001. ND Oxbro writes, in "Three Common Myths About Naturopathy" (2016-01-01)(2016 archived):
"Dr. Kimberly Oxbro, B.Sc., M.Sc., ND, of Nova Health Naturopathic Center has a master’s degree in pharmacology and understands the importance of conventional medicine. But as a naturopath, she has a better understanding of the important role of scientifically studied alternative therapies and how these options can often be safer without resorting to the use of traditional medicine and surgery [...]";
so, there's some talk of SCIENCE. As a credential particularly in terms of pharmacology. And the claim of "a better understanding" than, presumably, conventional doctors.
"there are still many common myths about naturopathy [...#1, that] naturopathy is completely unscientific. This may be the most often heard misconception. Like traditional medicine, naturopathy is based on research, with many studies showing the healthy benefits of natural medicine. Like medical doctors, naturopaths are required to undergo extensive training before becoming certified to treat patients [...]";
so, I take that as a claim that naturopathy is scientific, essentially. Now, if naturopathy is based on research, then WHY OH WHY does it contain the hugely science-ejected, like HOMEOPATHY?
002. ND Oxbro's homeopathy:
002.a. on her practice page "FAQs" (2016 archived), we're told:
"what is the difference between naturopathic medicine and homeopathy? Homeopathic medicine is just one of many therapies that NDs may use to treat conditions. Homeopathy is based on the principle of 'like cures like' using minute amounts of natural substances to stimulate the body’s self-healing abilities. NDs are trained in homeopathy, however, it is only one of many other natural medicine modalities in their education";
I think that BELIES that broad 'naturopathy is science' label that the ND poses. Posing naturopathy as categorically "science" is a myth. Myths posing as truths is part of naturopathy's reversal of values.
beware of licensed FALSEHOOD this 2016!