Naturopaths, Their Perhaps NonHomeopathic hCG Diet, and Some PalMD Wisdom on Truly Homeopathic and NonHomeopathic hCG Fraud

here, I list three NDs / NMDs who engage in commerce by selling the service of 'the hCG diet', according to their web pages [see 001., below]; then, I excerpt from a recent Scientopia.org post by PalMD on 'the hCG diet matter' [see 002., below]:

001. a google.com search with the parameter "naturopathic hCG diet" [without the external quotes] produces these first-page hits (2011-07-15):

001.a. Toghyani, J. (ND SCNM) who states in "HCG Diet -- Frequently Asked Questions" [vsc 2011-07-15]:

"attempting to go on a low calorie diet without the use of HCG will actually cause permanent harm to the body and to your health! [...] the dosage is almost considered homeopathic – really minimal, and no side effects have been reported yet. If anything, side effects might include: brittle fingernails becoming strong and normal; high blood pressure might normalize; blood sugar might normalize; high cholesterol might come back down to normal; skin tone might be better and stronger, depression and arthritis symptoms might lessen or disappear; and you might have to spend a lot of money to change your wardrobe completely! :0)."

Note: cute promises, with cute little sign-off graphics as well.  hCG is being posed as quite the panacea here.  It sounds to me that the dosage is PHYSICALLY ACTUAL since the doctor states it is "almost considered homeopathic".  If it were TRULY homeopathic, there'd be TRULY NOTHING in it.  Which is it?  Present or absent?  There's a sliminess to this description provided, a quasi-ness.

001.b. Smith, G.L. (NMD SCNM) who states in "HCG Promotes Safe Healthy Weight Loss" [vsc 2011-07-15]:

"hCG diet shots for weight loss [yes, INJECTIONS...] the amount differences between the hCG diet protocol and hCG used for fertility purposes is significantly different in quantity [...] important notice: HCG is not approved by the FDA to aid in weight loss. [Yet!!!] HCG for the use of a weight loss aid, is an alternative forms of treatment. The FDA has not determined it to have sufficient evidence to indicate that HCG is effective as a weight loss aid. However, thousands of people all over the world have safely and successfully lost weight with the assistance of HCG [efficacy claim]. Dr. Smith will have the final say on who may and who may not qualify for HCG. Please call for details."

Note: there is no mention as to HOW LOW the dosage is.  It seems again PHYSICALLY ACTUAL.  The FDA nonapproval is interesting: isn't this then a nonapproved human drug trial?  There are huge ethical issues therein.  First and foremost, are the test subjects properly being protected and are they wholly consenting in a wholly actually informed manner?   The lack of "sufficient evidence" hasn't stopped naturopathy from practicing whatever it wants, in my view.  In fact, they even falsely label the hugely non-efficacious as efficacious without penalty.

001.c. Purcell, A. (ND SCNM) who states in "HCG Diet Frequently Asked Questions" [vsc 2011-07-15]:

"although HCG is associated with pregnancy, it can safely be used by both men and women that are looking to get their weight under control [...] HCG has been found to have a positive response in cancer treatment by inducing cancer cell death, inhibiting cell proliferation, turning on tumor suppressing genes and promoting DNA repair, stay tuned as more research is conducted on this amazing hormone [...] researchers have found that HCG can actually help the body burn more fat [...] at Portal To Healing, our HCG program is 30 days long. Usually this is enough for the patient to reach their goals, however, if a weight reduction greater than 10% of their body weight is desired, the patient can continue HCG for an additional 10 days [...] research suggests a small, daily HCG injection (approximately 125IU to 150IU) results in a weight loss of 1 to 2 pounds per day, and often more, when accompanied by a low calorie diet of approximately 500 calories [...] HCG dieters lose 1 to 2 lbs or fat or more per day [...] HCG injections [...] for weight loss are administered using a very fine needle and are virtually painless."

Note: so, again, this sounds like ACTUAL HCG.  And of course a lot of promises are made.  Cancer?  Really?  Is it even possible to burn that much FAT in a day?  Particularly when the article mentions how LITTLE physical activity is required.  Seems absurd.

