Sunday, December 19, 2010
here, I cite from a recent article regarding an Oregon ND who has had his license suspended [see 001., below]; then, I point out the falseness that is at the heart of Oregon naturopathy overall [see 002., below]:
001. the Mail Tribune's Sam Wheeler reports in "State Levels Penalties on Medford Naturopath"(2010-12-18):
"Dr. Alan Kadish, the head naturopathic physician at Center of Health, 2612 E. Barnett Road, violated Oregon law by falsely advertising his practice and himself in 15 different instances, and preparing to administer a method of medicine that he was not certified to use [...] the board's investigation determined that from 2006 through 2009, Kadish had made 'untrue, improper, misleading, or deceptive statements in advertising by representing that he is a medical specialist or practices a medical specialty' [...Kadish has been] ordered to pay $15,000 in civil penalties and will have his license revoked for one year, the Oregon Board of Naturopathic Medicine concluded last week [...] the practice will remain open under the direction of naturopathic physician Dr. Zack Allen [...] in addition to the false advertising, Kadish was also disciplined for preparing to administer chelation therapy to one of his patients."
Note: so, false claims in commerce are penalized by OBNM. Interesting, considering how false and irrational naturopathy is overall.
002. Oregon's '.gov' web site is actually HUGELY FALSE:
OBNM should suspend all of naturopathy -- clinically and educationally -- until they fix 'that big boneheadedness called naturopathy' so that people can make informed decisions regarding the naturopaTHICK.
For instance, OBNM's web page "Naturopathy" states:
"naturopathic medicine is a distinctively natural approach to health and healing that recognizes the integrity of the whole person. Naturopathic medicine is heir to the vitalistic tradition of medicine in the Western world, emphasizing the treatment of disease through the stimulation, enhancement, and support of the inherent healing capacity of the person. Methods of treatments are chosen to work with the patient’s vital force, respecting the intelligence of the natural healing process. 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."
That is: the hugely science-ejected vitalistic survives scientific scrutiny. In other words, the falsehood at the heart of naturopathy is that the for-one-hundred-years science-ejected can right now survive scientific scrutiny.
Somehow, this is conveniently overlooked as an issue. If the premise of naturopathy is that 'something is what it is not' [vitalism is science], then why are they able to make discrete judgments about false advertising?
If science and nonscience are the same thing, then so too is truthful and false advertising!
It's all wacko, improper, misleading, deceptive.
Executive Branch on Scientific Integrity and Public Trust, and the Fake Branch of Medical Science Unworthy of Public Trust
here, I cite from recent White House documents on science [see 001., below]; then, I reiterate naturopathy's claim that it is a branch of "medical science" while essentially hugely-of-the-science-ejected, with examples provided from the National Academies and a Canadian ND [see 002., below]:
001. the White House states:
001.a. in "Scientific Integrity: Fueling Innovation, Building Public Trust" (2010-12-17):
"John P. Holdren is Assistant to the President for Science and Technology and Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy [...states] President Obama [has] issued a Presidential Memorandum on Scientific Integrity emphasizing the importance of science in guiding Administration decisions and the importance of ensuring that the public trusts the science behind those decisions [...] he highlighted six principles of scientific integrity [...] he asked me, in collaboration with other Federal officials, to craft recommendations for ensuring scientific integrity throughout the executive branch [...this includes] a clear prohibition on political interference in scientific processes and expanded assurances of transparency [...] as the President said at the annual meeting of the National Academy of Sciences last year, 'science is more essential for our prosperity, our security, our health, our environment, and our quality of life than it has ever been before.' I am confident that today’s Memorandum will help ensure that science and technology continue to be brought to bear by this Administration with the greatest effectiveness and integrity in the service of all of the national goals the President has so clearly articulated."
Note: so, good science / science-with-integrity is worthy of trust and vital.
001.b. and Holdren specifically states in that "Memorandum for the Heads of Executive Departments and Agencies" (2010-12-17):
"on March 9, 2009, the President issued a Memorandum articulating six principles central to the preservation and promotion of scientific integrity and assigning to the Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy the responsibility for ensuring the highest level of integrity in all aspects of the executive branch’s involvement with scientific and technological processes [...] foundations of scientific integrity [...] scientific and technological information is often a significant contributor to the development of sound policies. Thus it is important that policymakers involve science and technology experts where appropriate and that the scientific and technological information and processes relied upon in policy-making be of the highest integrity. Successful application of science in public policy depends on the integrity of the scientific process both to ensure the validity of the information itself and to engender public trust in Government [...] agencies should develop policies that ensure a culture of scientific integrity. Scientific progress depends upon honest investigation, open discussion, refined understanding, and a firm commitment to evidence [...] adopting appropriate whistleblower protections [...] facilitate the free flow of scientific and technological information [...] establish principles for conveying scientific and technological information to the public [...an] accurate presentation of scientific and technological information."
Note: pretty good stuff. I wholeheartedly agree. It may even lead to smarter decisions, like not going to war over imagined weapons of mass destruction as we stay more grounded in reality.
002. naturopathy's absurdity / irrationalism and nonintegrity:
002.a. recently, I'd posted about the pan-naturopathic claim that goes like this:
Note: science, science, science.
002.b. now, another pan-naturopathic claim:
that naturopathy is based upon vitalism (see my collection here) [this is a figmentation they ofen hide with coded language], which is an amalgam of vitalism, spiritism and teleology, a purposeful life spirit [truly science-ejected] figmentation held responsible for physiology.
002.c. vitalism is hugely science-ejected, and that is a fact so established that it may as well be fossilized. I'll provide one quote towards that fact, from THE scientific organization of organizations, the National Academies:
John Whitfield's "In the Beat of a Heart: Life, Energy, and the Unity of Nature" (ISBN 0309096812; 2006) states:
"the problem with vitalism [...] was the belief that the explanations for biological phenomena could be found in biology. Instead, biologists should go up the chain of explanations, to chemistry and beyond. They had neglected the physical sciences to their detriment. Why invoke vitalism when so many of the forms in the living world can be explained by simple physical principles? The physics of surface tension, Thompson noted, explain why raindrops are spherical, because this shape has the minimal surface area. Likewise, he argued, surface tension could explain the shape of amoeboid cells, or the spread of sticky droplets over a spider’s web. 'Has the biologist,' Thompson asked, 'fully recognized [...] that the physicist may, and must, be his guide and teacher in many matters regarding organic form? [...] in many of the simpler cases the facts are so well explained by surface tension, that it is difficult to find a place for a conflicting, much less an overriding, force.' Vitalism, in short, was unnecessary [so PAST TENSE UNNECESSARY!]."
