Wednesday, April 6, 2011

Iowa's Pro-Homeopathy Pro-Naturopathy Jack Hatch Who Needs to Educate Himself Before He Educates Others

here, I cite from a proponent's account of an Iowa pro-alt. med. legislator [see 001., below]; then I quote from the web page of an Iowa ND who doesn't transparently state the essentially naturopathic and labels homeopathy and craniosacral therapy "scientific" [see 002., below]; then I cite from the Iowa Naturopathic Physicians Association that labels naturopathy and homeopathy "science" [see 003., below]:

001. Rekha Basu -- who is very sympathetic to alt.med., obviously -- 'reports' in "Basu: Stay Open to the Idea That There are Many Ways to Heal" (2011-04-05):

"developed in 18th Century Germany [as in archaic], homeopathy is based on the principle that a disease can be cured by taking a substance that produces similar symptoms as the disease in healthy people ['like cures like', which is highly debunked]. The object is to stimulate the body's ability to heal itself through very small doses of highly diluted substances [has never scientifically been shown to happen, and at those dilutions such is implausible [...] Alan Koslow [I believe], a vascular surgeon in Des Moines, plans to die by homeopathic medicine this Sunday [...] he's staging an event called 'Mass Homeopathic Suicide' intended to prove homeopathy is a hoax [the hoax that it is, that is...he] says there's risk in putting faith in unproven medicines [actually, homeopathy is past 'unproven', it is DISCREDITED SCIENTIFICALLY...and he's] alarmed by some homeopathic groups' recent claims to having created vaccines and protections against radioactivity [yes Dana Ullman at Huffpo...yet Hatch] likes vitamins supplements and sends patients for hypnosis and acupuncture [ah, a shruggie in other areas, or perhaps even a proponent of certain pet nonsense, I'm not sure...] naturopathy includes homeopathy [requires homeopathy, actually, on board exams where it mislabels it science...and] Jack Hatch [...sponsor of an ND licensure bill says the] the state medical society and hospital association stood in the way [as they should oppose nonsense and licensed falsehood...] 'they're against anything and everything that looks like an invasion of their practice' [bullshit, this is more than just an economic contest / turf war...] Hatch agrees homeopathic vaccines have been discredited. But that's no reason to sink the field in general [ah, cherry picking the argument against homeopathy, which has truly been sunk to the bottom of the Marianas Trench!]. 'I don't look at naturopathic medicine as an alternative, just another choice' [actually, you should look at naturopathy and see that even in the realm of commerce / choice, it is quite false in how it operates (see 002., below)...] Hatch says it will take education [but he doesn't appear to know all that much about what he's an accomplice to...and regarding homeopathy particularly says] two hundred years is a long time for something to endure [homeopathy hasn't endured scientific scrutiny GALORE, but obviously Hatch is ignorant of that reality, and the reality that 'the test of time' is a logical fallacy...] we should want to explore alternative approaches, by setting standards to judge them by [yeah, it's called science and it has already made its pronouncements regarding the bunk he is promoting, licensing bunk will actually make standards that are nonsensical...homeopath] Su Sandon has been practicing in Minnesota for six years and says she's seen significant improvements in patients with bladder infections, arthritis, hypertension, allergies, auto-immune disorders and more [quite an efficacy claim for empty remedies...] she says it's much safer than conventional medicine and a fraction of the cost [how can that be, it's inert!]."

Note: hmmmm.  Why, again oh dear author, should we stay upen to homeopathic and naturopathic nonsense?  A way to "heal"?  'Cost effective'? No: a way to harm people, by taking their money under false labels.

002. an AANP Iowa ND and the typical naturopathic MO:

Note: I did a quick Google.com web search "iowa naturopathic" without the quotes and this practice was the result.

