Skeptical Letter Writer To ASA About CNM, 2010-11

here, I cite from the blog "Skeptical Letter Writer" [SLW; see 001., below]:

001. SLW writes in "The College of Naturopathic Medicine (again)" (2010-11-13)[vsc 2010-11-15]:

"here's another installment in my continuing series of complaints against the College of Naturopathic Medicine [...] can the college substantiate any of their claims [...about] reflexology [...and] applied kinesiology [...e.g., the former] 'helps to restore natural balance of the body resulting in an improved sense of health and well being [sic]. Energy, mood, circulation and immunity can also be enhanced. This relaxing treatment benefits many health conditions such as: stress, anxiety, insomnia, muscular pain, headaches, migraines, digestive disorders, hormonal imbalances e.g. PMS, menopause, and more' [...and the latter] 'uses muscles testing to identify imbalances within the body, so removes the need for guess-work in treating a client, friends and family [...] kinesiology [...] produces results quickly' [...] I suspect that the booklet may be in breach of the British Code of Advertising, Sales Promotion and Direct Marketing (CAP Code) [...for both,] under Section 12.1, I challenge whether the advertisers can substantiate their claims."

002. well, it can't hurt to complain about part of the weird diagnostics and treatments that are within 'the hugely weird naturopathic'.

Naturopathy, EBM, and SEBM - ND Barrett at Natural Medicine Journal, 2010-11

here, I cite from a recent interview of one NCNM ND by another at Natural Medicine Journal [NMJ] regarding evidence based medicine [EBM; see 001., below]; then, I illuminate the 'actual naturopathic' [see 002., below]; and, I muse on the lunacy [see 003., below]:

001. in NMJ's "Clinical Roundtable (audio)" [saved 2010-11-06], Kaczor, T. (ND NCNM 2000) and Barrett, R. (ND NCNM 1986) state:

"ND Kaczor: Dr. Barrett, as you know, there is a general acceptance of the evidence-based model as the paradigm in which all medicine should be practiced [...] in particular randomized-controlled trials [00.00.43...] can you speak to some of the pros and cons of using evidence-based medicine in the application of naturopathic care [00.00.58]?

ND Barrett: [00.01.03] I actually prefer the term evidence-informed medicine [...] I'm definitely leaning towards the pro side [00.01.14...] but, on the other side, I'm very much a naturopathic doctor in philosophy and outlook as well.  I think a lot of people say that you kind of have to pick one side: either [the] scientific point of view or have fidelity to naturopathic philosophy.  I think that's really a false dichotomy [00.01.56...with the philosophical context including] the Therapeutic Order [TO...and] the Naturopathic Principles [NP, 00.02.17...and then quotes] David Young [...] someone outside the field [...who is not an ND then, obviously, said, defending naturopathy,] 'naturopathic physicians are in the possession of the same set of scientific facts as conventional physicians, but conscienciously differ on how to apply that knowledge.'   I think that sums it up pretty well [00.02.44].

ND Barrett: [00.15.00] We always want to use the filter of the philosophy."

Note: so, there is a strong claim of the naturopathic being science, and there's talk of within all that are the NP and TO filters.  What is, specifically, within these 'filters'?

002. hmmmm, their filtering -- 'the actual naturopathic' / the 'essentially naturopathic' -- is, indeed, science-ejected woo [these are only two aspects of this sectarian belief system, there are many more!]:

002.a. naturopathy's vitalism, via their TO, is stated in their textbook's chapter, "Chapter 3 - A Hierarchy of Healing: The Therapeutic Order: The Unifying Theory of Naturopathic Medicine":

"the vis medicatrix naturae, the vital force, the healing power of nature. This is the first step in the hierarchy of healing and what naturopathic physicians may call the overarching clinical theory of naturopathic medicine: the therapeutic order [p.034]."

Note: vitalism is hugely science-ejected.

002.b. naturopathy's supernaturalism, via their NP, on one of their State board '.gov' web pages, the Oregon Board of Naturopathic Medicine's "Naturopathy", 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 [...#1] nature heals through the response of the life force [...#3] the process of healing includes the generation of symptoms, which are, in fact, an expression of the life force attempting to heal itself [...#5] the physician must also make a commitment to his/her personal and spiritual development in order to be a good teacher [...] causes may occur on many levels including physical, mental, emotional, and spiritual [...] health and disease are conditions of the whole organism, a whole involving a complex interaction of physical, spiritual, mental, emotional, genetic, environmental, social, and other factors."

Note: any supernaturalism is hugely science-ejected, though the OBNM claims in these principles' contents such is "objective" and "in fact" able to survive scientific scrutiny.  Notice that vitalism is in there too, just as falsely claimed to be just as scientific.

003. so, here's the 'naturopathy lunacy':

the hugely not science claimed as science.

Note: so, in the ultimate reversal of values, naturopathy is essentially 'science-ejected based medicine' [SEBM]. 

I would place scientific rigor on this continuum, starting from least to most scientifically rigorous: SEBM, EBM, SBM [science-based medicine].  

SEBM is categorically / by definition, NOT SCIENCE. 

You can find this lunacy explicitly stated at the alma mater and employer of these two NDs, NCNM.  This is truly the naturopaTHICK.

Carl Sagan Day at the JREF, 2010

here are some embeds linking to the videos that the JREF has put up from this year's Carl Sagan Day:

001. part one [7 min. about]:

002. part two [179 min. about]:

003. part three [165 min. about]:

004. part four [41 min. about]:

 

Gushing Endorsement of Naturopathic Efficacy, & Analysis - 'A News Vancouver Island' on Youtube, 2010-11

here, I cite from a 2010-11 Youtube bit from British Columbia, Canada that cannot say enough good things about naturopathy [with not a peep mentioned about its lunacy; see 001., below]; then, I cite from the web pages of the ND who is spotlighted in the video [see 002., below]; and finally, I offer a little bit of British Columbia ND lunacy [see 003., below]:

001. 'A News Vancouver Island' reports in "Prescription Pads Now Legal For Naturopathic Physicians" (2010-11):

"naturopathic physicians have for years used nontraditional remedies very effectively to help their patients [...now] BC naturopaths have been granted the authority to administer drugs to their patients [...] Dr. Neil McKinney, B.SC., ND, naturopathic physician in oncology [...talks of] 'herbal tinctures and homeopathic remedies [...] Chinese medicine [...] I have a broad set of tools to work with [... ] we are very well trained' [...the prescriptive rights do not include] federally regulated drugs with high abuse potential  [...and NDs say they now can] serv their patients better [...and we're told by the reporter] it's not about who is right or wrong, its about what works."