002.d. in sum, naturopathy has NO SCIENTIFIC INTEGRITY:
when 'that which it isn't is the same as that which it is', run -- particularly when that person is claiming ability to diagnose and treat.
Note: why else do you think such nonsense as applied kinesiology would be espoused by Canadian ND Leung, K. (ND CCNM):
"applied kinesiology is a system that evaluates structural, chemical, and mental aspects of health using manual muscle testing alongside conventional diagnostic methods [hmmm, they must compare well!]. The essential premise of applied kinesiology that is not shared by mainstream medical theory [because it is false] is that every organ dysfunction is accompanied by a weakness in a specific corresponding muscle, the viscerosomatic relationship [which is bullshit]."
As regards homeopathy, we're told:
"based on the principle of 'like cures like', homeopathic medicine uses minute amounts of natural substances to stimulate the self-healing abilities of the body [coded vitalism]."
As regards acupuncture, we're told:
"based on balancing the flow of chi (energy) [vitalism] through the meridian pathways, Asian medicine includes the use of acupuncture and Oriental herbs."
His bio. says:
"Dr. Kin is licensed to practice naturopathic medicine in Alberta, and is registered with the Alberta Association of Naturopathic Physicians (AANP) [...and] is also a member of the Board of Directors of Drugless Therapy - Naturopathy (BDDT-N), in Ontario, and the College of Naturopathic Physicians of British Columbia (CNPBC) [...and] a member of the Canadian Association of Naturopathic Doctors (CAND) and the Oncology Association of Naturopathic Physicians (OncANP)."
And CNPBC states in "Prescriptive Authority for Naturopathic Physicians: Objectives, Rationale and a Framework for Regulation: A proposal for The British Columbia Ministry of Health 22 December 2006":
"demand for naturopathic medical services continues to rise as patients seek valid, science-based alternatives [...] guided by scientific, evidence-based approaches to treatment and intervention [...] 'in common possession of scientific facts' [...] 'a shared scientific foundation'."
Note: fascinating, science-based nonscience. Evidence-based figmentation. Facts that are sectarian phantoms. A scientific-foundation not the basis of anything in science.
Naturopathy is your brain on bone-headedness.
here, I cite from the New York Association of Naturopathic Physician's [NYANP] page regarding licensure [see 001., below]; and then from the proposed licensure bill itself [see 002., below]:
001. NYANP states in "NYANP Promotes Access to Natural Medicine" [vsc 2010-12-19]:
"the New York Association of Naturopathic Physicians is committed to ensuring that citizens in New York and all 50 states have the freedom to access natural health care and the broad array of alternative therapies available. Our goal is to build awareness of the efficacy of natural medicine and the positive results our patients experience [...] naturopathic doctors are specialists in natural medicine [...and] treat illness using [...] the healing power of nature [coded vitalism...] THE INTENT OF OUR LEGISLATIVE EFFORT IS TO EXPAND ACCESS TO NATURAL MEDICINE BY LICENSING NATUROPATHIC DOCTORS TO DIAGNOSE AND TREAT UNDER A DEFINED SCOPE OF PRACTICE [their caps...] it is not the intent of the NYANP to restrict the use of natural therapies to naturopathic doctors [...] it is not the intent of the NYANP to restrict the use of homeopathy to naturopathic doctors [...] WE DO INTEND TO PROTECT THE PUBLIC FROM UNTRAINED PRACTITIONERS WHO PROMOTE THEMSELVES AS DOCTORS OR PHYSICIANS, BUT HAVE OBTAINED THEIR CREDENTIALS FROM DIPLOMA MILLS. WE DO INTEND TO PROTECT THE PUBLIC FROM PEOPLE WHO TREAT AND DIAGNOSE WITH LITTLE OR NO CLINICAL TRAINING [their caps]."
Note: what NYANP doesn't, apparently, value is transparency.
E.g.: why don't they tell us that their HPN is actually the science-ejected figmentation known as vitalism, and that it is at the heart of their worldview?
The freedom they want is the freedom to be legally deceptive [an oxymoron]. Efficacy? Well, they mention homeopathy and so much for efficacy having any meaning.
002. the New York State Assembly states in "A01370 Text" [vsc 2010-12-19]:
"15 S 6577. DEFINITION OF THE PRACTICE OF NATUROPATHY. THE PRACTICE OF
16 THE PROFESSION [professions claim] OF NATUROPATHY UTILIZES EDUCATION AND NATURAL THERAPIES
17 TO SUPPORT AND STIMULATE A PATIENT'S INTRINSIC SELF-HEALING PROCESS [coded vitalism] TO
18 PROMOTE WELLNESS AND TO PREVENT, DIAGNOSE, TREAT AND PRESCRIBE FOR HUMAN
19 HEALTH CONDITIONS CONSISTENT WITH NATUROPATHIC PRACTICE [which is based on vitalism, supernaturalism & kind]."
Note: NYANP summarizes the bill here.
Boy, there is so much missing that is necessary to make an informed decision regarding naturopathy, both as a legislator and as a member of the public.
The coded vitalism hidden in the bill merely scratches the surface of naturopathic opacity / deception. Engaging in such nontransparency voids their claim of professionalism, period.
Does this bill protect the public, when the bill itself would license as physician's these metaphysicians who do not distinguish between the science-ejected and the scientific, between the efficacious and the figmentatious, between the natural and the supernatural, between the opaque and the transparent [more oxymorony]?
well, when you do a google.com web search with the parameters >maloney quack<, you get these first-page results:
#6. 2010-02-17 - "Christopher Maloney Is A Quack.  But Maybe Not Censorious" at Popehat;
#10. 2010-02-18 - "Christopher Maloney is a Quack – For SHAME WordPress. Epic Fail" at One Furious Llama.
Note: and it goes on and on.
I don't even rank in the top 100! I have seven Naturocrit pages regarding Maloney, by the way [this is the eighth], and I never called him a quack therein. I cited those who did, surely.
I take it that Myers will not be gifting ND Maloney this holiday season with his desired 'cease and desist': the deadline was the 2010-12-14 if you use Myer's posting date of 2010-12-07, or it was 2010-12-07 if you use the letter's as written date of 2010-11-30.
