UM's Salzberg at Forbes on UMM Center Integrative Medicine / Pseudoscience / Magical Thinking

here, I cite from a recent article by Steven Salzberg at his Forbes blog regarding CAM/AM/IM at the University of Maryland [see 001., below]:

001. Steven Salzberg writes at Forbes in "Why Medical Schools Should Not Teach Integrative Medicine (2011-04-21)[my comments are in bold]:

"pseudoscience is insinuating itself into our medical schools across the nation, going by the name 'integrative medicine'. Integrative medicine is just the latest buzzword for a collection of superstitions, myths, and pseudoscience that has gone by various names over the years [...aka] holistic medicine [...] alternative medicine [...] complementary and alternative medicine [...] and lately integrative medicine [...]";

naturopathy has paralleled this lineage.  A Google.com web search of: "naturopathic alternative" brings me to this CT ND's site, and "naturopathic complementary" brings me to this Ontario ND's site, and "naturopathic integrative" gets me to this Arizona ND's site.

"CAM is moving into the medical curriculum at respectable medical schools, including the University of Maryland [..] I’m a professor at U. Maryland College Park, part of the same system as U. Maryland Medicine [...] how unfortunate that this pseudoscience has infiltrated its way into the medical curriculum, and that the UMM Center is, in essence, mis-training medical students [...] UM Medicine is undermining its own scientific and educational mission [...] someone ought to tell him that integrative medicine has no place in a 21st century medical curriculum [...]";

as someone who went through a similar mis-training, I concur.

"perhaps the best way to reverse this trend is to call attention to it [...] what’s going on at Maryland’s medical school? [...] its clinical services include acupuncture, homeopathy, reflexology, reiki, qi gong [...] the practices lumped together are bad medicine [...] all of them are, well, nonsense [...] pseudoscientific practices";

hear, hear.

"homeopathic treatments are just water [...] the other treatments offered by the UMM Center are no better. Their qi gong brochure explains that 'sickness, pain or physical disorders are the result of qi blockage, or unbalanced qi in the body. Qi gong practice helps to balance the qi system in the body and break the qi blockage(s) to recover health.'  There’s no scientific basis for qi – it is simply magical thinking. The brochure, though, claims that qigong will give you 'an increased resistance to illness through a stronger immune system.' None of these claims have any good science to back them up."

hear, hear.

New Zealand Herald on Homeopathy: A Quackery Not Evidence- or Science-Based

here, I cite from an editorial in the New Zealand Herald regarding homeopathy [see 001., below]:

001. we're told in "Editorial: Doctors Should Shun Quackery" (2011-04-24):

"in the latest issue of the New Zealand Medical Journal [...] five researchers, from New Zealand and the UK, called on doctors to stop prescribing homeopathic remedies or referring their patients to homeopathic practitioners, on the grounds that such behavior is 'not consistent with the ethical or regulatory requirements of practicing medicine' [...] the lead letter-writer, Tauranga-based medical researcher Professor Shaun Holt [...] reckons homeopathy is the 'nuttiest' of therapies in the CAM canon [...] he wants New Zealand doctors to stop using homeopathy or even referring patients to homeopaths because, he says, referral 'confers a credibility on homeopathy that it does not deserve' [...] doctors work within an evidence-based framework and patients expect their pronouncements and prescriptions to be based in science. There is not a single scientifically conducted trial that shows homeopathy to be effective and it should not be given the blessing - implicit or explicit - of medical practitioners."

Note: hear, hear.

An Australian "Live Blood Screening Test" via ND Reed, and What Quackwatch and Wikipedia Reveal

here, I cite from a recent article about an Australian naturopath who uses dark field microscopy [see 001., below]; then from scientific criticism of the practice [see 002., below]; and finally from the ND's practice pages [see 003., below]: 

001. the Northern Star in Australia's New South Wales reports in "Blood Put Under Microscope at Expo" (2011-04-25)[saved 2011-04-24; my comments are in bold]:

"[caption] Byron Bay naturopath Rachael Reed performs a live blood screening test [LBST] at the Starlight Wellbeing Expo at the Bangalow A & I Hall [...main text] standing out from the many rainbow-colored stallholders at the Starlight Wellbeing Expo at Bangalow over the weekend, naturopath Rachael Reed’s tools of trade are a microscope and laptop computer [...she] pricked my finger, squeezed a tiny drop of blood on to a slide and as she peered through the microscope [...she said she] would 'read' me at a cellular level [...] an image of my blood cells appeared [...on her] laptop screen [...]";

sounds TECHNICAL, MEDICAL, DIAGNOSTIC.

"after studying naturopathy at Southern Cross University [SCU] and working at allergy clinics in Perth and Brisbane, Ms Reed returned to Byron Bay where she now offers live blood screening which visually shows what state of health a patient is in, complemented by naturopathic advice [...]";

SCU places naturopathy within a department of "Health and Human Sciences".  An 'of interest' SCIENCE claim upon the 'naturopathic context'.

"from the image on the screen, this reporter’s white blood cells are 'viable' and A-okay. There isn’t any sign of illness or infection, but my red blood cells are looking a tad small and 'fragile', which could indicate an iron deficiency and would explain the fatigue I’ve experienced recently [...]";

sounds like a specific diagnosis.

"'it can be hugely motivating for people to see exactly what their health issues are, right there on the screen,' Ms Reed said. 'It can help pinpoint issues at a cellular level.'"

sounds like this one drop of blood is being used as if it can provide specific physiological / pathological insight.

