Thursday, August 20, 2015

The Naturocrit Podcast - Episode 010 Part 2b - Script & Annotations

here, I provide an annotated script for the Naturocrit Podcast's Episode 010 Part 2b, titled “Integrative-Holistic-Quackademic Woo, Information Asymmetry, Immanence and Fiduciary Duty: Minnesota '.edu' -Style." In this Part 2b of Episode 10, I will visit the web pages of the Northwestern Health Sciences University and a couple of science organizations:


001. the Episode 010b2 script and annotations:

Standard Introduction:

Welcome to, as that robot voice says, The Naturocrit Podcast, and thank you for boldly listening.

What ARE we even talking about?

Well, this podcast series is my take on naturopathic medicine, an area I've been studying for about twenty years, including my time in so-called 'scientific nonsectarian naturopathic medical school'.

My approach is a pairing of scientific skepticism and a deep knowledge of naturopathy's intimate details.

In previous episodes of this series, I established that naturopathy is, essentially, a kind of knowledge blending, misrepresentation, and irrationality

I have termed naturopathy both 'an epistemic conflation falsely posing itself as an epistemic delineation' and 'the naturopathillogical':

the science-exterior is mixed with what is scientific, then that whole muddle is absurdly claimed to be science as an entire category, while particular sectarian science-ejected oath-obligations and -requirements are coded or camouflaged, therein effectively disguising naturopathy's system of beliefs in public view.

Naturopathy's ultimate achievement is a profound erosion of scientific integrity and freedom of belief packaged in the marketing veneer "natural" and improperly embedded in the academic category "science".

Episode 10 - Part 2b Introduction:

In this two-part Naturocrit Podcast Episode 010, titled

“Integrative-Holistic-Quackademic Woo, Information Asymmetry, Immanence and Fiduciary Duty: Minnesota '.edu' -Style”, really,

I am looking at a very rich trove of the NATUROPATHILLOGICAL by way of the University of Minnesota, aka UMN herein, and the Northwestern Health Sciences University, aka NWHSU herein.

Episode Question:

And my overarching episode question for this Naturocrit Podcast Episode 010 is:

“what does the abundant CATEGORICAL false labelings of naturopathy's contents as science, as demonstrated by Minnesota post-secondary academic institutions, indicate regarding the ethicality of contemporary U.S. higher education, and its regard for consumer protections and patient informed consent?”

And if you've listened to Part 1 and 2a, it's not going well so far for UMN as a microcosm of higher education's ethicality, and naturopathy of both stripes in Minnesota.

Episode 10 Part 2b Synopsis:

In this final section of Episode 10, I'll be looking at naturopathy at the Northwestern Health Sciences University, a couple of science organization pages, and wrapping the whole thing up.

The Northwestern Health SCIENCES University:

Well, here's the second school this Episode concerns, FINALLY.

nwhealth.edu is the web address of the Northwestern Health SCIENCES University, aka NWHSU.

Let me please emphasize:

“.edu [...and] science”, in this here day and age, which is a claim of academic rigor regarding a certain kind of health knowledge.

Now, neither UMN nor NWHSU have naturopathy degree-granting programs, let me also emphasize, but, UMN is a huge proponent as we've seen, and NWHSU offers naturopathy clinically, as you'll see.

This episode's Part 2a showed how SEEDY the whole naturopathy enterprise is in terms of commerce, and intellectually, particularly epistemically, by way of the products of naturopathy educational institutions:

naturopaths.

I DON'T consider UMN to have integrity, by way of what I've exposed, but lets be open to the idea that NWHSU may be 'of integrity', particularly 'scientific integrity', since they claim to be a 'science .edu'.

So I pose this:

perhaps one might find intellectual and particularly epistemic integrity at NWHSU regarding naturopathy and kind.

We won't know until we look.

NWHSU could say:

'based on what we know in terms of science and how we DO science, the essentially naturopathic is pseudoscience.'

In other words, NWHSU COULD dismiss naturopathy, in terms of scientific stringency.

Now, if you are starting to feel I am straining in my charity toward the matter, I am, because:

they DO naturopathy at NWHSU, and a whole bunch of other woo.

And that is partnership and agency in the matter.

And I believe the school's name is a categorical label, so it's contents and rigors should live up the qualities of that label:

science. 

If they don't, in a patently obvious ways, aren't we then in an area best described as FALSEHOOD instead!

NWHSU's Accreditation:

Now, I really didn't deal with the credentialing bureaucracy behind or above UMN, but let's look at such for NWHSU before I go to their naturopathy pages.

It turns, by the way, that UMN and NWHSU are partnered with the SAME regional accreditor, and state and federal government overseers.

And I wonder if such approvers and abettors, aka the credentialing and permission bureaucracy, have standards that permit or forbid FRAUD in terms of 'academic commerce'.

Perhaps, perhaps...perhaps not.

The NWHSU page “Accreditation” [2015 archived] states:

Northwestern Health Sciences University is accredited by the Higher Learning Commission and is a member of the North Central Association of Colleges and Schools (NCA) [...which] was founded in 1895 as a membership organization for educational institutions [...and is] one of six regional institutional accrediting associations in the United States […] it accredits and grants membership to educational institutions in the 19-state North Central region [...and is] recognized by the United States Secretary of Education and by the Council on Higher Education Accreditation. Accreditation was extended to Northwestern in 1988, and was renewed in 1993, 2001 and 2010 [...and] Northwestern Health Sciences University is registered as a private institution with the Minnesota Office of Higher Education.”

I believe the expression one then uses is 'round up the usual suspects':

a regional accreditor North Central Association of Colleges and Schools, the the United States Department of Education, the Council on Higher Education Accreditation, and a Minnesota State Department of Education.

Let's look at those entities, and find some standards perhaps.