I must also add, Maloney called Atwood a quack [by post title] regarding Atwood's Medline piece, and engaged in quite obvious ad hominem. The Medline papers are rock solid, in my view, and Atwood didn't get into the pigpen -- in terms of ungrounded personal attacks on competence and integrity. But Maloney went the muddy way -- possibly libeling Atwood's "level of knowledge within his own area" -- and doesn't seem to have even read the entire Medline Atwood-published arc.
The irony is killing me: NCNM ND -- a place that irrationally labels the science-exterior and the science-interior as all the some kind of science stuff [a level of knowledge akin to forth grade?] -- who claims defamation, apparently doesn't have a problem dishing it out.
here, I cite from the Alaska naturopathy practice Avante Medical Center [AMC] which claims, over the years, that naturopathy is a branch of medical science [see 001., below]:
001. the science claim of AMC, by practitioner:
001.a. Babij, M. (ND SCNM) states in "Markian Babij, ND, FABNO" [vsc 2010-12-19]:
"naturopathic doctors cooperate with all other branches of medical science."
001.b. Smith, T. (ND NCNM 2001) states in "Torrey Smith, ND" [vsc 2010-12-19]:
"naturopathic doctors cooperate with all other branches of medical science [...] Dr. Smith loves utilizing the naturopathic tools [...] this includes using [...] the latest in scientific medical studies."
001.c. Ferguson, G. (ND NCNM 2001) states in "Gary Ferguson, ND" [vsc 2010-12-19]:
"naturopathic doctors cooperate with all other branches of medical science."
001.d. Harmon, J.J. (ND Bastyr 1999) states in "Jason J. Harmon, ND, FABNO" [vsc 2010-12-19]:
"naturopathic doctors cooperate with all other branches of medical science [...] Dr. Harmon is committed to advancing the integration of modern medicine, bringing together the best of science and nature [...] Bachelor of Science, Pre-Medicine, Bastyr University Seattle, WA."
001.e. Wiggins, N. (ND SCNM) states in "Natalie Wiggins, ND" [vsc 2010-12-19]:
"naturopathic doctors cooperate with all other branches of medical science."
001.f. Nalbandian, J. (ND Bastyr 1989) states in "Jana Nalbandian, ND, MT" [vsc 2010-12-19]:
"naturopathic doctors cooperate with all other branches of medical science [...] Dr. Nalbandian has been the Department Chair of Clinical Sciences."
001.g. Laing, A. (ND NCNM) states in "Abby Laing, ND" [vsc 2010-12-19]:
"naturopathic doctors cooperate with all other branches of medical science."
001.h. Erickson, L. (ND CCNM) states in "Liane Erickson, ND" [vsc 2010-12-18]:
"naturopathic physicians cooperate with all other branches of medical science."
002. there is, really, no larger science claim made by naturopathy, that it is essentially / categorically "science".
Friday, December 17, 2010
here, a citation illustrating the essentially naturopathic science-ejected vitalistic [see 001., below]:
001. Arizona NMD Hinojosa-Sinks, J. (NMD SCNM) states:
001. Arizona NMD Hinojosa-Sinks, J. (NMD SCNM) states:
001.a. in "Meet Your Doctor" [vsc 2010-12-17]:
"naturopathic medicine is based on the belief [it is indeed a belief system] that the human body has an innate healing ability [coded vitalism...] Dr. Hinojosa-Sinks [...] firmly believes [it is indeed a belief system] that each person has the ability to heal [coded vitalism]. She focuses her assessment and therapies on finding and stimulating the body's inherent power to heal [coded vitalism], which is known as a person's 'vital force' [explicit vitalism...] she is a member of the American Association of Naturopathic Physicians (AANP) and the Arizona Naturopathic Medical Association (AZNMA) [...] naturopathic physicians base [a belief basis] their practice on six timeless principles [as in 'science-ain't-ever-gonna-sway-us'...#1] let nature heal [coded vitalism]."
Note: so, vital force.
001.b. in "Acupuncture" [vsc 2010-12-17]:
"acupuncture is a therapy of traditional Chinese medicine that originated in China over 5,000 years ago [...and] is based on the belief [yes, belief] that people have a vital energy, called 'qi' [explicit vitalism], that circulates through twelve invisible [as in nonexistent] energy [a misuse of the term, scientifically speaking] channels known as 'meridians' on the body [...that] irrigate and nourish the tissues [...each] is associated with a different organ system. An imbalance in the flow of qi [explicit vitalism] throughout a meridian is how disease begins [...] acupuncturists insert needles into specified points along meridian lines to [...] reestablish the regular flow of qi [explicit vitalism] through the body [...] acupuncture treatments can help the body's internal organs correct imbalances in their digestion, absorption, and energy production activities, and in the circulation of their energy [coded vitalism] through the meridians [...] all ages and all conditions can benefit from acupuncture [panacea-like promise]."
Note: yes, the invisible-figmentatious as causative, manipulable, and highly efficacious!
Wow, and not a lick of admission that this is science-ejected crap. I do not consent.
Thursday, December 16, 2010
here, I compare two positions on acupuncture. First, there's the proponent ND Kontomerkos replete with panacea-like promises regarding the efficacy of acupuncture and big statements about her 'science foundation qualifications' [see 001., below]; then, a word from skeptic Novella at Science-Based Medicine [see 002., below]:
001. Kontomerkos, C. (ND UBCNM) tells us:
001.a. in "Acupuncture and Traditional Chinese Medicine" [vsc 2010-12-15]:
"acupuncture originated over 2000 years ago [it's older than dirt...and] involves the insertion of hair-thin, sterile, disposable needles into strategic points on the body that are specific for particular complaints or conditions [really!!!...and] has been clinically shown and medically accepted as an effective tool [really!!!...] acupuncture has also been linked to increased levels of specific hormones that improve the body's immune function and its response to stress [...] how does acupuncture work? Traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) and acupuncture are based on a concept of balanced qi [Q, aka vitalism, the archaic belief in an imaginary force or energy governing one's physiology...] or vital energy [VE, a qi alias] that flows throughout the body. Qi regulates all aspects of the body, influencing spiritual [supernaturalism], emotional, mental, and physical balance. Disease occurs when the flow of qi is disrupted and yin (negative energy [E]) and yang (positive energy) [both vitalistic, overall] become imbalanced [...] scientists have found ways that fit their scientific model of how and why acupuncture works [and that's quite a science-claim]."