002. scientific criticism:

002.a. Quackwatch schwacks LBST, stating:

"dark-field microscopy is a valid scientific tool in which special lighting is used to examine specimens of cells and tissues. The objects being viewed stand out against a dark background—the opposite of what occurs during regular microscopy. This allows the observer to see things that might not be visible with standard lighting. Connecting a television monitor to a microscope for diagnostic purposes is also a legitimate practice. However, live cell analysis is not. Most of its users are chiropractors, naturopaths, or bogus 'nutrition consultants.'"

002.b. Wikipedia states:

"live blood analysis (LBA), live cell analysis, or nutritional blood analysis is the use of high-resolution dark field microscopy to observe live blood cells in vitro. It is promoted by some alternative medicine practitioners, who assert that it can diagnose a range of diseases. Live blood analysis is an 'unestablished diagnostic test': its methods are not generally accepted in laboratory practice [...] there is no scientific evidence for the validity of live blood analysis, and it has been described as a pseudoscientific, bogus and fraudulent medical test. Live blood testing has also been described as a fraudulent means of convincing a patient that they are ill and require treatment with dietary supplements."

Note: oh snap!

003. ND Reed states [also here]:

003.a. along with other practitioners in "Services" [vsc 2011-04-25]:

"live blood analysis: you may have had blood test before but nothing compares to seeing your own blood live on a screen in front of you. Only 1 or 2 drops of blood are needed to to see the size, shape and ratios of the red blood cells, white cells and platelets in the blood.  These can then be explained to you by your experienced practitioner, in terms of how they relate to your health."

003.b. in "Live Blood Screening" [vsc 2011-04-24]:

"fast, effective, accurate and reliable. Improve your clinical results with hemaview [...] a scientific screening tool that allows your practitioner to assess your health at a cellular level [...]";

that's quite a promise!

"with just one drop of your blood your practitioner will use Hemaview to investigate your health. Your blood is examined under a microscope before you. You view your blood on a live monitor while your practitioner describes your findings. Your practitioner will use your blood screen to asses your health and design a comprehensive treatment plan [...]';

here are her fees.  Sounds like treatment based on a test whose reliability and what-not are inaccurately portrayed.

"you will also receive a computer generated report of your findings including detailed interpretations for your records. Hemaview increases the success in treatment outcomes as it allows your practitioner to correct your health at a cellular level [...providing] pictures and interpretations; treatment recommendations; compare your reports before and after treatment; assess key health markers such as inflammation, liver stress, oxidative damage, leaky gut syndrome, immune deficiencies, nutritional deficiencies, bacterial infection, viral infection, parasite infection."

Note: sounds AMAZING!

004. just another example of naturopathic nonsense.

British Columbia's ND Jheeta, Medicine Without Pathology, and Homeopathy Claimed as "Scientific Method"!

here, I cite from an article featuring ND Jheeta [see 001., below]; then from that ND's web pages [see 002., below]:

001. in "Naturopathy Enters the Mainstream" [vsc 2011-4-23; my comments are in bold]:

"Richmond naturopath Dr. Raj Jheeta [ND NCNM] credits the internet with the improved perception his profession has earned since he first opened an office in Richmond two decades ago [...]";

ah, that naturopathy professional claim.

"'people are clued into what complementary medicine is all about,' Jheeta said from his office on Ackroyd Road [...]";

hmmm, do they know about its problems with knowledge demarcation?

"Jheeta said while traditional medicine looks for what’s wrong with you, the naturopathic approach is the opposite [...]";

some serious word bending here, medicine without pathology.  It would be like going to a mechanic with a flat tire and the mechanic only looks at the the three other good tires.  Seems absurd.  I definitely would say there are many things "opposite" about naturopathy, particularly it's label of what is "science".

Note: I love the picture, the ND in his dispensory, which is a huge revenue generator though not pharmacological yet medicinal!  He's got the Littman stethoscope, white coat...

002. ND Jheeta states:

002.a. in "Welcome to Richmond Naturopathic" [vsc 2011-4-23]:

"treatments are science and evidence based naturopathic protocols!"

Note: ye great naturopathic science claim, which includes what science doesn't support and what science has rejected [see the archived NCNM link below].

002.b. in "Curriculum Vitae" [vsc 2011-4-23]:

"Dr Jheeta is a doctor of naturopathic medicine [...] he holds a degree in naturopathic medicine from the National College of Naturopathic Medicine in Portland, Oregon."

Note: archived forever.

002.c. in "Frequently Asked Questions"  [vsc 2011-4-23]:

"[q:] can you describe what homeopathy is in more detail? A: Yes. Homeopathy is a highly systematic, scientific method of therapy that respects the wisdom of the body."

Note: nonsense.