“the North Central Association of Colleges and Schools (NCA), also known as the North Central Association, is a membership organization, consisting of colleges, universities, and schools in 19 U.S. states, that is engaged in educational accreditation. It is one of six regional accreditation bodies in the United States, and its Higher Learning Commission is recognized by the United States Department of Education and the Council for Higher Education Accreditation (CHEA) as a regional accreditor for higher education institutions.”

The Higher Learning Commission states, in “The Criteria for Accreditation and Core Components” [2015 archived]:

“the criteria for accreditation are the standards of quality by which the Commission determines whether an institution merits accreditation or reaffirmation of accreditation […] criterion two: integrity: ethical and responsible conduct: the institution acts with integrity; its conduct is ethical and responsible […] integrity in its financial, academic, personnel, and auxiliary functions; it establishes and follows policies and processes for fair and ethical behavior on the part of its governing board, administration, faculty, and staff […] criterion three: teaching and learning: quality, resources, and support the institution provides [...] high quality education, wherever and however its offerings are delivered.”

So, that's quality, integrity, ethical, responsible, and "high quality education."

Member schools MUST do that stuff.

We're also assured:

“the institution presents itself clearly and completely to its students and to the public […] the institution is committed to freedom of expression and the pursuit of truth in teaching and learning […] responsible acquisition, discovery and application of knowledge by its faculty, students, and staff […] the integrity of research and scholarly practice conducted by its faculty, staff, and students […] the ethical use of information resources […] the institution has and enforces policies on academic honesty and integrity.”

That was clarity and completeness, truth, knowledge, research, ethical, and “academic honesty and integrity.”

Member schools MUST do that stuff.


"the Department identifies actions it may consider taking in response to a finding that an institution has engaged in substantial misrepresentation [...] do the misrepresentation regulations extend beyond substantial misrepresentations made about the nature of an eligible institution’s educational programs, its financial charges, or the employability of its graduates? [...] no. The Department recognizes that section 487(c)(3)(A) of the HEA provides the Department with the authority to act in response to substantial misrepresentations that may be made in three broad areas. The Department will not evaluate, nor potentially sanction, institutions for their substantial misrepresentations that do not fall within one of these three categories."

So there's this idea of “substantial misrepresentation” as relates to the “nature of an eligible institution’s educational programs, its financial charges, or the employability of its graduates.”

Now what I could say is that for schools that graduate NDs or NMDs:

it is quite a misrepresentation to state that naturopathy is categorically within science.

And to know this epistemic “nature” of naturopathy is then to know you, as someone hiring an ND or NMD, would NOT want fraud to be hired.

So, perhaps the whole naturopathy education enterprise is within such an “program integrity […] misrepresentation.”

Perhaps.

But, as I'd said, neither UMN nor NWHSU have naturopathy degree-granting programs, so far.

The Council for Higher Education Accreditation hosts the document "Accreditation and Academic Integrity" which states:

“what's the connection between academic integrity and higher education accreditation? […] one answer: because that's what accreditation is about. Accreditation is about the integrity of the educational enterprise; it announces, for example, that promises made in statements of learning outcomes, or competencies, for example, are being kept. 'Accreditation is validating that we are doing what we are supposed to do.'”

So, that's academic integrity, promises, and actually doing what you say you do.
For instance, if you call yourself science, if we process your contents through science and it does not survive that process, are you doing what you say you do, naturopathy educational edifice?
I don't think so.
Minnesota Department of Education:

education.state.mn.us is the web address of the Minnesota Department of Education, who partners with UMN and NWHSU, since they operate within that state.

Their page “Science” [rb; saved 2015-08-17] states:

“science is the active study of the natural and man-made world […] science students use their senses and tools to observe, record and analyze data about the world and to make conclusions based on evidence. Scientifically literate young people can understand basic science concepts, use skills for doing scientific investigations, solve technical problems, and design technologies for today’s world […] the Minnesota K-12 Academic Standards in Science were revised in 2009 and implemented by all schools beginning with the 2011-2012 school year. The 2009 standards are scheduled to be revised again in 2017-2018 […] Minnesota is a lead state in the development of the Next Generation of Science Standards. This is a cooperative effort of several states to provide standards that could be adopted by all states. The standards are based on A Framework for K-12 Science Education  developed by the National Research Council. The framework sets the vision for science education and identifies science and engineering practices, core disciplinary ideas, and cross-cutting concepts […] the Frameworks for Minnesota Mathematics and Science Standards is an online resource for use by educators for planning instruction, professional development, curriculum design and assessment. It provides instructional resources directly connected to each standard. It also has sections focused on best practices and standards implementation. The website is a collaboration of Minnesota Department of Education (MDE) and SciMathMN and reflects the expertise of teachers in identifying resources.”

So, there's science as “natural and man-made” as opposed to supernatural, science literacy, the a posteriori as in “senses and tools” in knowledge type, evidence, and the NGSS.

What a gift.

It is, as I like to point out, page 79 of that NRC book A Framework for K-12 Science Education that states:

“science is replete with ideas that once seemed promising but have not withstood the test of time, such as the concept of the 'ether' or the vis vitalis (the 'vital force' of life)”, and yet it is NCNM that states that that vital force survives scientific scrutiny.

And those are K-12 science standards, for basic science literacy.

Naturopathy is DOCTORAL level, you'd think the stringencies would become MORE stringent. 

The Minnesota Department of Education states in "Minnesota Academic Standards Science K-12 2009 Version" [rb; saved 2015-08-17]:

"the practice of science [...] scientific inquiry is a set of interrelated processes used to pose questions about the natural world and investigate phenomena [...] use observations to develop an accurate description of a natural phenomenon and compare one’s observations and descriptions with those of others [...] grade K."

Yes, that's right, it is a science education standard in Minnesota for KINDERGARTNERS that science deals with the “natural world [...and] natural phenomenon.”

As opposed to the SUPERNATURAL.

KINDERGARTEN.

