardiac problems and chasteberry for PMT [...] her own clinic [is] Breath of Life in Portmarnock, north Dublin [see www.bolhealing.com...she] trained at the College of Naturopathic Medicine in Dublin [...] an initial consultation includes [...] a tongue and pulse diagnosis [...] iridology and a short healing prayer as Ms O'Kelly believes strongly in the spiritual side of healing [...] a program is [then] recommended which may include [...] homeopathy, aromatherapy, reflexology [...] after the initial consultation I'm hooked up to a machine on the desk. This is a bio-resonance scanner. The scanner 'picks up energy levels, food sensitivities and areas that need attention' [...] the College of Naturopathic Medicine is one of Ireland's longest-established training providers of practitioner-level courses in herbal medicine, acupuncture, naturopathy and nutrition [...see] www.naturopathy.ie [...] did it work? Without a doubt, but treatment needs to continue [$$$]."
Note: what promotional, credulous junk! This is idiotic [and this isn't surprising]! Iridology? Bio-resonance? "Fit to be tried?" I don't think so. Nowhere in this article is there a morsel of transparency regarding where these diagnostics and therapies sit in light of modern medical science [they're ABSURD]. And nowhere is there even a whimper of a skeptical, analytical, or critical angle.
002. the ND's school states:
002.a. in "What Is Naturopathy?" [vsc 2010-09-06]:
002.a. in "What Is Naturopathy?" [vsc 2010-09-06]:
"the principles of naturopathy [...#1] the healing power of nature - nature has the innate ability to heal [...] naturopathy, or nature cure, is underpinned by a fundamental principle - vis medicatrix naturae - the healing power of nature [...] medicine, religion and science were intimately related and man was seen as a whole - a physical, mental, emotional and spiritual being. The same vital force or chi (qi) that made up the universe and nature flowed through man and it was his dislocation from this source that caused illness [...] early naturopaths realized that if you could restore the vital force to the patient, the body would naturally heal itself [...] many of the [vital force] suppressions [are] brought about through living in our modern times with all its concomitant stresses that seek to strangle the life force in our bodies."
Note: so, beginning from a nonsense vitalistic figmentation which conflates the natural and supernatural, the actual and the imagined, the medically relevant and the phantasmagoric, naturopathy therein can engage without blushing in pseudodiagnostics and wacko parlor therapeutics.
Saturday, September 4, 2010
here, I cite from the Wisconsin Naturopathic Physician's Association [WNPA] which labels naturopathy "science" [see 001., below]; and codes naturopathy's primary, science-ejected premise [see 002., below]; and I look at their President's credentials, and use her alma mater as a decoding mechanism [see 003., below]:
001. WNPA states in "About Naturopathic Medicine" [vsc 2010-09-04]:
"naturopathic medical programs provide a solid foundation in the basic medical sciences [...] naturopathic doctors cooperate with all other branches of medical science [...and they speak of] current advances in medical science."
Note: science, science, science.
002. WNPA also states on that same page:
"these six principles, emphasized throughout a naturopathic doctor’s training, outline the philosophy guiding the naturopathic approach to health and healing and forms the foundation of this distinct health care practice: [#1] harness the healing power of nature [HPN]. Naturopathic doctors work to stimulate your own self-healing abilities of body, mind and spirit. Naturopathic medicine harnesses the vast potential of nature’s medicines to stimulate your inherent healing power."
Note: and that's all you get. But, when you look perponderantly at naturopathy, HPN is actually the science-ejected concept known as vitalism blended with supernaturalism, and here half of that is coded. Science excludes both the science-ejected and science-unsupported, including the vitalistic [even if coded] and the supernatural. I wish they'd tell the public that, so that an informed decision could be made. Boy, does naturopathy BLEND [and disguise]. Yet, of course, naturopathic thinking is termed by naturopathy as "distinct." The obscure, opaque, camouflaged and coded distinct; such is also known as "the reversal of values."
003. WNPA states in "Board of Directors" [vsc 2010-09-04]:
"Allison Becker, ND [NCNM], LAc - President."
Note: not even Becker's "Naturopathic Medicine" [vsc 2010-09-04] fully explains the vitalistic, science-ejected premise that is central to naturopathy. Instead the premise is coded as "a deep respect for the body's ability to heal itself." But, if you go to the web page of her alma mater NCNM, you get that explicit vitalism falsely labeled as science, and it is repeated at the '.gov level.'
WNPA has stated that their mission is to base the healthcare system on naturopathic principles: so that something can be labeled what it is not.
