the Science-Ejected Naturopathic "Foundation" That Dare Not Speak Its Name - the Coding of UB NDs Charles and White of North Haven, CT

here, I illustrate the typical CT ND coding MO [see 001., below]; that also occurs at NDs' schools and state associations [see 002., below]; but, you can find their science-ejected foundation 'red in tooth and claw' in their primary textbook [see 003., below]:

001. Charles, M. (ND UBCNM) and White, L.H. (ND UBCNM) state:

001.a. in "Naturopathy" [vsc 2011-06-14]:

"there are six principles of healing that reflect the foundation of naturopathic medical practice [...#2] the healing power of nature: the healing power of nature is the inherent self-organizing and healing process of living systems which establishes, maintains, and restores health  [coded vitalism...we] support the body in healing [...] naturopathic medicine is a medical system that focuses on the body's vital ability to heal and maintain itself [coded vitalism...] a wholistic approach [...] the body has the innate potential to heal and repair itself and to keep itself in balance  [coded vitalism...#5] doctor as teacher: a principal objective of naturopathic medicine is to educate the patient [...] we often hold workshops and talks to educate people about naturopathic medicine [...] conversation and education."

Note: I don't feel well-educated by this particularly OPAQUE explanation of naturopathy.  In fact, I'd call it strategic CODING of the essentially naturopathic [HPN] for marketing / commerce purposes.  I'd rather be fully informed so I can actually consent.

001.b. in "What We Do" [vsc 2011-06-14]:

"we I truly believe the body has the ability to heal itself [coded vitalism...] the body's natural intelligence [...] we look at the whole person – mind, body, and spirit [supernaturalism]."

Note: more coding, and that naturopathic supernaturalism!  I'm not sure, actually, how one can LOOK at spirit.  Such is, fundamentally, a metaphysical and figmentatious concept and if actually apprehendible / discernible [as opposed to projected imaginings / articles of FAITH] I think these NDs would have been awarded Nobel Prizes by now for their measurement-o'-spirit breakthrough.

001.c. in "Homeopathy" [vsc 2011-06-14]:

"homeopathy is a system (art and science) of medicine."

Note: homeopathy is as scientific as astrology!  At least astrology uses ACTUAL STARS.  Homeopathy is INERT / empty!  But, in naturopathyland, science is ANYTHING including crap of the quality of astrology / homeopathy.  This practice LIKES homeopathy, too: "[we're told] homeopathic remedies are extremely safe and non-toxic but immensely potent medicines. As such, they have profound implications for virtually all states of disease, or imbalance, in the body."  Again: where is their Nobel Prize?  Homeopathy is indeed DEBUNKED and 'in the sack'.  What a crap claim.

002. the alma mater of these NDs, and their state ND association:

002.a. the University of Bridgeport:

002.a1. labels naturopathy [including its crap homeopathy] science, still, to this day.

002.a2. but, in supposedly explaining naturopathy, you still only get manipulative opacity and, underneath it all, irrationality:

to this day, UB calls naturopathy "natural health sciences" in a "division of health sciences".  The same page states: "are you interested in a career in a field of medicine that works to support the natural healing power [coded vitalism] of the body, mind, and spirit [supernaturalism]? In naturopathic medicine we call this vis medicatrix naturae (the healing power of nature) [HPN-VMN]."

Note: ah, bullshit piled upon horseshit.  So, the claim is science subset supernaturalism subset HPN-VMN.  So, essentially, the claim is science subset nonsense -- and that's absurdly insane.

002.b. the Connecticut Naturopathic Physicians Association states in "About Naturopathic Medicine" [vsc 2011-06-14; my comments are in bold]:

"naturopathic medicine is a licensed medical profession in the State of Connecticut [...]";

ah, ye old licensed falsehood.  Since when is a profession based upon falsehood?

"individualized therapy may include [...] homeopathy [...] naturopathic physicians are the only group of physicians that truly specialize in alternative and natural medicine [...]";

yes, specialized nonsense / junk like homeopathy, which is science-ejected and that also means alternative and natural.

"naturopathic medicine [...] stimulate[s] natural healing forces within the body [coded vitalism]."

and that's what they give you there.  That's it.

003. the Textbook of Natural Medicine has the Full Monty [it is archived here]:

"this is the removal of the obstacles to cure, which allows the action of the vis medicatrix naturae, the vital force, the healing power of nature. This is the first step in the hierarchy of healing and what naturopathic physicians may call the overarching clinical theory of naturopathic medicine: the therapeutic order."

Note: that is a DECODING of the underlying vitalism that is at the heart of the naturopathic healing context that they do not inform transparently about throughout most of their venues.

the science that is the science-ejected / the science-ejected sectarian belief archaisms that falsely claim the ability to survive modern scientific scrutiny.

that is naturopathy: pseudoscience, pseudoprofession.

the Science-Ejected Vitalism Figmentation of Bastyr's Science-Based Medicine [ISYN]

here, I quote from a couple Bastyr pages [see 001., below]:

001. Bastyr University's Bastyr Center for Natural Health states in "Health Conditions and Concerns: Pain -- Chinese Medicine Helps Ease Summer Activity Backlash" [vsc 2011-06-12]:

"the sudden influx of outdoor activities can also result in a lot of aches and pains. To avoid this 'activity backlash,' you can try some therapies offered in the acupuncture and Oriental medicine department at Bastyr Center for Natural Health, either as a preventive measure or to treat an injury [...] Benjamin Apichai, LAc, clinical faculty member at Bastyr Center, explains that according to the theory of traditional Chinese medicine, sports injuries can cause 'qi' (life force or energy)[vitalism figmentation] stagnation and blood stagnation [...] tui na deals with balancing the body's lack or surplus of 'qi' (life force)[vitalism figmentation]. 'Tui na is a therapy combining general massage, acupressure and stretching techniques. It helps the body in balancing yin, yang, qi [vitalism figmentation] and blood,' says Apichai."