Note: wow, hugely gushing endorsement.  Is this journalism or advertisement?  "Very effectively" and "what works"?  HOMEOPATHY [remedies with nothing in them]?  Fascinating that we're informed that this ND has a science degree [this is a confidence game!].

002. the McKinney, N. (ND NCNM 1985) web site (click here) states, in "Therapies and Services" [vsc 2010-11-06]:

"cancer treatment [...] natural medicines can help cancer patients at any stage. Therapy may include Iscador Mistletoe Therapy (an advanced cancer therapy from Germany) [...] homeopathy: since 1974 Dr. McKinney has been building a foundation of experience and training in classical constitutional and complex homeopathy for acute and chronic illnesses [...] Dr. McKinney offers a gentle homeopathic version of a flu shot that works with your immune system to give excellent protection [...via] Natural Immune Boost Injection (our version of the flu shot) [by] Heel of Germany has created two all natural homeopathic injectable remedies for influenza prevention.  When taken together they form a powerful resistance to colds, flu and other viral diseases.  The ingredients are simple herbs in a very dilute form, they stimulate the immune system to a high state of readiness to meet and defeat whatever strains may come along [...] we [also] offer a homeopathic approach to de-sensitizing allergies and sensitivities [...and] herbal homeopathic injections [...and] electrodermal screening assessment."

Note:

Iscador is known NOT to work, according to PubMed, as an antitumor agent in mice. It is one of these anthroposophy/Steiner strange ideas, and as Quackwatch states: "in 1984, the expert working group of the Swiss Society for Oncology concluded that there was no evidence that Iscador was effective against human cancers [...] more than 30 clinical studies have investigated imistletoe as a cancer treatment. The National Cancer Institute has concluded: 'reports of improved survival and/or quality of life have been common, but nearly all of the studies had major weaknesses that raise doubts about the reliability of the findings.'"

Homeopathic flu prophylaxis is ABSURDLY IMPOTENT, according to Science-Based Medicine's "Homeopathic Vaccines" by Dr. Crislip (2010-11-05): "the sad thing is parents will be fooled into thinking that their children are protected from infectious diseases, when, in fact, they are not.  Vaccines do not provide perfect protection; neither do seat belts.  But a vaccine is superior to the nothing of homeopathy and I would bet that parents would not rely on a child car restraint made by the same process as homeopathy." 

Electrodermal screening is what I've termed a pseudodiagnostic, and Science Based Medicine's "Another State Promotes the Pseudoscientific Cult that is 'Naturopathic Medicine' - Part 1" (2008) by Dr. Atwood reminds us that: "the FDA has, for practical purposes, declared such devices illegal."

003. the BCNA and NCNM's lunacy [since ND McKinney doesn't describe naturopathy at all, so one can make an informed decision]:

003.a. the British Columbia Naturopathic Association [BCNA] states in "The Nature of Naturopathic Medicine" [vsc 2010-11-06]:

"naturopathic medicine is science based natural medicine [...] the philosophy of naturopathic treatment [...includes] first, vis medicatrix naturae: the body has the inherent capacity to heal in the proper therapeutic environment [coded vitalism]. NDs believe in the recuperative power of the organism [coded vitalism...] embracing these tenets, on a science-based platform, is at the heart of naturopathic care."

Note: now, there's quite a 'science promise' in that description. The lunacy is that VMN is hugely a science-ejected idea, when you look at what naturopathy essentially means by it - vitalism.  So, the heart of naturopathy is deception and irrationality.

003.b. ND McKinney's alma mater, National College of Natural Medicine [NCNM], exemplifies this irrationality.  In "Principles of Healing" [vsc 2010-11-06] NCNM 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: [#1] the healing power of nature, vis medicatrix naturae [...] nature heals through the response of the life force [etc.]."

Note: so, a sectarian science-ejected figmentation [a 'life force'] is falsely labeled 'in fact able to survive scientific scrutiny.'

[And we were to believe -- falsely -- that naturopathy is very effective and about what works].

A Trove of Naturopathic Science-Ejected Thought - Hoyt, F.W. (ND NCNM)

here, I cite from the web pages of ND Hoyt regarding, particularly, naturopathy's science-ejected vitalism premise [see 001., below]:

001. Hoyt, F.W. (ND NCNM) [for a resume, click here, or here] states:

001.a. in "Alternative, Complementary, Naturopathic and Traditional Medicine" [vsc 2010-08-01]:

"naturopathic medicine focuses on the vitalistic tradition of medicine, emphasizing the treatment of disease through the stimulation, enhancement, and support of the inherent healing capacity of the person [IHCP]. Methods of treatments are chosen to work with the patient's vital force [VF], respecting the intelligence of the natural healing process [INHP (a teleological process)…#1] the healing power of nature, vis medicatrix naturae [HPN-VMN...] nature heals through the response of the life force [LF...#3] first do no harm, primum no nocere. Illness is a purposeful [that is, teleological] process of the organism. The process of healing includes the generation of symptoms which are, in fact, an expression of the life force [LF] attempting to heal itself. Therapeutic actions should be complimentary to and synergistic with this healing process [THP]. The physician's actions can support or antagonize the actions of the vis medicatrix naturae [VMN]."

Note: so, the terms that encompass naturopathy's essential vitalistic context include "vitalistic", IHCP, VF, INHP, HPN-VMN, LF, THP.  And this is "in fact."

001.b. in "Principles of Naturopathic Medicine" [vsc 2010-11-03]:

"naturopathic medicine represents the 'vitalistic' tradition of medicine [...] it treats disease through the stimulation, enhancement, and support of the patient's inherent healing capacity [IHC...] powerful and effective treatment modalities are chosen to work with the patient's vital force [VF], respecting the natural healing processes of nature [NHPN...] the following principles make naturopathic medicine different from all other medical approaches: [#1] first do no harm, primum no nocere: illness is a purposeful [teleological] process of the organism. The process of healing includes the generation of symptoms, which are, in fact, an expression of the life force [LF] attempting to heal itself [...] the physician's actions can support or antagonize the actions of the vis mediatrix [sp., 'medicatrix'] naturae -- the healing power of nature [VMN-HPN...#2] the healing power of nature, vis mediatrix [sp., 'medicatrix'] naturae [...] the healing process is ordered and intelligent [teleological]; nature heals through the response of the life force.  The physician's role is to facilitate this process [TP]."