Friday, September 3, 2010
here, I cite from Dr. Lipson's "The Death and Rebirth of Vitalism" 2010-09-02 repost at his new blogging location, Scientopia.org. It is one of my favorites regarding where medicine stands in terms of this archaic and science-ejected philosophy [that just so happens to be the centerpiece of naturopathy's belief system, no matter how slimily they code it]:
"[there's] this fallacy [...] that life must be more than matter [...but] biology has become a science in its own right [...and] all biological processes [...are] contrained by the laws of physics and chemistry [...biology's] important step was the rejection of two erroneous principles: vitalism and teleology [...] more offensive to me is the idea of vitalism [...] that the difference between living and non-living things is some sort of non-material vital force [...] some sort of 'elan vital' that animates living matter [...] the death of vitalism, and the discovery of genetics, allowed biology to grow to a mature scientific discipline [...though] we will always be temped to think vitalistically [...and] all alternative medicine is based on the idea [...e.g.] Chiropractic [...has] vital energy [...] 'energy therapies' [...have] qi [...] homeopathy [...has] vital force [...] if something is immeasurable and un-observable, either directly or indirectly, it then it is not medically relevant [...] why make up a silly, non-reality-based explanation [...that] has become irrelevant [...] vitalism [is] an ancient and discredited philosophy."
Note: hear, hear.
Tuesday, August 31, 2010
here, I cite from and comment upon the recently published University of Bridgeport College of Naturopathic Medicine "2010 Learning Outcomes" page [see 001., below]; and then I boil it all down [see 002., below]:
001. UB's "Naturopathic Medicine (N.D.) / Learning Outcomes" [vsc 2010-08-31] page states:
001.a. [bullet 3]:
"the UBCNM graduate will value and apply the primary principles of naturopathic medicine including: [...B3#2] to act in cooperation with the healing power of nature [HPN / coded vitalism...B3#6] demonstrate the ability to integrate naturopathic philosophy and principles with biomedical science [and] diagnostic science [...and] promote individual and community health and well being [...B3#7] demonstrate behavior that is ethical, professional, and accountable [...B3#8] demonstrate an understanding of the principles and importance of scientific and medical research."
Note: now, to understand precisely what is being talked about in the above [UB isn't providing transparency here, but I think the public deserves to be properly informed], we need a firm description of the actual principles of naturopathy.
We need to get to 'the things themselves.' Context is best obtained from the State of Oregon, believe it or not. You will notice several things within this detailed / 'canonical' iteration regarding “the primary principles of naturopathic medicine” [that UB doesn't detail]:
HPN is “life force” which is a science-ejected concept well-exiled from modern biology, and though NOT science such is claimed falsely by naturopathy as science [along with their spiritism supernaturalism]. So, overall, the idea of “integrate” [blending!] that UB speaks of is actually this absurd situation regarding knowledge: combine actual science with the hugely science-ejected and then label the whole thing science.
I call it 'epistemic conflation' which means to blend knowledge type, and 'epistemic misrepresentation', which means to mislabel discrete knowledge kind. I don't see how this is beneficial for the community: to undermine well-define delineations, including undermining the public understanding of science. I don't see how it is ethical [academically, commercially, medically] and professional to be so opaque and therefore manipulative. It's sad that one has to go to the West Coast -- to the naturopathy stronghold -- to find out what is happening, per 'the things themselves,' at a younger school on the East Coast.
001.b. “[bullet 1] demonstrate a comprehensive understanding of the history, principles, and philosophy of naturopathic medicine […bullet 2] apply an understanding of the history of medicine.”
Note: there's a reason vitalism and supernaturalism - them naturopathy principles -- aren't within actual medicine, historically, scientifically, and philosophically. They are science-ejected figmentations akin to fairy dust. What naturopathy is doing here is combining science and religion [roughly speaking], and then falsely labeling the whole thing science while misrepresenting the whole thing in naturalistic language. Medicine has matured into an applied science; it is not based upon coded sectarian figmentations posing as 'in evidence' as is the case with naturopathy.
002. the reversal of values:
the formulation is, overall, 'science=nonscience' OR more generally 'something=what it profoundly is not' [the ultimate reversal of value]. I term this 'the naturopathic reversal of values.' It is absurd, it is irrational, it is insane, it is cultic.
What I don't find in naturopathyland is acknowledgment of the public's and patient's right to informed consent, which is the basis of a physician-patient relationship and a contractual milieu.
So, beware. In naturopathyland: science is nonscience; ethical is unethical; professional is unprofessional; medicine is pseudomedicine; natural is supernatural; figmentations are 'in evidence'; rationality is insanity.
