Ad Hominem Defamatory Blather In My Direction - A Portland Business Journal Commenter:

recently, NCNM put up a listing in the Portland Business Journal [see 001., below]; and I commented, and somebody commented upon my comment [see 002., below]; and I share some ACTUAL FACTS [see 003., below]:

001. NCNM states in "National College of Natural Medicine":

"NCNM offers two exceptional degree programs [including the] Doctor of Naturopathic Medicine (ND) [...] established in 1956, NCNM represents the heart of natural medicine [...] natural health care [...] NCNM meets or exceeds all pertinent regulatory standards [...] the content of this listing was provided by a representative of National College of Natural Medicine."

Note: the claims of being exceptional / exceeding, & being central per "heart" within the ND [mis]educational world. I do agree with the latter.

002. my comment, and a response:

002.a. I commented:

"isn't NCNM the HEIGHT of pseudointellectual absurdity [naturopathy]? E.g., labeling as 'scientific fact' the IN FACT science-ejected vitalistic, supernatural, teleological & kind! naturocrit.blogspot.com."

002.b. someone anonymously responded:

"Rob Cullen, face it, you were asked to leave Bridgeport because you're a horrible clinician and now that you're bitter, you're continuing to burn more bridges. Get a life! With all this hate a [and?] negativity, no wonder you couldn't cut it. Naturoapthic [sp.] medicine is about positivity and optimism. You clearly did not belong. NCNM is the top Naturopathic school, working hand-in-hand with MD's, DO's, DC's and LAc's in the community providing preventive primary care at the highest levels... It's a 4-5 yr doctorate program with the highest standards of any other naturopathic program in the entire world. NCNM rocks! :)."

Note: first, my criticisms were substantively addressed. This is likely because they are true, and therefore unassailable. Instead, my character is attacked with falsehood and name-calling. This is not relevant to my criticism. I've no idea who wrote this, but I'd like to remind all that naturocrit is open to commentary and I'd only edit comments that are grossly without merit in regards to the blogpost commented upon.

003. some actual facts:

003.a. it is an actual fact that NCNM claims that that which is profoundly science-ejected in fact survives scientific scrutiny

- which is ABSURD, insane, & academically and professionally impossible to adhere to. That is what I specifically mean by "pseudointellectual absurdity". I don't see how such "exceeds" and is "exceptional". I would say that such thinking is typical of naturopathy: dumb-assed. I don't see how the rigorous standards of professionalism can be accomplished from a basis of falsehood: the scientific science-ejected. I don't see how the rather easier standards of fair trade can be accomplished when the trade occurs from a position of falsehood. In other words, caveat emptor isn't even being met, never mind credat emptor.

003.b. it is an actual fact, as regards UB:

003.a. I was not asked to leave Bridgeport by ANYONE. I left due to the unethical position I found myself in: being an ND, if I had stayed and graduated. One necessary hoop I'd have had to have jumped through was to treat patients with homeopathy, and complete required homeopathy courses, and then have to take board exams that include such CRAP.

Giving people NOTHING, and telling them it is medicine is REPUGNANT.

003.b. I am not a clinician of any kind. I am an educator and autodidact.

003.c. the rest, well, is blather and I don't care to comment further on it. I'll guess that this is a current NCNM student, but that's just a guess.

Commentary is invited.

***update 01: all of a sudden [7:20 pm EST], the web page is no longer active:

***update 02: all of a sudden [1:21 am EST] it's back up.

2 NDs Coding Naturopathy's Essential Science-Ejected Vitalism & Claiming Science Expertise: Ferguson, T. & M. (NDs Bastyr):

here, I quote from a Youtube video wherein an ND discusses the difference between naturopathy and homeopathy, and codes the central treatment goal of both [see 001., below]; furthermore, I show how web pages at that ND's practice also employ coding, while claiming science-expertise, AND I decode that ND central vitalistic premise by using a 2008 ND textbook [see 002., below];

Ferguson, T. (ND Bastyr 2007) states in:

001. "Naturopathy vs. Homeopathy":

"[interviewer] I'm wondering what's the difference between naturopathy and homeopathy? [...ND of Dynamic Healing Center] people usually equate the two, but the difference is homeopathy is a distinct form of medicine and you could say naturopathic medicine is a much broader term. Under naturopathic medicine would include [{sic.}...] homeopathy [...] there are lot of different things that are part of the naturopathic doctor's training [...] one of them is the system of medicine of homeopathy [...which is] one part of what we do [...homeopathy assists] the body's natural healing mechanisms toward health [{vitalism, coded}...] it follows the philosophy of naturopathic medicine which is the same [{vitalism!}...interviewer] it's only one system that you use [...ND] correct."

