here, I excerpt, and direct to the source post:
"what irritates me about this article is not so much that Gibb is undergoing naturopathic treatment. He's dying; he's desperate; he has a wife is is, to put it kindly, very prone to woo. What would be amazing is if he managed to stick to science-based treatment for palliation. He's also incredibly wealthy; so the usual complaint of quacks sucking down the last money of a dying man doesn't apply as much as it usually does. And, make no mistake, 'naturopathic oncology' is quackery, just as naturopathy is [...e.g.] homeopathy is part and parcel of naturopathy [AND I'll add falsely labeled science by that whole shebang...and] there is no quackery that naturopaths don't embrace[agreed]. 'Energy healing,' 'detox' woo, unscientific use of supplements, these are just a few of the sorts of pseudoscience naturopaths embrace enthusiastically. What irritates me is the typical reporter lazily buying into the spin that naturopaths put on their quackery that 'good nutrition' can stimulate the body's natural ability to heal itself, even to the point of healing an advanced malignancy [a dangerous and quite abusive absurdity...]contrary to what proponents of 'natural healing' tell us, eating the 'right' diet is no guarantee that you won't get cancer [...and] having a posse of naturopaths plying Gibb with their quackery isn't helping matters. We can only hope that it doesn't actually hasten his end."
Note: what I also am struck by is how obvious naturopathy is all the things highlighted above, and yet how false the North American naturopathy apparatus is in labeling and trading upon its absurd marketing label of "science-based natural medicine". The unfair trade, if that's the right word [I prefer racketeering myself], I'll guess, has amounted into the hundreds of millions of dollars so far. The whole post is up at the above link.