Note: so, we're told acupuncture has meaningful efficacy, and that acupuncture passes scientific muster. Its premise -- vitalism = Q = VE = E -- is communicated, but the status of vitalism as science-ejected isn't. You'll see below why such an admission cannot occur within naturopathy. The "points" are claimed to be specific, and of course you get naturopathy's requisite supernaturalism along with its vitalism.
So, the claim: science subset acupuncture subset vitalism and supernaturalism. This implies: science subset naturopathy, since this is a naturopathic clinical practice. It could be very inconvenient to admit the truth: science excludes the essentially naturopathic [vitalism, supernaturalism and kind], being that the ND's alma mater engages in commerce under a science label [that isn't true, which constitutes false advertising, roughly speaking].
Now, a word on the website's address, "let nature heal" [LNH]. This itself is a coding for naturopathy's essential science-ejected vitalistic context. For example, the ND's alma mater UBCNM states in "Six Guiding Principles. Guiding Principle #1" (archived here)[vsc 2010-12-15]:
"the healing power of nature. Viz [sp., vis] medicatrix naturae [HPN-VMN]: the body has the inherent ability to establish, maintain, and restore health. The healing process is ordered and intelligent [purposeful; goal-directed aka teleological]; nature heals [as in 'let nature heal'] through the response of the life force [LF]. The physician's role is to facilitate and augment this process [TP]."
So, ND Kontomerkos's web site address is indicative of naturopathy's overall vitalistic context: LNH = HPN-VMN = LF = TP.
You just have to decode it, "from the inside"!
001.b. in "Facial Rejuvenation Acupuncture" [vsc 2010-12-15]:
"Dr. Kontomerkos is certified in facial rejuvenation acupuncture
[...and it is claimed to do all these things:]
[...and it is claimed to do all these things:]
increased blood flow,
increased collagen production,
improvement of facial muscle tone,
reduction of puffiness around the eyes,
elimination of fine lines and wrinkles,
improvement in facial color,
increase in skin hydration,
reduction of sagging jowls and drooping eye lids,
increased blood and lymph circulation, tightening of pores,
reduction in acne, improvement of TMJ,
improved digestion and metabolism,
more restful sleep,
improved hormone balance,
improvement of self-esteem."
Note: quack panacea alert!
Note: quack panacea alert!
001.c. in "Services" [vsc 2010-12-15]:
"acupuncture [..is a] gentle, ancient healing technique [that] treats various health conditions, stimulates the body's healing response [coded vitalism], and promotes physical and emotional well-being [...] reiki therapy – reiki is an energetic therapy [that is, vitalistic...] reiki can decrease pain, improve health [really!!!...] it can benefit emotional health as well as physical health [...] homeopathy is a distinct system of medicine that treats illnesses with extremely diluted agents [...] homeopathic remedies [...] each remedy is chosen after Dr. Kontomerkos conducts an interview focusing on the physical and emotional characteristics of each person, which lead her to the prescription of an individualized remedy [...] Dr. Kontomerkos also performs facial rejuvenation acupuncture."
Note: whenever someone clinical claims homeopathy has efficacy...run. And acupuncture.
001.d. in "Meet the Doctor" [vsc 2010-12-15]:
"Dr. Kontomerkos was trained in the scientific model as her foundation [bullshit!] in medicine [...] she went on to earn a doctorate in naturopathic medicine from University of Bridgeport College of Naturopathic Medicine [...] Dr. Kontomerkos offers natural medical solutions [...] the aim is to heal the underlying cause of illness [coded vitalism...and speaks of] other health care professionals [...] for Dr. Kontomerkos, the goal is to provide excellence in health care and wellness by merging cutting-edge, evidence-based research with ancient healing traditions [epistemic conflation]."
Note: so, there's the big science model / context falsehood. The science-exterior [the essentially naturopathic] cannot be science, by definition.
001.e. in "Naturopathy" [vsc 2010-12-15]:
"naturopathic medical schools require the same basic sciences as a medical doctor [...] naturopathic medicine is a method of healing that blends centuries-old holistic medicines with modern medical science [...] the naturopathic physician is required to complete four years of training [...including] acupuncture, homeopathic medicine [etc....] naturopathic physician takes rigorous professional board exams."
Note: so, again, a science expertise / basis claim / promise, acu. and homeo., and a claim of 'professional rigor.' Notice that the science-ejected vitalism essential to naturopathy overall is not communicated in this page which claims to contextualize naturopathy.
We ARE told, cryptically, "the premise behind naturopathic medicine is to find the root cause of illness [RCI]", and that is, overall, vitalism coded.
Therefore: vitalism = RCI, also.
001.f. in "Christine Kontomerkos, ND, MS" [vsc 2010-12-15]:
"Dr. Kontomerkos was trained in the scientific model as her foundation in medicine and has a great respect for the ever-advancing field of medicine [a HUGE science promise...she has] a Doctorate in Naturopathic Medicine from University of Bridgeport College of Naturopathic Medicine [...] Dr. Kontomerkos offers natural medical solutions [...] her services involve the use of [...] homeopathy [...and] acupuncture [etc....] by merging cutting-edge, evidence-based research with ancient healing traditions [...] Dr. Kontomerkos enhances her knowledge of the profession [...] or more information, please visit http://www.letnatureheal.com/."
Note: wow, there's a HUGE science model / context promise again, UBCNM as an alma mater, homeo. and acu., and an 'of the professions' claim.
AND who pays for this? In "Insurance and Location" [vsc 2010-12-15] we're told:
"our office accepts the following insurance plans: Anthem Blue Cross Blue Shield, ConnectiCare, Cigna, HealthNet, Aetna [...] for any plans not listed here, most insurance companies will reimburse 'out-of-network' for services that are rendered."