ND Troy and Kalispell Regional Medical Center's Label of "Scientific" Upon Naturopathy-Homeopathy Nonsense

here, I cite from an article about a Montana naturopathic-oncologist which labels naturopathy a "scientific approach" [see 001., below]; except what's within that area includes what's scientifically rejected, such as homeopathy [see 002., below]; then, I cite from the ND reported upon, who claims her ND curriculum was comprised of rigorous science coursework [see 003., below]; and finally, from her state association [see 004., below]:

001. Molly Priddy reports in "KRMC Adds Naturopathic Treatments to Cancer Care" (see )(2011-04-21):

"Lynn Troy [ND Bastyr 2004], a naturopathic doctor, works one day a week treating cancer patients at Kalispell Regional Medical Center’s Northwest Oncology and Hematology office [...] Montana Association of Naturopathic Physicians [MANP] President Sarah Lane said Troy’s addition to the KRMC cancer treatment plans is an unusual one in the Big Sky state, but she hopes the trend grows [...] Northwest Oncology and Hematology manager Lynn Andenoro said most cancer treatments are passive. Learning how they can change their lifestyle to improve their health gives patients a sense of empowerment she said [...] Troy’s methods are based in scientific research, Andenoro noted, which helps patients and colleagues understand the naturopathic perspective. 'She takes a very scientific approach; I think that’s why she works so well with the physicians at KRMC,' Andenoro said."

Note: science, science, science.  I wonder what is included in ND Troy's scientific approach [see 002., below]?

MANP President ND Lane [ND Bastyr 1998] uses Vega testing, stating such is:

 "a biofeedback machine used for analysis of allergies, organ imbalance and therapy efficacy." 

I guess this is "scientific" too.  ND Lane also uses something called "Mayan abdomenal massage" which is treatment by:

"massage of the lower and upper abdomen, back and sacrum [...it's] oriented around positioning the uterus into its natural healthy place in the center of the pelvis [...because a mislocated uterus can cause] painful menses, decreased circulation to the uterus, ovaries, legs, feet; fibroids, infertility, back pain [...] varicose veins and hemerrhoids [sp., hemorrhoids...] digestive system problems [...] chronic muscle/ligament troubles of the low back and hips [...MAM] promote[s] circulation of blood, lymph, and qi (energy) [ah, vitalism -- how did qi get to the New World?] and the body can maintain homeostasis [...] also for men [not sure where the uterus comes into play here], this treatment will increase blood and lymph flow to and around the prostate, improving the prostate health, sexual function, and sperm health [...] digestion and back pain [...] fertility issues, painful or irregular periods, prolapse of uterus or bladder, chronic pelvic disorders: vulvodynia, painful intercourse, fibroids, cysts, hemerrhoids [sp., hemorrhoids], heavy periods, light periods, chronic yeast, bladder infections [...] decreased ability for orgasm, low back or sacrum pain, digestive complaints." 

quite a panacea for the crotch! Hugely scientific... 

002. KRMC states in "Naturopathic Services" [vsc 2011-04-21]:

"naturopathic medicine, also called 'naturopathy,' is a distinct, comprehensive system of primary healthcare. It is a practice of diagnosis, treatment and prevention of illness [aka medicine...] a central goal of naturopathic medicine is to use the healing power of the body and nature [coded vitalism] to maintain and restore health [...] the body's ability to heal itself [coded vitalism].  Naturopaths also emphasize prevention of illness through education [they know SO MUCH!] and promotion of healthy lifestyle habits [...] naturopathic methods may help increase your body's natural healing power to fight disease [coded vitalism]. As you undergo traditional cancer treatment, naturopathic medicine aims to: support normal metabolism, decrease side effects of treatment, boost the body's immune system, provide strategies for long term health maintenance, improve energy, well-being and overall quality of life [quite a promise...] naturopathic medicine incorporates the natural therapies of many different healing traditions [...which] aim to support whole-body wellness, including the immune system, digestion, sleep, energy levels, diet, exercise and spirituality [supernaturalism!...] the following are some therapeutic modalities of naturopathic medicine that you may decide to integrate into your cancer treatment plan [...including] homeopathic medicine [there you go...] Lynn Troy, ND, earned her doctorate in naturopathic medicine from Bastyr University in Seattle, Washington in 2004. She is licensed by the state of Montana and a member of the Montana Association of Naturopathic Physicians [...] naturopathic services are available at Northwest Oncology and Hematology [...] appointments include a detailed interview, dietary analysis, nutrient and supplement review, physical examination, and individualized treatment plan."

Note: hmmm.  We were promised science, but instead we get homeopathy, which is hugely science-rejected.  That is insane.  Additionally, there's the problem of the opaquely-communicated coded-vitalistic essentially naturopathic that's falsely labeled distinct. Does ND Troy and KRMC inform patients that a homeopathic remedy is empty?  That is quite certain, scientifically speaking.  Is naturopathy transparently explained as unable to actually be scientific but instead falsely labels itself scientific?  I doubt it.

003. ND Troy states in "Welcome..." [vsc 2011-04-21]:

"Lynn Troy earned her doctorate in naturopathic medicine from Bastyr University located in Seattle, WA.  Following rigorous coursework in medical sciences [including homeopathy as coursework, clinic requirements, and board exam material these days!], she completed her clinical training at the Bastyr Center for Natural Health. Bastyr is internationally recognized as a leader in naturopathic training and research, and may be considered the most progressive medical school in the nation [...] welcome to the future of medicine [...] naturopathic medicine: the healing power of nature [coded vitalism] is the inherent self-organizing and healing process of living systems which establishes, maintains, and restores health [coded vitalism].  Naturopathic medicine recognizes this healing process to be ordered and intelligent.  It is the naturopathic physician's role to support, facilitate and augment this process [coded vitalism...] for more information on the fundamentals of naturopathy and Dr. Troy's personal philosophy, please contact her at (406) 249-3584 [please do]."

Note: science, science, science.  The future of medicine / what's progressive is labeling nonsense science?  I don't think so.  Is opacity ethical?  I don't think so.