Note: so, the terms that encompass naturopathy's essential vitalistic context include "vitalistic", IHC, VF, NHPN, LF, VMN-HPN, TP.  This is "in fact" again, and "in fact" "powerful and effective."

001.c. in "Frequently Asked Questions" [vsc 2010-11-03]:

"the philosophy of naturopathic medicine: living things have an innate ability to heal themselves.  The human vital force [HVP] promotes self-cleansing, self-repair, and therefore self-healing [...] homeopathic medicine [...] stimulates the patient's vital force to help resolve the disease."

Note: so, the terms that encompass naturopathy's essential vitalistic context include HVF, VF. You can see how wed naturopathy is to homeopathy, sharing the same vitalistic underpinning.

002. vitalism, in the land of scientific literacy, is hugely science-ejected  [I won't even go into their particular 'naturopathic supernaturalism', which is likewise SUPERBLY science-ejected]:

One of my favorite quotes about vitalism goes like this:

"[Richard Dawkins] life is the execution of programs written using a small digital alphabet in a single, universal machine language. This realization was the hammer blow that knocked the last nail in the coffin of vitalism and, by extension, of dualism. The hammer was wielded, with undisguised youthful relish, by James Watson and Francis Crick [p.030...] for me, the greatest achievement of Watson and Crick was to turn genetics from a branch of wet and squishy physiology into a branch of information technology, in the process slaying, as I suggested above, the ghost of vitalism [p.226]."

Note: that is from "The Oxford Book of Modern Science Writing" edited by Richard Dawkins (ISBN 0199216800, 2008).

003. so, it's amazing, in this here 2010 [and 14 years from when I was first induced into this stupidity by the naturopathy hierarchy]:

you go to a school labeled science, and you get a bunch of junk you are obligated to by oath that is HUGELY science-ejected.  Naturopathy claims professionalism, but BLATANTLY can't even meet the lower standards of basic fair-commerce.

Supernaturalism Doesn't Belong in a Science Curriculum - Illinois Federation of Teachers, 2010

here, I quote from the position statement of the Illinois Federation of Teachers (IFT) regarding the inappropriateness of having supernaturalism in a science curriculum / classroom [see 001., below]; then, I connect this to naturopathy, which incorrectly places, AT THE DOCTORAL REGIONALLY ACCREDITED LEVEL, the supernatural as WITHIN science [see 002., below]:

001. the IFT states in "Resolution No. 11 - Keep Supernaturalism Out of the Science Curriculum" [saved 2010-11-03]:

"it is the responsibility of the Illinois Federation of Teachers to preserve the integrity of science in the classroom; therefore be it resolved [...] supernaturalism is not a scientific endeavor and [...] is inappropriate for inclusion in the science curriculum [...] science is a systematic method for investigating natural phenomena through experimentation, observation and measurement leading to falsifiable explanations that are open to continuous testing [...and] proceeds on the basis of methodological naturalism and assumes observed phenomena of the universe are real, nature is consistent and understandable, and nature is explainable in terms of laws and theories [...] there have been attempts in some states to include supernaturalism in the science curriculum as an alternative to scientific explanations of nature, particularly as an alternative to evolutionary theory [...] arguments that invoke supernaturalism are grounded in religious or philosophical considerations outside the realm of science; and [...as such are] also attacks on the validity of using reason and experimentation to understand the universe [...] legislation that conflates supernaturalism [and science], or limits, or prohibits the teaching of any scientific theory negatively impacts our ability to make informed decisions [...] adopted at the 2010 Illinois Federation of Teachers Convention."

Note: hoo-ya.  IFT expressly states that this is not a statement regarding belief or non-belief in god, or promotion or retardation of any other religiosity.

002. meanwhile, in naturopathy-land [for instance, in my State of Connecticut], the supernatural [as a general epistemic and ontological mode and type] is placed improperly within the scientific.

The Quackometer on UK Chiropractic: "A Pseudoscientific Education"

here, I cite from a recent post at the Quackometer [see 001., below]:

001. Andy Lewis writes in "Chiropractors at War with Their Regulator, the GCC: The Statutory Regulation of Chiropractors Can No Longer Be Justified, Even if it Does Help Prevent Them Making Bogus Claims" (2010-11-01):

"this blog has opposed the statutory regulation of superstitious medical practices, such as homeopathy, and it would be hypocritical of me if I thought chiropractors should be an exception [(or naturopathy, in my view!)...] it was a big mistake to give official state recognition and regulation to a discredited, superstitious and pseudoscientific form of medical treatment [...] chiropractic theory has been shown to be nothing but mystical whimsy [...it is] a cult-like pseudomedical trade [...] it is not a mature profession as it cannot even agree on what the essential nature of their [attempted] profession is. The core concept of the chiropractic subluxation, that drives their philosophy and practice, has been rejected by the regulator [...] the Universities [...have] complicity in the deception that is much of chiropractic [...students] are misled into believing that what they are learning has an academic status that cannot be justified by reason or evidence [...it is] a pseudoscientific education."

002. sounds familiar:

this pseudoscientific education thang.

Salzberg on Pseudoscience - Forbes 2010-10-27

here, I cite from a recent Forbes blog by Dr. Salzberg [see 001., below]; then, I extend it to include naturopathy [see 002., below]:

001. Steven Salzberg writes in "Osteopaths Versus Doctors" (2010-10-27):

"an osteopath has an D.O. degree, which is different from the standard medical (M.D.) degree [...granted] some osteopaths (DOs) are probably better doctors than some MDs [...] given that some MDs are outrageous promoters of pseudoscience [...e.g.] Andrew Weil [...yet] the training is not the same: the universities offering DO and MD degrees are largely disjoint, the standards are higher at schools offering MDs, and osteopathic colleges offer 'extra' training in [their] pseudoscientific practices [...overall,] when I’m looking for a doctor, I want someone who went to one of the best medical schools and received strictly science-based training. Colleges of osteopathic medicine do not fit the bill [...similarly,] a growing number of mainstream medical schools offer training in 'integrative' medicine, the latest marketing term used to disguise pseudoscience in the guise of real science. Those medical schools [...] have some explaining to do as well."

Note: there's no mention of naturopathy, so I'll make mention.