002. Dr. Novella writes at Science-Based Medicine in "Acupuncture and the Hazard of Nonsense" (2010-12-15):
"a recent study published in the Archives of Opthalmology [sp., ophthalmology!] compare patching of one eye vs acupuncture in the treatment of amblyopia in older children, and finds positive results from acupuncture [...one of sCAM's] highly implausible modalities [...] changes to clinical practice are not warranted based upon an unblinded pilot study such as this. The history of acupuncture specifically is one in which unblinded pilot studies tend to be positive, but then follow up well-controlled blinded acupuncture studies have tended to be negative. If history is any judge, these results will not hold up under further study, and therefore changes to clinical practice are premature. This episode is just one example of the hazard of studying was is essentially a nonsensical system – the notion that acupuncture needles placed in specific (and non-existent) acupoints can cause specific physiological effects [oh snap!...] there is no evidence for such wild speculation about possible mechanisms of acupuncture, and speculating about mechanisms is premature when the best acupuncture studies all find no effect [...] what we get from acupuncture, at best, are very non-specific effects from the therapeutic ritual that surrounds acupuncture [...] non-specific effects do not justify specific claims or mechanisms [...] the ultimate problem is that the underlying notions of acupuncture itself – that there are specific acupuncture points on the body, and that there are mysterious energies that can be manipulated by sticking needles in these points that then have specific physiological effects – are highly implausible. They are, in fact, nothing but pre-scientific superstition. The energy and acupuncture points of acupuncture, according to decades of research and multiple independent lines of evidence, simply do not exist. Acupuncture is ultimately a shell game of preliminary unreliable results and misinterpreted non-specific/placebo effects."
Note: yes, that is, again:
"acupuncture is ultimately a shell game of preliminary unreliable results and misinterpreted non-specific/placebo effects."
And it is business-as-usual for NDs / NMDs and their schools.
And it is business-as-usual for NDs / NMDs and their schools.
Monday, December 13, 2010
here, I cite from a recent post at The Quackometer regarding homeopathy [see 001., below]; then, I suggest some similarities homeopathy has to naturopathy [see 002., below]; and I provide a specific example [see 003., below]:
001. Andy Lewis writes in "Escaping the Cult of Homeopathy" (2010-12-13):
"I would not be the first to suggest that believers in alternative medicine often display the traits of members of cults [...and] of all alternative medicines homeopathy, to me, looks the most cult-like [...e.g.] it defines itself in opposition to what it calls 'allopathy' and in doing so creates a straw man of what medicine is today [...] homeopathy is so strictly defined by its opposition to modern mainstream medicine that it will always lie at the fringes in a pseudoscientific bubble [...] it must attack and denounce alternatives – such as scientific medicine – without any form of compromise [...] the cult model explains why virtually no homeopaths have condemned the murderous practice of using sugar pills to treat fatal diseases like HIV and malaria [...this] thinking of the cult [...this] cult-like dark side of homeopathy [...this] pseudo-medical and superstitious cult [...homeopathy apostate] Wendy describes life inside the cult of homeopathy [...] Wendy talks about how the training for homeopaths is vital for creating the cult-like mentality [...] questioning was highly discouraged [...] 'my critical abilities were silenced within the first year – not by others – but because it would be considered judgmental in that society [...] I now see homeopathy as the disease. I think it is a form of madness' [...] Wendy has found the current sceptical blogging about homeopathy on the internet a useful tool in 'de-programming' and re-engaging with a critical approach to examining the claims of homeopathy."
Note: there are many parallels between homeopathy and naturopathy. And I have, under oath, labeled naturopathy "cultic mystical weirdness", I must admit.
It is a fact that:
a) ND web pages often have a "FAQs" section rhetorically posing the question 'what is the difference between homeopathy and naturopathy?'
b) naturopathy labels modern medicine 'allopathy';
c) both homeopathy and naturopathy are based on science-ejected archaic / medieval ideas such as vitalism.
003. for example, Lee, T.S. (ND Bastyr 1986) states in "What Is Naturopathic Medicine?" [vsc 2010-12-13]:
"what is the difference between a naturopath and a homeopath? [...] homeopaths use only the homeopathic approach, whereas naturopaths train in several forms of diagnosis and treatment, one of which is homeopathy [...which] stimulates the patient's vital force to help resolve the disease [...paralleling] the philosophy of naturopathic medicine: living things have an innate ability to heal themselves [coded vitalism]. Our vital force promotes self-cleansing, self-repair, and therefore self-healing [...] naturopathic treatments [...and] techniques and methods have long been respected throughout the world. While modern allopathic medicine is a youngster of less than 200 years old, natural medicine has been the primary medicine used by most of the human community even into the 21st Century."
Note: this result came about by using google.com and web-searching >"what is the difference" homeopathy naturopathy<. It was the second result.
Phil Plait writes at blogs.discovermagazine.com in "Mike Adams Fails Again: Astrology Edition" (2010-12-13):
"Mike Adams [...] can politely be described as an antiscience propagandist. If there’s no evidence for it, he’ll believe it: naturopathy, antivax, alt-med fluffery, you name it. He runs the website Natural News, which has an extremely high density of nonsense per electron."
Note: well said.
Sunday, December 12, 2010
here, I list some of the relevant pages in the ND Maloney - Pharyngula issue somewhat organized chronologically [as near as I can tell]:
2010-02-17 - Myers posts "Christopher Maloney is a Quack":
"Maloney is a naturopath in the state of Maine, where quacks like him get to call themselves 'doctors' [...] a student, Michael Hawkins, dared to criticize him, pointing out that 'naturopathic medicine is pure bull' and stating that naturopaths are under-qualified and do not deserve the title of 'doctor' [...] Maloney took action to silence him [...] not only is Maloney a quack, but he's a stupid quack [...] now a much bigger blog is going to spread the word that Christopher Maloney is a quack [...] let the whole world know that Christopher Maloney is a cowardly quack."
2010-02-17 - Popehat posts "Christopher Maloney Is A Quack.  But Maybe Not Censorious";
2010-02-18 - Myers posts "Christopher Maloney: Still A Quack":
"that quack, Christopher Maloney, has written to me now... with a nice little edge of hysteria and paranoia [...] 'u can call me an idiot and a quack, but when you repeat the fact that I am not a doctor and not qualified, that is a written lie or libel. I am a doctor under Maine state law and meet the qualifications of that title' [...] the plot thickens. Maloney denies getting Hawkins' site shut down."
Note: related to this, Myer's posted on 2010-02-18 "Andreas Moritz is a Cancer Quack", Steve Novella posted on 2010-02-18 "Naturopaths Can Silence Critics Too" with Maloney using the name Quackalicious in the comments, and fellow ScienceBlogs.com blogger Orac posted on 2010-02-19 "Andreas Moritz and Trying to Shut Down Valid Scientific Criticism: A Sine Qua Non of a Quack" and fellow ScienceBlogs.com blogger Joshua Rosenau posted on 2010-12-08 "Christopher Maloney is a Quack".