On the page "K.1.1.2. Inquiry" [rb; saved 2015-08-17] we're told:

"grade: K. Subject: Science. Strand: Nature of Science and Engineering. Substrand: The Practice of Science [...] scientific inquiry is a set of interrelated processes used to pose questions about the natural world and investigate phenomena [...] use observations to develop an accurate description of a natural phenomenon and compare one’s observations and descriptions with those of others [...] from their very first day in school, students should be actively engaged in learning to view the world scientifically. That means encouraging them to ask questions about nature and to seek answers, collect things, count and measure things, make qualitative observations, organize collections and observations, discuss findings, etc. […] anticipating an eventual understanding of the scientific world view, these early science experiences can be designed to bring out one aspect of the belief in the unity of nature: consistency […] these activities should serve to stimulate curiosity and engage students in taking an interest in their environment and the workings of nature."

The NATURAL world.

And these “higher education” institutions in Minnesota, like UMN and NWHSU, are claiming that within science is THE SUPERNATURAL.

We've seen that with UMN and I will show you that with NWHSU.

That is a collision between actual science as a domain -- as I believe we value our kindergartners and tell them the truth, as in 'science deals with the natural world' -- and wacko pseudoscience all dressed up in flowing pseudo-scholarly robes.

But I don't expect any overseeing entity to care:

I get the feeling that all these entities treat the schools they supposedly oversee as clients.

So, let's look at the NWHSU naturopathy stuff to see the labels used upon the stuff they do and claim, in this "science" school.

NWHSU Pages:

One page to start with is the nwhealth.edu page “Integrative Approach” [2015 archived].

Yes, that marketing slogan “integrative”, which is right up there in terms of vagueness as the terms natural and holistic.

It is a MARKETING slogan.

They are bait.

The page states:

“Northwestern is creating new and collaborative ways to provide integrative, patient-centered care and we educate our students to practice using this emerging healthcare model. As a student at Northwestern – whether studying acupuncture and Oriental medicine, chiropractic or massage therapy – you learn about natural health care beyond your own field of study. You’re exposed to students in other academic programs and interact with healthcare providers in multiple disciplines […] we prepare you to effectively interact with other healthcare professionals to provide integrative care, whether you’re a solo practitioner or part of a larger clinical practice. You'll be able to communicate with healthcare providers from medical schools, nursing schools, physical therapy programs, and other allopathic or natural health schools.”

So, there's integrative, educate, professional, natural healthcare, and that term allopathic.

But, as has been said by me many times, what are we blending or integrating?

Because wine plus mud does not result in something that's potable.

The good stuff is ruined, and the bad stuff gets to benefit from the good stuff's reputation.

Now, historically speaking, NWHSU, like National University of Health Sciences in Illinois, was once solely a chiropractic college.

We're told in “Northwestern History" [2015 archived]:

“founded in 1941 as Northwestern College of Chiropractic, Northwestern Health Sciences University has grown in size and influence in the practice of natural health care in Minnesota and beyond […] Northwestern has grown in size, scope, and influence […] it still holds to its founder’s vision: a high-quality, science-based education that prepares practitioners for the ever-growing field of natural health care [...and it speaks of a] rigorous academic program [...and] the quality of the students and faculty [...and] other natural healthcare degree programs […] in 1983, the [then] college moved to its current location, a 25-acre campus in Bloomington, Minnesota, just south of Minneapolis. The new complex provided students with all the structure and amenities of a university […] in 1999, Northwestern Health Sciences University was established to reflect its new identity as a leader in natural healthcare education, clinical services and research […] the College of Undergraduate Health Sciences was created in 2011.”

So, there's “science-based” subset “natural health care” in Minnesota, promised as “high-quality [...as] rigorous […academically as a] sciences university” -level education.

And of course, this is a label of science upon the “integrative.”

And growth, growth, growth.

I glean there's a BURNING desire for this institution to get an ND-program up and running.

After all, an ND or NMD is often marketed as the terminal degree in “natural” healthcare, and they've had NDs on staff for quite some time, and are clinically practicing naturopathy at the school.

We'll see.

Other Specific NWHSU Claims of “Science-Based”:

A Science Label Upon Chiropractic:

There's the NWHSU Chiropractic College page "Science-Based Curriculum" [2015 archived], with a person looking through a microscope, which states:

"the basis for effective chiropractic care begins with a strong foundation in the basic sciences. Study the core basic sciences. When you learn the why behind the how, you build a strong foundation for practice success with our core basic science curriculum. Your courses include gross anatomy, human physiology, microbiology, biochemistry, histology and the neurological sciences. Learn about: normal human structure and function, pathology and dysfunction, disease processes at the cellular level, the process of inflammation. Learn from experts in the sciences. Our faculty include those who hold dual degrees in clinical and basic sciences, for example a PhD and DC. Our faculty understand the essential role of a strong scientific foundation in the success of a future doctor of chiropractic. You can get one-on-one help from our faculty, who are approachable and have a strong desire to help you succeed. Become a well-informed doctor. Our science-based curriculum helps you develop the critical thinking skills needed for an evidence-informed practice. Understanding underlying pathology enables you to make informed clinical decisions, including diagnosis, treatment planning and the need for referral. The curriculum: Trimesters 1 and 2. Emphasize basic sciences, introductory radiology, and chiropractic principles and methods. Trimesters 3-8. Complete the basic sciences, moves to the clinical and chiropractic sciences (including pathology and diagnosis), and proceeds to advanced methods and radiology. Trimesters 4-10. Integrate basic science education with clinical and chiropractic sciences as students deliver patient care during clinical clerkships and internships. View entire chiropractic curriculum outline."

So, science science science.

Of course, strangely enough, chiropractic really hasn't gotten ANYWHERE in terms of its treatment method in the past several decades in terms of efficacy as compared to conventional medicine's.

[See the documentary "The Alternative Medicine Racket: How the Feds Fund Quacks" which mentions how an NIH study states: "the concepts of chiropractic are not based on solid science."]

I've never seen the point of chiropractic, and I sat at UB for about four or so semesters sharing classes with chiropractic students and being taught by chiropractors while is was in the naturopathy program there.

