Naturopathy's 'Firm Scientific Foundation' Is Simultaneously An 'Article of Faith Figmentation' - ND Farina 2009:

here, I point out the central oxymorony [the burning stupidity!!!] of naturopathy, through an ND's 2009 letters to the Vancouver Sun: the claim that naturopathy is essentially scientific [see 001., below] while, when you look acutely, you find that the naturopathic is essentially 'science-ejected figmentation centered' [see 002., below]. The absurdity is: for naturopathy, a scientific fact is the same thing as an evidenceless figmentation / article of faith [see 003., below]:

001. Farina, V.J. (ND Bastyr 1997) [I'll assume, see note 02., below] states in "Naturopathy is Based On A Firm Foundation" (2009-03-07):

"[in response to McKnight's {excellent!!!}] 'Naturopathy's Main Article of Faith Cannot Be Validated' [...] he is mistaken to suggest naturopaths' belief in the 'vital force' is unscientific. There is a scientific name for it -- homeostasis [...] naturopaths are a pragmatic lot [see ***, below in 002.c.] and are trained and licensed to diagnose disease and refer onward for allopathic intervention as necessary [...] MDs have their comfort zone and aren't necessarily open to new options, scientifically supported or not. Valerie Farina. Vancouver."

Note 01: unfortunately, we are not informed by this document that Farina is [apparently] an ND, and therefore quite invested in the matter.

Note 02.a.: some research at the Vancouver Sun web site reveals that an ND named "Valerie Farina" had written in "More Powers For Naturopaths" (2009-02-13):

"I completed a naturopathic doctorate and can attest that the training was rigorous and the schools fully accredited. Valerie Farina. Vancouver."

Note 02.b.: plus, a search of Bastyr University's alumni web page provides this information:

"alumni. Find a Bastyr Practitioner. Valerie J. Farina, ND:

DEGREE(S) EARNED .................................MAJOR ......................................YEAR

Doctor of Naturopathic Medicine...............Naturopathic Medicine.............1997."

002. lets dig even deeper, and actually be thorough:

002.a. naturopathy claims a science foundation / basis;

002.b. naturopathy is obligated by oath to a vitalistic foundation;

002.c. vitalism is HUGELY not scientific.

***the Roget's II thesaurus states, per pragmatic: "having or indicating an awareness of things as they really are." A pragmatic lot...me arse!!!

003. so, in sum, for this ND, the word homeostasis [a concept, by definition, hugely science-supported when within the knowledge structure known as modern biology, aka within a scientific context] can be employed as equal to an imaginary figment within a truly science-ejected context.

To quote Phil Plait & originator plognark: the stupid, it burns.