004. the MANP states:

004.a. explicitly naturopathy's vitalism in "MANP Meeting Information" [vsc 2011-04-22]:

"Vis Medicatix Naturae: Respecting our Naturopathic Core in the Face of Contemporary Health Issues such as Environmental Toxicity and Resistant Infections [...]";

it's "medicatrix".  This is their core.

"this will be a discussion of the attendees facilitated by Michael Bergkamp, ND, regarding the importance of vital force and nature cure in the context of environmental toxicity issues and modern medicine".

so, there you go, vitalism at the core of naturopathy.  Also, their toxin phobia. 

004.b. in "Bylaws: Montana Association of Naturopathic Physicians" [vsc 2011-04-22]:

"naturopathic medicine is a distinct method of primary health care - an art, science, philosophy and practice of diagnosis, treatment and prevention of illness.  Naturopathic physicians seek to restore and maintain optimum health in their patients by emphasizing nature's inherent self-healing process, the vis medicatrix naturae [more coded vitalism]."

Note: so, even at the state org. level, you won't see them transparently communicate what is in their textbooks.  They love the science label though.  Somehow, all this muddle / opacity is "distinct".  I maintain that the state org. is setting an example: ND rules require manipulative opacity and false labeling.

005. so isn't this all very interesting:

if you do the math, naturopathy claims that that which is hugely science-ejected is within science -- and they mandate the behavior.  Easy to show, insane to maintain.

Homeopathy Taking a Big Hit in New Zealand! Meanwhile, North American Naturopathy-Homeopathy Witchcraft...

here, I cite from a synopsis of a letter in the New Zealand Medical Journal regarding homeopathy [see 001., below]; and then muse [see 002., below]:

001. Professor Shaun Holt writes in "Un-Doctored: Call For Doctors Not to Practice Homeopathy or Refer" [2011-04-18]:

"in a letter published in the current New Zealand Medical Journal [...] medical researcher Professor Shaun Holt [...] and other senior researchers [in full: Shaun Holt, Andrew Gilbey, David Colquhoun, Michael Baum, Edzard Ernst] from New Zealand and UK state that 'practicing homeopathy or endorsing it by referring patients is not consistent with the ethical or regulatory requirements of practicing medicine' [...] the letter was triggered by the recently released Medical Council of New Zealand Statement on Complementary and Alternative Medicine, which informs doctors of the standards of practice that are expected of them. It says that doctors must inform patients on the nature of alternative treatments they offer, the extent to which they are consistent with conventional theories of medicine, whether they have the support of the majority of doctors, and their likely effectiveness according to peer-reviewed medical publications, notwithstanding individual beliefs [...] 'there is no grey area with respect to homeopathy, a practice which involves diluting substances to such a degree that not a single molecule remains [...] homeopathy is completely inconsistent with our understanding of medicine. The British Medical Association has described it as witchcraft, yet a surprising number of doctors will tell their patients to see a homeopath' [...] said Professor Holt."

Note: hear, hear.  I don't have access to that Journal, and the original is password protected.

002. meanwhile, naturopathy-homeopathy in North America:

absurdly promotes homeopathy "witchcraft" as "clinical science" and has further supposedly gained another licensed state, North Dakota.

therein: licensed falsehood and truly a reversal of all values.

ND Hangee-Bauer's Pediatric Homeopathy Parental Advising Versus Australian Scientific Skepticism!

here, I cite from a recently posted American Health Journal video clip on AANP naturopathy by CBS affiliate winknews.com that promotes adult and particularly pediatric homeopathy nonsense [see 001., below]; then, a video about homeopathy from Australia [see 002., below]:

001. in "Naturopathic Family Medicine - Air Date 4/17/11" [vsc 2011-04-18; my comments are in bold]:

"[description] Dr. Carl Hangee-Bauer [ND Bastyr 1984] advises that naturopathic doctors give patients tools for improving their overall health and prevent disease [...] these doctors spend more time educating patients about their health and how to prevent their diseases or overcome diseases without a doctor in the room [...]";

ND H-B is the 2010-2011 AANP President, according to his own bio. So, we're told about "tools" and "educating", in the context of medicine [diagnosis, treatment] in the video's description.  On his bio. page, ND H-B informs us: "in my practice I adhere to these principles [...#6] to trust in the healing power of nature [HPN...#3] teach people ways to improve and maintain good health [...he uses] the principles and tools of natural medicine [...he's] a founder of the California Naturopathic Doctors Association [he has the second CA ND license that was granted], I have played an active role in successfully gaining licensure for NDs in California [...] I believe that naturopathic medicine is common-sense medicine."  So, on his own web page he barely mentions naturopathy's principle of HPN, and it is not explained.  And, of course, you hear this "teach" / educating ethos again.  All, of course, "common sense".  Even the President of the AANP does not transparently communicate the science-ejected vitalistic premise that is HPN! 

"[ND H-B]  naturopathic doctors are [...] a general practice field.  We're trained to help people learn about their health, improve their health, prevent disease and treat any disease that they may have [...] we spend a great deal more time with our patients helping educate them and helping them recognize how they can improve their health without a doctor in the room [...] it's about helping give them tools so you can get them started in a direction and let them follow through in ways that they can improve their health on a daily basis [...]";

so, there's the claim of NDs practicing general medicine, and mention of teaching / educating, and providing tools.  Regarding how much time is spent with patients: no amount of EXTRA time is useful if what is being taught is nonsense.  But have no worry, we're been told my ND H-B that naturopathy is common-sense medicine.