002. PalMD writes in "The 'hCG diet': A Fraud Literally Without Substance" (2011-07-14):

"hCG has made a spectacular return as a diet fad [...] back in the 1950s [...] British endocrinologist [...] ATW Simeons had an idea [...that] hCG (human chorionic gonadotropin) could help people lose weight without feeling hungry [...] several studies in the 1970s effectively discredited his work [...] not only does it not aid in weight loss, but as an active hormone, it may have other unintended effects [...like] tumor formation or growth [...] but in the 90's, famous shill and convicted felon Kevin Trudeau published a book that helped revive the hCG diet craze [...] put yourself in the shoes of a convicted felon like Kevin Trudeau: you want to continue to sell a weight loss scam, but you want to avoid getting sued if you happen to cause a tumor.  How can you still market the hCG diet without the hCG?  Homeopathy! [...wherein] fake drugs [are legally allowed] to be sold as real drugs [...] homeopathic dilution[s] of hCG [...have] no hCG [...it's just] water [...] hCG does not contribute to weight loss, and ultra-dilute hCG isn't even real --- there is no hCG in it.  It's all, in my opinion, more fraud."

Note: tell it to them, brother. So, when is the "effectively discredited" -- whether homeopathic or actually physically present -- claimed as a miracle panacea?  Naturopathyland. 

003. so, I wonder:

is this usage by naturopaths of hCG unapproved human experimentation?  It doesn't seem homeopathic mainly but could be homeopathic in some instances.  Either way, NDs/NMDs apparently find hCG WONDERFUL.  They also seem quite unaware of the experimental nature or even the fraudulent nature, depending on the type of hCG being used, and the legal consequences of such activity!!!

Mullin's 2011 "Integrative Gastroenterology" -- ISBN 0195371100 9780195371109 -- and Naturopathy's EM Vitalism via ND Pizzorno aka Old "Science-Based" Joe

here, I cite from the Oxford University Press 'just published' and MD Mullin edited "Integrative Gastroenterology" particularly regarding so-called 'energy medicine' and the naturopathy chapter by ND Pizzorno [see 001., below]; then, I cite from ND Pizzorno's own web page science-expert self-labeling and from his alma mater NCNM [see 002., below]:

001. editor Gerard Mullin MD's "Integrative Gastroenterology" (ISBN 0195371100 9780195371109; 2011) [my comments are in bold; a portion of this book is available for viewing at books.google.com and amazon.com]:

001.a. has a "Chapter 21 - Naturopathic Medicine and Digestion" by Pizzorno, J.E. (ND NCNM 1975) wherein Old "Science-Based" Joe states:

"naturopathic medicine prioritizes supporting the body's innate healing processes [p.205...and NDs are] armed with a strong belief in the inherent ability of the body to heal [p.206...]";

coded vitalism ALERT!  Much more of a BELIEF in the beliefy kind of manner than immediately indicated!

"naturopathic medicine is a distinct system [p.205...]";

naturopathy's DISTINCTIVITY is one of their more hilariously irrational claims:

A) look at ND Pizzorno's alma mater NCNM [more will happen in 002., below] which states on the current page "Frequently Asked Questions" [saved 2011-07-13]: 

"naturopathic physicians craft comprehensive treatment plans that blend [etc.]."

so, in REALITY, you get the oxymorony of 'the blended distinct', which to me sounds not-very-distinct.

B) search the web with google.com and the parameters "naturopathic medicine is a distinct system of primary health care that blends" [outside quotes removed] and you'll get quite a preponderance.

"naturopathic medicine [...is] a way of thinking about life, health and disease [...] it is defined [...] by the philosophical principles that guide the practitioner [p.205...] seven concepts provide the foundation that defines naturopathic medicine [...] as a guide to developing a curative relationship with patients [...#1] the healing power of nature (vis medicatrix naturae) [p.206...]";

and that's all you are told about #1.  No matter, I've quite a collection that preponderantly illuminates this here-coded expression as the vitalistic essential premise of naturopathy.  And truly, the vitalistic context does mean that naturopathy thinks about life, health and disease through that vitalistic lens.  They'd usually rather not broadcast that, though.

"[and speaks of] the scholarly discussion of naturopathic clinical theory [p.206...]";

oh how I wish NDs / NMDs had academic / scholarly integrity when it comes to their contents [theory is being too generous, in the scientific sense of the word] and actual science!

