here, I cite from the Guardian's column "Bad Science" [see 001., below]; then, I muse [see 002., below]:
001. Ben Goldacre writes in "Don't Cherry-Pick NHS Findings, Minister" (2011-02-12):
"so the minister has cherry-picked only the good findings [...] he cherry-picks findings he likes while explicitly claiming that he is fairly [resembles 'objectively'] citing the totality of the evidence [again, 'objectivity'] from a thorough analysis [as in 'comprehensive']. I [too] can produce good evidence that I have a magical two-headed coin, if I simply disregard all the throws where it comes out tails [oh snap!...] it's absolutely fine [for politicians] to make policy based on ideology, whim, faith, principles, and all the other things we are used to [...] and it's absolutely fine if your reforms aren't supported by existing evidence: you just shouldn't claim that they are [because that would be false]."
Note: oh how this reminds me of naturopathy!
002. musing:
naturopathy is based on principles, including "[#1] the healing power of nature (vis medicatrix naturae) [...] the body's inherent ability, which is ordered and intelligent, to heal itself. Naturopathic physicians act to identify and remove obstacles to recovery, and to facilitate and augment this healing ability" [and that's ALL you get]. But, that's some very cherry-picked language, not honoring 'informed consent' / transparency concerning naturopathy's essential premise, in my view. But, that's Bastyr for you: posing science, coding nonscience.
so, we hop a little south to Oregon and find more information on these principles from the mother-ship, and therein we're told by NCNM: "[#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. The physician’s role is to facilitate and augment this process."
ah, so it's vitalism that Bastyr is CODING / hiding and NCNM is relating transparently. And vitalism is hugely science-ejected [not to mention the supernaturalism on both of these pages]. There simply is no life force scientifically speaking: it is an article of faith / an ideology / a figmentation!
and guess what! NCNM [quite moronically] claims that such [their vitalism, supernaturalism and kind] is "in fact" on that page, and that such surivives scientific scrutiny.
as they say, 'you are entitled to your own opinion, but not to your own facts.'
now, a long time ago I got led into naturopathy by a similar manipulation:
the AANP and their schools, including Bastyr and NCNM, said [see the jpg above, which I printed in 1997 and then attended UB in 1998; it's archived here] that naturopathy was "science-based" and "not a belief system." Here it is as a rather blurry video screencapture from Archive.org [vsc 2011-02-12]:
the falsehood continues, and it is about 15 years later.
