Ye Olde 'Naturopathy is Science' Claim - UBCNM 2010-10

hey, back to basics -- "science" falsely used upon the naturopathic as an overall academic category / marketing label when what is essentially naturopathy is QUITE exterior to science:

ND Birdsall on the AANP Youtube Channel - Naturopathic Oncology is VERY Scientific

here, I compare contrary claims regarding naturopathic oncology FROM WITHIN THE SAME CANCER HOSPITAL.  First, there's the AANP Youtube.com channel who has CTCA ND Birdsall stating in a CTCA partially-funded video series that the naturopathic approach is "very scientific" [see 001., below]; then, there's what CTCA says about naturopathy, which is that it is based in-fact upon the hugely science-exterior [see 002., below]:

001. Birdsall, T. (ND Bastyr 1985) states in "Naturopathic Physicians - Show #2, Chapter 2: Integrating Cancer Treatment (2 of 5)" [vsc 2010-10-02]:

"we take a very scientific, evidence-based approach [00.04.06...] utilizing scientific rationales, scientific studies, and clinical evidence [00.04.19...and we're reminded that this series was partly sponsored by] Cancer Treatment Centers of America [CTCA; see here]."

Note: science, science, science.

002. naturopathy's science-ejected basis via CTCA:

002.a. CTCA states in "Naturopathic Medicine for Pharyngeal Cancer" [vsc 2010-10-02]:

"listed below are some of the founding principles of naturopathic medicine [...#2] the healing power of nature: naturopathy applies the healing power of nature and the body's inherent ability to establish, maintain and restore health. The healing process is ordered and intelligent; nature heals through the response of the life force. Your naturopathic practitioner's role in pharyngeal cancer treatment is to facilitate and augment this natural healing process."

Note: yet, we are also told by CTCA in "Naturopathic Medicine" [vsc 2010-09-30]:

"[that naturopathy is] scientifically grounded."

002.b. but, such "life force" vitalism is science-ejected.  So, naturopathy's overall absurdity is that it claims a label that the essential naturopathic is in-fact excluded from: science.

Naturopathy's "Objective Observation" of 'Subjective Figmentations' - A Google.com Search Round-Up

here, I use the Google.com web search engine and the parameters >"objective observation" naturopathic< and list all the first-page results [as of 2010-10-01; see 002., below]; then I muse on their false-labeling / knowledge-type muddle [see 002., below]:

001. results:

001.a. the Southwest College of Naturopathic Medicine web page "What Is a Naturopathic Physician?" [vsc 2010-10-01] which states:

"the principles of naturopathic medicine are based upon objective observation of the nature of health and disease, and are continually re-examined in the light of scientific advances."

Note: so, the overall promise is that naturopathy's tenets are 'scientifically in-fact.'  You will see this promise made from naturopathy's highest echelon national consortia all the way down to the individual NMD practitioner.

001.b. the practice page of Dye, J. (NMD Bastyr), Groves, A. (NMD SCNM), and Terlisner, A. (NMD Bastyr) titled "What is Naturopathy?" [vsc 2010-10-01] which states:

"the practice of naturopathy 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."

001.c. a Skeptic North comment of mine along the same lines as this current post.

001.d. the grand illusion, the Oregon.gov web page "About Naturopathy" [vsc 2010-10-01] which states:

"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. It is these principles that distinguish the profession from other medical approaches."

001.e. the National College of Natural Medicine page "Principles of Healing" [vsc 2010-10-01] which states:

"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."

001.f. the practice page of Smith, G. (NMD SCNM) titled "Doctor as Teacher: Naturopathic Medicine of Southern Arizona" [vsc 2010-10-01] which states:

"naturopathic medicine is distinguished by the principles which underlie and determine its practice. These principles are based upon the objective observation of the nature of health and disease, and are continually reexamined in the light of scientific advances. Methods used are consistent with these principles."

001.g. the practice page of Stephens, J. (NMD SCNM) titled "Naturopathic Philosophy" [vsc 2010-10-01] which states:

"the principles of naturopathic medicine are based upon objective observation of the nature of health and disease, and are continually re-examined in the light of scientific advances. Methods used are consistent with these principles."

001.h. the practice page of Steriti, R. (ND SCNM) titled "The American Association of Naturopathic Physicians Definition of Naturopathic Medicine" [vsc 2010-10-01] which states:

"naturopathic medicine is distinguished by the principles which underlie and determine its practice. These principles are based upon the objective observation of the nature of health and disease, and are continually reexamined in the light of scientific advances. Methods used are consistent with these principles."

001.i. the web page of Providence Health and Services and Aschtgen, C.D. (ND Bastyr) titled "Naturopathic Oncology" [vsc 2010-10-01] which states:

"the principles of naturopathic medicine are based on objective observation of the nature of health and disease."

001.j. the practice page of Bubis, E. (ND NCNM) titled "Naturopathic Medicine" [vsc 2010-10-01] which states:

"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. It is these principles that distinguish the profession from other medical approaches."