[00.01.05 ND H-B's patient Gabrielle Chernis] the great thing about starting to get care from a naturopathic doctor is that it has allowed me to educate myself. And as a mother [...] when your child becomes ill [pediatrics folks!...] it's pretty critical that we have some really good strategies right at hand [...] taking care of my own health has really empowered me to have a variety of things that I can do when my daughter gets a fever.  What should I do?  What kind of food should I give her?  What's the homeopathic remedy?  My daughter coughs at twelve midnight, I know what to do.  I hadn't really heard about homeopathy until I saw Dr. Hangee-Bauer [...]"; 

obviously, homeopathy is considered useful for treating ill children by this patient who was 'educated / empowered' by ND H-B.  Homeopathy is claim to be a 'really good strategy'.  Regarding what homeopathic remedy to take: sorry lady, it doesn't matter, they're just water and not even the homeopath can discriminate between the remedies if you unlabel them.  In this instance, naturopathic care is the doorway to homeopathic pediatric therapeutic nonsense. 

"now I have a book that's kind of just a handbook for moms ['Homeopathic Medicine for Children and Infants' is shown], that if a child gets a cough or a runny nose or a pinched finger, I have a hand book and a little homeopathic first aid kit in my house that I would use.  And without having been educated about this through my own care I don't know if I would be as effective caring for my children [...]";

it's rather all very cruel sounding, actually: her ND used homeopathy on her after he miseducated her about it, and now the children have to suffer it too.

"[ND H-B] it's a fundamental tenet of naturopathic medicine is to teach [...] we want people to be active participants in their health.  And to do that they need to be pointed in the right direction.  They need to know what kind of insights will help them improve their health, help them manage a chronic condition [...] it's about helping them navigate [...]";

again, it's all rather cruel sounding.  I'm all for patient's improving their lifestyle and such, but how is homeopathic nonsense helping someone?  I'd argue that having been miseducated in ND school [after all, ND H-B's alma mater does teach that within science is nonscience] it now happens clinically.  Homeopathy "the right direction", for ANY KIND OF DISEASE: no.   Have you been helped when you have been mind-fucked?  I don't think so.

Note: so THIS is family medicine!  Homeopathy / empty remedies for sick children!  This is a trimmed down version of the American Health Journal series that AANP naturopathy has up on its Youtube channel.  That source clip labels naturopathy "the art and science of natural medicine [...and calls it] a natural, vital part of the health care system [...and it does feature Murray and Pizzorno's 3rd edition] 'A Textbook on Natural Medicine.'"  The winknews.com section I've transcribed above begins 00.02.08 and ends 00.06.45.

002. and now for some scientific clarity regarding homeopathy, by way of mainly the Australian Skeptics.  Today Tonight reports in "Homeopathy is NOT Medicine" [vsc 2011-04-18]:

"[host] homeopathy generates billions of dollars in global sales [...these] so-called natural medicines [...are] used for all kinds of aliments in both adults and children.  But what's really in them? And do they actually work?  Or are they nothing more than expensive placebos? [...Richard Saunders] 'no herbs, no ingredients, it's more like witchcraft than science [...] there are laws in this country about the false labeling of medicines and homeopathy, which claims to be medicine, should be subject to those same laws' [...Simon Singh] after 200 years, and after 200 clinical trials, there is still no good evidence at all for any condition that homeopathy works [...the section reporter labels homeopathy an] absurdity [I LIKE that language!...] 'you're getting a dose of nothing'."

Note: even Phil Plait at Discover's Bad Astronomy has gotten in on it!  At TAM, a couple of years ago, I had the pleasure of meeting Richard Saunders as he showed off his Pigasus origami creation.  These Australian connections bring back a lot of great memories I have of studying Australian film and literature at CUNY-Lehman with Gary Schwartz.  There is, by the way, quite a lot to blog about in Australia regarding naturopathy.  It is labeled "science" in its degrees, and goes even further into nonsense in some diagnostics and therapeutics [e.g., iridology, EAV and biomesotherapy] than North American naturopathy.

well, ND H-B promised "common-sense" by way of naturopathy.  Yet to meet it.

Craniosacral Therapy, Homeopathy and a Claim of "Enormous" Naturopathic Efficacy: ND Marinaro

here, I cite from the descriptions of two supposed therapeutic methods used by Massachusetts ND Marinaro, craniosacral therapy and homeopathy [see 001., below]; then, I quote from her web page that claims that naturopathy is hugely effective for some very serious pathologies [see 002., below]:

001. Marinaro, C.A. (ND Bastyr 2009) states:

001.a.  in "Craniosacral Therapy" [saved 2011-04-17]:

"craniosacral therapy: this gentle form of bodywork focuses on the nervous system and the fluid that surrounds the brain and spinal cord, known as cerebrospinal fluid.  This fluid, much like blood, circulates through the body and distributes nutrients and oxygen to the cells of the nervous system.  Also like the circulation of blood, the cerebrospinal fluid can become stagnant, resulting in migraine and tension headaches, brain fog, fatigue, body aches, mood swings and other mood disorders. Craniosacral therapy helps to restore the circulation of the cerebrospinal fluid and the well-being of the nervous system."

Note: these claims lack scientific support or even plausibility.  The therapist holds the patient's head on their hands.  That's it.  How does this change CSF circulation?  How is such measured before and after?  An elaborate parlor trick / placebo therapy...