Note: so, Bastyr uses the label "science-based" on acupuncture's contents.  The degree is even called a "master of science." But, I don't think so: science and science-ejected figmentations are quite different.

NYANP-AANP, New York's ND Giardenilli, CNME's Lawyer Seitz - 'Professionalism and Homeopathy is Science', 'c$300,000 in Debt so License Me', 'Equivalent Science and We Will Build Schools' [respectively]

here, I cite from a New York Association of Naturopathic Physicians [NYANP] and American Association of Naturopathic Physicians [AANP] 2011-06-09 youtube.com video [see 001., below]:

001. the NYANP-AANP youtube.com video "Licensure for NDs in NY Could Pass This Session (June 9, 2011)" [vsc 2011-06-12; my comments are in bold; the video is on the AANP youtube account] states:

.

.

"[narrator] there is now a greater push to license naturopathic medicine in New York [...so they can] diagnose and treat [...] naturopathic doctors came to New York's capital to lobby legislators for a bill that will recognize them as licensed professionals [...]";

yes there is a bill.  Ah, the 'of the professions' claim and the desire to Dx and Tx.  I have often labeled naturopathic licensure "licensed falsehood", and I haven't changed my mind.  The video may state "getting naturopaths licensed is mostly about saving lives", but I don't think so.  It's mainly a legal shield for nonsense that the state will become a party to.

professionalism is a continuous claim by the NYANP and AANP.  NYANP, in fact, states on their web page "the New York Association of Naturopathic Physicians (NYANP) is the professional association for naturopathic doctors in New York State."  AANP states, in fact, on their web page "a naturopathic physician takes rigorous professional board exams so that he or she may be licensed by a state or jurisdiction as a primary care general practice physician [...and we're told one ND granting school is] National University of Health Sciences."  

so, overarching professionalism and science -- supposedly.  Now, what profession falsely labels the profoundly science-ejected [naturopathy's homeopathy, per NYANP, AANP and NUHS, for starters] science on a supposedly rigorous board exam and federally as well as state-sanctioned curriculum / commerce domain?

E.g.: here's AANP's Position Paper on Homeopathy [vsc 2011-06-12] whereby they label homeopathy -- to this day --  'science-supported' when IN FACT homeopathy is PROFOUNDLY science-ejected.

 

so, you see, licensure is IN FACT a stamp upon falsehood and nowhere will you see naturopathy transparently informing the public that it has SO ENLARGED the definition of professionalism and science that, in the ULTIMATE reversal of all values: a) professionalism is now falsehood and opacity; b) nonscience is now science; c) commerce occurs by quite misleading means YET absurdly has state and federal sanction.  Therein, false commerce is, by means of a naturopathy licensure bill, LEGALIZED -- and that's  absolutely absurd, no matter how legalized it is.

"[not-an-ND/NMD] Dr. Daniel Seitz, executive director Council of Naturopathic Medicine: 'MD students and naturopathic students both go through a four-year doctoral-level training program.  In that sense they are equivalent.  Both study basic sciences and clinical sciences that are equivalent.  However, naturopathic doctors go on to learn about natural approaches to health care, a whole range of therapies' [including homeopathy, falsely labeled as science on CNME's exam...]";

bullshit.  To repeat, I argue that when science and nonscience are absurdly posed as the same thing -- which is what naturopathy does, FUNDAMENTALLY -- this idea of equivalent  "science" / doctoral-level science is absurd.  THIS ISN'T EVEN HIGH-SCHOOL LEVEL SCIENCE.  It's like studying modern geology and cartography, and then saying that from that cumulative science-basis, the claim that the earth is flat is as equally scientifically true as the earth being round.  Replace 'flat-earth' with homeopathy's magic beans and unicorn tears, geology and cartography with biology and pharmacology -- and naturopathy is doing that same kind of nonsense.

Daniel Seitz, J.D., Ed.D. [who is not a naturopath] represents the Council of Naturopathic Medical Education.  So, therein, the USDE approved accreditation body of naturopathy -- that is CNME! -- falsely labels its contents: e.g., science subset schools subset naturopathy subset homeopathy.  WOW! 

"Dr. Sara Giardenilli is a naturopath who hopes New York will soon be added to the growing list [...] 'I have $279,000 dollars of debt from medical school' [...] 'I can't practice here in the state' [...]";

boo-hoo.  I've an equivalent amount of debt from ND school misadventures and research post-ND school into this nonsense [not to mention what was lost / HARM had I gone another route -- one with accurate labels and actual ethicality!].  I think that more than a quarter of a million dollars for educational nonsense needs A GRAND JURY INVESTIGATION and CLASS ACTION status [more than happy to testify].

