here, I quote from a recent HuffPo article by ND Lange that uses the 'Q' word toward CCNH NDs [see 001., below]; then, I selectively respond to language Lange uses about their-kind-of-ND versus his-kind-of-ND degree [see 002., below]; finally, I cite from Lange's own book and the Textbook of Natural Medicine homeopathy chapter to fully illustrate his own 'HUGE Q' [see 003., below]:
001. Lange, A. (ND Bastyr 1984) writes in "The Biggest Quack School in Natural Medicine Closes" (2010-07-12) [vsc 2010-07-12]:
"Clayton College of Natural Health [CCNH…] is preparing to cease operations [...it is] a classic diploma mill operation, offering doctorates and other degrees to students of natural health care, without providing clinical training or educational standards of any kind. They have unceasingly been opponents of accredited schools of naturopathic medicine and licensing for naturopathic physicians who attend four year graduate schools of naturopathic medicine [like Lange's alma mater Bastyr!...] Clayton graduates have represented themselves as naturopathic doctors and have mislead consumers […it has been] misrepresentation […] the graduates of the Clayton school and other unaccredited programs have been represented and supported by the American Naturopathic Medicine Association [...while] accredited programs of naturopathic medicine are represented by the American Association Of Naturopathic Physicians (AANP). A licensed naturopathic physician (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. [...] the [AANP-type] naturopathic physician is required to complete four years of training in clinical nutrition, acupuncture, homeopathic medicine [!!!...] a naturopathic physician takes rigorous professional board exams [...] additional information on naturopathic schools can be found through the American Association of Naturopathic Medical Colleges at www.aanmc.org or the AANP at www.naturopathic.org [....AANP naturopathy is] based on standards of education that reflect the need for competent health care. Medicine is not the exclusive domain of any one profession and health education is the prerogative of any individual. Its misrepresentation however is not. The growth of good health care is dependent on honesty and integrity as well as adequate training."
Note: the HuffPo page lists [promotes!] Lange's homeopathy book “Getting At the Root” (ISBN 1556433956, 2002) which I will talk about specifically in 003.a.
002. here are my selective responses to language used in this article:
002.a. "diploma mill," "without providing," and "standards of any kind" insinuate that a degree was paid for but the process wasn't the kind of 'in-residence' or 'classroom-setting' experience typical of higher education. It insinuates that the process was a figmentation, that shortcuts were taken as compared to the typical process, and that standards are LOW. What's offered in comparison are accreditation and licensure at the graduate, actually doctorate, level:
My response:
even fully accredited, licensure-track ND programs ARE NONSENSE! I went through one, so I know this firsthand. Naturopathy is centered upon a figmentation [search "vital life force"]! THERE ARE NO LOWER ACADEMIC STANDARDS THAN AANMC NATUROPATHY, which labels a sectarian figmentation scientific fact! ND licensure and accreditation has simply led to government subsidized FRAUD [see below];
002.b. regarding "mislead", "misrepresentation"x2, "honesty", and "integrity":
My response:
what would naturopathy know about the truth? All naturopathy is based upon misleading and misrepresenting. For example, notice how NMD Godbey doesn't transparently communicate the actual science-ejected, vitalistic, sectarian context that is naturopathy. Instead, he poses [or is posed] as a journalist [the article's address is 'news'] and poses the 'healing context' of naturopathy as something other [science] than what it actually is [science-ejected];
002.b. regarding "mislead", "misrepresentation"x2, "honesty", and "integrity":
My response:
what would naturopathy know about the truth? All naturopathy is based upon misleading and misrepresenting. For example, notice how NMD Godbey doesn't transparently communicate the actual science-ejected, vitalistic, sectarian context that is naturopathy. Instead, he poses [or is posed] as a journalist [the article's address is 'news'] and poses the 'healing context' of naturopathy as something other [science] than what it actually is [science-ejected];
002.c. regarding "graduate-level" and "same basic sciences":
My response:
simply put, the science that naturopathy practices includes, absurdly, the hugely science-ejected. This is not the same science, and certainly not even freshman undergraduate level science, as preponderant mainstream legitimate science. E.g., Bastyr states that within the scientific is the supernatural and vitalistic;
002.d. regarding "homeopathic medicine" and "rigorous professional board exams":
My Response:
homeopathy is bunk, period. So, if naturopathy's NPLEX board exams are so professional and rigorous, why is homeopathy falsely labeled "clinical science" on them?;
002.e. regarding "AANP naturopathy is based on standards of education that reflect the need for competent health care" and "adequate training";
My Response:
I don't think so. The entire context of naturopathy is absurd: that the science-based contains the science-ejected [for starters]. The goalposts have been moved so far that science is now meaningless in the naturopathic context.