Note: the lack of specific reference to the vitalistic basis of both homeopathy and naturopathy, and instead the coding of that context with naturalistic language. But, ND schools teach that homeopathy is fundamentally based on vitalism. That's what they taught me at UB. Interesting that the name of this ND's business includes the word "dynamic", because ND schools teach that another word for that vitalistic premise is "dynamis".

002. with Ferguson, M. (ND Bastyr 2005) states:

002.a. in "Therapeutic Order":

"naturopathic practitioners use the therapeutic order [TO] to maximize a person's natural healing process and minimize harm [...#2] stimulate the vis medicatrix naturae (i.e. the innate healing process of the body) [vitalism, coded] - using [...] homeopathy [amongst other things...] therapies utilized in our practice [...include] homeopathy."

Note: the author of the TO, Zeff, does state the actual vitalistic basis of naturopathy. See Zeff et al. states in the textbook "Naturopathic Physical Medicine" (ISBN 0443103909, 2008):

"that first principle is vis medicatrix naturae 'the healing power of nature', which establishes naturopathic medicine as a vitalistic medicine [p.002]."

Vitalism is profoundly science-ejected, of course.

Yet, this textbook is categorized by Elsevier as an Elsevier Health Science book.

Ha.

002.b. in "Naturopathic Philosophy":

"the healing power of nature (vis medicatrix nature) [vitalism, coded]. Naturopathic medicine recognizes an inherent ability in the body which is ordered and intelligent [teleological]. Naturopathic physicians act to identify and remove obstacles to recovery and to facilitate and augment this healing ability [{vitalism, coded}...] since total health also includes spiritual health, naturopathic physicians encourage individuals to pursue their personal spiritual path [supernaturalism]."

002.c. in "Naturopathic Education":

"board certified naturopathic doctors attend 4 years of post-graduate doctoral medical training at an accredited school where they are trained as primary care physicians integrating traditional healing methods with modern scientific medicine [...] the curriculum involves the standard classes of basic sciences [...] to be licensable, the naturopathic doctor must pass a set of science boards."

Note: the claim of science expertise.

AP on Homeopathy Theory: "Unverified By Mainstream Science" (2009-07-30):

In "Consumers Pay $34 Billion for Alternative Medicine" reporters Marchione and Stobbe state:

"a whopping $3 billion [annually] was spent on homeopathy -- highly diluted drugs made from natural ingredients. It is based on a theory unverified by mainstream science: that substances that create certain symptoms in healthy people are effective in treating the disease that causes the same symptoms."

Note: bravo.

Andy Lewis - Homeopathy is Untenable / Absurd [So I'm Wondering Why NANAA Falsely Calls It Science?]:

here, I quote from the Quackometer regarding homeopathy's nonscientific status [see 001., below]; and, drawing on my familiarity with naturopathy, I cite NANAA's as absurd position [see 002., below]:

001. the Quackometer Blog [Andy Lewis] recently wrote in "Homeopaths: Do You Really Want Statutory Regulation?" (2009-07-29):'

"homeopaths [being unregulated in the UK] have been free to indulge in whatever delusions they fancy [...free from the constraints of] plausibility and reliable evidence for anything [...encompassing] absurdities [...] homeopathy has failed in two hundred years to make any progression in showing that it is nothing other than a inert treatment based on pre-scientific and magical thinking [...] in the two hundred years since homeopathy was invented, our scientific understanding of medicine, chemistry and physics has moved on enormously and it clearly shows that homeopathy is not just implausible but is utterly contradicted by everything we know about the world. Homeopathy lies outside of reason and science. It is a pseudo-medicine and is just a placebo therapy. It is just not tenable to hold any other position [...it's] absurd treatment [...much like] the non existent foundations of much of chiropractic care [...that] vestigial remnant of Victorian back cracking quackery [...] chiropractors [now regulated] find themselves being held to the highest forms of professionalism and practice without an evidence base for pretty much anything they do."

Note: it is absurd to pose homeopathy as scientific [and naturopathy!].

002. the 'North American Naturopathic Absurdity Apparatus' [NANAA] labels their requisite homeopathy "clinical science", "medical science", "firmly science-based" and "health science":

002.a. "clinical science" per the North American ND licensing exam, NPLEX, in "About NPLEX";

002.b. "medical science" per the Association of Accredited Naturopathic Medical Colleges in "About Naturopathic Medicine"; also, the American Medical Student Association in "Welcome to AMSA's Naturopathic Medicine Interest Group!";

002.c. "firmly science-based" per Bastyr University states in "Naturopathic Medicine";

002.d. "health science" per the University of Bridgeport states in "UB Spotlight: Health Sciences Programs";

002.e. and just for S&G, Coward, S. (ND SCNM), Lewis, K. (ND SCNM) state in "Misconceptions Aside, Homeopathy Has Stood Test of Time" (2009-06-25), specifically regarding homeopathy:

"homeopathy is a 200-year-old medicinal science."

003. amazing.

