here, I cite from the web pages of NUHS Chair ND Smith who claims homeopathy is "clinical science" [see 001., below]; then, I go to the trunk of the naturopathy tree, NCNM, and show the 'knowledge conflation inanity' that is at the core of naturopathy [see 002., below]:
001. Smith, F. (ND CCNM 1997) states:
001.a. in "Naturopathic Doctors" [vsc 2011-04-13]:
"modern, properly trained naturopathic doctors are graduates of naturopathic programs that are affiliated with [...] the CNME is the specialty accreditation agency that the U.S. Department of Education recognizes at the accreditor of naturopathic medical programs. There are 7 such programs in North America [...including] National University of Health Sciences (Lombard, Illinois) [...] these schools produce a graduate who is well versed in the natural healing arts, and who has been trained to assess the health status of the patient. Rigorous study of biomedical sciences, diagnosis and supervised internship help shape the competent naturopathic graduate [...] Part I of NPLEX [licensure exam] evaluates basic science knowledge (Anatomy, Biochemistry, Pathology, Microbiology, Physiology). Part II NPLEX evaluates the clinical science knowledge such as diagnosis and treatment."
Note: so, there you go, a claim that the ND boards are "science". In the land of naturopaTHICKness: a 'university of science' teaches naturopathy, and this is "proper" and "competent"; "science" that is "rigorous" includes, as we shall see, what science has totally DISPATCHED. Naturopathy is truly a reversal of basic values. And who are the accomplices? The federal and state departments of education and kind.
001.a1. for some background, ND Smith also states in "About Fraser Smith, N.D" [vsc 2011-04-13]:
"in 2005, Fraser Smith was recruited by National University of Health Sciences in Chicago, Illinois, to develop their naturopathic medicine program. The doctor of naturopathic medicine (ND) degree program."
Again, science is an overall category that's used to describe naturopathy.
001.a.2. but, what isn't specifically mentioned by ND Smith:
is that within Part II the "Core Clinical Science Examination" is homeopathy, according to the exam's site.
Note: this boils down to naturopathy equating science and nonscience -- the absurdity of claiming that something is what it is not. In my view, that is what integrative, holistic, alternative, natural medicine does: it refuses to analyze, and instead conflates. But, that's insane.
001.b. in "Modalities of Naturopathic Medicine" [vsc 2011-04-13]:
"the mechanisms of homeopathy are not fully understood [it doesn't work, and we know the mechanism is placebo!], and some aspects of it defy explanation [or sanity!], but in terms of application, there is a great deal of clinical history [leeches had the same pedigree!]. Naturopathic physicians tend to use homeopathy [I'll say!] for both chronic and acute conditions [like Nuremberg!], because of its non toxic nature (homeopathic preparations are extremely dilute)[I'll say!] and because homeopathic medicines can be matched to the patient in a very specific way (individualization) [an efficacy claim!]. This link at the National Institutes of Health describes homeopathy in greater detail and offers other resources and links which can be helpful [legitimacy by association!]."
Note: so, there you go. A whole bunch of science-ejected or -unsupported archaic bunkum claimed as hugely efficacious. Notice the strategy of evoking the '.gov' authority of NIH as if this now makes bunkum scientific.
001.b1. also on that same page is homage to the core principle of TCM, "qi" / vitalism. ND Smith tells us:
"the fundamental basis of TCM [and naturopathy, I don't have to argue], is that the body's energy flows along certain pathways called meridians. This energy is known as qi; it enters the body at conception and is the vital principle in the human body throughout life. Health is when the flow of qi is harmonious and uninhibited, and, its fundamental aspects - that of yin and yang, are in balance. When qi is blocked, or yin and yang are not in harmony - disease results [really!]. TCM is a medical system unto it’s self: there is also a system of understanding of the bodies physiology [really!] which involves organs. Each organ represents a broader concept than that of the organ in western medicine, including some energetic or mental/spiritual aspects."
Note: so there you go again: overarching all this nonsense is the label "science" because in naturopaTHICKland, science is only a letterhead and the page is filled up with whatever sectarian and archaic crap they want. Somehow, naturopathic institutions and practitioners, and the government entities that 'accomplice' / facilitate this whole thing, don't have a problem engaging in such falsely labeled commerce. Along the lines of conflation, notice too that that which is mental is equated with that which is supernatural and energetic. "Energy" is not being used here in any kind of scientific sense, it is a figmentation.
001.b2. furthermore, on the same page, we're told:
"naturopathic medicine [NM] is truly the embodiment of a tradition in medicine which could rightfully be called 'vitalistic' [V...] the vitalistic tradition is based on the premise that the body has an inherent ability to heal itself [IAHI]. The role of the physician is to support that self healing ability [SHA]. The vis medicatrix naturae or 'healing power of nature' [VMN-HPN] is the foundation of naturopathic medicine."
Note: so, to formulate the above sentence, NM = V = IAHI = SHA = VMN-HPN. Yet, it is nonsense to call vitalism 'within science'.
001.c. in "Naturopathic Chronicles: "Science and Belief" [vsc 2011-04-13]:
"naturopathic medicine [...has] a practice framework guided by principles [...] this weekend I was reviewing my notes for a class today on the concept of 'vitalism' [because this is the basis of naturopathy!...] science is an activity that accumulates knowledge, constantly evolves, and leads to ever more powerful models for understanding, explaining and predicting phenomena. The assertions of sciences are at least in principle testable, that is, they can be proven false through an experiment. If they stand the test of experimentation, they remain part of current knowledge [...] the doctor must be able to reconcile science and belief [...] Fraser Smith, ND."
Note: so, we get lectured on science while the truly science-ejected is mentioned. The cognitive dissonance is amazing.
002. lets go to the source for the Full Monty, Oregon:
002.a. NCNM states in "Principles of Healing":
"National College of Natural Medicine, the oldest accredited naturopathic medical school in North America, celebrated its 50-year anniversary in 2006 [...] 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 [...]";
a 'survives scientific scrutiny' claim.
"these principles stand as the distinguishing marks of the profession: [#1] the healing power of nature -- vis medicatrix natura [...] nature heals through the response of the life force [...] the process of healing includes the generation of symptoms, which are, in fact, expressions of the life force attempting to heal itself [...] the physician must also make a commitment to her/his personal and spiritual development [...] homeopathic medicine is based on the principle of 'like cures like.' Clinical observation indicates that it works on a subtle, yet powerful, energetic level, gently acting to promote healing on the physical, mental, and spiritual levels";
what science has dispatched is claimed to be within science. And the supernatural is claimed to be within the scientific.
002.b. Oregon.gov's Board of Naturopathic Medicine states in "Naturopathy":
the same nonsense. Specifically regarding homeopathy, we're told by the State of Oregon:
"homeopathic medicine: this powerful system of medicine is more than 200 years old. Homeopathic medicines act to strengthen the body’s innate healing response [coded vitalism]."
003. what they have done:
is legislate FRAUD, in a pseudomedical, pseudoprofessional, pseudoscientific manner at an institutional level and particularly political level. This is truly a total reversal of all values and virtues. Once that happens, HOW exactly do you hold hucksters accountable for ACTS of nonsense when the law they're governed under is NONSENSE INCARNATE?
anyone harmed by naturopathy -- and I include, as in my case, anyone miseducated [mindfucked, truly] and therein abused and derailed from other NOT FRAUDULENT educational DOCTORAL options that have integrity -- can count these contributors as responsible:
the ND / NMD practitioner, their alma mater, their AANP state org., the State they're practicing in, the federal educational apparatus, regional accreditors, the national and international naturopathy apparatus.