Monday, March 26, 2012

Kudos to Carl Bartecchi For Stating It Like It is Regarding Naturopathy

here, I cite from a recent article on naturopathy:

001. Carl Bartecchi states in the Pueblo Chieftain's "Naturopathic Treatment: 'Unproven' Medicine" [vsc 2012-03-26]:

"a naturopath is a practitioner who claims to use natural [...] treatments to stimulate the sick body to heal itself [...including] herbs, nutritional counseling, homeopathy, acupuncture, traditional Chinese medicine, massage, mind/body treatments, water treatments, and such therapies as ozone, air and light, ultraviolet, ultrasound and electro-stimulation, among others [...such] fall[s] under the category of alternative medicine which by definition is 'unproven' medicine [...] the inability of naturopaths to apply science-based principles and scientific study to many of their most popular treatment modalities has been a major concern to health care professionals [...] some naturopathic treatments are not only unscientific but blatantly unsafe, and expose their patients to significant health risks and complications. For example, their major textbook recommended treatments that defy medical knowledge and omits any discussion of benefits that patients might receive from many drugs or surgery [...] naturopathic education programs are deficient in the study of the commonly used and scientifically proven effective drugs and other therapies that are so critical to modern approaches to a variety of diseases [...] well-known British scientists have led the charge to drop public funding for universities providing degrees in areas of alternative medicine, which includes naturopathy, homeopathy, reflexology, Chinese medicine and acupuncture. This has led to universities that had provided such degrees to shut down their alternative medicine departments and terminate recruiting students for such courses for 2012. The reality of these scientifically deficient practices has led to more scrutiny of public funding for these programs [...] the worst of which are homeopathic preparations, but also questionable Chinese medicine practices, 'natural methods' to treat cancers, acupuncture, colonic enemas and numerous other unproven therapies for real disease processes. Most of the treatments could have little more than a placebo effect [...] their longstanding opposition to childhood vaccination, in spite of well-documented decreases in childhood disease as a result of widespread vaccination, has been a particular problem".

Note: hear, hear.

002. I'll add:

Carl is being very generous here in terms of his criticism of WHAT-THEY-DO.  So much is actually scientifically-ejected, implausible, and downright DISHONEST.
Post a Comment