homeopathy is bunk, period. So, if naturopathy's NPLEX board exams are so professional and rigorous, why is homeopathy falsely labeled "clinical science" on them?;
002.e. regarding "AANP naturopathy is based on standards of education that reflect the need for competent health care" and "adequate training";
My Response:
I don't think so. The entire context of naturopathy is absurd: that the science-based contains the science-ejected [for starters]. The goalposts have been moved so far that science is now meaningless in the naturopathic context.
003. Lange's:
003.a. homeopathy book “Getting At the Root: Treating the Deepest Source of Disease” (ISBN 1556433956, 2002) states:
003.b. Chapter 39 in the "Textbook of Natural Medicine" on Homeopathy is hosted at his own web site and in it Lange states:
004. in sum, an ND calling another ND a quack, especially in this case, is quite absurd. It's like a psychic calling an astrologer a fraud.
003.a. homeopathy book “Getting At the Root: Treating the Deepest Source of Disease” (ISBN 1556433956, 2002) states:
"this book [...] engages a vitalistic philosophy [p.001...] vitalism recognizes a capacity for the organism to self-regulate, to maintain or reestablish homeostasis [...] vitalism represents a philosophy of a life force [...his] vitalistic medicine is therefore a method that draws upon the body's innate ability to heal itself [p.004...] an attempt to engage the life force or soul in the treatment of disease [...while admittedly] the recognition of the spiritual as an influence on mankind has been untenable in a scientific model [p.005...] homeopathy is utilized in this book as a primary model of vitalistic medicine [p.007...per] the vitalistic perspective of the homeopathic approach [p.043...] the essence of homeopathic diagnosis [comes] from its vitalistic perspective [etc. p.048...] the concept of the vital force in medicine as a self-regulating mechanism is represented in many ways by the functions of our immune system [p.102...] vitalism is the recognition of the life force as the organizing substratum of material form [...per] purpose and direction [which is teleology p.115...] the ideas of a life force or spirit. The spiritual or metaphysical [...] the idea of a vitalistic science [...] vitalism was dismissed as a science [!!!p.116...] vis medicatrix naturae: the healing power of nature [p.117...] the life force [...] the archeus or life force of Paracelsus [...] the concept of anima [...per] Stahl [...] as the basis for vitalistic theory in the eighteenth century [p.123...] in the late eighteenth and nineteenth century, the leading representatives of vitalistic medicine were Hahnemann and Anton Mesmer [p.124...] it was assumed that the triumph of chemical and mechanistic demonstrations of nerve impulses in physiology eradicated the remaining postulations of vitalism [p.126...] vitalism [...] may come from our wills or imaginations [...] a participatory science [!...and] arises not out of superstition or holding onto some dogma of an obsolete science [!p.131]."
Note: so, here you have heaps of science-ejected vitalism-spiritism-teleology claiming, if we're to believe Lange's HuffPo condescension towards 'them-other-NDs', to be the basis for a non-quackery science context. Deep? I don't think so: irrational, yes.
003.b. Chapter 39 in the "Textbook of Natural Medicine" on Homeopathy is hosted at his own web site and in it Lange states:
"vitalism. Disease, in the homeopathic model, is thought to arise from inherent or developed weaknesses in the patient’s defense mechanisms [...] this viewpoint is considered 'vitalistic' [p.389...] vitalists stress the teleologic behavior of organisms (i.e., the goal directedness and design in biologic phenomena) [p.390...] the vitalistic and holistic perspective of the homeopathic approach [...] homeopathy holds that the disease first affects the vital force [p.391],"
Note: vitalism, vitalism, vitalism 'big Q' nonsense. Taking Lange's language 'in sum,' I often label naturopathy's underlying premise that is vitalistic, spiritistic, and teleological as a belief in a 'purposeful life spirit' figmentation in charge of physiology. You can get to that same summation through the language of ND Pizzorno, a founder of Lange's alma mater Bastyr.
004. in sum, an ND calling another ND a quack, especially in this case, is quite absurd. It's like a psychic calling an astrologer a fraud.
No comments:
Post a Comment