"licensing naturopaths is a financial win-win for the state argues senator Ken Lavalle.  It will open the doors for naturopathic schools and keep jobs and patients in New York."

boy, you have been snookered, Mr. Legislator.  When is licensed falsehood a win-win?  When the perps get what they want and the lawmaker gets a law passed, to tell their constituents 'see, I do my job, I make laws'.  And when the marks get fleeced.

so, I went to an ND school bordering on New York, that falsely labels as science what science has either ejected for more than a hundred years or for several hundred years.  Does New York really need that kind of school?  Do the legislators CARE AT ALL about the integrity of education, science, and professionalism?  Or, are the taxpayers merely TO BE FLEECED?  I'm not optimistic.

Note: by the way, the video states "Dr. Paul Mittman, president of Southwest College of Naturopathic Medicine [...] 'we're spending 80% on easily preventable conditions [...] people want to see doctors who emphasize prevention'."  Excuse me, but isn't Mittman a DHANP?  An uber-homeopath, of the nth naturopathic degree!  Disqualified!  Blaming the victim's lifestyle for all the diseases of the world is quite abusive.  SCNM is as misrepresentational: labeling naturopathy science, stating that within naturopathy is the profoundly science ejected ['danger Will Robinson, LUNACY!!!'].

I've watched it for years.  In fact, they were party to the document that snookered me.

George Lundberg MD: Homeopathy is "Rubbish" and then Calls Medicine the "A" Word

MD Lundberg states at medpagetoday.com in "The Accidental Genius of Homeopathy"(2011-06-07):

"[transcript] why is homeopathy rubbish? In classical homeopathy [...] a chemical substance theorized to be possibly effective against a particular malady [...is] diluted and shaken repeatedly until the chemical initially placed into the water has been so diluted that none of its molecules can be found by chemical analysis [...and is] then administered to a patient by a healer who believes fervently that it will be therapeutically active in fundamental violation of the laws of physics [...] all thoughtful physicians I know consider the historical theory and philosophy of homeopathy to be rubbish, balderdash, preposterous, BS [...] NOT PLAUSIBLE [...and] not even worth testing for safety and efficacy [...he speaks of] homeopaths and their related ilk [...] a competent-seeming, confidence-oozing, self-labeled healer who listens with empathy, communicates well, and radiates good will, who then doles out pretty, colored, distilled water [...] safety in homeopathy would not seem to be a problem, save for possible delays to treatment for some serious malady for which allopathic medicine has effective, safe treatment."

Note: yes, rubbish -- empty remedies falsely posed as medicinal.  But using the 'allopathic' label upon modern medicine to me rings false.  It's as accurate as labeling modern chemistry alchemy.  And I think it plays into the homeopathic camp's nonsensical typification of modern science-based medicine, because allopathy was the tail-end of archaic humoralism philosophy and such heroic and now-a-days seen-as-wacky measures around the year 1800.

Naturopathy Irrationality Microcosm - Australia's 'ND' Morick and the Science-Ejected Falsely Labeled Science

here, I cite from the web page of naturopath Morick of Western Australia [see 001., below]:

001. Morick, S. (BHSc ECNH 2009) states in "Naturopathic Medicine" [vsc 2011-06-02]:

"naturopathic medicine uses the same scientific understanding of disease processes (anatomy and physiology) as conventional medicine [...] modern herbalism is an advanced scientific discipline [...] advanced scientific investigation has now also determined exactly [etc....the] main point of difference is that naturopathy fully acknowledges that all living beings contain a vital 'life force' that sustains them.  This life force may be referred to as 'chi', 'prana', 'spirit', 'etheric or astral body' or the 'vital force' [...]  the intangible, spiritual, energy dimension of each of us. This vital force has an aspect to it that induces our body to heal."

Note: so, I use the ND credential here with some caution, as credentials in Australia are a little different.  But the absurdity isn't: yes, science claimed upon the vitalistic-supernatural, which isn't within science or supported by science IN ANY MANNER.  Biology, particularly physiology, discarded vitalism several decades ago and science discarded supernaturalism from its contents a few hundred years ago.  Unless you are scientifically illiterate, as naturopaths often are.  Claiming that within a category is that which that category excludes is IRRATIONAL. 

It's fascinating that a supposedly "science" degree is ANYTHING BUT, essentially [iris diagnosis anyone?].

NMD Weiss - Uber "Cardiologist"

here, I cite from a press release concerning SUPPOSEDLY HUGELY SUCCESSFUL "cardiologist" naturopath NMD Weiss [see 001., below]:

001. prweb.com's "WellWise.org Interviews Nation's Only Naturopathic Cardiologist" (2011-06-02)[vsc 2011-06-02; my comments are in bold]:

"Dr. Decker Weiss [...is] the nation’s only naturopathic cardiologist [...he's] the first naturopathic cardiologist in the nation to complete a residency program in the Columbia Hospital System, the Arizona Heart Hospital and the prestigious Arizona Heart Institute [...]";

recently, naturopathy has begun more and more to mirror MD-land:  NDs have taken on, as Weiss does, the initials NMD [vsc 2011-06-02] and titles that MDs use as indicators of specialty expertise.

