here, I cite from a 1997 archived American Association of Naturopathic Physician's [AANP] description of their Textbook of Natural Medicine [see 001., below]; then, from Dr. Atwood's recent letter to the top administrator of the NCCAM [see 002., below]; finally, I muse [see 003., below]:
001. AANP writes in "A Textbook of Natural Medicine" c1997 [vsc 2010-07-25; linked to from the AANP's main site]:
"the most comprehensive and thoroughly-researched reference on natural health sciences [...] scientific documentation of the healing power of nature [HPN...] scientific and practical review [...] scientific indications [...] thoroughly referenced to the scientific literature."
Note: science, science, science as a label placed upon the 'essentially naturopathic,' particularly their HPN. This is nonsense. The TNM 3rd. ed. states that the HPN is actually the science-ejected premise known as vitalism. The third chapter of the TNM 3rd. ed., "A Hierarchy of Healing: The Therapeutic Order," states:
"naturopathic medicine is distinguished by the principles that underlie and determine its practice. These principles include the healing power of nature (vis medicatrix naturae) [p.032...] the vis medicatrix naturae, the vital force, the healing power of nature [p.034]."
It is irrefutable that vitalism is science-ejected. It was so even in 1997, which, by the way, as a year before I started at UBCNM [which falsely labels vitalism science, to this day]. So, AANP was basically labeling the hugely science-ejected as 'the science supported' and this still hasn't changed 13 years later. E.g., TNM co-editor ND Pizzorno still labels naturopathy "science-based natural medicine," yet he is a 1975 NCNM ND grad. and the requisite vitalistic nonsense can still be found at their web page.
002. [actual] Science-Based Medicine's Dr. Atwood writes in "Open Letter to Dr. Josephine Briggs" (2010-07-23) [where do I begin!]:
"let me address the principal reason for this letter: it is disturbing that you will shortly appear at the 25th Anniversary Convention of the American Association of Naturopathic Physicians (AANP) [...a] group [that] is best characterized as a pseudoscientific cult, and nothing since has altered that opinion [...a] pseudomedical pseudoprofessional organization [...] NDs claim to be well trained to practice what most people think of as family medicine or primary care medicine, although their version of training is chock full of pseudoscientific nonsense [...] let me assure you that there are no promising ideas emanating from naturopathy [...] consider homeopathy, a core claim of naturopathic medicine [...] the British Medical Association and the House of Commons Science and Technology Committee have seen through the ruse of pseudoscience that is homeopathy, the former declaring it 'witchcraft' and latter making this statement: 'the Committee concurred with the Government that the evidence base shows that homeopathy is not efficacious (that is, it does not work beyond the placebo effect) and that explanations for why homeopathy would work are scientifically implausible' [...] certainly science must remain neutral in the face of not-yet-seen data from rigorous studies [...but] science and skepticism [...] are not distinct. Good science involves, first and foremost, skepticism [...] Dr. Briggs, please consider the possibility that you no longer must hide your considerable scientific prowess in order to be a good NCCAM Director [...as apposed to] giving undue credibility to unfeasible and dangerous claims."
Note: I haven't found anything Dr. Atwood has ever written about naturopathy to be in disagreement with my own observations. In fact, at this year's NECSS dinner, I'd said to Dr. A. that my best description of it all is "cultic."
003. another issue that comes to mind:
as a public servant [let's put aside her duty to society in terms of the ethical obligations of her medical oath and membership], Dr. Briggs has a duty to report BLATANT FRAUD to the appropriate Federal authorizes.
So, let me offer two specific examples of naturopathy's fraud:
academically, how about a regionally accredited university falsely labeling the hugely science ejected science, and engaging in commerce under those conditions [I've linked to the University of Bridgeport, but any of the AANMC schools fit this bill];
State-wide government-hosted false labeling of the hugely science-ejected as science [specifically here, Oregon].
Wow, that was so easy to do.
No comments:
Post a Comment