"[NDs are] a unique group of professionals [...and ND Pizzorno writes of] the profession [p.206...] naturopathy became a formal profession in the United States after its founding by Benedict Lust, in 1896 [p.207]";

and they insist PROFESSION PROFESSION PROFESSION.  There are actual characteristics of formal professions!  In my view, naturopathy's false labeling, irrationality, and opacity EXCLUDE it from being professional and even from meeting the lower bar of fair commerce!  After all, what kind of business or profession for that matter falsely labels the science-ejected IN A HUMONGOUS WAY.........science anyway?  Science is a distinct kind of knowledge, yet naturopathy seeks to blend in a whole bunch of junk with science and instead of simply calling it all now-not-science but a muddle, they insists that such blended knowledge is distinctly science anyway.

"the disease-centric approach of conventional medicine [p.206...]";

and there we go, a straw-man representation of modern medicine.  This is such a bad representation of modern medicine that ND Pizzorno should be ASHAMED.

"7 naturopathic guidelines [...#2] stimulate the vital force [p.206...]";

and there you go,  the Full Monty! Ye old archaic science-ejected vitalistic context which defines 'the naturopathic'.  The book has much more to say about such vitalism / so-called energy medicine [EM; see 001.b., below].

001.b. has a "Chapter 15 - Energy Medicine and Gastrointestinal Disorders" by Ann Marie Chiasson, MD who states:

"there is an underlying energy body within the physical body that affects health [p.156...]";

this is, of course, an article of faith.  There is no evidence for such, and no need for such to explain how the body actually works.  What this is really is supernatural spiritism and metaphysics hidden by scientific words like "energy".

"there is no evidence for or against energy medicine [p.156...]";

bullshit.  I'd argue that science, as an aggregate, has DISCARDED the supernatural / spiritualistic / metaphysical that is truly the subject here and therefore there is HUGE non-evidence for it.  Since things are so well-explained parsimoniously without such, the burden is upon the claimant to provide such evidence, and justify this nonessential belief's necessity. 

"energy medicine is a newer term [many might say New Age term] coined to refer to healing modalities that work with the underlying energy or vital force of the body [...aka] energy body, biofield or subtle energy [p.156...] a subtle form of energy [...aka] 'qi [...] ki [...] doshas [...] prana, etheric energy, fohat, orgone, odic force, mana, and homeopathic resonance' [...this is] a resurgence of 'vitalism' or the belief [I'll say] that an underlying vital force exists in the body and is central to health [...] Mesmer [...] called it magnetism [...aka] the putative field [...] the resurgence of energy medicine is actually an integration of prior views of health and healing [p.157...]";

ah, so there we go, a rogues gallery of vitalism around the globe and for the last few centuries.  I think the devolution aspect of "integrative medicine" can be seen here, wherein science-ejected archaicisms are re-injected into medicine for no reason other than that the practitioner likes certain articles of faith and believes such figmentations are relative to human biology.  There's also a huge conflation between objective / mutual reality and subjective / individual imaginings here. 

"the belief in an underlying vital force or subtle body [...that] underlying energy of the body [...is] alternately characterized as spiritual healing [p.158...]";

and there you go, unmasked.  All this energy and electromagnetic talk is really camouflage for 'ye old spiritual blankety blank'.

"common energy medicine techniques [...include] acupuncture [...] healing touch [...] homeopathy [...] joh rei [...] polarity therapy [...] qi gong [...] reiki [...] sound therapy [...] tai chi [...] therapeutic touch [...] yoga [...] zero balancing [p.158...]";

sure.

"EM techniques arise from the ancient concept of a primary vital force within the body affecting the health of the physical body [p.163]."

ah, so in a nutshell, a definition that shows vital force is archaic. It is also an article of science-ejected faith / figmentation.

Note: her web page "Services" states:

"Dr. Chiasson is pleased to offer integrative medicine consultations [...for] $400.00 [...and] energy medicine treatments  [...for] $125.00 [...] energy medicine works with a model of illness that addresses the electromagnetic field (or energy field) that underlies the organs and physical structure of the body [...] energy  medicine  incorporates  hands  on healing and other techniques that change, stimulate, add or shift the underlying energy that is associated with the disease process."

you really have to wonder what happened to an MD who studied ACTUAL science and 'things of immediate evidence' to practice medicine, and then got into all this figmentatious masked-spiritualism vitalistic babble while masquerading the whole supernatural and superstitious thing with the quite inappropriate scientific language of "energy" and "electromagnetic" and "field" and even "force".

002. Old "Science-Based" Joe and his alma mater NCNM:

002.a. ND Pizzorno:

is famous at Naturocrit for his self-labeling "one of the world's leading authorities on science-based natural medicine."  Specifically, he is talking about naturopathy and its contents.  Armed only with an ND [no PhD of a science variety and no apparent scientific activity of the 'hands-on active scientist' kind] Old "Science-Based" Joe is a self-made expert of science who isn't a scientist in the professional sense.