Naturopathy's "Conventionally Trained Medical Professional" Claim - Fox, S. (ND NCNM):

here, I quote an ND who recently stated an ND is a "conventionally trained medical professional" [see 001., below]; and, I elucidate NDs' "philosophical grounding" in vitalism claimed as scientific when HUGELY not -- YES, that's how ABSURD naturopathy is!!! [see 002., below]:

001. naturopath Fox, S. (ND NCNM) states in "Naturopathic Physicians: Up and Coming Partners in Diabetes Care" (2009-07-24):

"although they [NDs] are conventionally trained medical professionals, naturopathic physicians are distinguished by their extensive post-graduate outpatient and clinical experience, and deep trust [faith!] in the body’s ability to heal itself [BATHI...] naturopathic medicine differs from conventional Western medicine in its deep grounding in a set of philosophical tenets [...] their philosophical grounding [...] foremost among them a profound trust [faith!] in the body's ability to heal itself [BATHI...per] the body's innate self-healing design [BISHD...] the body's self-healing mechanisms [...per] the self-healing mechanisms [SHM...NDs are] a licensed medical professional [s...] primary care physicians [...and] medical experts [...] trained in four-year accredited postgraduate medical programs [...] naturopathic physicians are well-trained [...with a goal of] empowerment of people to make beneficial choices for themselves, naturopathic physicians are often an excellent choice [...] accredited programs in naturopathic medicine are currently offered at National College of Natural Medicine in Portland, OR, Bastyr University near Seattle, WA, Southwest College of Naturopathic Medicine in Phoenix, AZ, and the University of Bridgeport in Bridgeport, CT."

002. now, what MUST the specific context of BATHI-BISHD-SHM premise be to particularly an NCNM graduate such as Fox? Vitalism claimed a scientific when hugely not [a.k.a. ABSURDITY]:

002.a. the vitalism that dare not speak its name [coded]:

002.a1a. [as spoken at the source / alma mater, NCNM] NCNM states in "Principles of Healing":

"the practice of naturopathic medicine emerges from six principles of healing. These principles are based on the objective observation of the nature of health and disease and are examined continually in light of scientific analysis [SS]. These principles stand as the distinguishing marks of the profession: the healing power of nature -- vis medicatrix naturae [HPN-VMN]. The body has the inherent ability to establish, maintain, and restore health. The healing process is ordered and intelligent; nature heals through the response of the life force [LF...] symptoms [...] in fact [are] expressions of the life force [LF] attempting to heal itself [...we're all about] the practice of promoting health through stimulation of the vital force [VF]."

Note: vitalism [HPN-VMN, LF, VF] is claimed as able to survive SS, in fact. But, vitalism is PROFOUNDLY science-ejected, in fact. Now, NCNM is the trunk of the tree of the this sectarian movement. As NCNM recently stated in "National College of Natural Medicine":

"National College of Natural Medicine (NCNM) is the oldest accredited naturopathic college in North America. Its graduates have gone on to establish all of the accredited naturopathic colleges now operating in North America [...] NCNM meets or exceeds all pertinent regulatory standards."

Bastyr NDs Burnett x2 a testament to this 'trunk of naturopathy' fact, as they employ NCNM's language in "Naturopathic Medicine":

"naturopathic medicine is distinguished by the principles which underlie and determine its practice. These principles are based upon the objective observation of the nature of health and disease, and are continually reexamined in the light of scientific advances."

I will state this as simply as possible: engaging in commerce under the guise of legitimacy [science as a marketing label] when actually nonsensical [calling the nonscientific science] MUST violate basic strictures of commerce regulatory standards [we don't even have to go to the even higher strictures of professionalism regulation, which cannot be met until lower, easier strictures are met].

002.a.1b. vitalism at two of NCNM's other branchings, UBCNM and SCNM:

UB states explicitly in "UB Spotlight: Health Sciences Programs":

"health science programs [...] the University's professionally accredited health sciences programs [...include] the College of Naturopathic Medicine."

Note: the claim of professionalism and science per the naturopathic.

But, also at UB is "Six Guiding Principles: Guiding Principle #1" which states:

"the healing power of nature, viz medicatrix naturae: the body has the inherent ability to establish, maintain, and restore health. The healing process is ordered and intelligent; nature heals through the response of the life force. The physician's role is to facilitate and augment this process."

Just like NCNM, the nonscientific is stated as scientific.

SCNM states in "What is A Naturopathic Physician?":

"the principles of naturopathic medicine are based upon objective observation of the nature of health and disease, and are continually re-examined in the light of scientific advances [...] the degree of doctor of naturopathic medicine requires four years of graduate level study in the medical sciences [...] the major belief is in the healing power of nature (vis medicatrix naturae)."