2010-07-27 Steve Novella posts "Maloney Declares Victory":
"made clear by this exchange is the difference between the science-based approach and Maloney’s approach, which is typical of naturopaths. I look at all the evidence for plausibility, safety, and the reasonable potential for benefit. If I am convinced that I can offer my patients the probability of benefit in excess of harm, I will use a treatment (no matter how it is labeled) with proper informed consent. But I will then closely follow the evidence and will stop using a treatment if good clinical evidence is negative. Or I will start using a treatment when new evidence shows that it is safe and effective. Maloney, on the other hand, appears to trade in wild speculation. In my opinion he has demonstrated sloppy, black and white thinking, an inability to understand the implications of published research, a bias against science-based medicine, and a willingness to prescribe treatments based upon the flimsiest of scientific justifications. He then accuses me of being 'dismissive' and has the stones to declare victory in our exchange because I eventually tired of his evasiveness and crank tactics."
Note: Maloney's compilation is here.
2010-10-14 - Maloney posts "Quack Attack: An Explanation of the Attacks on Dr. Christopher Maloney";
2010-12-07 - Myers posts "I Get Mail":
"some people just don't get it. Christopher Maloney wants to silence a message he doesn't like on the internet by serving a cease and desist order. The last time I mentioned Maloney was eight months ago, and even then it was to point and laugh at his page throwing crazy paranoid accusations at me. So now [...] he has decided to stir the pot and remind everyone that Christopher Maloney is a quack and that he keeps on quacking? [...] once again, the web will start echoing the Christopher Maloney is a quack message. It must be handy for a quack to marry a lawyer, but I don't think she's giving him good advice in this case. You might as well serve a writ on the tides to stop flowing as ask the internet to erase a piece of its data."
Note: Maloney's compilation is here.
Note: Maloney's compilation is here.
2010-12-08 - Popehat posts "If It Walks Like a Duck, and Censors Like a Duck...";
The deadline for the cease and desist request is 2010-12-14. We'll see what happens this week.
ND Murray's 2009 ISBN 9781416549338 - Analyzing 'What ND Murray Won't Tell You About Naturopathy Overall'
here, I quote from ND Murray's 2009 book [see 001.a., below]; then, I provide some transparency regarding the essentially naturopathic [see 001.b., below]:
001. the book and a partial analysis:
001.a. Murray, M.T. (ND Bastyr 1985) writes in "What The Drug Companies Won't Tell You and What Your Doctor Doesn't Know" (2009;ISBN 9781416549338):
"[the dust jacket tells us Murray is] one of today’s leading authorities on natural medicine [...and states he is] drawing on more than thirty years’ worth of scientific research [...and he] provides clear guidance [...and his web site is] www.doctormurray.com [...the prologue tells us] conventional wisdom is established if it is simple, convenient, comfortable, and comforting -- though not necessarily true [...] people want to believe conventional wisdom because it is indeed so simple, convenient, comfortable and comforting, even if it may not be true [...] change [...] we are in the midst of it [...] a new paradigm [...] a model used to explain events [...] is emerging [...] as our understanding of the environment and the human body evolves, new paradigms -- new explanations -- are developed [p.001...] the era of self-empowerment is beginning [...] by definition and philosophy most conventional medical doctors M.D.s practice allopathic medicine, the system of medicine that focuses primarily on treating disease rather than promoting health [...] you may have noticed the N.D. after my name on the cover [...] I am a naturopathic doctor [...a degree from] Bastyr University [...] naturopathic medicine is based on seven time-tested principles [...#2] employ the healing power of nature [HPN, coded vitalism]. N.D.s believe that the body has considerable power to heal itself [coded vitalism]. The role of the physician is to facilitate and enhance this process [coded vitalism, p.002...#3] causes can spring from physical, mental-emotional, and spiritual levels [supernaturalism...#4] an individual as a whole, composed of a complex set of physical, mental-emotional, spiritual [supernaturalism], social, and other factors [...#7] 'health' is defined as the state of optimal physical, mental, emotional, and spiritual [supernaturalism] well-being [...] I am a proponent of what I like to describe as rational medicine [p.003...] a more rational and truthful approach to health care is needed [p.004...] I also hope that you can all become advocates of change [...#5] the physician is a teacher. The word 'doctor' comes from the Latin docere, which means 'to teach.' N.D.s view our roles as primarily those of teachers: to educate, empower, and inspire our patients to assume more personal responsibility for their health [p.005]."
001.b. analysis & commentary:
001.b1. regarding the dust jacket:
001.b1. regarding the dust jacket:
"leading authorities", well then I think we can take ND Murray's methods of communicating naturopathy as 'the typical way they do it' / their M.O.;
"scientific", well, lets apply science to the contents of what is 'essentially the naturopathic' [more on that below regarding naturopathy's principles' context];
"clear guidance", well, I'll show you how naturopathy codes its essential science-ejected principles and doesn't inform concerning the science-exterior status of said, and you'll see that instead of clarity we get camouflague, instead of the clear we get the opaque;
001.b2. regarding the prologue:
"conventional wisdom", well, the conventional wisdom regarding licensed naturopathy is that it makes sense and reflects truth, but it doesn't and that is actually easy to show [more below];
"change" and 'the evolution of knowledge', well naturopathy missed the boat regarding the progression of scientific knowledge as regards naturopathy's contents;
"self-empowerment", well, what ND Murray fails to realize is that it is exceptionally paternalistic and disempowering not to be transparent about where naturopathy lies [literally, as in falsehoods];
"allopathic" as "treating disease", well, that's bullshit. For example, pediatrics deals with prevention of disease HUGELY. It's simply false to claim that medicine is locked in to 'the pound of cure' view as opposed to prevention. Vaccines anyone?;
"seven time-tested principles", well, two aspects of these principles' context, when you really boil it down, are 'time-ejected figmentations' in terms of science, vitalism and supernaturalism [more on that below]. Humans tens of thousands of years ago -- without language, soap, and culture overall -- surely beat each other over the heads with sticks to solve their everyday problems in a very time-tested manner, but today I hope one wouldn't argue about the 'time-testedness' of such barbarity;
'HPN', oh, you dissembling dissemblers when it comes to communicating your context, NDs across North America! This is their racket: don't disclose this context in full, use naturalistic language that disguises what you REALLY are talking about -- vitalism, that science-ejected concept naturopathy is defined by, and defined by falsely representing it as able to survive scientific scrutiny!;
'the supernaturalism', well, I'm all for people believing as they so desire, but naturopathy claims that these supernaturalisms and vitalisms survive scientific scrutiny, which is false;
"teacher" and "educate", well, this isn't teaching and educating, it strikes me as manipulative propaganda. In order for people to 'be responsible' they have to be in command of the facts, and naturopathy is quite dysfactual and dyseducational!;
"inspired", well, if naturopathy has done anything it has demonstrated to me how a bunch of cultic yahoos can legalize their racket and disguise themselves as an overall M.O.