002.b. NCNM:

is his alma mater, and that is the institution that credentialed him academically.  It is interesting to see that at NCNM, science includes what is hugely not science.  But, I guess you'd incorrectly be labeling nonscience as science your whole career as Old "Science-Based" Joe has done if your origination educational institution had that very same approach.

003. in sum, the book:

shows naturopathy's vitalistic / EM / masked spiritistic requisite premise and how integrative medicine [IM] isn't about any NEW IN-EVIDENCE methods and ideas that are in any sense immediately medically necessary, but is instead a RETROGRADE DEVOLUTION to centuries-ago science-ejected superstitions, ideas, methods and claims then MIXED with current modern medical science and earnestly claimed NECESSARY MEDICALLY.

and there isn't much hesitation, in the IM and naturopathic realms, toward falsely labeling the big knowledge jumble all specifically "science-based".

Naturopath's Blood Type Diet Not Scientifically Supported

Nan Allison writes in "Ask an Expert: Get your answers on blood type diet, HPV: Science Doesn't Support Diet Based on Blood Type" [saved 2011-07-12]:

"[Q:] there’s a book out that’s called something like 'Eat for Your Blood Type.' Is there any scientific evidence that this works? [...A:] Eat Right for Your Type by Peter J. D’Adamo, a naturopathic doctor, is based on his theory that the right diet for your blood type [...] his theory has never been tested [...] the science is not there to support it the author claims that a person may lose weight from following the right blood type diet [...due to] the 'toxins' [that] are stored in fat tissue [...] there is no research to back the author's claims."

the Absurd Science-Based Qi of ND Dugoua

here, I highlight quite the contradiction / irrationality -- which in itself is a microcosm of naturopathic absurdity -- WRONGLY using knowledge-type labels [see 001. and 002., below]:

001. Dugoua, J.J. (ND CCNM) states:

001.a. in "Biography Of Naturopathic Doctor Jean-Jacques Dugoua" [vsc 2011-07-11]:

"I practice science-based medicine [...] Dr. JJ combines naturopathic medicine, clinical nutrition, evidence-based medicine, acupuncture, homeopathy, detoxification, mesotherapy and intravenous (IV) therapies in his treatments."

Note: that's quite a list of supposedly science-based stuff, including the highly science-ejected HOMEOPATHIC and naturopathy's detox falsehood / chemicals phobia.  I think the claim is science-based subset 'all this stuff I do'.  But how can something be within a group it is exterior to?

001.b. in "Practice" [vsc 2011-07-11]:

"qi: the theory of the channels is fundamental to the understanding of acupuncture. There are 365 mapped acupuncture points along the 12 major channels, as well as over a thousand extra points found on the hand, ear and scalp. Qi [...] is the energy moved through the channels and the movement of qi helps to balance yin and yang, balance an excess or deficiency in the body, and nourish the internal organs [...and is used for] 

irregular periods, painful periods and PMS, infertility, headaches (tension and migraine), stress, back pain, constipation, menopause, insomnia, allergies and sinusitis, asthma, chronic pain, erectile dysfunction, carpal tunnel syndrome, fibromyalgia, high blood pressure, shingles, tinnitus, urinary tract infection, musculoskeletal problems."

Note: wow, quite the all-purpose therapy.  Yet, qi does not exist, nor do the channels or points.  In science, energy actually has quantity, it is not a figmentation!

002. it is incorrect:

to label homeopathy and qi, for starters, as within science.  But, that's what naturopathyland does.  And engauges in commerce based on such WRONG labelings as 'the science-based science-exterior'!

'Science Subset Naturopathy-Homeopathy-Therapeutic Touch' -- Griffin Hospital's Integrative Junk Thought / Nonsense

here, I cite from the web pages of Griffin Hospital [see 001., below]; then, from scientific criticism of what Griffin has falsely termed 'scientific' [see 002., below]:

001. Griffin Hospital’s Integrative Medical Center states:

001.a. in "Frequently Asked Questions" [vsc 2011-07-07]:

"naturopathic medicine [...] treats with safe and effective natural therapeutics [...including] homeopathy [...NDs have studied] the basic medical sciences."

