Sunday, February 6, 2011

The Quackometer on UK Homeopathy Opacity, and My Extension onto the NA Naturopathy Apparatus

here, it cite from a recent post by Andy Lewis at the Quackometer [see 001., below]; then, I extend those observations onto North America's naturopathy apparatus [NANA, see 002., below]:

001.  the Quackometer writes in "The Media Code for Homeopaths" (2011-02-06):

"in December, various homeopathy groups from the UK have held a conference [...] one of the results of that conference was a 'Media Code', a set of rules designed to help homeopaths present their views to the media [...] a version of that Media Code has leaked out, and I am sure they will not be happy about it as it shows how they intend to be less than straightforward about their beliefs [...] this media code is amateurish, deceptive and will be ultimately inconsequential."

Note: so say we all.  So, overall there is opacity -- a lack of transparency / truthfulness -- concerning BELIEFS.

002. parallels with NANA:

002.a. NANA's TRUE belief set:

This can easily be found at the '.gov' site of the source of it all, pretty-much, the State of Oregon [SoO].  I won't go through the rigors of directly citing [as I've done this all too often on this blog], instead I'll summarize.  On this web page, naturopathy claims that the hugely science-ejected is able to survive scientific scrutiny.  It's a decree; not a finding that has made its way through any kind of scientific community process.  Claiming, de novo, that something is what it is not is quite a contraction and irrationality -- and all this has '.gov' sanction.

The ejected ideas / claims are best categorized as prescientific sectarian belief, such as vitalism and supernaturalism: that physiology is run by / imbued with a 'purposeful life spirit' which can be manipulated to cure disease.  Overall, then, we're told that current science-fact is current nonscience-figmentation.  This leads me to the conclusion that, within this belief system, a 'physician' and a 'metaphysician' are the same thing, and that it is deemed rational to visit a so-called physician who's overall worldview conflates science with nonscience, belief with objective fact, and the archiac science-ejected with that which actually survives scientific scrutiny.  My well-being is more important to me, I suggest you too avoid such medievalism.

But there you go, etched in marble at the Oregon state capital [sort of].  Having the whole thing on a '.gov' site is, by the way, a data-forensics wet dream.

002.b. then there's the more typical obfuscation / opacity, as you'd be hard-pressed to find that same SoO language at either:

002.b1. the State of Connecticut [SoC] site for naturopaths, the Connecticut Naturopathic Physicians Association [CNPA], who state in "About Naturopathic Medicine" [vsc 2011-02-06]:

"naturopathic medicine is a licensed medical profession [professions claim...] individualized therapy may include [...] homeopathy [empty pills, essentially, claimed as medicinal...] in an effort to stimulate natural healing forces within the body [coded vitalism...NDs] possess an in depth understanding of human and plant biochemistry and physiology [...] empowering the patient in the process."

Note: and that's really ALL you get there.  This CNPA page doesn't contextualize either, merely briefly mentioning: "according to my best ability and judgment, I will use methods of treatment that follow the principles of naturopathic medicine [...#1] vis medicatrix naturae - to act in cooperation with the healing power of nature [...while claiming naturopathy is] science."

What kind of profession is based upon deception's like homeopathy, and false claims about physiology?  What kind of profession codes its premises and therein does not provide enough information to be truly informed in a decision about whether to engage with it?  Who exactly is empowered by such?  CNPA claims that its primary principal is "first do no harm", truly the reversal of all values in the sense that now harm / manipulation and benefit / transparency are the same thing.

Most of the board at CNPA went to the Oregon school that wrote that Oregon description!  At least with the Oregon site we get some details of the whole absurdity-irrationality.

CNPA also states at their homepage [vsc 2011-02-06]:

"a millennium of experience, decades of scientific research the ancient new medicine that works for everyone."

Wow.  A huge science claim, and that great "ancient new" contradiction in terms like 'science-based naturopathy' or 'the naturalistic supernatural'.

I'd love to know how homeopathy works for ANYONE: Randi has a million dollar challenge that NOBODY at CNPA, I'll guess, will participate in.

In fact, not even SoC's '.gov' site transparently communicates naturopathy's actual contents / context [that I can find].  The State of Connecticut Department of Public Health [vsc 2011-02-06; the propaganda arm of CNPA!?] is actually falsely claiming that naturopathy's contents are SCIENCE.  So, I'd say: don't expect enforcement action in the State of Connecticut regarding naturopathy's commerce-illegality [clinical, educational and such].  SoC would have to prosecute itself [its DPH, its DHE], and I doubt that's going to happen.  Better to call in the Feds?

002.b2. at the Province of New Brunswick, Canada site for naturopaths, the New Brunswick Association of Naturopathic Doctors [NBAND] states in "About Naturopathic Medicine" [vsc 2011-02-06]:

NOTHING about naturopathy's science-ejected vitalistic basis, instead coding it as: "to cooperate with the healing powers of nature - we cannot have healthy people on a sick planet, so we must take care of our environment and use the gifts of the earth in a respectful manner."  Really, wow, how INACCURATE   No wonder David Suzuki supports them, and speaks at their meetings.  There is a touch of naturopathy's supernaturalism there, per "we take into account the physical, psychological and spiritual health of each patient."  And there's a lot of talk of science.  But, nowhere are you transparently informed that naturopathy is a belief system comprised of science-ejected ideas.  You are instead manipulated with opacity and false science claims placed upon the profoundly science-ejected.

Perhaps NBAND's statement "naturopathic treatments can be used effectively on their own [...like] homeopathy" says enough about all this naturopathic nonsense.

Ironically, we're told: "an ND emphasizes patient education with the intention of empowering individuals towards self responsibility and control over their own health care decisions.  We are also eager to share our knowledge."

The irony is killing me.

Now, they are not licensed / regulation yet by the province, but I am eager to see what language ends up there.
Post a Comment