And SCNM states in "2004 SCNM Fall Newsletter":

"this therapy fits well with one of the basic principles of naturopathic medicine: 'the healing power of nature'. The healing power of nature or vis medicatrix naturae is based on the principle that the body has the inherent ability to establish, maintain, and restore health [IATEMARH]. The healing process is ordered and intelligent; nature heals through the response of the life force. The physician's role is to facilitate and augment this process."

Again, vitalism [IATEMARH-LF] claimed as science, but also acknowledged as belief.

00.2b. do NDs sound:

002.b1. conventionally trained?

when the profoundly science-ejected is STRANGELY labeled science, I don't think so.

002.b2. professional?

when does a professional disguise and manipulate, and when is a profession based upon the completely false?

002.b3. extensive post-graduate & medical?

how are sectarian concepts that for several decades have been science-ejected [NDs' vitalistic belief amalgam], portrayed falsely as science, of post-graduate caliber education and medical?

003. overall note:

crazy like a Fox ND? [irresistible].

Also note, NCNM, Bastyr and SCNM were part of the 'education robbers science not belief' AANP-Alliance BIG LIE that I've discussed elsewhere.

CA Likely Eliminating Their .gov Naturopathy Board - Yeah, Baby! [No More Coded Deceptive Propaganda?]:

here, I cite a recent article that states that California's Bureau of Naturopathic Medicine is getting the axe [see 001., below]; and I flesh out some reasons why this is good because they [NDs] are so bad [at science, for one thing; see 002., below]; so do it [see 003., below]:

001. the Sacramento Business Journal reports in "Budget Bills Go to California Assembly" (2009-07-24):

"the California State Senate finished passing 31 bills early Friday morning to close a $24.2 billion gap in the state budget. Added to $921 million in reserves, state lawmakers claimed to have solved a $25.3 billion budget problem [...] the Integrated Waste Management Board and the Bureau of Naturopathic Medicine are singled out for elimination."

Note: this would be a very good thing in terms of consumer protection. It would stop their racket: because they are the health and education robbers. I flesh a little of this out below.

002. California's Department of Consumer Affairs Bureau of Naturopathic Medicine tells us:

002.a. in "California Department of Consumer Affairs: A Consumer's Guide to Naturopathic Medicine" (archived here):

"naturopathic medicine [...] stimulate[s] the body's self-healing process [BSHP...per] the healing power of nature [HPN...aka] the body's inherent wisdom to heal itself [BIWTHI...using] complementary and alternative therapies [CAM...per a] holistic approach [HA...per] a natural approach [...NDs training is] graduate-level [&] accredited [...including] science and clinical courses [...and they are a] health care profession [...] licensure ensures that naturopathic doctors have met the professional standards [...per] professional practice [...and we are referred to] the California Naturopathic Doctors Association [CALND...and] the American Association of Naturopathic Physicians [AANP]."

Note: this is the State of California participating in, plain and simple - deception / the naturopathy racket. California's nondisclosure of naturopathy's essential science-ejected sectarian premise is repugnant. Informed consent is the basis for the physician-patient relationship, in these here modern times. Yet, instead of information that is accurate and complete, the State of California acts as an echo chamber for that same old slimy, coded, false and incomplete ND propaganda [see my examples below: in their own words, per this blog's mission of 'from the inside'].

002.b. let me explain, a little:

002.b1. the terms BSHP-HPN-BIWTHI:

are actually representing the fundamental / essential naturopathic precept / context: vitalism. This is clearly stated at one of their schools, the University of Bridgeport. Notice that California's language does not clearly state "life force" or "vital force" or accurately or completely label BSHP-HPN-BIWTHI as vitalistic / vitalism. This is important because the vitalistic is HUGELY science-ejected.

Are you informed of this? No, not there.

Do you want a supposed primary care doctor:

a) basing her / his entire worldview regarding 'the medical' on Tooth Fairy premises mislabeled as science and posed as medically relevant?

b) not disclosing that in fact he / she represents an unethical sectarian pseudoscience taking your money under false pretenses?

This is the modus operandi of this CAM-HA: claiming to be professional and scientific, when professionalism is bound by the stricture "credat emptor" [let the buyer have faith] yet deceiving the patient with science-ejected junk. This is ethically repugnant. Professions-level and graduate-level science? Hmm, they can't even get straight a basic logical premise from elementary school: something cannot be what it is different from [more on this below].

002.b2. CALND states:

002.b2a. in "Frequently Asked Questions":

"[for] a naturopathic doctor (N.D.) [...] the training consists of a comprehensive study of the conventional medical sciences [...] they learn how to integrate the principles of naturopathic medicine into clinical practice [such as vitalism]."

Note: again, we're led to believe that the essentially naturopathic is scientific, that they are science experts. En masse, they posture that there's a firm scientific basis to science-ejected principles such as vitalism. Hilarious, if it wasn't so despicable and moronic. And insane.