002. ND Murray's web page, mentioned above, is not up right now. Random House states in "Michael T. Murray, N.D.":
"Michael T. Murray, N.D. is widely regarded as one of the world's leading authorities on natural medicine. He is a graduate, faculty member, and serves on the Board of Trustees of Bastyr University in Seattle, Washington. Dr. Murray is the co-author of A Textbook of Natural Medicine, the definitive textbook on naturopathic medicine for physicians [...he is] a consultant to the health food industry ['big supplement'...] for the past twenty years, Dr. Murray has been compiling a massive database of original scientific studies from the medical literature. He has personally collected over 50,000 articles from the scientific literature [...] according to Dr. Murray: 'one of the great myths about natural medicines is that they are not scientific' [...] Michael T. Murray, N.D. has dedicated his life to educating physicians, patients, and the general public on the tremendous healing power of nature [HPN, that cannot here be mentioned as a science-ejected figmentation!]."
Note: I cannot make this shit up.
003. so, again we engage in the complete reversal of values:
wherein naturopathy claims to be informing and empowering but is really dissembling and manipulating. And someone who rails against pill pushers is himself a pusher of a lot of known-as-ineffective pills [glucosamine etc.].
Well, I'm glad we've straightened out what HPN is, overall. But, if you are still confused, see this chapter of Murray's TNM, which details naturopathy's science-ejected vitalistic context -- so often disguised as HPN.
"Truthful"? Naturopathy is not only "not necessarily true", it is indeed not true at all.
"Rational medicine", me arse.
Saturday, December 11, 2010
ND Ferguson and Bastyr's 'Nonscience Is Science NaturopaTHICK Permissiveness' - Youtube 2008, Peterson's College Guide 2009
here, I cite from a Bastyr ND's Youtube video [see 001., below]; then, from Peterson's College Guide where Bastyr advertises [see 002., below]:
001. Ferguson, T.M. (ND Bastyr 2007) states in "Science Supports Naturopathic Healing" (posted 2008-12-12)] [vsc 2010-12-10]:
"[the video's textual description] Dr. Todd Ferguson on how science and research shows naturopathic methods are effective ways of healing [...from the video itself, narrator] 'are treatments in naturopathic medicine supported by scientific research?' [Ferguson] 'Ah, yeah [..] it sort of depends on how you define science [...] 3000 years of trial and era would be considered, in my mind, science. But I think what you're getting at is more the modern type of science, and yes [...] many naturopathic concepts actually have a lot of research in them [...] yes there is a lot of research if you look in the right place."
[here's the link as a Youtube embed]
Note: science, science, science. Wow, so, this product of Bastyr University states, basically, that knowledge and habits from the prescientific era are INDEED scientific. That is quite generous. It is also quite wrong. Hmmmm: 'the Earth to me seems flat' said the cave man, 'therefore that is as scientific to naturopathy as the actuality that by modern methods we know the Earth to be round [roughly].' Such is naturopaTHICK thought.
002. Peterson's College Guide 2009 [which I consider to be a form of 'false advertisement / commerce inducement'] states in "Bastyr University School of Naturopathy" [vsc 2010-12-11]:
"Bastyr’s fully accredited four- to five-year Doctor of Naturopathic Medicine (N.D.) program is internationally renowned for its rigorous, science-based curriculum [...] a distinct multidisciplinary, science-based approach [...] students receive a thorough foundation in the basic medical sciences [...] basic science studies [...] the field of natural health sciences [...] scientifically trained naturopathic physicians [...] science major-level chemistry [...] science major-level biology [...] with an emphasis on understanding the mind, body, spirit, and nature."
Note: so, we're told that within science is the supernatural. This isn't true. And it hasn't been for a couple hundred years. But, we can see from Ferguson's example, in naturopathyland, ANYTHING is science [including especially the supernatural].
003. what "nature" is contextually in naturopathy:
Broadly speaking, in naturopathy, "nature" is the "healing power of nature". Bastyr explains this foundation-to-naturopathy in "Principles of Naturopathic Medicine" [vsc 2010-12-11]:
"[the first and foremost] the healing power of nature (vis medicatrix naturae): naturopathic medicine recognizes the body's inherent ability, which is ordered and intelligent, to heal itself. Naturopathic physicians act to identify and remove obstacles to recovery, and to facilitate and augment this healing ability."
Note: and that's all you get. You have not been properly informed, along the lines of professionalism.
But, if you go to Oregon's .gov site which is the 'trunk of the naturopathic tree' [Bastyr is an offspring of Oregon's NCNM], you'll get some transparency [along with absurdity]. There you will see that "nature" for naturopathy, in its principles, is the science-ejected concept known as vitalism [ejected from science for, charitably, 100 years and more].
004. so what to make of this:
the pattern is obvious: person educated wrongly / vitimized by an institution goes on to Youtube and espouses that institutions huge falsehoods / errors for the world to see. Said institution continues its racket through advertisement via college guides.
Friday, December 10, 2010
here, I cite from a recent report that clearly indicates how NDs view scientific consensus [as in misrepresent it]:
Robert Mangelsdorf reports for the Maple Ridge News in "Children Pulled From Maple Ridge School Over Wi-Fi Concerns" (2010-12-10)[vsc 2010-12-10]:
"parents at a Maple Ridge elementary school have pulled their children out of school over fears radiation from Wi-Fi internet routers may be harming their children. Samantha Boutet [...] a naturopathic doctor [...] pulled her two daughters out of the public school system and now home-schools them [...while] a considerable body of scientific evidence suggests radiation from Wi-Fi routers is perfectly safe. In a 2006 report, the World Health Organization stated there is no convincing scientific evidence that the weak radio frequency signals from base stations and wireless networks cause adverse health effects. Health Canada [...] has determined 'exposure to low-level radio frequency energy, such as that from Wi-Fi equipment, is not dangerous to the public' [...] in response to concerns about perceived health issues, School District No. 42 reviewed existing research, and found there to be no convincing evidence of a health threat associated with Wi-Fi. Boutet believes [!] that until there is concrete evidence Wi-Fi is safe for children, schools should plug their computers back in. 'The science is divided, but until we know for sure, we shouldn’t be putting kids at risk,' she said. 'My kid is the canary in coal mine.'"