001.b. in "Homeopathy" [saved 2011-04-17]:

"Dr. Corrie has studied constitutional homeopathy extensively [...] the selection of a remedy intended to correct imbalance in the patient’s constitution, including physical, mental and emotional levels of health [...] and often uses it to resolve issues on the mental and emotional planes that prevent the physical body from healing. Homeopathy is a very gentle form of medicine that generally has no side effects but can promote profound healing.  Its gentle nature and delivery in sugar pills make it ideal for use in pediatric patients.  Children also tend to respond more quickly and efficiently to homeopathy as their immune systems are stronger than those of adult [...] homeopathy is one of oldest forms of medicine and was the cornerstone of the practice of medical doctors prior to the invention of pharmaceutical medicines [...they] are diluted quantities of plant, mineral or animal substances delivered in sugar pills.  These remedies can be given for acute complaints such as rashes, food poisoning, muscle sprains, cough and numerous other every-day ailments."

Note: except there's nothing active in the pills, and science has discarded this archaicism.

002. ND Marinaro states in "What Kinds of Conditions can Benefit from Naturopathic Medicine?" [saved 2011-04-17]:

"because naturopathic medicine treats the individual person and not their disease, there is always something to be done for any and all patients. Some specific conditions with which Dr. Corrie has experience and which are known to benefit enormously from naturopathic therapeutics are listed below [...]

fatigue, back pain, headaches/migraines, recurrent infections, allergies, asthma, obesity, flu/colds, depression, anxiety [...] infertility, post-menopausal symptoms, uterine fibroids, ovarian cysts, urinary incontinence, recurrent yeast infections, recurrent urinary tract Infections, human papilloma virus/abnormal pap smear, polycystic ovarian syndrome, pre-menstrual syndrome, painful/heavy menstruation, endometriosis, acne and other skin conditions, decreased libido, irregular menstruation, thyroid disorders, osteoporosis/osteopenia [...] coronary artery disease/atherosclerosis, high blood pressure, diabetes/pre-diabetes, high cholesterol/high triglycerides, metabolic syndrome, transient ischemic attacks [...] allergies, asthma, eczema, autism, ADD/ADHD, recurrent ear infections/colds, diarrhea, constipation [...] rheumatoid arthritis, Crohn’s disease, ulcerative colitis, Hashimoto’s thyroiditis, Grave’s hyperthyroidism, multiple sclerosis, myasthenia gravis, Parkinson’s disease [...] muscle pain, osteoarthritis, temporal mandibular joint pain disorder [...] benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH), erctile dysfunction, hernias [...] food allergies, gastroesophageal reflux disorder (GERD), ulcers, hernias, loose stools/constipation, excessive gas, malabsorption, maldigestion."

Note: wow!  I doubt that empty remedies and holding someone's head in your hands can cause patients "enormous benefit".  What's her SECRET?  When will the Nobel committee visit?

Is ND Fan MD Benda the Biggest Pro-Naturopathy Douche, or What?

here, I cite from a recent AANP blog post by MD Benda who hypocritically presses for "transparency" [see 001., below]; then, I remind all why Benda is an accomplice to naturopathic opacity / manipulation [see 002., below]: 

001. at the AANP's blog "Physicians Who Listen", MD Benda states in "Brand New Wine in the Same Old Bottle" [vsc 2011-04-15; my comments are in bold]:

"one of the worst things about aging is that we tend to become intolerant [...]';

oh really.

"one of the best things about aging is that we can get away with it. In fact, curmudgeonly editorializing is one of my favorite current pastimes [...]";

really, you are a seriously TWISTED person!  Ah-ha-ha-ha.

"this blog submission will deal with one of my personal pet peeves: conference brochures [...]";

fascinating.  And here I thought you'd talk about something INTERESTING.

"[regarding] the recently adjourned Integrative Healthcare Symposium in NYC and this past weekend’s iMosaic assembly in Minneapolis [...]";

blah blah blah blah, blah blah blah bhah.

"we are pioneers of cleaner and less toxic therapies, protagonists in the battle to provide truth and clarity to our patients [...]";

I believe the IRONY meter has exploded.  When naturopathy's thought process is 'clean' and 'truthful' and possesses "clarity", well -- good will be bad, the first shall be last and the last shall be first.

"Kenny Loggins and Jim Messina sang a song in the '70s about our flawed American political system entitled 'Same Old Wine in a Brand New Bottle.' What we have here is a kind of backwards take on the same problem. If we are truly offering a new, healthier wine, we really need a more transparent bottle."

when a fan of naturopathy presses for transparency, you grab my attention!  "A more transparent bottle", huh?

002. MD Benda and the JFP naturopathy manifesto FILLED with opacity:

002.a. so, in "Naturopathic Medicine: What Can Patients Expect?" (2005-12), MD Benda and his ND / NMD compatriots wrote, quite cryptically:

"Western medicine rarely takes into consideration the inherent organizing forces underlying known physiologic processes such as metabolism or tissue repair [really!]. Naturopathic medicine calls this primary principle the vis medicatrix naturae, or the healing power of nature."

Note: you can expect to be deceived!  Because, if you read this blog regularly, you should recognize that this is the science-ejected 'essentially naturopathic' premise / context known as vitalism, coded -- because that is their MO.  MD Benda, me thinkst you dost protest too much.

douche: be transparent, and then demand transparency!  Otherwise, you are a hypocrite.

and the saying is 'old wine in new bottle', not 'new wine in an old bottle'.  But, I guess that doesn't matter, if  you support the reversal of all values.