That is a comprehensive understanding of where naturopathy is...absurdity.
here, I cite from the web page of Arizona NMD Orona, who explains the underlying [science-ejected!] vitalism and supernaturalism that is AANP-AANMC etc. naturopathy's core premise:
"naturopathic medicine, also known as 'naturopathy' is a school of medical philosophy and practice that seeks to improve health and treat disease chiefly by assisting the body's innate capacity to recover from illness and injury [...there are] five principles of naturopathy: [#1] the healing power of nature, vis medicatrix naturae. The body has the inherent ability to establish, maintain, and restore health. The healing process is ordered and intelligent; nature heals through the response of the life force. The physician’s role is to facilitate and assist this process [...] 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 attempting to heal itself. Therapeutic actions should be complementary to and synergistic with this healing process. The physician’s actions can support or antagonize the actions of vis medicatrix naturae [...] in the state of Arizona, naturopathic medical doctor (NMD) and naturopathic doctor (ND) are used synonymously."
Note: in naturopathyland, that which is science and that which is hugely science-ejected is also synonymous. Just to also mention, on this same page, we are told of the requisite supernaturalism that is inherent to naturopathy. E.g., "the physician must also make a commitment to her/his personal and spiritual development [...] health and disease are conditions of the whole organism, involving a complex interaction of physical, spiritual, mental, emotional, genetic, environmental, and social factors [...] causes may occur on many levels, including physical, mental-emotional, and spiritual." Her alma mater, NCNM -- THE North American naturopathy school in terms of this healing sect's history -- labels all this 'as able to survive scientific scrutiny.'
Naturopathy's absurdity is amazing: sectarian figmentations that are at best politely called 'articles-of-faith' are falsely labeled 'in fact scientific.' All with '.gov' support.
Ah, but what they don't tell you.
002. I like the language used by evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins in "The Oxford Book of Modern Science Writing" (2008; ISBN 0199216800):
"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 [which includes 'spirit' in the supernatural / immaterial sense]. 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]."
Note: naturopathy, which claims to be "state-of-the-art," 'thinks' otherwise.
Note: naturopathy, which claims to be "state-of-the-art," 'thinks' otherwise.
here, I analyze the language of the University of Bridgeport's [UB] 2010 description of their N.D. program that's offered by their College of Naturopathic Medicine within their Division of Health Sciences [see 001., below]; then I provide some ACTUAL detail / elucidation [see 002., below]:
001. UB states in "Naturopathic Medicine (N.D.): Program Details" [vsc 2010-08-29]:
"are you interested in a career in a field of medicine that works to support the natural healing power [NHP, coded vitalism] of the body, mind, and spirit [BMS, supernaturalism]? In naturopathic medicine we call this vis medicatrix naturae (the healing power of nature) [therein VMN-HPN is an amalgam of vitalism and spiritism, minimally], and it is our guiding philosophy [required sectarian central belief / standard of naturopathic practice].
are you interested in a profession [professions claim] that serves humanity [!] with both ancient tradition and modern science [aka blended knowledge...] we embrace the old and the new [...] this blend of old and new [...] modern biomedical science and diagnosis [...blended with archaic] philosophies and healing modalities [...which is] the medicine required to meet the challenge of the twenty-first century [!...]
the College of Naturopathic Medicine at the University of Bridgeport [...offers] a program of professional education [again, that professions claim] to prepare naturopathic physicians to provide compassionate healthcare that addresses the cause of disease [again, that VMN-HPN framing...]
the course of study is rigorous [!] as is appropriate [!] for the training of physicians [...]
the College of Naturopathic Medicine trains naturopathic physicians who practice medicine in a way that supports the inherent healing wisdom of nature [coded vitalism...] preparing them to become leaders in natural healthcare [naturopathy's false naturalistic language...]
the College provides an education of the highest standards [high standard claim], with academic and clinical training based on the principles and philosophy of naturopathic medicine [their sectarian belief amalgam framing...]
students are also encouraged to become honorable and dedicated professionals [again, professions claim], committed to serve their communities and the naturopathic profession [again, professions claim...]
the College conducts research to advance the understanding and knowledge of the natural health sciences [their overarching label for all this...]
the College of Naturopathic Medicine is accredited by the Connecticut State Department of Higher Education to offer the degree of Doctor of Naturopathic Medicine [...and] the Council on Naturopathic Medical Education (CNME), which is recognized by the U.S. Department of Education [their accomplices in all this absurdity]."
Note: yes, the word "details" was used. But, why then do I have to elaborate, comment and elucidate? But, I must, to provide detail / transparency.