002. particularly applicable to naturopathy is the phrase:

"pseudoscience in the guise of science."

Note: my links above are quite intentional.  You have, specifically, the ruse known as homeopathy -- which is fused into an ND degree -- overall, and quite falsely, labeled science.

Announcing NAH - Naturopaths Against Homeopathy

here, I cite from web pages of the new ND group "Naturopaths Against Homeopathy", established by ND Davis:

001. ND Davis (UBCNM 2002) states in "Homeopathy - Sugar = Water" [vsc 2010-10-31]:

"warning: when homeopathy is practiced, substances are diluted to the point that there is only water present, plus the magical signature that the original substance imparted to the water. Patients are not receiving any medicine at all, unless water and sugar are considered medicine [...] the human body, as well as the the bodies of other living creatures, have the ability to heal themselves up to a certain point. Homeopathic success stories are largely due to this innate ability of the body [...] most people who practice homeopathic medicine believe it works and defend it even though there is no scientific proof [...] if your naturopathic doctor is practicing homeopathic medicine on you, then you should ask them to stop, or just say, 'no thank you' [...] for a practitioner to use magic (homeopathy), then that is an obstacle to cure, because they are wasting your time and theirs.  Your doctor should be using scientific principles to eradicate disease, not magic backed up by hearsay, which is the basis of the 'science' of homeopathy."

Note: membership is available [see 002., below].  I, not an ND / NMD, am ineligible.

002. on the NAH page "Membership" [vsc 2010-10-31], ND Davis writes:

"to become a member of Naturopaths against Homeopathy, one must first be a naturopath.  Second, you must be against homeopathy. Third, you must also be against applied kinesiology, reflexology, qi therapy, iridology, reiki, flower essences, vis therapy (http://novfsinscience.blogspot.com/ ). If you satisfy these three conditions and would like to be considered for membership, then click on this link to contact the President of NAH [at] http://www.doingwellness.com/contact."

Note: now, I must admit, the page he directs towards regarding 'the veez' / vis is my own.

WTNH's Reiki Advertisement - Magical Beliefs Strangely Categorized as Health and Fitness, and Natural

here, is an example of a magical belief masquerading as a plain Jane health and fitness article [see 001., below]; then, I cite from a recent Skeptic North article on magical beliefs [see 002., below]; then, from my own compilation covering how 'vitalism is science ejected' [see 003., below]; and finally, from the Quackwatch article on reiki [see 004., below]: 

001. Connecticut's WTNH states in "Relax with Reiki" (2010-10-25)[vsc 2010-10-26]:

"reiki is a Japanese form of energy healing that treats the whole person [...a] Japanese term [...] 'rei' means universal and 'ki' means 'life force energy' [LFE...it is] the energy found within all living things [...and is] passed from the practitioner to the recipient through the practitioner’s hands [...and] brings balance and maintains health and well-being [...this is] a natural way to heal the body [...] it encourages the body’s healing response [...] reiki can help with a variety of emotional and physical ailments from anxiety and stress to injury, and cancer."

Note: so, by use of hands, we're naturally healed by LFE.  I argue that reiki is an engagement with the supernatural, and that LFE is imaginary.  There is a six minute video segment on the WTNH page, where we're told it has "amazing benefits."  And, of course, the terms "chakra" and "meridians" come up.  I call this an advertisement because it is completely credulous and offers no other opinion besides overwhelming support.  Even the so often fair-balanced distortion at least would be bad journalism.  This isn't journalism.

002. Skeptic North's recent post "A Skeptic’s Guide to Magical Thinking – Part 1" (2010-10-25) states:

"by tying it to the scientific method, we admit that there are three possible values for a magical belief: the belief has not been tested, the belief is un-testable by scientific means, the belief has been tested and is false [...] vitalism – the belief that living things posses an animating energy or life force [...] I['ve] lumped everything that had to do with a life force or vital essence [...including] reiki [...such] animism is generally considered alongside theism as a religious belief, yet its spirits typically profess no intelligence, making them more akin to a vital energy than a god."

Note:  so, reiki categorically is in the magical, animistic, vitalistic woo area.

003. LFE is science ejected.

004. Reiki's cousin, therapeutic touch, specifically, was scientifically dismantled by an 10 year old girl.  See "Reiki is Nonsense" at Quackwatch where we're reminded:

"reiki has no substantiated health value and lacks a scientifically plausible rationale. Science-based healthcare settings should not tolerate its use, and scarce government research dollars should not be used to study it further."

Note: hoo-ya.

Homeopathy as a Risk - Sir John Beddington in The Guardian

the Guardian's Ian Sample reports in "NHS Funding For Homeopathy Risks Misleading Patients, Says Chief Scientist" (2010-10-27):

"'I have made it completely clear that there is no scientific basis for homeopathy beyond the placebo effect and that there are serious concerns about its efficacy, Professor Beddington [...] the country's most senior scientist [...] told the Commons Science and Technology Committee today [..and] patients are at risk of being misled over the benefits of homeopathy by the government's decision to fund the remedies on the NHS [...] patients might believe homeopathic treatments could protect them against serious illnesses, or treat existing conditions [...but] homeopathic remedies are diluted multiple times to the point that only water is left, while others are essentially sugar pills [...] government funding for homeopathy risked legitimising unproven treatments and that patients could harm their health by choosing these over conventional vaccines and medicines [...] Professor Beddington cited the case of a man who caught malaria after being advised to take a homeopathic preparation to protect against the disease."

Note: again, I point out, naturopathy meanwhile falsely postures homeopathy as a "core clinical science."

Neurologica - Homeopathy is Absurd, a Scam, a Fraud

here, I cite from a recent Neurologica post on homeopathy [see 001., below]:

001. Dr. Novella writes in "FDA Warns Homeopathic Product Is Not Just Water" (2010-10-27):

"the one thing that is more absurd than homeopathy is the regulation of homeopathic products [...] they do not require any testing for safety and effectiveness [...] the labeling requirements are almost Orwellian. They need to list ingredients – even the ones that are not actually in the preparation because they have been diluted past the point where there is likely to be a single molecule left. They must list the indications – despite the fact that there aren’t any. There isn’t a single proven indication for any homeopathic remedy. So homeopaths essentially have to make up multiple fictions to put on the label of homeopathic products – in the name of consumer information [...] there is no there, there. Homeopathic pills are literal placebos – nothing but sugar and water [...] homeopathy is an unmitigated scam [...] a pure pseudoscience [...we need] the laws to catch up to the science [...] homeopathic remedies [...] should be banned as fraudulent."