"Dr. Weiss is well qualified to address these issues [...]";

well, NMD Weiss is a graduate of SCNM 1997. Hmmmm: ND schools like SCNM claim to be "scientific" [vsc 2011-06-02] yet naturopathy is based on the science-ejected.  I'm not at all impressed with such academic nonsense -- hugely mislabeling knowledge categories -- as a prelude to being a physician in this modern era.  Maybe 300 years ago.  What's so interesting about the link that I've provided regarding SCNM's science claim is how coded the actually science-ejected-naturopathic is in that document: nowhere in that document is it admitted that science has been irrationally unlimited to the point wherein it contains the hugely science-ejected, and that naturopathy's context is actually a science-ejected context due to its requisite vitalism, supernaturalism, homeopathy etc.  So "well qualified" my ass.  It's the same old 'naturopathy false commerce labeling' and pseudoprofessionalism opacity in the clinical and educational realms.

"[he] has a remarkable 13-year record of successfully treating thousands of patients with naturopathy [...] in 13 years of practice treating thousands of patients, he has had only five patients who died of heart attack [...and] every one of his patients with congestive heart failure improved [...] his approach has a proven track record [...]";

anecdote, anecdote, anecdote.  There are many reasons -- besides the fact that his therapies are effective -- to account for this 'success': self-selection is one of them [e.g., if you have a serious heart condition, would you be CRAZY enough to be ONLY treated by a naturopath and would that naturopath be crazy enough to be the sole PCP for a serious heart condition?].  Ah, "proven"...but he has published no studies himself, that I know of and that have 'rocked the cardiology world', that compare typical treatment to his 'other' REMARKABLE treatment.  Weird.

"heart disease is the number one cause of death for adult Americans [...] the cause of heart disease [is] inflammation [...]";

I don't think that SOLE CAUSE is actually true.  There are many causes and type of disorders that are 'heart disease'.  I'd think that heavy antiinflammatory therapies would, even with other problems such might cause, have already been noticed as DRASTICALLY reducing heart disease if this were true: e.g., there are a heck of a lot of people with inflammatory disorders who haven't been noticed to have huge heart disease benefits / prophylaxis secondary to their decades-long antiinflammatory pharmaceutical regime.

"natural medicine [...aka] naturopathy uses a different approach than conventional medicine to get the basic cause of heart disease under control [...e.g.] plant-based medicines that have been used safely for 1,000 years [...and] anti-inflammatory supplements [...]";

having claimed an ability to fix the FAKE sole specific cause with specific 'natural' implausible methods..."different" is an understatement.

Applied Kinesiology: "An Unconscious Fraud" From the Quackometer...to 3 North American NDs

here, I cite from a recent Quackometer post regarding applied kinesiology [AK; see 001., below]; then, I illustrate the use of AK by NDs [see 002., below]:

001. Andy Lewis writes in "How Applied Kinesiology Can be Used to Justify any Quack Treatment" (2011-05-19):

"you may not be surprised to learn that applied kinesiology was invented by a chiropractor [...whereby] customer and practitioner get locked into the mutual delusion that muscle strength can be altered in the presence of 'good' and 'bad' substances [...AK] is widely used to [fakely] diagnose allergies and other health problems, and then on the back of a fake diagnosis [/ diagnostic test], sell lots of vitamin pills, diets and dubious devices [...AK] is an unconscious fraud caused by suggestion and the ideomotor effect [...] it lies at the heart of much quackery and I hope that the Nightingale Collaboration will be making it a Focus of the Month in [the] future, as this nonsense really needs to be challenged."

Note: hear, hear.  Me too.

002. these first-page results occurred via a Google.com web search parameter ""applied kinesiology" naturopathic diagnosis" [without the outside quotes] (2011-05-30):

002.a. Alberta, Canada's Lenung, K. (ND CCNM) states in "Applied Kinesiology" [vsc 2011-05-30]:

"applied kinesiology is a system that evaluates structural, chemical, and mental aspects of health using manual muscle testing alongside conventional diagnostic methods. The essential premise of applied kinesiology that is not shared by mainstream medical theory is that every organ dysfunction is accompanied by a weakness in a specific corresponding muscle, the viscerosomatic relationship."

Note: really.  The wonders of naturopathic gullibility never ceases to amaze.  Not shared because it isn't true.

002.b. Portland, Oregon's Thomas, N. (ND NCNM) states in "Applied Kinesiology" [vsc 2011-05-30; my comments are in bold]:

"applied kinesiology [...] AK balances the structural, chemical and mental sides of health [...it's] used for:

musculoskeletal issues - pain, injuries, sprains, loss of function, limited range of motion, spinal and joint misalignment, TMJ dysfunction, etc.;

disease and illness prevention and recovery;

increasing organ and gland health and function;

releasing and managing emotions and stress;

improving brain and nervous system function and co-ordination;

discovering individual nutritional needs and sensitivities [...in sum]

AK treatment addresses the function of your body's muscles, organs, glands, spine, joints, nervous system, lymph, meridian flow (based on Chinese medicine), emotions, and nutrition [...]";

that's quite a list.

"applied kinesiology (AK) is a diagnostic and therapeutic practice [...] its diagnostic principles are based on traditional Chinese medicine in which every muscle in the body is related to an organ, gland or acupuncture meridian. By testing specific muscles, the doctor can identify areas of dysfunction in the body and apply the appropriate method of treatment [...]";

a lot of bunk there -- I'll guess it doesn't happen for free, either.

"AK blends therapeutic modalities from cranial-sacral therapy, sacral-occipital technique, acupuncture meridian therapies, chiropractic, naturopathy, osteopathy, clinical nutrition, and energy psychology [...]";

because when all that junk petered out, a rebranding had to happen!