Actually, half of my UB transcript says my classes were within the chiropractic department.

I see it as a joint-cracking traveling sideshow based on a false theory to begin with.

A Science Label Upon Massage:


"Northwestern Health Sciences University's science-based massage therapy curriculum […] as a Northwestern Health Sciences massage therapy student […] Northwestern Health Sciences University's School of Massage Therapy […] Northwestern Health Sciences' Massage Therapy Program benefits: a comprehensive science-based curriculum."

So, it's safe to say NWHSU loves that science-based label upon its contents.

NWHSU's Many Naturopathy Pages:

Now, oddly enough:

I don't get any search results for “medicatrix” at all or "healing power of nature" as relates directly to naturopathy, through google.com, currently at their site,
.
.
.
but “naturopathy [...and] naturopathic” are quite abundant, as well as homeopathy and homeopathic, and “science-based” and of course “health sciences.”

There's the current NWHSU page “Natural Care Center at Woodwinds” [vsc 2015-05-17; 2015 archived] which lists as “healthcare providers […a] naturopathic doctor” and which has a link to “patient forms [...for] naturopathic medicine” and has “clinical services […] naturopathic medicine”.

On that page, they also tell us:

“the Natural Care Center at Woodwinds is an integrative health clinic which provides chiropractic, acupuncture, Chinese herbal medicine, massage therapy, naturopathic medicine and physical therapy services.”

So, they're in the business of naturopathy, clinically speaking.

They practice naturopathy at NWHSU under the banner “science.”

So much for my 'charity of science stringency'.

Affirming their naturopathic clinical activity is the NWHSU page "Clinical Services" [2015 archived] which states:

"Northwestern Health Sciences University is a leader in the field of integrative and collaborative care with our team-based care. Through well-developed, evidence-informed care pathways, our patients are experiencing improved outcomes and high satisfaction [...] we make evidence-informed decisions based on your individual needs [...] we offer chiropractic, acupuncture, Chinese herbal medicine, massage therapy, naturopathic medicine, physical therapy and healing touch services [really, healing touch...] naturopathic medicine prevents or addresses illness and restores health by recognizing the body’s innate healing ability. Your naturopathic doctor will offer treatment plans that include nutrition, lifestyle counseling, botanical or ayurvedic medicine, and homeopathy. Your diagnosis may require lab tests and the treatment plan my include natural supplements and vitamins."

So, there's integrative, evidence, CAM, naturopathy, coded vitalism, ayurveda, and homeopathy, and supplements.

So, therein, we get the epistemic claim at NWHSU, in an academic '.edu' setting of HIGHER education:

science subset naturopathy and contents, and all these similar kinds.

The broad or categorical claim that naturopathy is within science.

That's right, “sciences” as a categorical label there, in the name of the school, and therefore “sciences” as a categorical label upon the school's academic contents and clinical activities, and therefore “science” as a categorical descriptor for such things as:

NWHSU's homeopathy as stand-alone homeopathy, and the homeopathy that's within NWHSU's naturopathy.

That is so UNTRUE, categorically.

And I certainly think that when you say “health sciences university”, a certain kind of PROMISE is being made upon the school's academic contents and activities, which echoes the overseer's language:

like 'what we're saying is academically scientifically true.'

But I get the feeling we are being DICTATED as in RULED by an authority:

this is what we say we are, and what matters here at NWHSU is that we say “science.”

Science's actuality on the other hand is quite not true.

By way of naturopathy, ND Ratte – who works at NWHSU, as we'll see in detail -- had promised to: “educate [...and]empower.”

How is what's false able to do that?

Such is the state of HIGHER education in Minnesota:

false claims upon academic contents and academic clinical activities.

And as regards supplements, supplements, supplements for health issues, well, once a body of thought says homeopathy is “powerful”, as the NCNM NDs like Ratte are taught [2015 archived], and then that body thought says something else, anything ELSE also WORKS, I am SKEPTICAL.

Because when nonsense is falsely posed as GREAT by whatever source, then I think all judgments from that source are highly suspect, since values are then reversed and standards are without stringency.

The homepage for NWHSU catalogs is the page “University Catalog” [2015 archived].


“Northwestern's Natural Care Centers are unique, integrative natural health care clinics providing chiropractic, acupuncture, Oriental medicine, massage therapy, physical therapy, sports medicine, naturopathic medicine, healing touch, and advanced practice nursing services [...] The Natural Care Centers feature a variety of patient services, including chiropractic, massage therapy, acupuncture, Oriental medicine, healing touch, naturopathy and advanced practice nursing services […] faculty[…] Nita J. Champion, Assistant Professor […] ND, Southwest College of Naturopathic Medicine, 2007 […] Amrit Devgun, Assistant Professor […] ND, Canadian College of Naturopathic Medicine, Toronto, 1995 […] Paul J. Ratté, Assistant Professor […] ND, National College of Naturopathic Medicine, 1997 [...] credential references [...] ND Doctor of Naturopathic Medicine.”

So, the NDs at nwhealth.edu are or have been:

Champion, Devgun, and Ratte, whose practice pages we talked about in Part 2a.

If you recall, as I'd quoted from in Part 1 of this Episode, ND Ratte apparently wrote the UMN naturopathy page with all those false BROAD science categorizations of naturopathy and its contents, as a “expert contributor”.

At nwhealth.edu, ND Ratte's faculty web page, “Paul Ratte” [2015 archived], states he's an:

“assistant professor [...in the colleges of] chiropractic [...and] acupuncture and oriental medicine [...and a] lecturer [in the] college of acupuncture and oriental medicine [...and we're told he has a] doctor of naturopathy, National College of Naturopathic Medicine, 1997.”