Seeman, S. (ND Bastyr 2005) states in "About Naturopathic Care" [vsc 2011-04-06; my comments are in bold]:

"naturopathic philosophy blends [I'll say] traditional therapies tested over the standard of time with scientific therapies [homeopathy is listed, as well as craniosacral therapy] tested with modern medicine [...]";

so, the claim is that the therapies are scientific, even if the language in that sentence is rather grammatically nonsensical -- for instance, scientific therapies are not tested with modern medicine, therapies are tested with scientific methodology; also, naturopathy claims to blend using though what's scientific, which is not a blended but instead a distinct kind of knowledge.

"naturopathic consultants can treat a wide range of health concerns in all ages of people [...] health benefits of naturopathic care may include increased  energy, weight loss, improved digestion, blood sugar control, improved concentration, reduced blood pressure, decreased cholesterol, stronger immune system, better sleep, asthma and allergy reduction, pain refief, stable moods";

ah, the primary care practitioner claim.

"naturopathic consultants are the highest trained specialists in the field of natural medicine [FNM...]";

this FNM is quite an odd place.  We were just told naturopaths blend, but specialize, yet their patients are anyone and the areas they can supposedly help are all over the place.  Take this ND's alma mater, for instance, Bastyr.  It is quite true that Bastyr, in their description, labels the supernatural and science-ejected "science".  So, to be highly trained in that context is like being a clown [NDs] who can state that he/she -- as opposed to other clowns [NDs] who didn't -- went to clown college [ND school].

"naturopaths are trained in the same basic sciences and have additional training in the naturopathic philosophy [a philosophy that inherent blends science and nonscience and falsely labels it all science] and treatment methods such as herbal therapy, vitamin and mineral supplements, nutritional and lifestyle counseling, and homeopathy [...]";

ah, so here we have it.  It's is usually stated as "the same basic sciences and medical doctors".  So, the claim is that their basis of knowledge is science.  So, why is homeopathy then able to survive in the naturopathic "science based" context?  As I've pointed out, because such places as Bastyr degrade scientific integrity and falsely apply the term to what isn't science-based and, like homeopathy, is in fact science-ejected.

"the naturopathic philosophies include treating the whole person, addressing the underlying cause of illness, individualized therapies that heal the body, mind and spirit [supernaturalism], and supporting the body's ability to heal itself [BAHI aka coded vitalism...]";

and here is that naturopathic MO, coded vitalism and supernaturalism.  Why aren't you being informed on this page that BAHI is their vitalistic science-ejected context?

"naturopathic consultants take the time to get to know you as a person and act as a partner with you in your health care while helping you make decisions about treatment [...]";

but are they INFORMED decisions?  Hell, if homeopathy is a treatment used and the patient hasn't been told how hugely discredited that whole archaicism is, wow!  So much for informed consent.


003.a. in "INPA Annual Membership Application" [vsc 2011-04-06]:

"as per the INPA By-laws, Article III; The Mission of the Iowa Naturopathic Physicians Association, Inc., shall be: (a) to advance, promote and protect the science of naturopathic medicine and the naturopathic medical profession, and to evaluate the standards of naturopathic medical knowledge and practice in the state of Iowa. (b) Educate the public as to the merits of naturopathic medicine."

Note: wow.  So a science claim, a claim to educate.  Nonsensically labeling homeopathy and craniosacral therapy scientific are two of their outreach programs. Hmmm, a professional claim.  I'd argue that knowledge standards in naturopathy don't exist, as naturopathy is thoroughly epistemically conflated.

003.b. in "Naturopathic Medicine" [vsc 201104-06]:

"naturopathic physicians attend four-year, graduate level programs at institutions recognized by the US Department of Education [ah, the enablers].  There are currently six such schools in the United States. Naturopathic medical schools provide the same basic and clinical sciences coursework as conventional medical schools [...] member schools [...include] National University of Health Sciences [...] University of Bridgeport - College of Naturopathic Medicine Health Science Center."

Note: science, science, science.  Homeopathy is on that page!  They label it "effective."  I'm thinking that if science has been unbound to also include the nonscientific, naturopathy's science is not the same as what they say it is the same as.  As you can see, other schools besides Bastyr falsely label naturopathy "science".  So, the nonsense and absurdity continues.
Post a Comment