Note: science has thoroughly refuted homeopathy, strangely enough.  It is not only not effective, it is not considered worthwhile to investigate due to what already has been done and its absurdity / lack of plausibility.  I think the claim here is science subset naturopathic medicine subset homeopathy.   Such is false, but it gets better below.

001.b. in "Patient Evaluations" [vsc 2011-07-07]:

"a scientific paper describing our model of care is available here [...] treatment approaches available at the IMC include [...] naturopathic medicine [NM...] therapeutic touch [and] homeopathy."

Note: wow, there's some seriously mislabeled WOO.  I think the claim here is scientific subset 'what we do'.  I'll get down to brass tacks in the next subsection regarding the NM.

001.c. in "The Integrative Medicine Center Team" [saved 2011-07-07]:

"Lisa Rosenberger, ND, MS, LAc -- staff naturopathic physician and licensed acupuncturist [...] a graduate of the National College of Natural Medicine in Portland, Oregon [...] her areas of specialty are drainage therapies [and] homeopathy."

Note: now, I LOVE NCNM NDs!!!  You get an idea of the sectarian conflation of knowledge types at NCNM, wherein science is claimed to contain what science has hugely ejected for several decades.  Conflation and integration lead to NONSENSE and IRRATIONALITY, by modern medical standards.  Drainage therapy is a form of homeopathy - UNDA.

001.d. in "Connecticut’s Integrative Medicine Center Offers a New Conventional Medicine Model: An Interview With David L. Katz, MD, MPH, FACPM, FACP, and Ather Ali, ND, MPH" (from Integrative Medicine: A Clinician’s Journal, vol. 7, no. 1, Feb/Mar 2008):

"we offer [...] alternative therapies such as general naturopathic care [...] homeopathy [...] therapeutic touch [...] our current resident has strong interests in classical homeopathy [...they treat by means of] herb, drug, nutritional supplement, homeopathic remedy, or a combination  [...] we gave him a homeopathic remedy [...] the graduates of our resident program [...] are practitioners trained in naturopathic medicine [...and] understand science [...] I was interested in developing a model that was in equal parts responsive to the needs of patients and responsible about the use of scientific evidence [...] scientific evidence is important [...] we need more science. We need more evidence."

Note:  ah, the STRIDENT call for science and claim of is quite IRONIC.  When someone has an ND like from say NCNM where science and nonscience are equated, hmmmmm.  I don't think science is therein understood.  Abused, yes.  Understood, no.

002. science says that these therapies and worldviews are bunk:

homeopathy,

therapeutic touch,

naturopathy's essential vitalistic premise:

"mainstream science has rejected vitalism since at least the 1930s, for a plethora of good reasons that have only become stronger with time."

you can find such vitalism on the Griffin Hospital site, too.

Swedish Skeptic Astronaut Overdoses on Homeopathic Sleeping Pills, Feels Fine

Clara Guibourg reports in thelocal.se article "Fuglesang Survives Homeopathic Pill Overdose"(2011-07-07):

"[in] an effort to get the inefficiency of homeopathic medicine [...] a group from a Swedish science organization, with astronaut Christer Fuglesang in the lead, took an overdose of sleeping pills [...] Thursday afternoon [...] ten times the recommended dose of homeopathic sleeping pill coffea alfaplex [...] 'I feel just fine. I guess I feel neither better nor worse than just before taking this overdose' [...] 'we're risking our lives for science,' wrote Fuglesang in an opinion piece for newspaper Svenska Dagbladet, signed by the organization Vetenskap och Folkbildning (VoF) , a non-profit organization working towards promoting popular science education, and discrediting false science [aka pseudoscience...] 'we expect Swedish politicians to rethink their stand on alternative medicine's use in healthcare' [...] 'we hope the use of homeopathy will cease, seeing as how it's pure humbug. And above all, the state and country councils should not stand behind such humbug'."

Note: since the pills are inert, of course nothing happened.  Naturopaths, of course, claim homeopathy is a clinical science on their North American licensure exam, and they are HIGHLY FUNDED by homeopathy companies.

Naturopathyland's Oregon.gov as Racketeering [musing]

here, I cite from the Wikipedia article on racketeering [see 001., below]; then, I mention the imaginary 'principal cause' of illness that naturopathy claims 'needs their special treatments or you will be harmed' [see 002., below]:

001. according to Wikipedia's "Racket" (2011-06-29):

"a racket is an illegal business [...] engaging in a racket is called racketeering [...] the word racket is used to describe a business [...] engaged in the sale of a solution to a problem that the institution itself creates or perpetuates, with the specific intent to engender continual patronage."