Note: meanwhile, ND / NMDs label homeopathy science.  I was required to do homeopathy courses during my ND-school days -- classes I refused to do, ultimately.  I was quite struck by the insane credulity of the student body, the cultic gullibility.

Skeptic North's "Guide to Magical Thinking" Series [highly recommended]

here, I cite from the very excellent Erik Davis penned Skeptic North series that will run with a new post each day of this week [see 001., below]:

001. Erik Davis writes in "A Skeptic’s Guide to Magical Thinking – Part 1" (2010-10-25):

"in my mind I’d formed a rough ontology that sorted all magical practices [...] in the first category, I put the sympathetic magic practices above.  In the second, I lumped everything that had to do with a life force or vital essence [vitalism...] in the third category was everything that posited some sort of internal or external super-intelligence [...yet] many practices fit in more than one of my categories [...e.g.] homeopathy, while generally identified as sympathetic magic, is often said to work by impacting a vital force [(that's what I was taught in ND school!)...and] some superficially similar practices have very different underlying mechanisms [...] animism is generally considered alongside theism as a religious belief, yet its spirits typically profess no intelligence, making them more akin to a vital energy than a god."

Note: I'm loving the material and the approach -- go there, read it,  gnaw at it, comment!

ND Recommends "Homeopathic Flu Prophylaxis" But Not Seasonal Flu Vaccination [what a surprise]

here, I cite from one of the articles by ND Pincott who is in British Columbia [see 001., below]:

001. Pincott, I. (ND NCNM 1984) states in "Questions For Your Naturopath" (2010-10-25)[vsc 2010-10-25]:

"Q. What is the best thing I can do to prevent H1N1 or other flus? A. Regular cleansing programs. Take a good probiotic regularly. Take cod liver oil daily. Take homeopathic flu prophylaxis from October until April of every year for you and your family. Limit sugar intake. Get 8 hours of sleep every night."

Note: the take-home message seems to be that this treatment protocol will be "best".  I'll comment on two things: "cleansing programs" are for detoxing imaginary toxins naturopaths continually warn us about; "homeopathic flu prophylaxis" is absurd as protection [prophylaxis; the function of vaccination, which actually works] since there isn't anything in a homeopathic remedy.  If your family members are at risk for flu (say very young, very old, or particularly compromised), this does not sound "best" yet it is stated in quite an absolute manner.  Now, a lot of people say 'oh, what's the harm so long as modern medical treatment is being used concurrently.'  But, ND Pincott in no manner advises here that which works best for the particularly vulnerable to prevent flu morbity and mortality: seasonal vaccination.  Horrid.

And nowhere is it disclosed that homeopathic treatment is placebo therapy.

Accreditation is "Broken": NCAHF, CCAP and Some Personal Experience

here, I cite from a recent Consumer Health Digest issue by the National Council Against Health Fraud [NCAHF] which cites a recent Center for College Affordability and Productivity [CCAP] report [see 001., below]; then, I quote some from that report [see 002., below]; then, I attach it to naturopathy [see 003., below]:

001. the NCAHF states in "Consumer Health Digest #10-42 [...] U.S. Education Accreditation System Called 'Broken'" [2010-10-21]:

"[CCAP] has published a detailed analysis of the role that accreditation has played in American higher education [... it] concludes 'our current system of higher education accreditation is broken [...] it does a poor job of conveying important information to those funding it, including the customers themselves (students) as well as major donors (governments, private philanthropists) [...] this study outlines a series of different  approaches to introducing a new system [...] new approaches to the accreditation process could give consumers more practical information on the strengths and weaknesses of institutions [...] and be ultimately governed by persons far removed from those being accredited' [...NCAHF says this] is relevant to consumer health because the current system permits schools to promote health care approaches that are not science-based."

Note: yeah, baby!  I'll take it one step further [see 003., below].

002. in that the position paper "The Inmates Running the Asylum? An Analysis of Higher Education Accreditation", Center for College Affordability and Productivity [2010-10] authors Gillen, Bennett and Vedder state their major recommendations:

"accreditation  [...] needs to be changed [...] first, any system of accreditation or certification must focus on quality control and improving matches of consumers and producers [...with] complete public disclosure not only of accreditation reports, but also of information about student outcomes [...] second, the current binary system where schools are either approved (accredited) or not-approved (not accredited) is unacceptable, and should be replaced by a system that provides vastly more indicators of quality in a far more nuanced fashion [...] third [...] most notably, accreditation today was largely created by institutions themselves to promote institutional self-interest, not the public interest [...or] broader public needs. Fourth [...] a replacement system would be far more outcomes-based than current accreditation [...] fifth [...] the role of a single regulatory authority, most notably the federal government, should be minimized [...p.047] a move in this direction is badly needed and grossly overdue [p.048]."

Note: though issues of quality are matters of extent, I must emphasize that my criticism of naturopathy is not a sliding gray-scale like slippery-slope.  When naturopathy states that it is scientific and nonsectarian, I know it to actually be categorically [as opposed to qualitatively], at its essential core [e.g. vitalism, supernaturalism, etc.] not science and actually science-ejected.  Yet, they persist and they cannot be held accountable, because, as I know all too well, the system is as hugely broken as naturopathy essentially is hugely nonscientific.

003. I'll restate NCAHF's take [my words, not theirs, from my immediate experience]:

'this is relevant to consumer health because the current system permits schools to promote health care approaches that are not science-based and falsely label them as science-based.'

Note: e.g., naturopathy schools.  And, it's no longer then a matter of quality, but of categorical commercial fraud.

Announcing the [anti-sCAM] Nightingale Collaboration!

the Nightingale Collaboration states:

"misinformation about complementary and alternative therapies is rife on the internet, in newspapers and magazines and on the high street and this misinformation misleads the public. It is particularly important that the public have accurate information about healthcare so they can make informed choices [...] it needs to be challenged [...] it is possible to confront and highlight misleading information, have it withdrawn and those responsible held to account [...] the Nightingale Collaboration will work to improve the protection of the public by ensuring claims made about complementary and alternative therapies are not misleading [...by] challenging misleading claims made by practitioners on their websites, in adverts and in their promotional and sales materials and subjecting these to scrutiny by the appropriate regulatory bodies [and by] striving to ensure that organisations representing complementary and alternative practitioners have robust codes of conduct for their members that protect the public and that these are rigorously enforced [...] the Nightingale Collaboration will make tools and resources available so that others can pursue their own individual campaigns with maximum effect [...] more information will be released on the website over the coming weeks and months [...] Alan Henness & Maria MacLachlan, Directors."

