here, I cite from an El Paso Inc. piece regarding a reported Texas Medical Board [TMB] investigation of naturopath Eliezer Ben-Joseph [see 001., below]; and then I suggest what else should be investigated about naturopathy [see 002., below]:
001. Timothy Roberts writes in "State Medical Board Investigates Radio 'Doc'"(c2010-09-13)[vsc 2010-09-13]:
"Eliezer Ben-Joseph [is] a radio talk show host and naturopath [...experiencing] an investigation of his natural medicine practice by a state licensing board [...] the Texas Medical Board is investigating a complaint that he calls himself a doctor, even though he has no traditional medical degree [...he claims] 'in 14 years I have never called myself an M.D. I am a naturopath' [...] on his radio show, he calls himself 'a naturopath of the first order' [...] his website [...] further explains that 'he holds degrees of MD (MA) Medicina Alternativa, and a D.Sc., (doctor of science) from the Open International University for Complementary Medicines in Sri Lanka' [(impressive!)...] Dr. Raj Marwah, an El Paso rheumatologist who serves as a spokesman for the El Paso County Medical Society [...said] claims by naturopathic practitioners 'are blatantly off track' [...] of Ben-Joseph in particular, he said, 'he has a concoction for every symptom that you have' [(snake-oil salesman?)...and] Ben-Joseph 'gives the impression that he’s a medical guy [...] he should be transparent about this.' [...] Armando Meza, M.D., associate dean of graduate Medical Education at the Texas Tech University Paul L. Foster School of Medicine in El Paso said [...] 'there is no real evidence that (many of these treatments) work,' he said. 'It requires a lot of faith' [...while medicine] is evidence-based."
Note: some of the language that stands out is "blatantly off track", "transparent", "no real evidence", and "evidence-based".
002. what also should be investigated about naturopathy [their education racket]:
002.a. concerning the "blatantly off track" and of "no real evidence":
You get the claim that within science is the profoundly science-ejected. For instance, the UBCNM nonsensical claim that within "science" is the supernatural and vitalistic. This is an absurdity that I've illustrated ad nauseam.
002.b. concerning the non-"transparent":
When NDs describe the essentially naturopathic, they should be forced to state that it is nonsense to label what is outside of science as science and then posture as a physician who literally holds your life in their hands based upon such knowledge-blending irrationality.
002.c. concerning the "evidence-based":
I'd love to see actual, science-vetted evidence to support 'the naturopathic profoundly science-ejected' -- but, that's a long wait for a train that ain't coming. It' is as likely that there will be scientific evidence to support a vital force or a spirit within the human frame as there will be evidence that the earth is the center of the universe.
Yet, naturopathy's MO -- falsely labeling a mixture of science and profound nonscience as science and perniciously trading upon it [academically, clinically] -- unfortunately won't be what the TMB bothers looking at.
Perhaps the FTC will.
