here, I cite from the web pages of Maine ND Forbes regarding naturopathy's science claim, coded vitalism, and supernaturalism [see 001.a, below]; I then decode naturopathy's principles, contrasting ND Forbes's version with her alma mater NCNM [see 001.b., below]; and cite her homeopathy proponentry [see 001.c., below] and buried explicit vitalism [see 001.d.]:
001. Forbes, J. (ND NCNM) states:
001.a. in "About Naturopathic Medicine" [vsc 2011-01-23]:
"naturopathic medicine is a scientifically based approach [overarching science claim] to supporting the body’s own healing power [coded vitalism] with the use of safe, natural therapies such as [...] homeopathic medicines [...] naturopathic medicine recognizes an inherent self-healing process [coded vitalism] in the person which is ordered and intelligent [teleological!]. Naturopathic physicians act to identify and remove obstacles to healing and recovery, and to facilitate and augment this inherent self-healing process [coded vitalism...it's] a blending of scientific advancements [science claim] in diagnosis with the safe and sound principles of naturopathic medicine [sound? really?...] recognizing symptoms and signs from the body, mind and spirit [supernaturalism...] I see my role as assisting with the inherent self-healing process [coded vitalism]."
Note: so, there's the science claim overarching the homeopathy proponentry, the supernaturalism, and the coded vitalism. Sound? We'll see below.
001.b. now, ND Forbes is an NCNM graduate and has conveniently edited / removed some essential information regarding naturopathy, a lot of which can be currently found at her alma mater's web page explaining naturopathy, NCNM, who states in "About Naturopathic Medicine: Principles of Healing" [vsc 2011-01-23]:
"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...#1] these principles stand as the distinguishing marks [they're essential] of the profession [professional 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; nature heals through the response of the life force [explicit vitalism]. The physician’s role is to facilitate and augment this process [vitalism is mandatory...#3] the process of healing includes the generation of symptoms, which are, in fact, expressions of the life force attempting to heal itself [factual claim upon vitalism...it's] the practice of promoting health through stimulation of the vital force [explicit vitalism...] the physician must also make a commitment to her/his personal and spiritual development [mandatory supernaturalism of some kind that 'develops']."
So, there's the essential vitalism context claimed as objective fact / able to survive scientific scrutiny. There's requisite supernaturalism, similarly claimed as within science. Neither are supported by science and it is in fact false to claim so. So, are naturopathy's principles sound? No. Unless labeling the hugely science-exterior and the science-interior the same thing is sound. Unless insanity as a way to approach reality is sound. Such are not. Such are irrational. The amount of opacity / editing / nondisclosure in ND Forbes's version of "About Naturopathic Medicine" compared to the source -- which is hugely irrational itself -- is AMAZING. But, that is naturopathy's usual MO: claim science basis upon the coded nonscientific, and don't transparently communicate the irrational and falsity / unsoundness -- professional standards be damned. Naturopathy is truly the reversal of all values.
001.c. in "About Dr. Forbes" [vsc 2011-01-23]:
"homeopathy is my main treatment modality [...she's a] classical homeopath [...] acute and chronic illnesses can be treated very successfully with homeopathy [...including] asthma, allergies, strep throat, candida, cancer, hypertension, ear infections, depression, anxiety, heart disease and many other common ailments that limit peoples lives."
Note: that's quite a claim of efficacy for some very serious diseases for something now truly 'thrown into the rubbish bin'.
001.d. in "Interfering or Possibly Antidoting Factors" [vsc 2011-01-23]:
"huge stresses, emotional shocks, grief [...] they can so overwhelm the vital force that a new remedy may be indicated, or the former remedy may need to be repeated in a high potency [...] if someone is exposed to a particular stress we may classify as an antidoting factor, the vital force will rebound and the beneficial effect of the remedy will remain intact, especially if the harmful stimulus (coffee, etc.) is eliminated from the diet."
Note: and there's some explicit vitalism, buried within a pdf buried on her web site. She is, after all, a classical homeopath and an NCNM graduate. Vitalism -- that cultic science-ejected belief -- is mandatory in those two sectarian domains.
The label science upon nonscience is mandatory too, obviously.
"Danger, Will Robinson!!! Beware of unethical sectarian pseudoscience!"