And on the nwhealth.edu page "Instructors - Annual License Renewal Seminar 2014" [2015 archived] we're told:

"Paul Ratté, a naturopathic doctor, is an authority on functional medicine, a science-based health care approach that improves physiological function and restores health. He is a 1997 graduate of the National College of Naturopathic Medicine in Portland, Oregon. He is an assistant professor at Northwestern Health Sciences University where he teaches clinical nutrition to chiropractic, acupuncture and massage therapy students. Ratté is also a practitioner at Rhythm of Health, Inc. in Woodbury, Minnesota, where he creates personalized wellness programs for his patients that prioritize their health concerns and reflect their commitment to change. He believes it is not enough to treat disease using natural medicine, aspiring instead to teach health using nutrition, resilience and physical activity. He is a passionate proponent of integrated health care and has experience collaborating with medical professionals to provide the best care for his clients."

So, functional medicine as science based, natural, and best.

Yet, “functional medicine” has its critics.

At the scienceblogs.com blog Respectful Insolence, in 2013's "Naturopathy, Functional Medicine, and Other Quackademic Medicine at the University Of Kansas Medical Center", Orac writes:

"functional medicine, a nebulously defined 'specialty,' is pure quackery, as has been described before."

What I find most interesting relating to Ratte is the nwhealth.edu page "Raul Ratte, ND" [2010 archived] which states:

"Dr Ratte is a licensed naturopathic physician who graduated from National College of Naturopathic Medicine in Portland, Oregon. His vision is to provide a systematic and comprehensive approach to health based upon physiological function. He educates, empowers, and motivates clients towards self-reliant health in body, mind, and spirit. He is an accomplished public speaker with a strong interest in the promotion of wellness and preventative medicine. He currently teaches and practices at Northwestern Health Sciences University."

Let's talk of such naturopathic scatolalia, for a moment:

the shit it speaks.

If you look at what naturopathy is by way of NCNM, you'd see that what they claim as able to survive scientific scrutiny can't and doesn't, like vital forces and supernaturalism and such things as homeopathy, yet here we have an expertise claimed regarding “physiological function” by ND Ratte, and the placement of supernaturalism within science.

Which is quite CONTRADICTED by Minnesota state kindergarten science standards.

And as regards “physiological function”, well, that is quite the redundancy, me thinks.

It seems to say 'of functional function', kind of like saying 'anatomical anatomy' aka 'of structural structure.'

MORE naturopathy mindlessness:

like their typical label upon themselves as “a distinct system that blends” and 'general practitioners who specialize'.

The nwhealth.edu page “Naturopathic Doctor” [2015 archived] states:

“your doctor will recommend a treatment plan that includes nutrition, lifestyle counseling, homeopathy, and botanical or ayurvedic medicine. Your treatment plan will prevent or address illness and restore health by recognizing your body’s innate healing ability. Learn more about naturopathic medicine [and the link is to...] Amrit Devgun, ND.”

So, there's homeopathy, ayurveda, and coded vitalism.

And as I'd mentioned earlier, ND Devgun's bio.page  mentions a special interest in “iridology [...and] detoxification.”

Speaking of naturopathy's iridology, there is, in fact, up in Ontario Canada – the location of the ND's alma mater CCNM – a program now in place by OAND, the Ontario naturopaths' association, titled “Legacy Project.”

In the vimeo.com video "OAND - The Naturopathic Medicine Legacy Project (FULL)" (saved 2015-08-15) we're told:

"[from the description] OAND - The Naturopathic Medicine Legacy Project: Acquire, Transfer and Archive Naturopathic Medical Wisdom and Knowledge.  Legacy Project Seminar Series [...] the seminar videos are a monthly hands-on workshop series by the Naturopathic Legacy Committee, whose mandate is to preserve and teach core clinical methodologies of naturopathic elders which are critical to advancing the profession [...from the video] Dr. Helena Ovens, FCAH, CCH, CBHT: Homeopathic First Aid [...] principles of naturopathic medicine [...include #3] vis medicatrix naturae: use the healing power of nature.  Naturopathic medicine stimulates the patient's vital force, also known as qi, chi, prana and life force.  This increase in energy facilitates the healing response [...] Dr. Edie Pett, ND, DT: Iridology [shows the iridology homunculus of Jensen...] Dr. Avram Sussman, ND, DC: Body, Mind and Spirit in Action: Talking with the Human Energy Field [including the use of a pendulum]."

Yes, that's homeopathy, vitalism, iridology, and energy pendulums.

This is what they value as "core clinical methodologies."

By the way, it is OAND on the page "About Naturopathic Medicine" who states:

"naturopathic doctors treat the root causes of disease and address preventable risk factors, using a wide range of science-and evidence-based, natural and conventional therapies."

But SCIENCE isn't whatever you want it to be, you learn that in kindergarten actually.

nwhealth.edu's other page also titled “Naturopathic Doctor” [2014 archived] states the same and links to the NWHSU page:

“Stephani Waldron-Trapp, ND.”

If you remember from Part 2a, that ND is a HUGE proponent of homeoprophylaxis.


“I am a doctor of naturopathic medicine at the Bloomington Natural Care Center. I educate my patients on how to address their healthcare concerns through a combination of lifestyle changes and natural medicine and therapy. I provide lifestyle guidance to help my patients improve their nutrition, physical activity, sleep/wake patterns and stress levels. I prescribe natural supplements and therapies that may include homeopathy, herbal medicine, Bach Flower remedies, vitamins, minerals, amino acids and water therapy. Specific recommendations for detoxification and weight loss or weight management may be included. I have a specialty interest in women’s health which includes balancing hormones and reducing depression, anxiety and fatigue. I specialize in balancing gastrointestinal function to improve digestion and absorption of nutrients, providing treatment protocols to manage pain, chronic diarrhea and/or constipation, and resolving eating disorders. I also enjoy working with the pediatric population, as I have children of my own which give me great insight into their world. Education [...] doctor of naturopathy, University of Bridgeport, 2005. Special interests [...] detoxification/purification.”

So there's educate, natural, supplements, homeopathy, a wide net, and detoxification.