Note: so, commerce / business / patronage occurs after a fake problem is constructed and then remedied by the creators.  Sounds familiar, if you know about naturopathyland's operation.

002. naturopathy's fake cause of illness, 'the vital force':

002.a. for years:

I've been collecting naturopathy's claim of a vital force underlying physiology.  It truly doesn't exist.  It's a fake problem / artifice -- a vital force causing illness that needs to be fixed.  In that sense, the heart of so-called natural medicine is artificial.  Naturopathy claims regular medicine only treats the symptoms of the vital force's activities [biology!] causing 'suppression' and greater harm to the person, and that only naturopathy fixes that vital-force principal cause by 'getting to the root' [truly a metaphysical belief / figmentation].  So, they say something is wrong with you that isn't, that they can fix it, and this gets them business because, claiming professionalism, science, and rigor, they prey on people's trust [bait and switch with the addition of a threat of harm if a certain route is not taken].

002.b. a specific example, Oregon's Board of Naturopathic Medicine [vsc 2011-06-29]:

"methods of treatments are chosen to work with the patient’s vital force [...aka] the healing power of nature, vis medicatrix naturae [...because supposedly] nature heals through the response of the life force [...naturopaths must] first, do no harm, primum no nocere [...] the process of healing includes the generation of symptoms, which are, in fact, an expression of the life force attempting to heal itself. Therapeutic actions should be complimentary to and synergistic with this healing process [vitalism].  The physician’s actions can support or antagonize the actions of the vis medicatrix naturae. Therefore, methods designed to suppress symptoms without removing underlying causes [fix that vital force!] are considered harmful and are avoided or minimized."

Note: and there you go, licensed falsehood and licensed racketeering along the lines of 'if you ignore our science-ejected vitalistic figmentation underlying physiology and merely use science and evidence medically, you will be harmed'.  Of course, you do not get that kind of honesty / transparency from them.  The State of Oregon is endorsing a physiological bogey-man and the commerce that occurs to treat it, and the mislabelings of this health sect: the racket of treating a fake cause / artifice erected by naturopathy or you will be harmed, and not giving the consumer proper labeling.  The life force / vital force is falsely postured as "in fact" and Oregon.gov goes so far as to state that the figment / bogey-man at the heart of naturopathy is "based on the objective observation of the nature of health and disease, and are continually reexamined in light of scientific analysis." The endorsement still shocks me to this day: how exactly do you objectively observe and scientifically analyze a metaphysical figmentation that science has profoundly ejected?  How do they get away with labeling homeopathy "powerful" when in fact it is WITHOUT ANY EFFICACY!!!  According to Archive.org, this Oregon.gov OBNM page was crawled and permanently archived 2010-05-28 [vsc 2011-06-29].

it appears, also, that naturopaths get REALLY CLOSE to seriously ill people, as oncologist like ND Birdsall these days, and do their naturopathy thing around these very vulnerable people.  That link is immediately related to Oregon.gov because that's where she went to ND school.

here's another one, NMD Helms, who states:

"I use the guiding principles of naturopathic medicine with a comprehensive group of therapies to strengthen whatever vital force you have left to the point where the disease/disorder/condition is relieved, reduced, and then removed [ah, it was my figmentation that made me ill!...] I have done a year long residency in oncology and still see cancer patients that are looking for a complete approach [...] I particularly enjoy working with cancer patients [...] I look at the science of the disease/condition and work with you to develop a treatment plan [...including] energy therapies (homeopathy, acupuncture, hands-on & hands-off healing)."

yes, absurdity marches on.

Naturopathy Is More Expensive Than Conventional Care [2010 Pubmed indexed study], Less Expensive and Homeopathy is Science [NYANP assertion]

here, I compare an assessment of naturopathic medical care increased-costs from Germany [see 001., below] with assertions by the New York Association of Naturopathic Physicians of supposed cost-savings [see 002., below]:

001. up at Pubmed is the abstract for "A Study of Costs and Length of Stay of Inpatient Naturopathy -- Evidence From Germany" by Romeyke, T. and Stummer, H. [from Complement Ther Clin Pract. 2011 May;17(2):90-5. Epub 2010 Oct 6] which states:

"a total of 918 patients who received naturopathic complex therapy were investigated regarding their clinical picture and the length of their stay in hospital [...] the results showed that the duration of hospitalization was significantly greater than that of the comparison group of patients (cases from 263 German hospitals) receiving purely internal medical treatment [aka conventional!] in hospitals at [the] national level."

