Salzberg & Novella: Defund NIH's NCCAM Pseudoscience & Illigitimate Treatments -- Washington Post 2009-03-17:

here, I quote from a recent Washington Post article concerning CAM's NCCAM as a bastion for pseudoscience & illegitimate therapy, & also from NIH's statement concerning the nonscientific status of much of naturopathy's core belief-set [see 001., below]; & I point out the huge absurdity of naturopathy stating a nonscientific article of faith / belief is equivalent to an objective scientific fact / the science-based [see 002., below]; & finally, I direct you regarding any absurdy-induced emesis due to these mindfrakers [see 003., below]:

001. Brown, D. (? ?) reports in "Critics Object to Pseudoscience Center":

"critics say that alternative medicine (also known as 'complementary' and 'integrative' medicine, and disparagingly labeled 'woo' by opponents) doesn't need or deserve its own home at NIH [here, here...] the notion that the world's best-known medical research agency sponsors studies of homeopathy, acupuncture, therapeutic touch and herbal medicine has always rankled many scientists [...e.g.] Steven Salzberg, a genome researcher and computational biologist at the University of Maryland, said last week 'one of our concerns is that NIH is funding pseudoscience.' Salzberg suggested that NCCAM be defunded on an electronic bulletin board that the Obama transition team set up [here, here...] critics of alternative medicine say the vast majority of studies of homeopathy, acupuncture, therapeutic touch and other treatments based on unconventional understandings of physiology and disease have shown little or no effect. Further, they argue that the field's more-plausible interventions -- such as diet, relaxation, yoga and botanical remedies -- can be studied just as well in other parts of NIH, where they would need to compete head-to-head with conventional research projects [...] 'what has happened is that the very fact NIH is supporting a study is used to market alternative medicine,' said Steven Novella, a neurologist at Yale School of Medicine and editor of the Web site Science-Based Medicine, where much of the anti-NCCAM discussion is taking place. 'It is used to lend an appearance of legitimacy to treatments that are not legitimate' [...] many of NCCAM's critics view complementary medicine as nothing more than the placebo effect dressed up in a dozen different costumes."

Note: this is, in part, what NCCAM currently states regarding naturopathy in "An Introduction to Naturopathy":

"a number of beliefs [e.g. their central 'purposeful life spirit' / 'god power within you' article of faith!!!] and practices [like detoxifying the body through the feet!!!] in naturopathy do not follow the scientific approach of conventional medicine."

002. that's quite a revelation / condemnation, since this domain [naturopathy] claims at a university, doctorate, fully-accredited, State-sanctioned level to be based upon objective scientific fact:

isn't it interesting that one part of our government, on their [shouldn't I say OUR!!!] own web pages can:

002.a. state that the naturopathic is in fact 'nonscientific belief-centered' [NIH], and;

002.b. another part of our government can wholly endorse 'naturopathy's beliefs falsely labeled scientific fact' [e.g., OBNE]?!?!?!

Note: a long time ago I planned my future career around a particular naturopathic lie:

note1: that naturopathy was "science based" and "not a belief system";

note2: while it's actually a belief system that is based upon nonscientific ideas falsely claiming a scientific status.

003. barf-bags are on the backs of the seats in front of you, in case this has been too large a dose of fraking absurdity.