"an AK doctor is able to examine how areas of the body (organ, glands, etc) are functioning, locate the cause of any dysfunction, and apply therapy towards the specific areas to restore and maintain health. In this way, AK is able to help the areas that need the support, and prevent pathology and disease before it occurs."

promises, promises.

002.c. Newington, Connecticut's Riley, K.M. (ND Bastyr 1984) who states on the Naturopathic Gathering 2011 page [vsc 2011-05-30]:

"Kathleen Riley has been practicing naturopathic medicine for the past 26 years [...]  Dr. Riley incorporates applied kinesiology [...] and other therapeutics into her practice as a way to help her patients effect deeper healing [...] she has worked extensively with patients with Lyme disease for many years and has much to share in how to approach these patients using our naturopathic principals [sp., principles]. She strives to try and help her patients work toward healing in the way that she was taught by her teachers, especially John Bastyr and Bill Mitchell and is excited to be able to share her experience through cases and conversation at this year’s Gathering."

Note: the Gathering is about the 'essentially naturopathic'.  And yes her alma mater Bastyr's motto is "science-based natural medicine", an absurd label placed upon what is TRULY not scientific at all --  e.g. much of naturopathy's principles' content [vitalism, supernaturalism and such, for starters].

003. AK, therein, is VERY naturopathic:

pseudo and nonsensical.

New York State's ND Marcantonio and NCNM: Science and Efficacy Claims Upon the Science-Ejected (2005, 2011 respectively)

here, I cite from a 2005 Buffalo News piece written by New York State ND Marcantonio claiming that naturopathy is 'science, science science' [see 001.a., below]; and from her practice's 2011 web page that claims homeopathy is "effective" [see 001.b., below]; then, from her alma mater NCNM [see 002., below]; and finally, from the Quackometer's recent post on homeopathy [see 003., below]:

001. Marcantonio, R. (ND NCNM 2001) states:

001.a. in the Buffalo News's "Education, Licensing Standards Would Protect Public"(2005-08-04) [vsc from their archive 2011-05-24; access to BN's archived articles is available for a small fee]:

"[as NYANP treasurer] NYANP would like to state that we share Andrew Skolnick's concerns in his July 27 article about practitioners using the title 'naturopath' who have no scientific, medical or accredited medical educational background [...we are] licensed naturopathic doctor (N.D.) with extensive science-based training in the safe use of natural therapies [...] like conventional medical schools, the first two years concentrate on the basic biomedical sciences: anatomy, physiology, histology, embryology, pathology and biochemistry. The second two years integrate the basic biomedical sciences with clinical sciences, focusing on a broad range of preventive therapeutic interventions: clinical nutrition and diet, botanical medicine, homeopathy, naturopathic physical medicine and hydrotherapy and counseling."

Note: science, science, science.  Homeopathy has been considered nonsense by science even farther back than this century!  But not for naturopathy: their licensure exam labels homeopathy "science".

001.b. in "NHC Medicinary" [practicing with Lim, M. (ND NCNM); vsc 2011-05-25]:

"a 300 year old medicine, homeopathy is based on the 'aw of similars', like cures like. Homeopathic remedies prepared from serial dilutions of either plant, animal, or mineral substances act to stimulate the body's own healing mechanisms. Homeopathy is quite a safe and effective tool for children as well as adults."

Note: stating homeopathy is effective is like stating voodoo and witchcraft are effective.

002. back to the mother ship, NCNM:

so, NCNM is famous for stating 'the full monty' regarding naturopathy: notice the science claim upon the vitalistic science-ejected, and the homeopathy included under that posed science umbrella as "powerful".  Fascinating that the practice page of ND Marcantonio that supposedly defines naturopathy doesn't fully disclose these wacko contents, and instead gives us CODING of naturopathy's essential premises.

Note: in sum, so much for professionalism, science, transparency, informed consent and above-board commerce!

003. as Andy Lewis writes in "The Myths of NHS Homeopathy" (2011-05-24):

"I have already spelled out in some detail why such research would be deeply unethical: firstly, we already know with a very high degree of certainty that homeopathy is a superstitious form of medical treatment that is completely ineffective."

Note: hear, hear.

Popular Science on the Nonscientific Status of Vitalism - 1884-04

here, I go BACK into the 1800s and cite from an article in Popular Science Monthly regarding the nonscientific status of vitalism:

William G. Stevenson, M.D. writes in "Physiological Significance of Vital Force" (PSM 1884-04, pp. 760-773:

"modern science has so extended the horizon of our mental perspective, has achieved such brilliant triumphs in so many departments of thought, and, on the basis of verified fact, has erected such an imposing superstructure of useful knowledge in the domain of inorganic nature, that some, rejecting the vitalistic theories of the past, have accepted the belief that the deeper mysteries of vital phenomena will, in final analysis, be demonstrated to be but resultants of physical forces acting under complex conditions of organization [p.760...] to some, 'vitalism' yet maintains its position in the philosophic realm or organizations, and a 'vital force,' independent of and antagonistic to physical force, yet presides over the manifestations of organic bodies.  This, if true, necessitates 'two distinct sciences and two distinct orders of nature,' which, though related, are not reciprocal. This view is not in harmony with either chemical, physical, or biological science of the present day, and stands in direct contradiction to the accepted doctrine of the correlation and conservation of energy [...] matter, or material organization, is, therefore, so far as human knowledge goes, an absolute condition upon which all life-manifestations depend, and to assert, as do the 'vitalists,' that this vital energy -- an agency which cannot be verified, though dependent upon a material condition for a display of its actions -- is not related to it, but is independent of it and under distinct and antagonistic laws, is an assumption at variance with scientific truth and reason [p.765]."