002.b2b. in "Education":

"the naturopathic medical profession's infrastructure includes accredited educational institutions, professional licensing, national standards of practice, peer review, and a commitment to state-of-the-art scientific research [...] the training consists of comprehensive study of the conventional medical sciences [...] naturopathic doctors are guided by six principles [...including] the healing power of nature [...which] forms the foundation of this distinct health care practice."

Note: again, we have the claim of professionalism, science [and requisite vitalism]. Both are false, as their fundamental premise HPN indicates: naturopathy is based upon the profoundly science-ejected, and they disguise that premise, and they mislabel it science. This is unprofessional in the sense of breaching fidelity in two major areas: the trust of the patient and the public, in terms of being truthful and competent overall which is minimally required from a professional, and naturopathy's complete hijacking of "science" to support sectarian woo-woo. There are K-12 science textbooks that clearly state that vitalism is science-ejected [e.g.]!

002.b3. AANP and I go way back. They are the HUGE charlatans, and I know about this personally.

003. so ELIMINATE THEM.

Naturopathy's "Firmly Science-Based" Bullshit: Roxas, M. (ND NCNM) 2009:

here, I cite the words of an ND who claims that naturopathy is firmly scientific [see 001., below]; while naturopathy, as defined by that ND's own alma mater, is clearly based upon vitalism, teleology, and supernaturalism [see 002., below]; which ALL are PROFOUNDLY NOT SCIENCE [see 003., below]; and I give the Irish salute to all these rogues [see 004., below]:

001. Roxas, M. (ND NCNM) states in "What is Naturopathic Medicine?":

"while firmly science-based, modern naturopathic medicine [etc.]."

Note: the claim is that 'the naturopathic' is quite science-established.

002. National College of Natural Medicine [NCNM] states in "Principles of Healing":

"the practice of naturopathic medicine emerges from six principles of healing. These principles are based on the objective observation of the nature of health and disease and are examined continually in light of scientific analysis [{science claim}...] these principles stand as the distinguishing marks of the profession: [professions claim; #1] the healing power of nature -- vis medicatrix naturae. The body has the inherent ability to establish, maintain, and restore health. The healing process is ordered and intelligent [{teleology claim}]; nature heals through the response of the life force [{vitalism}]. The physician’s role is to facilitate and augment this process [...#3] first do no harm -- primum no nocere. The process of healing includes the generation of symptoms, which are, in fact [fact claim], expressions of the life force [vitalism claim] attempting to heal itself. Therapeutic actions should be complementary to and synergistic with this healing process. The physician’s actions can support or antagonize the actions of vis medicatrix naturae [vitalism...#2] causes may occur on many levels, including physical, mental-emotional, and spiritual [supernatural claim...#4] health and disease are conditions of the whole organism, involving a complex interaction of physical, spiritual [supernatural claim...#5] the physician must also make a commitment to her/his personal and spiritual development [supernatural claim...] homeopathic medicine [...] promote[s] healing on the physical, mental, and spiritual levels [supernatural claim]."

Note: NDs claim that within 'objective scientific fact' is the teleological, vitalistic, and supernatural - obviously!

003. what science says:

003.a. teleology is HUGELY science-ejected, and so is vitalism [see 003., here].

003.b. supernaturalism is HUGELY science-ejected.

004. when is a 'firmly scientific fact' simultaneously HUGELY science-ejected...

naturopathy. Beware. They are the education robbers. When is a profession completely absurd...

naturopathy [therefore not a profession at all].

I want to thank all those involved for visiting this upon me as a consumer and citizen of the modern era:

the AANMC ND colleges and universities, the State oversight apparati [particularly CT], the Federal Dept.s of Education and of Trade.

As this whole consortia demand $ from me I answer:

pogue mahone.

Naturopathy's Essential Superstitious Teleological Vitalism - Sensenig 2007 in UE:

here, I quote from a 2007 Unified Energetics [UE] article that reveals the teleological vitalism that is essential to naturopathy [see 001., below]; while naturopathy labels itself science [see 002., below]; while teleology and vitalism are PROFOUNDLY science-ejected [see 003, below]:



001. the Foundations of Naturopathic Medicine Project [I consider this 'of the preponderant naturopathic'] states in "The Heart of Naturopathic Medicine":

"[per ND Sensenig] there are words or phrases that we have borrowed from our predecessors that we use interchangeably: vis medicatrix naturae [VMN], vitality [V], simple substance [SS...] dynamis [D...] qi [Q...] energy [E...] vis medicatrix naturae [VMN...] vis is this tendency in nature towards organization, order and purpose [P...] towards the ideal [I] or perfection [P...a.k.a.] homeostasis [H...] the direction of order [DO...] this vis [VS...] the organizational tendency in nature [OT...] vitalism [VT]."