Yet, at the nwhealth.edu page “Naturopathic Medicine” [2014 archived] we're told:

“naturopathic medicine services are no longer available.”

It seems some changes are going on.

One site seems to be called Woodwinds, and the other site is Bloomington.

It adds:

“naturopathic medicine is a form of health care that consists of diagnosing, treating and preventing disorders by using natural methods, medicines and remedies. It is based on the foundation that your body has the ability to self-heal […] treatment approaches include nutrition, lifestyle counseling, botanical or herbal medicine, homeopathy, and detoxification […] naturopathic medicine can treat […] acute care and injuries […] allergies and immune system disorders […] food or environmental allergies, recurring colds and infections […] osteoarthritis [and] rheumatoid arthritis […] cancer […] cardiovascular conditions […] digestive disorders […] emotional issues […] pediatric conditions […] skin disorders […] women’s health issues.“

So, there's coded vitalism, homeopathy, detoxification, and a wide net.

NWHSU: Full of Woo:

Here are some other pages from NWHSU that are within their categorical label “science” because they are HAPPENING there.

There's applied kinesiology woo, in "Kinesiology Applied to Functional Medicine" [2014 archived].

There's homeopathy, by way of "Tim McCollough, DC, DABCI" [2008 archived].


So, Fully Accredited Bullshit:

So, NWHSU has the same crap going on in terms of naturopathy that UMN does.

NWHSU's accrediting HLC, as I've mentioned, is ALSO the accreditor for UMN.

As UMN tells us in “Accreditation”:

“all campuses of the University of Minnesota operate with the accreditation of the Higher Learning Commission.”

Reflexively I have to state:

isn't accreditation BULLSHIT.

Insuring NOTHING.

Schools don't do what they MUST, they do what they WANT.

I've been there myself.

I attended the ND program at UB for four years, a school that's FULLY accredited and yet we get such craziness as a claim that naturopathy is within a “division of health sciences” while containing to this day the science-ejected homeopathic and a very strange belief system that's also science exterior

And I'll lead you to some links at archive.org regarding Dean Peter Martin [here for the essential vitalism; here for that "scientific medicine" claim while including "the synthesis of body, mind and spirit"].

So, I'd say this about accreditation by way of naturopathy:

it is a marketing PLOY.

The overseers are accomplices and co-conspirators.

That's what I think, that's how it seems.

Reflections on Episode 10:

Well, I've got an episode question to answer, after all that heavy lifting concerning naturopathy in Minnesota.

And I'd mentioned that I'd include a couple pages from national science organizations, of some kind.

This Episode's question was:

“what does the abundant CATEGORICAL false labelings of naturopathy's contents as science, as demonstrated by Minnesota post-secondary academic institutions, indicate regarding the ethicality of contemporary U.S. higher education, and its regard for consumer protections and patient informed consent?”

To get to an answer for this question, I'll pick just two items within naturopathy's many items that both UMN and NWHSU claim are science, which patently aren't.

There's the claim that homeopathy as science, which is batshit crazy, though this is what AANP-CAND naturopathy maintains.

Recently, at sciencebasedmedicine.org, Jann Bellamy posted the article "Society for Science-Based Medicine: Comment to FDA on Homeopathic Drug Regulation" (2015-08-06), which stated:

"the Society for Science-Based Medicine welcomes the FDA’s examination of homeopathic prescription and OTC drug regulation. In many respects, the current regulation of homeopathic drugs resembles that of all drugs prior to the passage of the Food, Drug & Cosmetic Act in 1938 (FD&C Act) [...wherein] there was no premarket regulation.”

And that is not good, unless you are a CRAZY libertarian who thinks 'the necessary rules for a civilization impede FREEDOM.'

Because before such consumer protection, there was EGREGIOUS exploitation and harm, like the case of Eben Byers. 

SSBM We're told:

“according to the FDA, Americans now spend about $3 billion a year on homeopathic drugs […] proponents of homeopathic products testifying at the hearing gave examples of available online sources […] these sources simply repeat the unproven claims that homeopathy is safe and effective for a wide range of diseases […] the website of the National Center for Homeopathy [...] contains information that can only be described as fantastical from a scientific standpoint [...and] the American Institute for Homeopathy website states that homeopathic remedies 'stimulate the person’s own healing power,' which is nothing more than vitalism, a pre-scientific, and long-rejected, belief in an incorporeal 'healing force' erroneously credited with healing powers. It falsely claims that homeopathic drugs are 'deep-acting medicines [that] can be used to treat persons experiencing many kinds of medical conditions' […] the homeopathic industry has the public fooled […] consumers apparently have no understanding that the perceived 'effectiveness' of homeopathic products could well be due to such things as the natural course of disease, motivated reasoning, placebo responses, regression to the mean, confirmation bias, conditioning, the post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy, or the effect of other treatments. In fact, from a scientific standpoint, these are the only plausible explanations for the putative effectiveness of homeopathic products […] there has been no objective, third-party confirmation of safety and effectiveness by the FDA or otherwise. Claims of efficacy are in direct contradiction to basic principles of physics and chemistry and no reputable scientific authority supports the fantastical postulates upon which homeopathic remedies are reputed to 'work.' Clinical trials confirm the obvious: homeopathic drugs do not work as claimed […] the FDA is fortunate that the Australian National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) recently completed a comprehensive evaluation of the evidence. The resulting analysis, 'Effectiveness of Homeopathy for Clinical Conditions: Evaluation of the Evidence' (2015), concluded: 'there is a paucity of good-quality studies of sufficient size that examine the effectiveness of homeopathy as a treatment for any clinical condition in humans. The available evidence is not compelling and fails to demonstrate that homeopathy is an effective treatment for any of the reported clinical conditions in humans […] based on the assessment of the evidence of effectiveness of homeopathy, NHMRC concludes that there is no health condition for which there is reliable evidence that homeopathy is effective' […and] the UK House of Commons Science and Technology Committee, in its 'Evidence Check 2: Homeopathy,' after a review of the evidence, concluded: 'in our view, the systematic reviews and meta-analyses conclusively demonstrate that homeopathic products perform no better than placebos. We could find no support from independent experts for the idea that there is good evidence for the efficacy of homeopathy'.”