Note: yes, this was written in 1884. The full version is available for free at books.google.com. Naturopathy, meanwhile, absurdly claims that vitalism survives scientific scrutiny NOW.  Notice that vitalism was science-ejected EVEN BEFORE the discovery of DNA.

I'll repeat what the author so eloquently states: vital energy is an assumption at variance with scientific truth and reason.  Yet, somehow naturopathy schools were started in the late 1900s [such as UB; and NUHS in 200x with the 's' standing for SCIENCES] and label such vitalism [and similar science-ejected kind] "science", and engaged in educational commerce based on such falsehoods.

Five-Year Anniversary of My TNM Review at Amazon!!!

here, I reiterate my review of the Textbook of Natural Medicine, 3rd. ed. that I'd put up at Amazon five years ago, "This is Scientific Medicine?" (May 20, 2006):

"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: and I wouldn't change a thing.  Well, I would change the fact that they bamboozled me into studying the junk for four years with false labels in terms of commerce and education, derailing my life at great cost.

"Alternative Medical Treatments Rarely Work" - The Economist and Edzard Ernst

here, it cite from a recent article in The Economist regard alt. med. as placebo:

001. someone writes in "Think Yourself Better" (2011-05-19):

"Edzard Ernst, the world’s first professor of complementary medicine [...is] no breathless promoter of snake oil. Instead, he and his research group have pioneered the rigorous study of everything from acupuncture and crystal healing to Reiki channelling and herbal remedies [...] over the years Dr Ernst and his group have run clinical trials and published over 160 meta-analyses of other studies [...] his findings are stark. According to his 'Guide to Complementary and Alternative Medicine', around 95% of the treatments he and his colleagues examined—in fields as diverse as acupuncture, herbal medicine, homeopathy and reflexology—are statistically indistinguishable from placebo treatments [...] Dr Ernst believes his work helps address a serious public-health problem. He points out that conventional medicines must be shown to be both safe and efficacious before they can be licensed for sale. That is rarely true [we call this 'epistemic charity' in the land of knowledge study] of alternative treatments, which rely on a mixture of appeals to tradition and to the 'natural' [...] a placebo is a sham medical treatment [...] its main scientific use at the moment is in clinical trials as a baseline for comparison with another treatment [...] the effect is strongest for those disorders that are predominantly mental and subjective [...] practitioners of alternative medicine often excel at harnessing the placebo effect, says Dr Ernst. They offer long, relaxed consultations with their customers [...] and they believe passionately in their treatments, which are often delivered with great and reassuring ceremony. That alone can be enough to do good, even though the magnets, crystals and ultra-dilute solutions [that is HOMEOPATHY, folks] applied to the patients are, by themselves, completely useless."

Note: ah, yeah...

Naturopathy Irrationality Microcosm: New York State's ND Fey's Science Label, the NCNM Opaque Revealed, and NPLEX Homeopathy Absurdity

here, I first cite a 'naturopathy-is-science' claim from ND Fey [see 001.a., below]; then, the whole shebang / epistemic irrationality from her alma mater NCNM that explains, explicitly, 'the naturopathic' [see 001.b., below]; and finally, there is ND Fey's claim that homeopathy is "highly effective" [see 002., below]:

Fey, A.H. (ND NCNM) states:

001. 'the naturopathics' supposed science-basis:

001.a. in "Naturopathic News Fall 2008" [vsc 2011-05-08]:

"what is different between us [NDs] and MD's? Basically our education is focused on the same basic sciences as an M.D., but ND’s also study natural approaches."

Note: ah, so simply related.  So, the science is claimed as actual science / science-that-is-science.

001.b. the opaque revealed: ND Fey's alma mater National College of Natural Medicine states in "Principles of Healing" [vsc 2011-05-20; my comments are in bold]:

"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 [...]";

ah, the GRAND / ALL ENCOMPASSING label that naturopathy uses upon 'the naturopathic': that such is, essentially, scientific and objective fact!  As I've said many times, the claim is that 'the essentially naturopathic' survives scientific scrutiny.

"these principles stand as the distinguishing marks of the profession: [#1] the healing power of nature, vis medicatrix naturae: the body has the inherent ability to establish, maintain, and restore health. The healing process is ordered and intelligent; nature heals through the response of the life force. The physician’s role is to facilitate and augment this process [...#2] the process of healing includes the generation of symptoms, which are, in fact, expressions of the life force attempting to heal itself [...this is] the practice of promoting health through stimulation of the vital force [...]";

ah, the 'of the professions' claim, and vitalism!  The HPN-VMN / LF / VF is claimed as scientifically IN FACT.  This is FARTHEST from the truth.  Vitalism is IN FACT hugely science ejected: and stating it survives scientific scrutiny doesn't make it so.  That is a form of magical thinking, and a sign of scientific ignorance.  Naturopathy claims professionalism and science but both are transparent and not false, generally speaking. The term "profess" is within the text of that page seven times, actually.