Note: so, we have -- at the heart of naturopathic medicine, a.k.a. 'the essentially naturopathic' BY THEIR OWN DEFINING -- VMN = V = SS = D = Q = E = VMN = VS = VT in terms of vitalism, and P = I = P = H = DO = OT in terms of teleology [with the two intertwined {inseparable in naturo.}; for science's position on these two DEFUNCT ideas, see 003. below]. Here's an important note on ND luminary Sensenig: he was my instructor at UB in 1998 and spewed similar 'cultic mystical weirdness' [a label I'd applied to my UB naturopathy experience in a sworn deposition], and here is a handout from that course. Sensenig is second from right in this Foundation's group picture.

002. for naturopathy's self-labeling of "science", click here.

003. and here's my favorite science quote regarding teleology and vitalism:

"[per biologist Ernst Mayr in "What Makes Biology Unique?: Considerations on the Autonomy of a Scientific Discipline"(2004; ISBN 0521841143)] I did not want to fall into a trap like vitalism or become a teleologist [...] the biology for which I wanted to find a philosophy had to qualify as a genuine, bona fide science [p.002...] occult forces (vitalism and teleology) [...] vitalism was an invalid approach [p.017...] the refutation of certain erroneous basic assumptions [...] certain basic ontological principles that later were shown to be erroneous [...] certain basic explanatory principles not supported by the laws of physical sciences and eventually found to be invalid. The two major principles here involved are vitalism and a belief in cosmic teleology [...] an invisible force, lebenskraft or vis vitalis. Those who believed in such a force were called vitalists. Vitalism was popular from the early seventeenth century to the early twentieth century [p.022...] generations of vitalists labored in vain to find a scientific explanation for the lebenskraft until it finally became quite clear that such a force simply does not exist. That was the end of vitalism [p.023...] biologists [...by 1866] now rejected vitalism and cosmic teleology [p.025...] after vitalism had become obsolete [p.069...] genetic programs occur only in living organisms [...] naturalists [...] have been aware of this fundamental difference for thousands of years, but their explanation for it was invalid. They tried to attribute life to the occult force of vitalism, as vis vitalis, but eventually is was determined that such a force does not exist [...] this was finally made possible in the twentieth century by the discoveries in cytology, genetics, and molecular biology. The sciences finally provided us with a naturalistic explanation of life [p.090...] glossary [...] vitalism: the now thoroughly refuted belief in the existence of an occult invisible force in living organisms responsible for the manifestations of life in any living organism [p.225]."

004. so, when is the HUGELY science-ejected [teleological vitalism] falsely labeled science?

Naturopathy. There ain't nothing so CONTINUALLY stupid and false.

E.g: at UB, where I believe Sensenig still teaches, they still label their naturopathy science, while vitalistic and teleological.

I think the Federal Trade Commission has a word for this.

More Naturopathic Misinformation?: The 1st AANMC Informational Webinar 2009-07-16:

here, I point out the Association of Accredited Naturopathic Medical Colleges' [AANMC] claim / promise that they will, next week via web conference, provided reliable [I'm reasonably presuming that's what people will assume] information regarding AANMC naturopathic education so that the public will be able to [I'm reasonably presuming] make an informed decision regarding attending naturopathy school [see 001., below]; meanwhile, naturopathy falsely labels the profoundly science-ejected vitalistic and supernatural as scientific, without a single disclaimer [see 002., below]; so, I say instead of "for you", naturopathy exists "for themselves" [see 003., below]:

001. the AANMC states in “AANMC 2-Minute E-News […] Attend the 1st AANMC Informational Webinar!” (2009-07):

“[per Deger, C . (? ?) - AANMC managing editor] the Association of Accredited Naturopathic Medical Colleges is very excited to debut a new way to learn about naturopathic medical education without leaving home […] we will bring you an interactive, online experience that will help you in the process of selecting and applying to naturopathic medical school [...via our] experts in naturopathic medical education […our] leading professionals in the field of naturopathic medicine [...] this event is sponsored jointly by the seven accredited colleges of naturopathic medicine comprising the Association of Accredited Naturopathic Medical Colleges (AANMC) [including the University of Bridgeport].”

Note: notice the claim that they will be “informational”, that the public will “learn”, that they have educational / academic expertise, and that naturopathy meets the ethical strictures of a profession. Can AANMC actually help you? Is AANMC actually looking out for YOU? [No, not in my book. I relate to this 'not for you' reality below (see 003.)].

002. [how naturopathy's recent past speaks volumes] debunking naturopathy's educational / academic / professional science expertise claim, a.k.a. 'how they label as science that which is PROFOUNDLY not science and therein do not fulfill a professions-level ethical role':

002.a. AANMC claims that naturopathy is science in "What is Naturopathic Medicine?":

"naturopathic physicians cooperate with all other branches of medical science".

Note: for a larger collection of 'naturopathy's science self-labeling', see here.

