Thursday, August 16, 2018

Unrestrained: There's No Science in Vermont's Naturopathy Law

here, would you believe [how sweet for grifting]:

001. at, currently there's their "The Vermont Statutes Online Title 26: Professions And Occupations Chapter 81: Naturopathic Physicians" [2018 archived] which states:

"the Vermont Statutes Online. Title 26: Professions And Occupations Chapter 81: Naturopathic Physicians  § 4121. Definitions As used in this chapter: (1) 'Acupuncture' means the insertion of fine needles through the skin at certain points on the body, with or without the application of electric current or the application of heat to the needles or skin, or both, for the purpose of promoting health and balance as defined by traditional and modern Oriental theories. (2) 'Approved naturopathic medical college' means a college which grants a degree of doctor of naturopathic medicine or doctor of naturopathy: (A) is accredited by the Council of Naturopathic Medical Education, its successor, or other accrediting agency recognized by the United States Department of Education; (B) has attained candidate for accreditation status with such agency; or (C) meets educational standards essentially equivalent to those established by such accrediting agency [...]";

so, so the Vermont .gov is right behind those NDs and their apparatus.  With quackupuncture baked in, and mention of those ND schools which allow science subset nonscience nonsense which is the CNME's mode and that the USDE has to problem with.

"'naturopathic physician' is a person who practices naturopathic medicine and is licensed under this chapter [...] 'naturopathic medicine' or 'the practice of naturopathic medicine' means a system of health care that utilizes education, natural medicines, and natural therapies to support and stimulate a patient's intrinsic self-healing processes and to prevent, diagnose, and treat human health conditions, injuries, and pain [...] a person licensed under this chapter may use the designations 'N.D.,' 'doctor of naturopathic medicine,' 'naturopathic doctor,' 'doctor of naturopathy,'or 'naturopathic physician;"

so, coded vitalism.

"[and ND may] administer or provide for preventative and therapeutic purposes nonprescription medicines, topical medicines, botanical medicines, homeopathic medicines, counseling, hypnotherapy, nutritional and dietary therapy, naturopathic physical medicine, naturopathic childbirth, therapeutic devices, barrier devices for contraception, and prescription medicines authorized by this chapter [...]";

so, therein we see standards so lax that homeopathic garbage is approved.  And nowhere is this web page is the root "scien."

"[and we also get] conduct that evidences moral unfitness to practice naturopathic medicine [...] willful misrepresentation in treatments"; 

oh the irony...You must be morally fit though your premises are willfull mistrepresentations.  And don't worry about the limitations of science-based and such, do whatever.  And keep up the coded sectarianisms...

Wednesday, August 15, 2018

The Illinois State Medical Society's Position on Naturopathy in Terms of Science

here, the Illinois State Medical Society's position on naturopathy in terms of science:

001. the ISMS states in "Opposition to Licensure of Naturopathic 'Physicians' – HB 3508" [2018 archived]:

"there is no consistent application of evidenced-based principles and scientific study for naturopathic treatments. The naturopathic profession’s reluctance and/or inability to apply evidence-based principles and scientific study to its treatment modalities is of great concern. The mechanism of action and the efficacy of many naturopathic treatment modalities are not scientifically supported, and many are considered unsafe yet continue to be offered to patients";


Tuesday, August 14, 2018

SBM's MD Hall on the Textbook of Naturopathic Medicine: "A Travesty"

here, MD Harriet Hall of the blog Science-Based Medicine looks at the NDs Pizzorno and Murray Textbook of Naturopathic Medicine 4th edition: 

001. at SBM, in "Naturopathy Textbook" (posted 2018-08-14), MD Hall writes a lot in the very well done post but here's a take-away:

"NDs believe in an imaginary vitalistic force that heals [...] vitalism has been refuted by empirical evidence and has been discarded by both scientists and philosophers – essentially by everyone except proponents of naturopathy and some other forms of alternative medicine. The Textbook asserts that vitalism is based on observable scientific phenomena. It asserts that homeostasis, entropy, and evolution require vitalistic rather than mechanistic explanations. This is simply not true; it demonstrates their poor understanding of science [...] it is hard for me to fathom how such a textbook could exist in the 21st century and how anyone could characterize it as scientific [...with its] bizarre, uneven potpourri of good science, bad science, pseudoscience, vitalism, philosophy, ancient history, superstition, gullibility, misrepresentations, metaphysics, religion, hearsay, opinion, and anecdotes [...] it is a travesty. If this is what NDs are taught, if this is what NDs believe, they are deluding themselves and doing their patients a disservice [...]";

hear, hear. I recently did a Naturocrit Podcast Episode 014 on the only other 'posed as textbook' naturopathy textbook, by ND Smith.

Saturday, August 11, 2018

Michelle Simon ND PhD 2018 AANP Physician of the Year & AANP's IOM

here, a reminder from the INM, and my extensions and musings:

001. the AANP's Institute for Natural Medicine states this 2018-08-10 in "Naturopathic Convention Forges a Culture of Collaboration" [2018 archived] states:

"more than 600 naturopathic doctors (NDs) and ND students came together for the American Association of Naturopathic Physicians (AANP) 2018 Convention and Exhibition last month in response to a call for collaboration among the various groups within the profession [...] the AANP Annual Convention is a platform for knowledge sharing [...]";

I think they do this meeting every year, so I don't know what "call" is being referred to.  It's an interesting bunch in terms of "the profession", in terms of its epistemic / knowledge nonsense... 

"Michelle Simon, ND, PhD won the 2018 Physician of the Year Award for her work revitalizing the Institute for Natural Medicine [IOM]which focuses on expanding public awareness about naturopathic medicine [...]";

so, IOM.  More on that below.

002. IOM claims:

002.a. so, there's a central web page for the IOM, which is for some reason.  There, you can find such things as:

002.b. naturopathy's science categorical claim, "FAQs" [2018 archived] which states:

"licensed NDs complete a rigorous, four-year, in residence, science-based, post-graduate medical education at an accredited naturopathic medical school [...] students are educated in the
biomedical sciences as well as the latest advances in science [...]"; 

interesting epistemic distinction.

002.c. naturopathy's essential vitalism, coded, in "What are the Six Principles of Naturopathic Medicine?" [2018 archived] which tells us:

"the six principles of naturopathic medicine (in English and Latin) are: [#1] the power of nature (vis medicatrix naturae): naturopathic doctors recognize a person’s innate ability to heal. They act to identify and remove obstacles to healing and recovery to facilitate this inherent self-healing process [...] the individual’s self-healing process [...] ";

and that's all they say.  With no results for "life force", or "vital force" it's obvious that they don't like transparency. But, you can go to ND Simon's alma mater, Bastyr, and get such explicitly stated [2018 archived].  That's an interesting word comparison: a presentation outside of and then from within the Rabbit Hole.

002.d. and then you can see, such as at the National Center for Science Education, as I'd said nonsense, that categorically and essentially vitalism is science-ejected:

there's a name for this kind of culture of collaboration concerning false labels...