"homeopathic medicine [HM] 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 [...]";

ah, so now within the 'able to survive scientific scrutiny' is homeopathy and supernaturalism.  HILARIOUS.  So, supposedly HM works, is powerful, acts, and though natural is supernatural-effecting; and supposedly all this is science supported.

Note: this page is, in my view, the Rosetta Stone of naturopathy.  ND Fey does not relate these contents on her New York State web pages, to my knowledge.  That is why I call her portrayal of naturopathy "opaque".  NCNM doesn't accurately represent the true 'nature' of naturopathy, either: what's science-ejected falsely labeled as science-supported.  And this is all licensed in Oregon from the educational institution all the way into the NDs clinical suite: licensed falsehood.

002. ND Fey's super-absurd naturopathic claims regarding homeopathy's efficacy and its science basis:

002.a. in "Naturopathic Medicine" she writes [vsc 2011-05-20]:

"homeopathic medicine [HM] is a holistic [whatever that means!] form of medicine that aims to help the body heal itself. It works for both acute illnesses and chronic conditions. Homeopathic remedies act on both the physical and emotional level with seldom side effects, and they are safe for all ages. Homeopathy is a powerful form of medicine that has been used for more than 200 years."

Note: the claim is that HM heals, works, acts POWERFULLY.

002.b. in "Naturopathic News Fall 2007" she writes [vsc 2011-05-20; my comments are in bold]:

"homeopathy treats the whole person by using minute doses to stimulate the body's own healing mechanisms. Homeopathic remedies are nontoxic, inexpensive, and highly effective [...]";

the claim is that homeopathy treats, stimulates, and is hugely effective.

"naturopathic doctors (NDs) receive a 4-year postgraduate level training at an accredited naturopathic medical school. The 4-year training includes graduate level study in the medical sciences and clinical medicine; in addition to, training in naturopathic therapeutics [like homeopathy]. After graduation, NDs must pass a national board examination [NPLEX] consisting of basic medical sciences, clinical sciences as well as naturopathic modalities [like homeopathy] to become licensed doctors."

and, of course, the claim that 'naturopathy subset homeopathy' is science-girded!  Now, I'd like to straighten out the location of homeopathy within that NPLEX examination, because what is written above is the 'old' NPLEX.  It is in fact most accurate to state this formulation when it comes to that exam, currently: NPLEX subset clinical science subset homeopathy.  The formulation, of course, is in fact false.  This is one item that supports my label: licensed falsehood.  BUT, as we've seen from the principles page of ND Fey's alma mater NCNM, naturopathy indeed equates science and nonscience and then labels the whole thing falsely science.  The specific labeling of homeopathy as science is merely a symptom of this epistemic muddle known as naturopathy.  Of note: science has HUGELY refuted homeopathy to such an extent that further research is considered UNETHICAL.  Oh SNAP!

003. what's so sad:

journalists these days don't seem to have the chops to report on naturopathy IN FULL, IN DEPTH, and ACCURATELY.  Each piece instead seems like an ad placed by the NDs.

wouldn't it be nice of journalists abided by the highest of journalistic professional code?

New York's Medical Society Opposes ND Licensure [aka Licensed Falsehood]

here, I cite from a recent article in the Albany Times Union regarding the 2011 New York State licensure push by NDs [see 001., below]; then, I cite from the mentioned ND's own web pages [002. and 003., below]:

001. Cathleen Crowley reports in "Naturopathic Doctors Seek New York Recognition" (2011-05-18)[my comments are in bold]:

"naturopaths were at the Capitol on Tuesday lobbying for bills [...] sponsored by Sen. Kenneth LaValle, R-Port Jefferson  and Assemblyman Sam Hoyt, D-Buffalo [..] that would recognize them as licensed professionals [...]";

ah, that 'of-the-professions' claim.  But professions are transparent and not based on falsehood. 

"[currently] New York law does not allow them [NDs] to diagnose or treat patients or prescribe medications [...]";  

I'm sure eventually they'll get licensed...and then we'll have another state directly condoning falsehood!

"'we are not MDs and we are not trying to be MDs [...] we are primary care providers that stress natural interventions for preventing health problems' [...]"; 

ah, the "natural" fallacy and 'bait and switch'.  The last time I checked, for naturopathy "natural" also includes the science-ejected, the figmentatious, and the supernatural.  Do you want to go to a PCP who incorrectly believes that imaginary vital forces are at the root of physiology, and that magic beans and unicorn tears will treat  real-life medical problems?

"'our model is preventive and well care, not sick care [...] which is a more cost-effective approach' [...said] Korey DiRoma, a naturopathic doctor [...whose] Delmar patients drive across the state line [to Vermont] so he can examine them, diagnose their health problems and recommend treatment [...with] exercise, diet and supplements for health problems [...]"; 

licensed falsehood like Vermont's ND licensure!  Interesting that what isn't mentioned is that homeopathy is a frequent therapy used by NDs and though the remedies are empty and the modality is science-ejected, naturopathy's licensure exam labels homeopathy a "clinical science".  So much for reporting with DEPTH.  I will use ND DiRoma's web pages as an illustration of naturopathy's "model" in 002., below. 