002.b. naturopathy's essential vitalism can be found from one of the AANMC's member schools, the University of Bridgeport, per “Six Guiding Principles. Guiding Principle #1”:

"the healing power of nature [HPN]. Viz [sp., vis] medicatrix naturae: the body has the inherent ability to establish, maintain, and restore health. The healing process is ordered and intelligent [purposeful; goal-directed]; nature heals through the response of the life force. The [naturopathic] physician's role is to facilitate and augment this process."

Note: for a larger collection of 'naturopathy's essential vitalism', see here. Yet, vitalism is completely science-ejected.

Overall note for 002: notice that there is no disclaimer / no warning regarding AANMC's actually very FALSE, very actually ABSURD position that that which is fundamentally nonscientific is being improperly labeled as scientific. Instead, AANMC mainly codes their 'sectarian underneath' in naturalistic language, per “The Six Principles”:

“naturopathic medicine celebrates the healing power of nature [HPN]. Naturopathic medicine is dedicated to the study and celebration of nature’s healing powers […] a dynamic philosophy as well as a profession [...] naturopathic medicine is defined by principles rather than by methods or modalities. Above all, it honors the body’s innate wisdom to heal […] naturopathic physicians practice the six fundamental principles of naturopathic medicine: [#1] the healing power of nature: trust in the body’s inherent wisdom to heal itself […#6] treat the whole person: view the body as an integrated whole in all its physical and spiritual dimensions.”

Note: this is the vitalism context that dare not speak its name. Instead, a naturalistic facade / veneer is presented. That's misinformation of a most sophisticated type. Also, notice that after labeling naturopathy “science”, supernaturalism is of primary concern to them. Yet, supernaturalism itself is science ejected. That's misinformation of a most crude type.

003. overall, AANMC is first and foremost FOR THEMSELVES, not for you:

a.k.a., not by a long shot of the highly stringent ethical condition credat emptor [let the buyer have faith -- of the professions in ethical caliber]

but instead,

not even able to pass the less ethically stringent condition of caveat emptor [let the buyer beware; falseness, 'bait and switch', deceit -- which is even of lower ethical caliber than legitimate commerce].

Looking For Naturopathy's HIDDEN Essential Vitalism - naturopathic.org 2009-07:

here, I share some search results from naturopathic.org [see 002., below], the website of the American Association of Naturopathic Physicians [AANP], in terms of their dishonest communication of the essential vitalism that underlies naturopathy [see 001., below]:

01. the central premise of naturopathy is of course vitalism, particularly as evidenced by their central textbooks.

Note: this is, overall, a science-ejected figmentation.

002. at naturopathic.org, an internal search for "life force" and "vital force" and "vitalism" reveals...NOTHING. There are no hits! Wow, do they not wish for us to be informed, in order to make informed decisions? But, a synonym does produce 2 hits, "medicatrix":

002.a. in "AANP Awards":

"the Vis Award honors and celebrates the life and work of Dr. William A. Mitchell, N.D. (1947-2007). Dr. Mitchell embodied the Vis with his passion for life, for naturopathic medicine, for teaching, and for the loving care of his patients. The Vis Award acknowledges persons who represent the Vis, the healing power of nature, as demonstrated through their work, life, and community service. The Vis Award recipients are naturopathic students, faculty members, or clinicians who exemplify the vis medicatrix naturae by their understanding and application of the healing power of nature."

Note: this is their vitalistic premise, coded.

002.b. in "Speakers":

"[etc.] stimulate the vis medicatrix naturae leading to the patient healing."

003. so, are they purposely concealing their central concept at this site? Me thinks. Their motto is "physicians who listen", but, do they honestly inform? On their web page "What is Naturopathic Medicine?", which should hit the nail on the head in terms of honest description, we are told:

"naturopathic physicians base their practice on six timeless principles founded on medical tradition and scientific evidence: [#1] let nature heal. Our bodies have such a powerful, innate instinct for self-healing. By finding and removing the barriers to this self-healing—such as poor diet or unhealthy habits—naturopathic physicians can nurture this process."

Note: there is not 1 incidence of "force" on this page. And notice that we are told INSTEAD that this is SCIENCE.

004. yet, when you go to the BIG consortia statement regarding naturopathy, there's the vitalism overarching all of the supposed profession. Well, actually, you can't go there right now. They've taken that site down. Perhaps it was too honest. But, you can get to it on archive.org:

"heir to the vitalistic tradition of medicine in the Western world, naturopathic medicine emphasizes the treatment of disease through the stimulation, enhancement, and support of the inherent healing capacity of the person. Methods of treatments are chosen to work with the patient's vital force, respecting the intelligence of the natural healing process [...aka] the healing power of nature, vis medicatrix naturae. The body has the inherent ability to establish, maintain, and restore health. The healing process is ordered and intelligent; nature heals through the response of the life force. The physician's role is to facilitate and augment this process [...] the process of healing includes the generation of symptoms which are, in fact, an expression of the life force."