Note: sure, there's a lot not specified.  But, I would think, if naturopathy is SO GREAT, and as naturopaths say 'treats the cause unlike regular medicine which only treats symptoms', why apparently do the patients stay sicker longer?  Wait: I would think that if you forgo the best modern medical methods for care, YES, your stay SHOULD be longer and therein MORE EXPENSIVE because you replaced it with INFERIOR methods.

002. meanwhile, the New York Association of Naturopathic Physicians states in "Benefit Analysis of Licensing Naturopathic Doctors" (2011-05):

"NDs Prevent Chronic Disease & Decrease Health Costs [...] naturopathic medicaid services are 57.5% more cost effective than MD/DO/NP combined services."

Note: so they claim!  NYANP also claims in the document "naturopathy is a science-based health care practice" and "natural therapies include [...] homeopathic remedies."  Yeah, science.  Yeah, bullshit!

if naturopathy's standards for science are so low as to contain the science-ejected falsely labeled science, I suspect naturopathy's standards for cost-savings are so low as to include what-ACTUALLY-costs-more!

because naturopathy is truly 'the reversal of all values.'

On Naturopathy's Homeopathy: NYU Langone Medical Center and AANP [falsehood] versus Wikipedia 2011-06-26 [truth]

here, I cite from AN ACTUALLY FALSE description STILL UP by New York University's Langone Medical Center [NYULMC] covering naturopathy and homeopathy [see 001., below]; then, from the preponderance known as Wikipedia [which is quite vetted these days]:

001. NYULMC states in "Naturopathic Medicine FAQs" [vsc 2011-06-26, my comments are in bold]:

"naturopathic medicine encompasses homeopathy [...]";

that is, naturopathy subset homeopathy!

"naturopathic physicians cooperate with all other branches of medical science [...] an ND cooperates with all other branches of medical science."

yes, they say it twice.  I can say this once: NYU is in bed with falsehood.  That's kind of sad, I went to NYU as a graduate student for a time.  I left, ironically, because I believed the false descriptions of the naturopathy organization that this very same NYU page links to per "information courtesy of the American Association of Naturopathic Physicians."  The world is a small place!  And naturopathic fraud is PERSISTENT: not just in its activities but in lifelong effects.

002. meanwhile, Wikipedia's article "Homeopathy" (2011-06-26) states:

"as the quality of the trials become better, the evidence for homeopathy preparations being effective diminishes, and the highest-quality trials show that the remedies themselves have no effect [...] the collective weight of scientific evidence has found homeopathy to be no more effective than a placebo."

Note: some references are

"Ernst, E. (2002), 'A systematic review of systematic reviews of homeopathy', British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology 54 (6): 577–82, doi:10.1046/j.1365-2125.2002.01699.x, PMC 1874503, PMID 12492603 [...] Parliamentary Committee Science and Technology Committee - 'Evidence Check 2: Homeopathy' [...] 'Homeopathy - Issues', National Health Service [...] Altunc, U.; Pittler, M. H.; Ernst, E. (2007), 'Homeopathy for Childhood and Adolescence Ailments: Systematic Review of Randomized Clinical Trials', Mayo Clinic Proceedings 82 (1): 69–75, doi:10.4065/82.1.69, PMID 17285788 [...] Shang, Aijing; Huwiler-Müntener, Karin; Nartey, Linda; Jüni, Peter; Dörig, Stephan; Sterne, Jonathan AC; Pewsner, Daniel; Egger, Matthias (2005), 'Are the clinical effects of homoeopathy placebo effects? Comparative study of placebo-controlled trials of homoeopathy and allopathy', The Lancet 366 (9487): 726–732, doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(05)67177-2, PMID 16125589."

003. is 'science subset medical science subset naturopathy subset homeopathy' right?

no, NOT AT ALL, unless your standards for science are so low that profound nonscience is now science.  Which is absurd.  This blog is fueled by such absurdity.  By the way, I went to ND school with NYU's ND, who speaks of 

"powerful therapies for urologic conditions [...including] prostate cancer."

only in Naturopathyland is nonscience science, and magic-beans powerful: the POWERFUL illogic labeled POWERFUL urologic.