Note: the science IS NOT DIVIDED. But, being that naturopathy groups the scientific and the nonscientific into one falsely labeled scientific category, this is a perfect example of the naturopaTHICK.
here, I cite from a recent account of an naturopath in Arizona accused of child molestation [see 001., below]; then, I detail how naturopathy molests science [see 002., below]:
001. AZCentral.com reports from the Arizona Republic in "Videotape Shows Anthem Doctor Showering With Boy, Authorities Say" (2010-12-10):
"[as reported by Brennan Smith] authorities have discovered a videotape they believe shows an Anthem [naturopathic!] doctor showering with a 9-year-old boy he is accused of molesting, according to Lt. Brian Lee of the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office [...] Don Underwood [is] a naturopathic doctor who is accused of molesting a former employee's son [...] Underwood faces seven counts of child molestation and three counts of sexual conduct with a minor in the case of the 9-year-old, who told his mother that Underwood molested him on several occasions [...] authorities said the boy provided 'very descriptive and graphic information implicating Underwood in several felony molestation charges' [...] Dr. Craig Runbeck, executive director of the Arizona Naturopathic Physicians Medical Board [more on them below], said he has not received Underwood's police report but will pursue a summary suspension of Underwood's license if his conduct is deemed harmful to his patients [huh? how about society at-large?]."
Note: so, that concerns the horrid [alleged / accused] sexual molestation of a child.
002. naturopathy's molestation of science:
002.a the State of Arizona Naturopathic Physicians Medical Board states:
002.a1. at their home page:
"mission statement: the primary duty of the Board is to protect the public through the regulation of the practice of naturopathic medicine."
Note: quite a noble goal.
002.a2. that its board members are:
"Catherine Lynn Walker NMD, Chairman; Daniel Rubin ND [ND SCNM 1997], Vice Chairman; Mr. Evan Zang, Secretary/Treasurer; Renee Waldman NMD, Physician Member; Mr. Kip Micuda JD, Public Member; Ms. Linda Barron, Public Member; Dr. Bruce Sadelik, Physician Member."
Note: so, lets look at ND Rubin.
002.b. ND Rubin as a microcosm of naturopathic science molestation:
002.b1. ND Rubin [bio.and CV here, here, here] states naturopathy's essential and required science-ejected premise, vitalism, in "Naturopathic Medicine: Ways, Means and Practicality" [archived from his http://www.naturopathicspecialists.com/uploads/Naturopathic_Medicine_What_is_it.pdf, vsc 2010-03-06]:
"[naturopathy's essential] precepts. Vis medicatrix naturae [slide 010...] vis medicatrix naturae. Vis = energy, strength or force [...] the body possesses the inherent ability to restore health. The physician's role is to facilitate this process with the aid of natural nontoxic therapies [slide 011...] the vital force. This describes the energy essential for life, the innate life principle, or the inherent power within every living organism. Naturopathic doctors seek to support the vital force [slide 012]."
Note: such vitalism is hugely science-ejected AS A CONTEXT. The slideshow states "Presented by Daniel Rubin, N.D. [at the] University of Illinois Medical Campus Chicago, IL [on] March 15, 2006." I've had it in my archives for years.
002.b2. yet, ND Rubin claims that naturopathy is scientific while nonscientific in "Naturopathic Oncology: An Emerging Discipline" [vsc 2010-12-10] (2005-08):
"naturopathic medicine is a distinct system of health care and distinguished by the principles that underlie and determine its practice [...which] are based on objective observation of the nature of health and disease [...and] continually reexamined in the light of scientific advances [...its] methods used are consistent with these principles [...] such principles are vis medicatrix naturae (the healing power of nature) [(VMN-HPN a.k.a. coded vitalism!)...and speaks of] the philosophy, science and practice of naturopathic oncology [...] to attend naturopathic medical school, applicants complete the same science premedical requirements required by conventional schools of medicine. Naturopathic medical schools are 4-year, graduate level, federally and regionally accredited institutions. The first two years are comparable to conventional medical school, emphasizing basic medical sciences. The second two years concentrate on clinical sciences, focusing on natural therapeutics [...] the Naturopathic Physicians Licensing Examination [NPLEX] is the standard used by all licensing jurisdictions for naturopathic physicians in North America. It includes five basic science exams -- anatomy, physiology, pathology, biochemistry, microbiology and immunology -- taken after the first two years of naturopathic medical school. The clinical science examinations are taken following graduation and include [...] homeopathy."
Note: science, science, science. And that label is placed upon naturopathy's VMN-HPN, and homeopathy. This does not compute: something isn't equal to what it is excluded from!
Currently, isn't it interesting that at ND Rubin's page "Practice Philosophy" we aren't told of this vitalism-science conflation-irrationality [indistinction!]. Yet, ND Rubin does state [and I think it is quite ironic actually, and would be even absurdly funny, if this wasn't such a huge load of ONCOLOGY mischief / horror]:
a reverence for patient's "humanity and dignity";
their "becoming empowered";
"I believe that each individual with cancer should be treated as a person first, and a patient second";
"the best treatment approach";
"a type of healing that transcends any type of physical or molecular mechanistical medicine";
"a good treatment plan always begins with the education of both the person undergoing the treatment";
"I believe that when the basis of a treatment plan, as well as the basis of cancer is well understood, one will be in a better position to decide if such a treatment is truly appropriate for them";
"the purpose of this writing is to generate understanding though education";
"one needs to understand the fundamentals of the situation".
Yes, the irony is TRULY killing me.
003. overall note:
so, a member of the Board of NDs/NMDs in Arizona is actually A MENACE [molesters are menaces too] to the public's understanding of science since science is claimed absurdly as equal to the actually science-ejected, and therein science is sadly HUGELY molested [of course, in a much differently-heinous context than child molestation].
I could go on and on.
Obviously, if you understand, in the words of ND Rubin, "the fundamentals of the situation" regarding naturopathy and science / their false self-labels,
naturopathy is an absurd pseudoscience doing quite scary things in quite serious situations and with a quite misleading mannerism / M.O.
Ah, the most extreme reversal of values. 'Under lying' indeed.