Note: oh, goodie. This was reported in the Guardian.

SCNM's "Public Health Commitment" - East Valley Tribune 2010-10

here, I cite from an East Valley Tribune article concerning Southwest College of Naturopathic Medicine and Health Science's new clinic facility [see 001., below]; then, I muse on SCNM's claimed "public health commitment" [see 002., below]:

001. Channing Turner [me thinks; a person with no science or medical background, apparently] reports [quite credulously and supportively, IMHO] in the East Valley Tribune article "Naturopathic Medical School Opens Tempe Facility" [vsc 2010-10-23]:

"the Southwest College of Naturopathic Medicine and Health Sciences officially opened a new medical center in Tempe recently [...] Paul Mittman, president and CEO of SCNM [... ] 'the school has a significant public health commitment,' he said. 'We expect (the center) to have a greater impact on public health' [...] naturopathic physicians can prescribe nearly every treatment available to a medical doctor, including prescription drugs, Mittman added. But the naturopathic method emphasizes prevention and supports the body’s ability to heal itself [(coded vitalism)...] 'you need to take a holistic approach.'"

Note: there is a claim here of a 'commitment to public health' via the 'holistic' 'body's ability to heal itself.'  Let's bear that out, and decode [which is quite relevant].

002. naturopathy's epistemic muddling [blending of knowledge type; a threat to public health, if public health is to be based upon the best kind of knowledge regarding reality, and the public's understanding of science has value]:

002a. naturopathy's coded vitalism [such deceit is a nonprofessional attribute minimally; an issue of false commerce overall]:

well, "the body’s ability to heal itself" is, when we get down to brass tacks with naturopathy, a belief that has been science-ejected: that physiology is run by a purposeful life spirit.  They code this, all the time.  You can find a glimpse of SCNM's vitalism in uncoded full-regalia at this collection I've put together.  ND Mittman stated this belief explicitly as belief, and here it is archived [vsc 2010-10-23].

002.b. falsely claimed as science:

SCNM's overarching [false] label of science placed upon all this science-ejected beliefy stuff I've collected here.

Note: ah, so THAT is the holistic -- code your essential premises, falsely label them, engage in commerce, rinse and repeat.

Live Blood Cell Analysis - MD Crislip vs ND Fredericks

here, I cite from two opposing claims regarding 'live blood cell analysis' [LBCA].  First, there's super-naturopath Fredricks in Australia, who is a LBCA proponent and labels it "science" [see 001., below]; then, there's Oregon MD Crislip of the Science-Based Medicine blog who labels it a pseudoscience and a form of augury [see 002., below]:

001. Fredricks, G. (ND ? 1987, ND ? 1996) states in "What is Live and Dry Blood Analysis?" [vsc 2010-10-22]:

"live and dry blood analysis is an unobtrusive testing procedure where a single drop of blood is taken painlessly from your finger [...] the results can be viewed immediately [...] during your naturopathic consultation, live and dry blood analysis will be used [...] this scientific approach to naturopathic medicine can get to the bottom of stubborn and recurring health issues, in effect, giving you a number of different nets so you can catch all of the issues that are blocking your health and energy, and address them at the source."

Note: so, we're told this is "scientific."

On ND Fredricks's bio. page, he doesn't share from where his TWO ND doctorates [which makes him a super-ND!] come from.  The microscope, I presume, is on this page and this page.  And he does do "postal consultations", and I'll guess those are 'dry'.

On his homepage, we're told:

"Greg believes people can be empowered to take control of their own health and longevity and reverse many disease conditions if they are given the proper blueprint [...] he has learned from some of the world’s leading biologists and scientists to develop this unique naturopathic assessment [...] Greg Fredericks uses many screening modalities in finding your personal blueprint including: saliva hormone analysis, blood analysis live and dry, iridology / sclerology, Tibetan style eye diagnosis, physical constitution and personality type assessment, Chinese and ayurvedic body diagnosis.  This is one of the most comprehensive naturopathic screenings in the world [...and it's] covered by all major health funds."

Wow, fully covered pseudodiagnostics.  Quite empowering, quite proper, quite comprehensive.

002. Crislip, M. (MD ) states in "Live Blood Analysis: The Modern Auguries" (2009-02-13):

"I saw a patient last week [...who] had been seeing a DC / ND for a variety of symptoms [...and was] diagnosed him with an infection, based on live blood analysis [...] live blood analysis is one of these alternative methodologies that has a hint of legitimacy that is extrapolated far out of proportion to its validity [...LBCA] practitioners [...] grow a forest of fantasy and magic [...] some practitioners also practice dry blood analysis, where they examine clot to look for patterns that are allegedly indicative of disease [...] in live blood analysis, the 'physician' takes a drop of the patients blood and examines it under a high power phase contrast or a darkfield microscope. Changes in the constituents of the blood are noted and linked to a variety of ills. It is an impressive and expensive system: microscopes and various support equipment start at around $5000 [...] live blood analysis has the opportunity to be lucrative in the right hands as the patient often gets weekly analysis to see how the interventions (usually supplements sold by the blood analyst) are working. Evidently in the hands of a skilled snake oil salesman, an income of $100,000 a year to more can be generated [...] virtually every diagnosis in live blood analysis is nonsense and much of the alleged pathology is either normal or artifact on the slide. The alleged pathophysiology is also nonsense; they just make this stuff up [...] live blood analysis does not resemble most alternative medicine modalities, but is more akin to high tech reading of tea leaves or the entrails of pig to divine the future. It is the cargo cult of quackery, with the trappings of science but none of the substance [...] it is microscopic paradolia, with the practitioners seeing their own imagining in the structures on the slides [...] there is no validity behind almost all of the claims made by the practitioners [...] pseudoscientific jargon and imaginary physiology combined with the a microscope [...] gives the live blood analysis proponents the trappings of real science."

Note: said as only Dr. C. can.