001.k. the practice page of Cox, S.E. (ND NCNM) titled "Naturopathy" [vsc 2010-10-01] which states:

"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. The following tenants [sp., 'tenets'], reaching far back to the time of Hippocrates, distinguish the profession from other medical approaches."

001.L. the practice page of Keaton, D. (NMD NCNM) titled "Naturopathic Medicine" [vsc 2010-10-01] which states:

"naturopathic medicine is distinguished by the principles which underlie and determine its practice. These principles are based upon the objective observation of the nature of health and disease, and are continually reexamined in the light of scientific advances. Methods used are consistent with these principles."

001.m. the practice page of Awad, R. (ND Bastyr) titled "AANP Definition of Naturopathic Medicine" [vsc 2010-10-01] which states:

"naturopathic medicine is distinguished by the principles which underlie and determine its practice. These principles are based upon the objective observation of the nature of health and disease, and are continually reexamined in the light of scientific advances. Methods used are consistent with these principles."

001.n. the practice page of von der Heydt, L. (ND NCNM) titled "About Naturopathic Medicine" [vsc 2010-10-01] which states:

"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."

001.o. the practice page of Engard, K. (NMD NCNM) titled "What is Naturopathic Medicine?" [vsc 2010-10-01] which states:

"naturopathic medicine is distinguished by the principles which underlie and determine its practice. These principles are based upon the objective observation of the nature of health and disease, and are continually reexamined in the light of scientific advances. Methods used are consistent with these principles."

001.p. Chaitow's naturopathic textbook, via books.google.com, titled "Naturopathic Physicial Medicine: Theory and Practice for Manual Therapists and Naturopaths" (2008, ISBN 0443103909) which states:

"naturopathic medicine is distinguished by the principles that underlie and determine its practice.  The principles are based upon the objective observation of the nature of health and disease and are continually re-examined in the light of scientific advances.  Methods used are consistent with these principles [p.002]."

001.q. the practice page of Patterson, J. (ND UBCNM) titled "About Jaquel Patterson" [vsc 2010-10-01] which states:

"naturopathic medicine is distinguished by the principles which underlie and determine its practice. These principles are based upon the objective observation of the nature of health and disease, and are continually reexamined in the light of scientific advances. Methods used are consistent with these principles."

001.r. the practice page of Holk, L.E. (ND NCNM) and White, D.J. (ND NCNM) titled "What Is Naturopathic Medicine?" [vsc 2010-10-01] which states:

"naturopathic medicine is distinguished by the principles that underline and determine its practice. These principles are based upon the objective observation of the nature of health and disease, and are continually reexamined in the light of scientific advances. Methods used are consistent with these principles."

001.s. the practice page of Sakonyi, J. (ND Bastyr) titled "The Principles of Naturopathic Medicine" [vsc 2010-10-01] which states:

"the principles of naturopathic medicine are part of what distinguishes the naturopathic approach to health care from the conventional approach and are based on objective observation of the nature of health and disease.  The following principles are the foundation of naturopathic medical practice."

001.t. the practice page of Rios-Young, M. (ND Bastyr) titled "Naturopathic Principles" [vsc 2010-10-01] which states:

"naturopathic medicine is distinguished by the principles that underlie and determine it’s [sp., its] practice. These principles are based on the objective observation of the nature of health and disease."

002. the false label of "objective observation" placed upon 'subjective figmentations':

well, for starters, a defining principle of naturopathy is that the body is run by an immaterial 'vital force' which I'll condense as a 'purposeful life spirit.'  This force doesn't exist.  It is a figmentation.  It is a belief in the sense of a without-evidenced-article-of-faith.  Vitalism has been ejected from science for OH SO MANY YEARS.  It is a subjective figmentation, and not an objectively observed phenomenon. 

This muddle of 'kinds of knowledge' essentially defines naturopathy [epistemic conflation].  Perhaps what also defines naturopathy is a lack of intellectual rigor in terms of being able to make the distinction.

Notice that I've not even touched upon the science-exterior supernaturalism which is also built into the naturopathic belief-amalgam.

Note science, not transparent, not a profession.

CTCA's ND Kellman and the 'Coded Naturopathic Science-Ejected' - AANP Youtube Style

here, I cite from an American Association of Naturopathic Physician's [AANP] Youtube channel that opaquely explains naturopathy's essential premise [see 001., below]; then, I decode that so-often coded science-ejected premise through AANP and Cancer Treatment Centers of America web pages [see 002., below]:

001. the AANP's Executive Director Karen Howard has up on Youtube the video "Daniel Kellman, ND, FABNO, on 'Good Morning Texas' - Cancer Treatment (September 15, 2010)" [vsc 2010-09-28]:

"[interviewer Rob McCollum] when someone gets a cancer diagnosis, they want to do whatever they can to fight it.  Now that includes taking advantage of traditional treatments and naturopathic medicine.  Daniel Kellman is a naturopathic clinician at Cancer Treatment Centers of America.  Good to see you sir, welcome. [the ND] Nice to see you Rob. [McCollum] Thank you for driving in from Tulsa this morning.  So, tell me a little bit about what exactly naturopathic medicine is and how that can help reduce some of the side effects that come along with cancer treatments. [the ND] Well, naturopathic medicine uses what is called the healing power or nature or the vis medicatrix naturae [VMN] to restore and maintain health. [McCollum] Wait, say that again. [the ND] Vis medicatrix naturae, which is Latin for the healing power of nature.  And so we utilize that in cancer treatment to protect healthy tissues while patients are undergoing some of the chemotherapy, radiation, and surgery  treatments [then some supplements are shown and talked about...and] acupuncture [...and] homeopathic medicines [mentioned...plus some slides for] Cancer Treatment Centers of America [are shown...McCollum] what kind of training to you have to have to become a naturopathic clinician? [...the ND] four years of undergraduate, four years of medical school [...] we have the training to keep people safe."