"naturopathic doctors have a bachelor's degree and four years of post-graduate training at accredited schools. They receive an average of 2,800 hours of clinical training -- compared to medical doctors who have 3,200 hours of training and nurse practitioners who have 700 hours, said Donielle Wilson, president of the New York Association of Naturopathic Physicians [...]"; 

and that's the difference, quantities?  Me thinks not.  I'll state is simple, and it is a matter of knowledge quality: the kind of epistemic monkey business / irrationality that you see in already licensed states like Oregon, wherein the hugely science-ejected is falsely labeled science, COULDN'T GET YOU THROUGH A BACHELOR'S DEGREE never mind the doctoral level that it sits within unless, of course, one is now allowed to maintain that a domain includes that which it by definition excludes and to engage in commerce based on that false position / irrationality.  That is, by the way, the DEFINITION of a licensed ND state! 

"the Medical Society of New York State opposes the bill, saying the it is too broad and the title 'naturopathic doctor' is misleading [...and] that medical doctors receive a more rigorous training than naturopathic doctors [...] 'while the bill prohibits such licensee from practicing or claiming to practice another licensed profession, including medicine, the title itself will convey to the public that the naturopathic practitioner is in fact the equivalent of a licensed physician'"; 

hear, hear.  Misleading in so many ways.  And, again, the rigor is not an issue of quantity, but contents and framing.  Since naturopathy has reversed all values -- science is also nonscience, professionalism is now false commerce, what's natural is now what's supernatural -- yes. 

"licensing naturopaths would open the doors for naturopathic schools and insurance coverage for their services in New York." 

and then education falsehood ensues, as my lived experience informs! 

002. naturopathy's knowledge model [the actual difference], via DiRoma, A.K. (ND SCNM), who states in "Naturopathic Medicine" [vsc 2011-05-18; my comments are in bold]:

"naturopathic physicians are trained as primary health care practitioners, whose diverse techniques include modern and traditional, scientific and empirical methods [...] a licensed naturopathic doctor (N.D.) attends a five-year graduate-level naturopathic medical school and is educated in all of the same basic sciences as an M.D. [...]"; 

science, science, science.  I'd argue that since the "science" of naturopathy includes what is science-ejected, this statement is false.  When "science" is not science, it is not the "same" science. 

"offering [...] natural remedies that are safe and effective are the inherent philosophy of naturopathic medicine [...such as] homeopathic medicine [...]"; 

after all that supposedly graduate-level science, we come to homeopathy falsely postured as effective. Claiming homeopathy has efficacy is like stating magic spells are effective medical treatments -- false.  But, based on what naturopathy does to science, I'm thinking that even magic spells would be acceptable within their realm to label as 'science-based natural medicine'. 

"[naturopathy is] founded upon a holistic philosophy [...] Korey DiRoma, N.D. believes in the healing power of nature [...] the body’s innate ability to heal [...] the goal of a naturopathic doctor is to employ therapies that support and promote the body's natural healing process [HPN / coded vitalism]." 

ah, that HPN.  HPN is, of course, a coding for that most fundamental of naturopathic beliefs: vitalism, which is their worldview, is truly science-discarded, and which obviously they LOVE to code. 

003. some transparency / decoding:

a while ago, ND DiRoma used to state naturopathy's essential science-ejected vitalism quite clearly in "The Team" [now buried, but archived!]:

"as a naturopathic doctor [...] I believe that there is a vital inner force and in disease it can be suppressed, not allowing one to function optimally. Naturopathic medicine is about stimulating that vital force and allowing it to thrive. As a naturopathic doctor at the Center for Integrative Health and Healing, I am committed to facilitating this healing process for my patients to achieve optimal health and well being."

Note: see, the truly sectarian "nature" of naturopathy is being submerged.  My guess is in order to not hold up licensure.  But, the heart of professionalism is transparency and accuracy, which isn't happening here: this vitalistic belief is science-ejected, hidden, and never communicated by naturopaths to be the actually science-ejected figmentation that it is.

Connecticut's ND Gruber Claims Homeopathy as Biologically Active / Effective

here, I cite from a recent newspaper article whereby a New Canaan, Connecticut naturopath states that homeopathy is an effective allergy treatment [see 001., below]; and then from the web page of that ND whereby homeopathy is labeled effective [see 002., below]:

001. Melvin Mason reports in "New Canaan Physician Pushes Natural Allergy Cures" (2011-05-15)[saved 2011-05-15]:

"Dr. Gary Gruber [...] who also teaches naturopathic medicine at the University of Bridgeport [(his alma mater, actually)...] recommends [...] for people with longstanding allergy problems [...] homeopathic drops to desensitize the eyes."

Note: me thinks homeo. is being posed as specifically medicinal.

002. ND Gruber states in "Services" [vsc 2011-05-15]:

"I have effective therapies [...e.g.] homeopathic medicines are very small doses of natural substances that can stimulate the body's self-healing response without side effects. This gentle, effective system of medicine is based on the principle that 'like cures like'. Homeopathy supports healing and does not interfere with conventional or pharmaceutical treatments."

Note: so, there is a claim of biological activity and efficacy / medicinality.  But, we know homeopathy in fact is so inert that its recommendation is considered unethical [deceptive] and further research is unwarranted [it's implausible].  Yet, at the University of Bridgeport, naturopathy is STILL labeled a "health science" [vsc 2011-05-15] and within it is homeopathy [vsc 2011-05-15].

naturopathy -- truly the reversal of all values / a strange land of [false] educational and clinical commerce.

perhaps the article should be titled "New Canaan Metaphysician Pushes Magic Beans and Unicorn Tears as Allergy Cures."