Science-Based Subset Naturopathy Subset Natural Therapies Subset Homeopathy Subset Science-Ejected -- Lane, K. (NMD SCNM), ISYN

here, I amuse myself by citing from a naturopath's web page particularly regarding naturopathy's homeopathy [see 001., below]; and then from her alma mater [see 002., below]:

001. Lane, K. (NMD SCNM) writes in "Natural Therapies" [vsc 2011-06-24]:

"[naturopathy's] homeopathy is a medical system more than 200 years old, which uses highly diluted substances that act to enhance the body's innate healing response [coded vitalism...] Dr. Hahnemann stated: 'any substance that produces symptoms in a healthy person when given in full-strength form, will cure a sick person with the same symptoms when given in a very diluted minute form' [minute is GENEROUS when describing the contents of a homeopathic remedy!...] homeopathic medicines know[n] as homeopathic remedies treat a gamete [not sure what word is SUPPOSED to be there!] of health concerns [that's quite a promise of efficacy...] it does this by addressing the source of illness not just the symptoms. Homeopathic medicine treats the vital force (known as qi in Chinese medicine) [vitalism], which is the element that distinguishes a living creature from one the not. Homeopathic remedies assist the vital force in returning to a balance state and restoring health physically and emotionally."

Note: so, vitalism [and other not-science-supported ideas, like dilution INCREASING effect] is the premise of homeopathy.  A vital force is not an element in any modern sense; it is an archaic figmentation that has been ejected from biology, which is the science that studies life.  Vitalism is a belief which naturopathy, including its homeopathy, is based upon.  Naturopathy is a belief system.

002. her alma mater, Southwest College of Naturopathic Medicine and Health Sciences [SCNM] states:

002.a. this vitalism too [see my collection].

002.b. and then ABSURDLY puts 'the science label' on top of all naturopathic content, including, of course, the science-ejected vitalistic-homeopathic.

NCNM's New Master’s of Science Degree in Integrative Medicine Research (MSiMR) and Their Decades-Persistent FALSE Idea of What Constitutes Legitimate Science and Evidence

here, I cite from an announcement by the National College of Natural Medicine [NCNM] regarding their new supposedly "scientific" graduate degree [see 001., below]; but, other graduate degrees at NCNM are scientific nonsense so watch out [see 002., below]:

001. NCNM writes in the email mailing "NCNM Master's of Science Degree in Integrative Medicine Research (MSiMR)" (I received this 2011-06-21; my comments are in bold):

"National College of Natural Medicine (NCNM) [is] introducing the Master’s of Science Degree in Integrative Medicine Research (MSiMR) [...a] new MS program[...] designed for medical professionals and those interested in a strong foundation in research and study design [...] this program aims to train evidence-based clinicians [etc....] it combines course subjects from the standard master of public health (MPH) and master of clinical research programs (MCR) with a CAM research literature and scientific base [...] the Master of Science in Integrative Medicine Research blends the scientific rigor of the MPH and MCR with the natural medicine content [...]";

science, science, science.  But, is wine plus mud still wine? 

"the curriculum for the Master of Science in Integrative Medicine Research begins with two core courses that provide a foundation in natural medicine research. The Introduction to Research course is a medical research literature survey course that not only provides students with an overview of seminal natural medicine research studies but also teaches them how to critically evaluate research literature [...] Research Practicum is the foundational research skills-building course wherein students are trained in scientific methods [...]";

again, science and supposed criticality.

"interested in learning more about this exciting new degree? Please see the attached flyer or contact the Office of Admissions at  503.552.1660 / 877.669.8737 or admissions@ncnm.edu."

this is commerce, of course: they require payment for what is offered.

Note: NCNM has details up at their web site here.

002.  science claims upon the science-ejected / science-exterior, for decades:

it is not difficult to find NCNM's naturopathy description, which does this [labeling the science-ejected vitalistic and the science-exterior supernatural falsely 'within science'].

it is also not difficult to find NCNM's classical Chinese medicine description which claims that CCM as a science lives in its own private science Idaho per "an independent science that has its own parameters and does not require validation by other scientific systems."

003. overall note:

this new science graduate degree just looks like more sectarian nonsense disguising itself as science when actually NOT.

so take care with your future: in "natural medicine"-land, nonsciences are falsely posed as sciences and traded upon quite deceptively.

if you study them long enough, and I've watch NCNM particularly for decades, you can unravel the HUGE absurdity:

that nonscience can be categorically within science as a category.