here, I cite from the web pages of Griffin Hospital [see 001., below]; then, from scientific criticism of what Griffin has falsely termed 'scientific' [see 002., below]:
001. Griffin Hospital’s Integrative Medical Center states:
001.a. in "Frequently Asked Questions" [vsc 2011-07-07]:
"naturopathic medicine [...] treats with safe and effective natural therapeutics [...including] homeopathy [...NDs have studied] the basic medical sciences."
Note: science has thoroughly refuted homeopathy, strangely enough. It is not only not effective, it is not considered worthwhile to investigate due to what already has been done and its absurdity / lack of plausibility. I think the claim here is science subset naturopathic medicine subset homeopathy. Such is false, but it gets better below.
001.b. in "Patient Evaluations" [vsc 2011-07-07]:
"a scientific paper describing our model of care is available here [...] treatment approaches available at the IMC include [...] naturopathic medicine [NM...] therapeutic touch [and] homeopathy."
Note: wow, there's some seriously mislabeled WOO. I think the claim here is scientific subset 'what we do'. I'll get down to brass tacks in the next subsection regarding the NM.
001.c. in "The Integrative Medicine Center Team" [saved 2011-07-07]:
"Lisa Rosenberger, ND, MS, LAc -- staff naturopathic physician and licensed acupuncturist [...] a graduate of the National College of Natural Medicine in Portland, Oregon [...] her areas of specialty are drainage therapies [and] homeopathy."
Note: now, I LOVE NCNM NDs!!! You get an idea of the sectarian conflation of knowledge types at NCNM, wherein science is claimed to contain what science has hugely ejected for several decades. Conflation and integration lead to NONSENSE and IRRATIONALITY, by modern medical standards. Drainage therapy is a form of homeopathy - UNDA.
001.d. in "Connecticut’s Integrative Medicine Center Offers a New Conventional Medicine Model: An Interview With David L. Katz, MD, MPH, FACPM, FACP, and Ather Ali, ND, MPH" (from Integrative Medicine: A Clinician’s Journal, vol. 7, no. 1, Feb/Mar 2008):
"we offer [...] alternative therapies such as general naturopathic care [...] homeopathy [...] therapeutic touch [...] our current resident has strong interests in classical homeopathy [...they treat by means of] herb, drug, nutritional supplement, homeopathic remedy, or a combination [...] we gave him a homeopathic remedy [...] the graduates of our resident program [...] are practitioners trained in naturopathic medicine [...and] understand science [...] I was interested in developing a model that was in equal parts responsive to the needs of patients and responsible about the use of scientific evidence [...] scientific evidence is important [...] we need more science. We need more evidence."
Note: ah, the STRIDENT call for science and claim of is quite IRONIC. When someone has an ND like from say NCNM where science and nonscience are equated, hmmmmm. I don't think science is therein understood. Abused, yes. Understood, no.
002. science says that these therapies and worldviews are bunk:
"mainstream science has rejected vitalism since at least the 1930s, for a plethora of good reasons that have only become stronger with time."