In conclusion, we're told:

“nothing in the FD&C Act permits the FDA to avoid its regulatory mandate [...] homeopathy is highly implausible, unsupported by scientific evidence, ineffective in treating illness and, when relied upon instead of actual medicine, dangerous and even deadly. The FDA should apply the FD&C Act as Congress intended. The law offers no exception for homeopathic products."

And my response to all this is:

hear, hear.

And there's the even more egregious area of supernaturalism as science, which is quite DANGEROUS in terms of basic human rights, in my view:

because when someone tells you that something you CAN choose to believe or not believe is an OBJECTIVE FACT instead, falsely claiming that a belief is a fact, then that person or organization is taking away CHOICES from you by curtailing a basic FREEDOM.

I cannot help but cite two things from Bastyr University, an ND-granting school unlike UMN and NWHSU, first and foremost, as a microcosm of this claim of science subset supernaturalism.

Bastyr states in "Who We Are":

"[that they have a] a multidisciplinary curriculum in science-based natural medicine [...as] natural health sciences."

Bastyr then states that this science area has:

"an emphasis on integrating mind, body, spirit and nature."

So science, that will not stay in its cage, so to speak, but can be, basically, ANYTHING.

That's not what Minnesota teaches its kindergartners!

Also, Bastyr recently emailed me a newsletter, this 2015 [2015 archived], which stated, in an article written by “Mallory Anderson, ND, resident at Bastyr Center for NATURAL Health”:

“running can shape up your body, mind and spirit.”

The spirit part:

how do you MEASURE that, Bastyr, in terms of your science subset spirit epistemic claim?

I call BULLSHIT.

What's funny is that the article states:

“running improves overall mental health and cognitive performance, relieves stress, increases confidence, builds strength in the muscles and joints, provides weight control, strengthens the immune system, promotes cardiovascular health and reduces blood pressure.“

How secular, how mundane:

all of that is psychology and physiology.

Where's that spirit part?

You promised in your title SPIRIT.

You keep offering things that aren't THERE.

Now, in my view, from a point of view of scientific skepticism, science polluted with supernaturalism is like wine polluted with mud.

It is the mixing of vastly differing kinds, and to then call the whole thing 'still wine', is quite erroneous.

It's like stating 2 + 2 equals 5.

And we've seen, on an ELEMENTARY level, that science is naturalistic, not supernatural-containing.

Now, up at PBS -- and I can think of no better, BIGGER, mainstream source regarding a definition of science, in terms of 'a consensus' -- there's the page "Defining Science Transcript".

The text is for the 2007 NOVA documentary “Judgment Day: Intelligent Design on Trial”. 

The documentary mentions:

“the very nature of scientific inquiry […as relates to] legitimate science or religion in disguise.”

I think naturopathy would be appalled that such a DISTINCTION is POSSIBLE:

they'd rather INTEGRATE, as in blend and conflate.

It's easier, it's simplistic.

By the way, I highly enjoy Ken Miller's comment, regarding putting intelligent design or nonscience into science:

“it's a violation of everything me mean, and everything we understand, by science […] it makes people stupid.”

And I'd call naturopathy's similar 'putting' as 'a STUPID violation'.

Anyway, the transcript states:

"Nick Matzke, Public Information Project Director, National Center for Science Education [of which I am a member, by the way, I must declare...] avoiding the supernatural: one of the core features of science for hundreds of years has been the reliance on natural explanations. And while it's true that there's various gray areas in defining the edges of science, in distinguishing science from pseudoscience, the issue of the supernatural is not one of those gray areas. If you really look at the history of science, many scientific fields really didn't get started until supernatural explanations were discarded and natural explanations were adopted […as in] a useful, natural explanation for a natural phenomenon and come up with a solution to a natural problem [...] Ken Miller, biologist, Brown University. Science and religion: there are a lot of ways to define science. But I think the best definition is one that I've actually seen several states adopt for their K-12 educational programs, and that is that science is the human activity of seeking natural explanations for what we see in the natural world […] saying that the supernatural can be investigated by science, which always has to work by natural tools and mechanisms, that's simply incorrect […] by placing the supernatural as a cause in science, you effectively have what you might call a science-stopper. If you attribute an event to the supernatural, you can by definition investigate it no further […] Robert T. Pennock, philosopher and evolutionary scientist, Michigan State University […] natural explanations: science is characterized, if nothing else, by its methods. It's not just the discoveries that we've made. It's characterized by the way of thinking, a way of providing answers in terms of empirical evidence […] there's a big fancy term for this, it's methodological naturalism, scientific naturalism. And it says we can't appeal to the transcendent; we can't appeal to the divine […] what creationists hope to do is to change the ground rules of science and to reintroduce supernatural explanations into science. That's the thing that disqualifies it […] Eugenie Scott, Executive Director, National Center for Science Education. Science tests its claims […] a scientific view. Science makes its decisions by testing its claims, not just by accepting them because they sound good. So, because we have to test our claims, we can only use natural claims, because natural claims are the only ones we can test. Natural claims are the only ones that we can hold constant variables for. They are the only claims that we can control variables for. You can't control for the effects of god."

In the video, an ACLU lawyer states:

"when you loosen the rules around what is science and permit the supernatural, permit deities, you are really destroying what makes science so vitally important to the progress that our civilization has witnessed over the last four or five hundred years. You are going back before the scientific revolution. And that's a pretty scary thing."

And the narrator states:

"with the scientific revolution, the work of Galileo, Newton and others banished supernatural explanations from science."

Now, from the point of view of basic human rights, freedom of belief and disbelief, freedom of religion, is a basic human right and I highly respect other's right to belief, or not believe, whatever they so choose in the realm of what I'll term articles of faith.