The AANP's President: Naturopathy is An Unsustainable Career

here, I quote from a recent blogpost by the AANP's President which speaks of the unsustainability of a career in naturopathy [see 001., below]: and I comment on some of his language [see 002., below]:

001. AANP President Hangee-Bauer, C. (ND Bastyr 1984) states in "The Cream Rises to the Top" (2010-10-18)[vsc 2010-10-18]:

"I am always on the lookout for trends and conditions in my communities, both local and national, that have effects on my practice and my profession [...it is reported]  many licensed acupuncturists are finding it hard to make ends meet [...e.g.] Lisa Rohleder [...] concludes that 'acupuncture education, and the conventional acupuncture business model [...are] NOT SUSTAINABLE. May take years of your life and leave you with nothing, except huge student loans' [...they] graduate and get licensed, but then struggle for years to pay off student loans and get paid appropriately [...] many fail. Sound familiar? [...] acupuncturists are dealing with some of the same frustrations and challenges that affect the naturopathic profession [...] we are not alone [...] our colleges have to do a better job at preparing our graduates to enter the healthcare marketplace [...] the cream rises to the top,' it's said, and naturopathic medicine is the gold standard for people seeking new choices and new directions for their healthcare."

002. my comments:

-"on the lookout for trends": how about that trend in modern thought wherein 'the essentially naturopathic scientific' [that which lacks evidence, or has been replaced by better information] is science-ejected?;

-"profession": yup, 'ye olde naturopathic of-the-professions claim';

-" many licensed acupuncturists are finding it hard to make ends meet": yet, many NDs carry LAc.s as an attempt to increase their income and practice scope;


-"our colleges have to do a better job at preparing our graduates"; how about your colleges begin transparently engaging the public concerning the actual science-ejected sectarianism that defines naturopathy, and therein your graduates would be better prepared at being factually accurate and more ethical when it comes to their descriptions of 'the essentially naturopathic absurd'?;

-"the cream rises to the top": oh, how folksy;

-"NOT SUSTAINABLE"; good, because it's also not efficacious;

-"huge student loans": know what that's like;

-"many fail": and this is a BAD thing?;

-"the same frustrations and challenges that affect the naturopathic profession"; yes, there you go, naturopathy is as 'not sustainable' and hopefully the scientific blogging community is helping to choke them off;

-"naturopathic medicine is the gold standard": naturopathic medicine's standards are as golden as engaging in commerce with false labels;

-"new choices and new directions": actually, naturopathy is a throw-back to the times when knowledge types were all blended together and by modern standards that is quite 'not new'.

Naturopathy and MMS Oral Industrial Bleach [chlorine dioxide] Quackery

here, I cite from Pharyngula regarding a young skeptical man's exposure of a very dangerous sCAM panacea, oral industrial bleach [see 001., below]; then, from a New Zealand report that quotes naturopaths supporting this 'therapy' anyway [see 002., below]; and finally, from CNN which mentions the FDA has issued a warning on MMS [see 003., below]:

001. P.Z. Myers writes in "Drinking Bleach is Good For You?" [2010-10-18]:

"I haven't heard much about Rhys Morgan in the US [...] but he won an award at TAM London for his skeptical work [...he] boldly took on peddlers of evil woo: they were selling some crap called Miracle Mineral Solution, which is nothing but bleach [...] it takes some gall for a quack to prescribe a treatment for a chronic intestinal disorder that involves glugging down a corrosive poison, and then when the poor patient suffers with a painfully sore throat, vomiting, and diarrhea, to claim that they should drink more, that's a sign that it is working...but that's what they were doing [...] realize too that he's only 15 years old, so we can look forward to another hundred years or so of Mr. Morgan shredding the quacks. I almost feel sorry for the poor lying frauds."

Note: Dr. Myers is right to CONDEMN this.  Notice, some things are simply WRONG and don't deserve the charity of 'fair and balanced' reporting, since they are ABSURD and HARMFUL.

002. New Zealand's The Daily Post reports, in "Naturopath Reports Good Results From 'Harmful' Liquid"(2010-10-16):

"Miracle Mineral Solution (MMS) is being marketed to cure various illnesses from colds and flu to Aids, hepatitis, malaria, herpes, tuberculosis and cancer [a cure-all / panacea!]. Medsafe has issued an official warning advising people to stop taking the liquid [...] 'the product instructs consumers to mix the 28 per cent sodium chlorite solution with an acid such as citric acid. This mixture produces chlorine dioxide, a potent bleach used for stripping textiles and industrial water treatment [...] high oral doses of this bleach, such as those recommended in the labeling, can cause nausea, vomiting, diarrhoea and symptoms of severe dehydration' [...yet a] Rotorua naturopath [...] said she was living proof the solution was helpful not harmful [...] 'it's fast and quick acting and I've never had a negative effect [...] this is just a battle between pharmaceutical companies and complementary medicine. The sickness industry is a multi-billion dollar industry and the reason why Medsafe is against this is because it's a relatively cheap way to treat sickness' [...another] Rotorua naturopath Aiden Pargeter of the Naturopathic Center said he didn't object to the use of MMS and hadn't heard of any personal reports of it being harmful. 'It has its place. Because chlorine dioxide increases the oxygen in the blood it is good for parasites' he said.'"

Note: actually, I think perhaps OXYGEN increases the oxygen level of the blood, in certain conditions, like emphysema.  Let me think of the options here for an emphysemic, for instance: rot my guts out with bleach and go hypoxic, or take my life-saving O2 and not corrode my GI tract?

NDs, of course, have a fetish for imaginary parasites.  It was naturopath Hulda Clark, after all, who claimed an imaginary parasite was responsible for cancer, who invented a machine to zap the cancer, and who died of cancer recently.

003. CNN reports "FDA warns against using Miracle Mineral Solution" (2010-08-02):

"the Food and Drug Adminstration [sp., 'Administration'] is warning people not to use a supplement that claims to treat diseases ranging from HIV to acne, after receiving reports it is making consumers sick [...] the FDA has received numerous reports of serious side effects including nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, and life threatening low-blood pressure from dehydration [...] when used as directed, the FDA says Miracle Mineral Solution (MMS) produces chlorine dioxide, a potent bleach often used in industrial water treatment and [for] stripping textiles [...] MMS is also marketed under the name Miracle Mineral Supplement [...] if you have used MMS and its made you sick, the FDA says you should see a doctor as soon as possible.  [And] the FDA would also like to hear from you.  Click here for more information."