Two Massachusetts SCNM NDs: So THIS is What's Scientific [Decoder Ring Provided by Naturocrit!]

here, I cite from the web pages of two MA NDs who claim naturopathy is science-based [see 001., below]; then, from their alma mater SCNM to decode the science-ejected 'essentially naturopathic' that these NDs don't transparently communicate [see 002., below]:

001. ND:

001.a. Rajcok, P.J. (ND SCNM) states:

001.a1. in "Naturopathic Medicine" [vsc 2011-04-15]:

"naturopathic medicine combines a strong, scientific foundation with time-honored and modern healing systems, to produce a comprehensive and practical approach to primary health care [...] as with conventional medical doctors (MDs), the first two years of naturopathic medical school cover the basic sciences [...] after receiving the doctor of naturopathic medicine (ND) degree, one must pass a national level board exam to become licensed [...] all naturopathic doctors attend a four-year graduate level accredited naturopathic medical school [...] naturopathic medicine draws from a wide variety of  natural therapeutics, which include [...] homeopathy."

Note: there's a "scientific" expertise claim, an 'of a science base' claim, a "practical" claim, a 'board exam rigor' claim, and a "graduate level" claim.  So, now HOMEOPATHY is of a "strong, scientific foundation" and is "practical"!  In fact, that board exam labels homeopathy a clinical science.  Right -- is now wrong.  My overarching distillation of such education: this is fully accredited nonsense, Title IV and commercial thievery.

001.a2. in "Principles of Naturopathy" [vsc 2011-04-15; my comments are in bold]:

"[include: #1] the healing power of nature: nature acts powerfully through healing mechanisms in the body and mind to maintain and restore health. Naturopathic doctors work to restore and support these inherent healing systems [...]";

and that's all you get.  I'll decode this statement in 002., below -- IN THEIR OWN WORDS.  It represent the science-ejected sectarian core that DEFINES naturopathy.

"[#5] doctor as teacher: naturopathic doctors focus on education and encourage self-responsibility for health."

I think to teach you should have knowledge that has ACTUAL integrity. But, of course, if an ND's education was nonsense, then their educating is likely nonsense.

001.b. Riedlinger, J. (ND SCNM) states:

001.b1. in "About Naturopathy" [vsc 2011-04-15]:

"a licensed naturopathic physician (N.D.) attends a 4-yr graduate-level naturopathic medical school and is educated in all of the same basic sciences as an M.D. or D.O. [...] naturopathic medicine [...] is based on the core principles listed below: [#1] the healing power of nature: have trust and faith in the body’s inherent wisdom to heal itself [...#5] treat the whole person: view the body as an integrated whole in all its physical body, mental, and spiritual dimensions [...] a naturopathic physician takes rigorous professional board exams [...] disease prevention and health promotion is the primary goal in every naturopathic medical practice. The naturopath uses safe and effective treatments."

Note: there's the claim that their basis is science that is the science that is what science is as science -- per "same".  We have HPN again, but not transparently communicated. And there's supernaturalism, 'rigorous board examination', a claim of professionalism, a claim of efficacy.

001.b2. in "About Dr. June Riedlinger Shibley" [vsc 2011-04-15]:

"[her] training and credentials [...] doctor of naturopathic medicine: [she] graduated from Southwest College of Naturopathic Medicine (SCNM), Tempe, Arizona, one of the country’s four medical schools specializing in science based natural medicine and research [...] treatments include therapies that have a basis in advanced modern scientific research."

Note: yes, that's an overarching label that the naturopathic is "science based" and "natural".

001.b3. hosts "Why Homeopathy Makes Sense and Works" by Dana Ullman [saved 2011-04-15]:

"[which poses as an intelligible scientific argument employing the root 'scien' 37 times, saying such things as] another source of modern basic science and clinical research on homeopathic medicine is the Samueli Institute."

Note: Ullman has been quite skewered.  Orac has a great post specific to this Ullman piece, published 2009-12-15.

001.b4. in "Services" [vsc 2011-04-15]:

"Dr. Riedlinger provides a service that examines a person's health care needs and provides educational information to help patients regain their health [...] your experience with naturopathic care will be a process of self discovery, lifestyle management, and establishment of a healthy physical, mental, and spiritual body/soul [...]";

yes, you will be educated by this miseducated ND.  What is a "spiritual body/soul" anyway?  Sectarian and supernatural, to say the least.  It's a strange kind of "natural" "science", supernatural and science-exterior.

"therapeutic modalities [...include] homeopathy, reiki [...]";

empty remedies and the laying on of hands, very scientific.  Nonsense treatment labeled science-based: quite professional. 

002. SCNM, the alma mater of these two NDs, states at their homepage in 2003 (which will decode and contextualize that HPN 'thing' they keep talking about):

"first described in western medicine by Hippocrates, the vis medicatrix naturae, is also referred to as chi in Chinese Medicine, prana in Ayurveda, and vital force in homeopathy. When alive, the vis medicatrix naturae enables humans and other living beings to resist entropy and decay, unlike inanimate objects that are subject to these effects. Creating treatment plans that harness the healing power of nature, that incorporate dietary and lifestyle improvements, that employ the least invasive, least harmful and most effective therapies, is the art, the heart and the essence of naturopathic medicine."

Note: so, there you go.  Science-ejected vitalism is the context of naturopathy, and their MO is to falsely label vitalism and kind [supernaturalism; expressed often in naturalistic language] science-based.  What kind of profession is not transparent about what they are all about?  What kind of profession is based on falsehood?