002. elucidation regarding:
NHP / HPN-VMN [the naturopathic vitalism that dare not speak its science-ejected life force status!]: this is, preponderantly, a coding / camouflage for naturopathy's central belief in vitalism. Here's my collection of such [including earlier UB pages that used "life force" in earlier VMN definitions] stated by naturopathy explicitly in other places. Often naturopathy does not explain that VMN is an article of faith most akin to supernatural spiritism, wherein the body is governed by a 'life spirit' or 'life force' which is intelligent / purposeful. I have often described this amalgam as 'purposeful life spirit' and that encompasses the concepts of vitalism, spiritism, and teleology. In modern times, naturalism is not supernaturalism, but, herein, naturopathy labels supernaturalism with naturalistic language -- which is quite misleading and FALSE [also note that vitalism is quite science-ejected minimally for several decades]. The public is not informed of this material fact;
BMS [the science-ejected supernatuaralism that speaks volumes concerning naturopathy's pseudoscientific / 'epistemic conflation' status]: you will notice that the program is offered within the label of science, and here we have explicit supernaturalism, which is science-exterior and has been for hundreds of years [ah, the absurdity!]. The public is not informed of this material fact;
"profession": what kind of profession opaquely DECEIVES and engages in such transparent MANIPULATION?;
blended knowledge falsely labeled a specific kind of knowledge "rigorous" / "appropriate": who needs such? This is going to be good? You will notice that THE hallmark of naturopathy is to study some science, study a bunch of nonscience, and then falsely label the whole muddle as science. And they diagnose and treat disease. It is akin to a Ouija board and a laboratory test being equated, and then falsely labeled as both being scientific instruments. Here's a great anecdote: I had an ND instructor at UB who diagnosed patients with a pendulum. That's the knowledge conflation in a nutshell: science blended with nonscience and it all called science with the ND unable to distinguish because the blending has been done so thoroughly.
"natural health sciences": this is a false label, simply put. The essential supernaturalism and vitalism alone knock naturopathy out of this category;
the accomplices: a very large number of local, state, and national persons and entities are as responsible for this nonsense as the immediate purveyors.
Sunday, August 29, 2010
here, I excerpt from a recent What's New by Bob Park [see 001., below]; then, I connect it to naturopathy misconduct [see 002., below]:
"Misconduct: Graduate Students Emerge as the Heroes. Renowned Harvard psychology professor Marc Hauser, author of 'Moral Minds: How Nature Designed Our Universal Sense of Right and Wrong' (Ecco, 2006), wrote that 'our moral instincts are immune to the explicitly articulated Commandments handed down by religions and governments.' I agree with his conclusion, and so indeed did the two Catholic seminary teachers I wrote about in "Superstition: Belief in the Age of Science," (Princeton, 2008), except that Hauser and I believe it to be an instinct shaped by evolution, while the two priests said it was 'written in our hearts by the Holy Spirit.' Details. It is often referred to by the faithful as 'the moral law.' Hauser thought other primates must exhibit similar instincts, but fudged his experiments with New World monkeys to show it. It was his own students, who protested, first to Hauser and then to the Dean, that the experiments showed just the opposite. As Eric Felten wrote in this morning's Wall Street Journal, they 'risked their careers and reputations to blow the whistle on him. They are the scientists to celebrate.'"
002. here's the Naturocrit connection: my continuous whistle-blowing on AANP-AANMC naturopathy misconduct!
so, for the thousandth time or so, I'll reiterate a central issue that makes naturopathy, even of the 'big-six accreditation' type............absurd, and in that sense, hugely 'of misconduct' and falsehood:
a science label is placed upon the hugely science-ejected [the vitalistic, the supernatural and kind] and then this false labeling is traded upon academically and clinically.
The more absurd thing about naturopathy is this: experiments weren't ever done to then fudge the results of to:
a) support their vitalistic premise;
b) support their supernatural premise.
There misconduct is of a lazier type, never doing science but instead writing a bunch of blather as if science is a letterhead and magically then anything written on the page beneath that label is then 'in-evidence.'
I go way back with this gross naturopathy misconduct, e.g.:
[where I went to school in 1998] you'd think, in all this time that has passed and due to so many so-called regulators having scrutinized the college / university [there's misconduct too], they are being accurate when they label naturopathy in this here 2010 web page "science" [vsc 2010-08-29]
and in this here printed 1997 web page "science-based [...] not a belief system."
But, labeling the nonscientific science is absurd, false, and at this level of 'medical' doctoral so-called physicianship -- gross misconduct and such.
And the racket continues. So does the whistle-blowing.
One difference may be this: my college, unlike Harvard, had no internal processes for grievance and actively legally fought my truthful criticism of their fraud and they won.