Monday, January 30, 2017

NDNR 2017 - ND Sharif Says Homeopathy is "Highly Effective" Defying the FTC

here, a naturopathy publication and ND lauding 'the inane homeopathic' while the Federal Trade Commission notes that homeopathic products "lack reliable scientific evidence to support their claims":

001. at Naturopathic Doctor News and Review, in "Homeopathy for Digestive Disorders" (2017) [2017 archived; I'm citing from the paper-based version], ND Sharif writes:

"homeopathic remedies can be highly effective in treating acute digestive conditions such as the stomach flu, bloody diarrhea, and pancreatitis, as well as chronic digestive conditions such as inflammatory bowel disease and hemorrhoids [...]";

but actually, homeopathy is an empty placebo and we known this through rigorous scientific analysis.  Yet we're told "highly effective", not just merely effective!

"[and his bio. tells us] Sharum Sharif, ND, has a primary care practice in Kent, Washington, and is an Affiliate Clinical Faculty at Bastyr University. He Is a graduate of Bastyr University and New England School of Homeopathy [...] he has taught homeopathy at naturopathic medical schools in the United States and Canada [...]";

let's go to that practice in 003., and Bastyr in 004.

002. the Federal Trade Commission tells us in "Homeopathy: Not Backed by Modern Science" [2017 archived]:

"marketers of traditional homeopathic products claim they effectively treat symptoms, but lack reliable scientific evidence to support their claims [...] traditional homeopathic products lack reliable scientific evidence for their claims of effectiveness.  Homeopathy is based on a theory from the 1700’s that is not generally accepted within today’s scientific community [...]";

ouch!!! True that. 

003. at the ND's practice, we're told in "Is Homeopathy Scientific?" [2017 archived]:

"indeed homeopathy cannot be more scientific [...]";

ah, no.  That's insane.

004. at bastyr.edu: 

Bastyr claims its contents, including naturopathy's homeopathy, is "science-based".  So beware.  Their idea of what is science is quite, let's say, 'permissive.'  The FTC has other words for false claims in the marketplace, whether goods or services.
Post a Comment