Note: notice that VMN was never really detailed.  In the interview, the interviewer then later referred to it as 'the body's systems.'  Well, that's the game NDs play, which I will detail in 002.  For ND Kellman's bio. at CTCA, click here [vsc 2010-09-30].

002. decoding what should have been transparently communicated to facilitate informed consent and accuracy in commercial advertising:

002.a. AANP:

002.a1. naturopathy's essential vitalism "vis" belief:

you can get a glimpse of the underlying vitalism [as in, usually, 'file under lying' -- as in 'lie of omission'] from the AANP's blog, such as ND Schor's "Letting Nature Heal"(2009-08-11)[vsc 2010-05-10] wherein he states:

"are we not supposed to be naturopaths and is not our goal supposed to be to stimulate the vital force or the vis medicatrix naturae [...] let me quote a respected medical writer on nature’s healing properties [...Hahnemann!] 'what the vital force does in these so-called crises and how it does it remains a mystery to us like all the internal operations of the organic vital economy.'"

Now, Schor is an NCNM graduate, and here's the essential vitalism of his alma mater.  Now, Schor received AANP's "Vis Award"[vsc 2010-09-30] in 2008, and he explains:

"at the 2008 annual convention of the American Association of Naturopathic Physicians, Dr. Jacob Schor was both surprised and honored by his colleagues as the first recipient of the Vis Award [...] this award was created to honor those naturopathic doctors who have exhibited similar characteristics of service to their patients and commitment to living and practicing naturopathic medicine in accordance to what is called the 'vis medicatrix naturae' or healing force of nature.  The vis medicatrix naturae, or vis, is one of the fundamental principles that guides and distinguishes the practice of naturopathic medicine. The vis is the belief [yes, belief!] that every living being contains a 'life force'. When this force is given proper building blocks and freed from obstacles, each being will come to a state of ideal health and balance."

So, vitalism vitalism vitalism.  A belief.

002.a2. naturopathy's science claim [upon the vis, particularly]:

here's an archived AANP definition of naturopathy, circa 2006 [vsc 2010-09-30], which states, in terms of science, that their principles, including that all-important "vis", are based upon "objective observation" and are "continually reexamined in the light of scientific advances."

Note: that's quite a promise.  And you'll notice that even on that AANP page, there's no explicit / transparent explanation of 'the vis.'

002.a3. the science-ejected status of vitalism:

well, that's quite easy to show.

002.a4. 'we are irrational':

so, you have the hugely science-ejected falsely labeled 'able to survive scientific scrutiny', which is hugely irrational.  AANP's label could be, if it were to be honest about its essential 'nature', "we are irrational."

002.b. CTCA:

002.b1. details naturopathy's essential vitalism:

in this archived page [vsc 2010-09-30] circa 2004.

002.b2. while falsely labeling it science:

as in "scientifically grounded" [vsc 2010-09-30].

002.b3. in terms of irrationalism, ditto, and cancer is a very serious affliction which I'd hope would be approached from rationality instead of naturopathy.  Ironically, Kellman's bio. page at CTCA states:

"he is a good listener, has an investigative and scientific mind, and is compassionate." 

It didn't take me too long just here to scientifically investigate naturopathy's essential premises for the sake of the public good [compassion!].

Interesting that the elephant in the room is so easily missed by NDs, and so well-camouflaged by them in their 'explanations.'

CCNM to CPSO: 'Look Very Closely At Us, and Embrace Us'

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;

Wherein CNME Falsely Credentials Me "ND" and Asks Me For Money [ISYN]

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."

Sandwalk Schwacks Naturopathy

here, I cite from a recent blog post by scientist Larry Moran on his Sandwalk blog here on blogspot:

001. in "What Is Naturopathy?" [2010-09-23], Larry Moran writes:

"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.

Craniosacral Naturopathic Nonsense & the ASA Judgment 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."

Note: ouch!

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.

The Antiscience-Science of ND Rubin and the AANMC

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.

The AANMC's Claim that Naturopathy is Science-Based and Evidence-Based, 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]:

"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.

Naturopathy's Essential Science-Ejected Vitalism via ND Tara Johnie Shelby

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?

Not me.

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.

Homeopathy: The Quackometer vs. NABNE

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.

Newsbiscuit.com Has Some Fun with Naturopathy, Homeopathy, and Forensics

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.'"

Note: splendid.

the Independent.ie's Promotion of Naturopathy

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]:

"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.