Note: do you sense quite a nonexistent honesty? It is nice to see though that AANP's Pizzorno wrote the foreword for the 2008 Chaitow naturopathy text book I right now hold in my hands (ISBN 0443103909) which states in "Physical Medicine in a Naturopathic Context" co-written with AANP NDs Zeff and Snider [and remember, naturopathic.org is AANP's website!!!]:

"the key principle in naturopathic medicine is a major distinguishing element. That first principle is vis medicatrix naturae, 'the healing power of nature', which establishes naturopathic medicine as a vitalistic medicine, a modern inheritor of the vitalistic tradition."

At least paper can't be so easily expunged.

Decoding Naturopathy's Essential Science-Mislabeled Vitalism - Godby, D. (NMD NCNM):

here, I parse ND Godby's claim -- as recently stated in Rocklin & Roseville Today and on his own web pages -- that naturopathy is "science based" [see 001.a. and 001.b., below]; while, a little web research and third-grade-level thinking reveals that naturopathy is actually obligated to and centered around the science-ejected falsely labeled as able to survive scientific scrutiny [see 002., where I decode this ND's occult vitalism]:

001. Godby, D. (NMD NCNM) writes in

001.a. "California Threatens Naturopathic Care" [also hosted on his own web page] (2009-06-30):

"naturopathic medicine is based on the belief [!!!] that the human body has an innate healing ability [IHA...we use] cutting edge natural therapies to enhance their [patients'] bodies’ ability to combat disease [BATCD...] naturopathic doctors craft comprehensive treatment plans that blend the best of modern medical science and traditional natural medical approaches to treat disease and restore health [...] a licensed naturopathic doctor (N.D.) attends a four-year graduate-level naturopathic medical school and is educated in all of the same basic sciences as an M.D. [...] a naturopathic doctor takes rigorous professional board exams [...] naturopathic physicians base their practice on six timeless principles founded on medical tradition and scientific evidence: let nature heal [LNH] by removing the obstacles to cure, identify and treat causes, first do no harm, educate patients, treat the whole person, prevent illness."

001.b. in "Naturopathy":

"as professional leaders and pioneers in science-based natural medicine, naturopathic physicians [...] integrate scientific research with the healing powers of nature [HPN]."

Note: NDs claim that HPN is science-based.

001.c. in 'homepage':

"Sacramento naturopathic doctor, Dennis Godby, has helped hundreds of patients from Redding to Fresno, Placerville to the Bay Area to heal complex, chronic diseases that most medicine can’t touch [{quite a promise!!!}...service at] Sacramento Naturopathic Medical Center [...] is always done in light of the powerful principles of naturopathic medicine: 1) first do no harm, use the most natural least invasive and least toxic therapies first, 2) identify and treat the underlying causes of illness and remove the obstacles to cure rather than merely treating symptoms, 3) use the healing power of nature [HPN], 4) treat the whole person, 5) prevent when possible."

002. overall note:

naturopathy is belief-based. IHA-BATCD-LNH-HPN are codings for naturopathy's 'purposeful life spirit bioagency' sectarian article of faith aka vitalism, which is not cutting edge, not scientific, and is supernatural archaic superstitious figmentation. Blending science with 'the traditional' is another way of saying that overarching any scientific content that naturopathy may resemble is a sectarian belief-based context. Yet, NDs absurdly claim 'we are of the same kind of science, rigor, and professionalism' as other healthcare science doctorates! Vitalism [and supernaturalism] is in no way based upon scientific evidence. In fact, vitalism is science-ejected. To actually be science-based means to reject what science does not support and honestly call it nonscientific. Is this rigorous? Is this professional? No. In naturopathy, science has been unlimited to allow any old ideation, and professionalism has been unlimited to allow deceit and misinformation.

From the inside, the vitalistic obligations of naturopathy -- falsely stated as able to survive scientific scrutiny -- are ONLY obvious [Godby does not tell you in the above!] when you look at his alma mater, NCNM, which states in "Principles of Healing":

"these principles stand as the distinguishing marks of the profession: the healing power of nature -- vis medicatrix naturae. The body has the inherent ability to establish, maintain, and restore health. The healing process is ordered and intelligent; nature heals through the response of the life force [...] the practice of promoting health through stimulation of the vital force [...] the process of healing includes the generation of symptoms, which are, in fact, expressions of the life force attempting to heal itself [...and true to form for naturopathy, they claim falsely] these principles are based on the objective observation of the nature of health and disease and are examined continually in light of scientific analysis."

Also, the supernatural obligations of naturopathy are evident on that principles page per:

"causes may occur on many levels, including [...the] spiritual [...] health and disease are conditions of the whole organism [...including the] spiritual [...] the physician must also make a commitment to [...] spiritual development."

Naturopathy indeed blends, but then falsely labels the whole thing one kind of thing, scientific.