001. on NBC Connecticut's "Prescription Rights for NDs in Connecticut" (2015-02-27) [vsc 2015-02-28], ND Skowron states [my comments are in unquoted bold]:
"[the host] help Dr. Skowron out and we'll see what we can do here in Connecticut [...]";
this is BLATANT advocacy. Journalism: extinct?
"[host] what is a naturopathic physician? [...]";
oh, how going to NCNM in part 002. will show how OPAQUE this ND is!!! It seems we don't deserve to know, so we can then decide.
"[the ND] well a naturopathic physician is a physician who is educated in how to use natural medicine [...] integrative medicine [...] the best of conventional medicine and the best of natural medicine [...] it's all about combining both [...]";
so there's that BLENDING. But is it a good idea to blend WINE and MUD? Such does not sound improved.
"you want to see a naturopath for naturopathic medicine because they have the best education [...] the people who use this best are the people with the best education [...]";
so there's that BEST twice.
"[the ND] anyone who wants better health uses natural medicine [...] natural medicine is wonderful in more mild cases [...]";
what a WONDERFUL admission: naturopathy prescreens its patients, stacking the deck.
"[host] what are some of the things you brought in? [...the ND] what I love about natural medicine [is that] you can use so many different things [...] nutrition [...] herbs [...] nutritional supplements [...] homeopathy [and we're shown Boiron homeopathic tubes...] hydrotherapy [...] there's so many different tools in the tool box [...]";
well, a tool actually HAS TO WORK and homeopathy, we know scientifically speaking, doesn't. So, there's the mud, amongst other mud.
"[host] in other states [....] naturopathic physicians can write prescriptions [...] not the case in Connecticut [...the ND] the [naturopathic] law [...] needs to be updated for the 21st century [...] so currently there's a bill in the State House to give naturopathic physicians that right [...see] cnpaonline.org [...]";
the seeking of the wine! Ah, CNPA, 'CT ND opacity central', which doesn't even mention the basic premise of naturopathy, "vital force." So much for being modernized. Paternalism rules instead. And, if updating the CT ND law is modernizing, then so would naturopathy abiding by legitimate scientific methodology and boundaries. Instead, we're in the medieval times, epistemically speaking, wherein: homeopathy is equal to prescriptive medicines in terms of overall merit.
002. at the ND's alma mater, NCNM, we're told, and this is supposedly "best", in "Learn About Naturopathic Medicine":
"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. 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 process of healing includes the generation of symptoms, which are, in fact, expressions of the life force attempting to heal itself [...]";
ah, ye old science-ejected life force falsely claimed as able to survive scientific scrutiny. Falsely claimed as in-fact. NOT BEST at all.
"homeopathic medicine is [...] powerful [...]";
so powerful it is, scientifically speaking, considered WORTHLESS. Again, NOT BEST.
I think it's a bad idea. Homeopathy as useful is a reversal of modern pharmacological values. Medications only increase naturopathy's POTENTIAL FOR HARM. And how would they know they've harmed, when in their world, homeopathy is powerful, and epistemic nonsense is BEST?