Wikipedia defines such freedom of belief in "Freedom of Religion" stating:

"a principle that supports the freedom of an individual or community, in public or private, to manifest religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship, and observance; the concept is generally recognized also to include the freedom to change religion or not to follow any religion [...and we're reminded] The Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen (1789) guarantees freedom of religion, as long as religious activities do not infringe on public order in ways detrimental to society."

Now, here's a weird concurrence"


One of my favorite Paine quotes is:

“what we obtain too cheap, we esteem too lightly; it is dearness only that gives everything its value.”

In other words, let's think a little harder and a little deeper, let's not be so shallow, let's have an historical memory.

Paine, of course, is the author of “The Rights of Man”, if you recall from your ELEMENTARY history.

So I'll add this quote from that:

“rights are inherently in all the inhabitants.”

And what I'll say is this, bluntly:

naturopathy does NOT have the right to redefine science to support its own 'New Age whatever beliefs and practices' or its prescientific 'preferred beliefs and practices.'

And naturopathy does not have the right to NOT warn, up-front, about its redefinitions.

And naturopathy definitely doesn't have the right to engage in commerce, of any kind including academic, under false labels.

That is DETRIMENTAL to scientific integrity and freedom of belief, and to society.

As Paine wrote:

“each societal institution that does not benefit the nation is illegitimate.”

And naturopathy is an illegitimate profession because it is based on falsehood.

Now, I must talk of tolerance, because I can picture naturopathy responding I am being persecuting and intolerant.

Wikipedia defines tolerance in "Tolerance" as:

"tolerance or toleration [...] the state of tolerating, or putting up with, conditionally, also to suggest a fair, objective, and permissive attitude toward those whose opinions, practices, race, religion, nationality, etc., differ from one's own; freedom from bigotry."

Now, it is not intolerant to require that naturopathy be up-front in terms of its contents.

It's not bigoted to require that naturopathy engage in fair trade, in whatever contexts:

be it clinically or academically.

Now, naturopaths are really BIG on claiming that they treat the root cause.

Well, here's my epistemic diagnosis, which gets to the heart of the matter regarding naturopathy:

both the false labeling of 'homeopathy and supernaturalism as within science' are merely symptoms of naturopathy's underlying disorder, epistemic conflation posed as epistemic distinction.

That is the blending of knowledge kinds posed as one knowledge kind.

So, with naturopathy as a microcosm or biopsy of higher education, particularly in Minnesota, here's an answer to my episode question:

higher education is NOT SO HIGH.

Therein, not so ETHICAL, as in GOOD.

This is not what SHOULD happen:

falsehood elevated, a reversal of values.

Consumer protection and patient informed consent DON'T, in the naturopathy realm, exist.

CRAZY runs the asylum.

Now, my episode wouldn't be complete without talk of the MONEY involved with this naturopathy apparatus and racket.

This is, after all, higher education in America.

The Princeton Review, I must say, has been CORRUPTED with naturopathy's marketing.

The princetonreview.com page "Naturopathy/Naturopathic Medicine" [2015 archived] states:

"naturopathic medicine [...is] a holistic approach [...] a collection of ancient practice[s...] rather than isolating and treating patients’ symptoms alone, naturopathic practitioners focus on the complete well-being of a person and consider the patient an active participant in their own recovery and well-being.”

So, there's holistic, ancient, a swipe at conventional medicine, an idea of being comprehensive, and posed empowerment.

And I have to say, that “complete well-being”, in my view, is this kind of thing:

wearing the white lab coat of science and underneath wearing the black vestment of the ministry, of the lergy.

Complete, as in EVERYTHING under the sun and BEYOND into the metaphysical supernatural divine etc., but then calling the whole thing “science.”

We're told:

“in addition to the same basic science and clinical training conventional medical doctors receive, naturopathy students are grounded in naturopathic philosophy and theory and explore an exhaustive array of both Western and Eastern medical techniques.”

So, I think that is a BLEND.

Specifically, they state that blend includes:

“classical Chinese medicine, nutrition, herbal medicine and homeopathy, natural childbirth, hydrotherapy and naturopathic manipulative therapy, as well as standard medical practices such as pharmacology, diagnostic medicine, and surgery.”

And finally, the description states:

“graduates are eligible to take state board exams for licensure [...] as a naturopathic physician (N.D.)."

So, there's that NPLEX.You know, the so rigorous test for ND licensure that falsely labels homeopathy as “clinical science.”

The page then gets to the money side of things.

We're told:

"according to a survey by the American Association of Naturopathic Physicians, naturopathic doctors generally earn in the low- to mid-range of family practice doctors. A beginning N.D., just starting up his or her practice, working part-time or building a staff, may earn between $20,000 to $30,000 per year. However, an N.D. who runs or partners in a large, busy practice makes an average estimated income of $80,000 to $90,000 per year--and may make upwards of $200,000."

And I'd say that is done under the banners of “science-based” and efficacious, including homeopathy and a whole bunch of other weird things science says is junk, along with things that are rather conventional.

So, how many NDs are practicing in North America doing such?

The ucsf.edu 2001 Arkay Report stated that at that time, there were about 2000 licensed naturopaths.

So lets adjust some numbers since it is 14 years later.

I'll guess there are 4000 naturopaths now between the CAND and AANP and their seven schools, and I'll multiply that number by that $80,000 in INCOME, and that about $320 million dollars in income yearly.

Of course, I'm just guessing right now, but I feel I'm low-balling it all.

Now, as regards the education apparatus, the same Princeton Review page tells us about the tuition and enrollment of five ND schools out of the seven in North America.

And basically, with some guesstimating as well, I get to a combined TUITION ONLY number that those students will spend of about $175 million for their four years of ND schooling.

So, CRAZY not only runs the asylum, CRAZY has a FAT WALLET.

And that's only tuition, they take out massive loans for cost of living during those four years as well.

And naturopathy didn't get to where they are now:

truthfully, accurately, actually, or transparently.
Post a Comment