Note: perhaps the notorious 'supplement industry protecting' DSHEA law is shielding the maker?  As that Quackwatch article states:

"most people think that dietary supplements and herbs are closely regulated to ensure that they are safe, effective, and truthfully advertised. Nothing could be further from the truth. Although some aspects of marketing are regulated, the United States Congress has concluded that 'informed' consumers need little government protection. This conclusion was embodied in the Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act of 1994 -- commonly referred to as 'DSHEA' -- which severely limits the FDA's ability to regulate these products."

McGill U.'s Call to Arms Against Pseudoscience - Montreal Gazette 2010-10-16

Joe Schwarcz, "director of McGill University's Office for Science and Society" writes in "Confronting the Plague of Pseudoscience" in the Montreal Gazette (2010-10-18):

"scientifically unsupported claims about therapeutic interventions that are not science-based offer false hope. Worse, they may steer patients away from proven conventional treatments [...] pseudoscience is enjoying a golden age [...it] can masquerade as science and wreak intellectual and physical havoc [...though] a definition is hard to come by because pseudoscience takes on so many forms [...it is a] plague [...an] intellectual muddling [...and] most scientists [...] would agree that when they see it, they know it. But this is not necessarily the case for people not well versed in science [...] in essence, pseudoscience encompasses any belief, process or claim that pretends to have a scientific basis but actually has none [(yes!)...] real science accumulates facts and formulates testable theories to gain an understanding of the physical world, pseudoscience relies on anecdotes, ideology and cherry-picked data to support preconceived notions [...and] is often mired in dogma [...] homeopathy would be a typical example of a pseudoscience [...per] no scientific basis [...also] distance healing [...] when scientists start raising eyebrows at such mindless twaddle, the pseudoscience champions unleash their usual attacks, claiming that scientists are closed-minded [...though] as Carl Sagan cleverly said, they may have laughed at Columbus and the Wright brothers, but they also laughed at Bozo the Clown. Scientists are quite prepared to stop laughing when evidence is provided [...] where is the comparable evidence for astrology, iridology [a pseudodiagnostic], crystal healing, quantum healing, magnetic healing, 'chi' channels [vitalism], telepathy, or creationism? Where is the proof that John Kanzius's radio waves can cure cancer or that [naturopath] Hulda Clark's 'zapper' can zap it away? There isn't any, and Hulda is not going to produce any, given she passed away from cancer last year [(oh snap!)...] it is time to stem the rising tide of pseudoscience [...] the Lorne Trottier Public Science Symposium is one of McGill's premier annual events and this year focuses on pseudoscience [...it will have] four world-renowned experts on pseudoscience [...] Dr. Ben Goldacre, medical columnist for The Guardian in England and author of Bad Science; Dr. David Gorski [...] a managing editor for the famed 'Science-Based Medicine' blog; Dr. Michael Shermer, Scientific American columnist and founder of Skeptic magazine; and the incomparable and indefatigable James Randi, the world's leading investigator of pseudo-scientific and paranormal claims."

Note: naturopathy, of course, is a world renown pseudoscience. At the Naturowatch site, Dr. Barrett's article is famous for calling the average naturopath a "muddlehead."

ASTC on the Naturalistic Basis of Science

the Association of Science-Technology Centers [ASTC] states in "Evolution in Science Centers":

"the theory of evolution by natural selection is a unifying concept that explains the incredible diversity of living things, their genetic relationship, and evidence that living things change over time [...it is] central to modern science [...]

'[from 2005] ASTC and its members -- science centers and museums around the world -- present information based on scientific evidence [...we're] committed to advancing the public understanding of science and contributing to the development of a scientifically literate society. Science is a human endeavor that uses observations and experimentation to develop explanations of the natural world. Scientific theories are grounded in and compatible with evidence [...and] is based on hundreds of years of scientific observation and experimentation and many thousands of peer-reviewed publications' [...] 

in response to public discussion about evolution [science] and creationism [nonscience] in museums, Jeffrey Kirsch, Director of the Reuben H. Fleet Science Center, San Diego, California, wrote in the May 3, 2005 issue of the online newspaper Voice of San Diego:

'scientists parse the unanswerable into something they can answer through experiment, reasoning, or observational discovery. And, in general, the new answers lead to other questions that provide the basis for future studies and...future questions. Seen this way, science is a seemingly never-ending human quest to understand how living and non-living things work. It is quintessentially open-ended, and curiosity is the universal prerequisite for a working scientist [...] belief-based explanations have one aspect in common: they cannot be tested the way a scientific model can be. The scientific understanding of biological development on earth, usually referred to as evolution, is derived from the search for natural explanations for phenomena such as the fossil record, the geological record, and our planet's biosphere. And these explanations must be tested again and again until they become generally accepted or changed to fit the facts. So, when an institution uses the word science in its name...it is understood by all to be concerned with natural and verifiable explanations for the way things work' [...]

[and ASTC recommends the following excellent resources]

 

Understanding Evolution [...] by the University of California Museum of Paleontology and the National Center for Science Education;

 

National Center for Science Education: Defending the Teaching of Evolution in the Public Schools;

Evolution Resources, National Science Teachers Association;

Evolution and Creationism: A Guide for Museum Docents [...] by the Museum of the Earth at the Paleontological Research Institution, Ithaca, NY;

.Dialogue on Science, Ethics, and Religion: Evolution, American Association for the Advancement of Science;

The Evolution Controversy in Our Schools - Letter to Academy members from President Bruce Alberts. National Academy of Sciences.  March 4, 2005;

Explore Evolution, a new exhibit at the University of Nebraska State Museum;

Evolution: Constant Change and Common Threads, Howard Hughes Medical Institute on-demand webcast of 2005 Holiday Lectures and student discussion session on reconciling religion and evolution;

Thomas Jefferson Fossil Collection, The Academy of Natural Sciences, Philadelphia."

Note: while ASTC advances science understanding, it seems to me that naturopathy -- at its core -- does the opposite.  And while science is preponderantly based upon naturalism and evidence, naturopathy seems to think that it's fine to throw in supernaturalism and not worry about evidence at all.  And while mainstream science heartily admits that articles of faith aren't, roughly speaking, processable through the methodologies of science, naturopathy seems to think that what science is, ultimately, is merely the process of putting ink to page to create [mythical] facts.

But what I love most is this:

"when an institution uses the word science in its name...it is understood by all to be concerned with natural and verifiable explanations for the way things work."

That's not true with naturopathy.  Naturopathy labels the supernatural nonverifiable and downright science-ejected science at the institutional level.