Institutionalized Falsehoods: NUHS's Naturopathy Chair Smith and Oregon.gov Claim Homeopathy is Scientifically Supported

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.

A Big Upcoming Naturocrit Anniversary: 5 Years of TNM Criticism at Amazon.com This 2011-05-20

here, I reiterate my objections to the 'essentially naturopathic' in a partial review at Amazon.com that I did in 2006 as reflected in ND Murray and Pizzorno's "Textbook of Natural Medicine" 3rd edition [see 001., below]; then, I talk about the things I would now change in that review [see 002., below]:

001. I wrote, in "This is scientific medicine?" [vsc 2011-04-11]:

"I recently viewed the new chapter concerning 'naturopathic philosophy' [in the 3rd edition, 2005] within this text at the University of Bridgeport's library, as there's a naturopathic school there that I attended. The chapter discusses the premises of 'the naturopathic.' Do you really want to be treated by a physician who conflates (blends) supernatural, nonscientific, scientifically discarded, idealistic, metaphysical, religious and scientific information -- and presents the whole thing as [supposedly] scientific? [a misrepresentation: Kitzmiller et al. v. Dover Area School District anyone?]. Check out "The Epistemic Conflation of a School of Thought Claiming to be Scientific" and "Why I Dropped Out of Naturopathy School" - online per me, Rob Cullen. [THIS is future healthcare? I disagree, these prophets are truly 'facing backward']. I'm highly ethically disturbed by this text and naturopathy, still. I'll just make one point about this book's contention that complexity, self-regulation, and evolution indicate that life defies the laws of natural science {and is therefore supernatural} -- particularly the second law of thermodynamics, per physics, in terms of life as supposedly being antientropic as indicated by life's evolving complexity [p.081-082] -- therefore justifying, particularly, vitalism and its handmaiden teleology-finalism. [Beliefs essential to 'the naturopathic'; explanations no longer within science at all; rejected-knowledge in terms of the scientific].[Yes, evolution! Even though evolution is actually the culmination of 'methodological naturalism,' which is HOW science approaches phenomena, that is: SCIENCE DOES NOT INVOKE THE SUPERNATURAL {which includes ideas like naturopathy's vitalism, spiritism and kind}, science determines its contents based upon EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE, and exceptionally LEAN explanatory approaches {per parsimony: as in 'do not multiply entities needlessly'; that is, if not ascribed by the evidence, IT ISN'T A SCIENTIFIC EXPLANATION}]. Ah, HUGE problem. The second law deals with closed systems and life's context is within an open system, in terms of thermodynamics. [For the compliance of the 'living' with thermodynamic law, see Atwater & Rosa's work in 1897 which specifically speaks in terms of the first law {the Kinesiology Dept. of Rice University has a nice web page on biological thermodynamics}; and see 'Biological Thermodynamics' ISBN 0521795494 {p.321 specifically speaks in terms of the second law}]. UB says NDs practice "scientific medicine" and naturopathy is "health science." Hmmm, what kind of [supposed] science text gets something so simple WRONG? Naturopathy is a 'self-labeled science-based' area that won't let go of what has not been considered scientific [the supernatural, the metaphysical, the idealistic, the scientifically-refuted and -discarded -- and kind; i.e., the tenets of their doctrines] for several decades PLUS. This text reflects naturopathic 'epistemic mislabeling nonsense' [e.g. naturopathy's vitalism ("life force"), spiritism ("personal spiritual development; body, mind, spirit"), autoentheism ("god-power within"), teleology-finalism ('life force' as "intelligent, purposeful, goal-directed") and 'whatever else idealism'/ woo-woo AREN'T science-based (or even empirical phenomena, as in therefore 'not scienceable') -- but are falsely labeled as scientific by naturopathy anyway]. In reality, minimally, a mandatory, manipulatable, spiritual, 'underlying' {metaphysical, supernatural, idealistic and what-not} 'life force' {of many aliases} immediately responsible for states of health and disease is INSTEAD AN ARTICLE OF FAITH {aka a 'sectarian medicine' belief set}. Hmmm: "the most thoroughly researched and carefully referenced text on natural medicine has been revised to include the most up-to-date information...." It has been a couple of months since I read that chapter, and I'm still, honestly, LAUGHING OUT LOUD. Naturopathy is, essentially, a 'supernatural science' (an oxymoron; particularly, vital-force-spirit, spiritism, autoentheism, and teleology-finalism as "science-based" are arrived at through a radical unlimiting of the boundaries of 'the scientific'); while evidence from science doesn't support the supernatural / theistic, the metaphysical, or the idealistic; and vitalism and spiritism, in terms of physiological agency, are refuted biological hypotheses. -rc."

Note: I've posted this early because I may forget come May.  I just love all the believers / supporters ad hominems.  Perhaps in May I'll post directly about them. True skepticism involves disassembling their evasive and attacking responses.  Here's another chapter sample from TNM.  Of course, the new textbook should be a hoot as well, sponsored by big-supplement / big-empty remedy. By the way, second from the right is ND Sensenig, whom I had as a teacher in naturopathy school, and, who informed me that the body is run by a vital force / god-power-within all the while the ND program was within a supposed "health sciences division" at a school supposedly "nonsectarian".  It is from that experience at UB in 1998 that I coined the label autoentheism to describe that belief.

002. what would I change:

nothing.