Friday, February 25, 2011

Colorado's HB 1173 and CoAND This 2011: A "Medical" Label, A "Science" Claim, Coded or Missing Naturopathic Premises [Opacity Written into Proposed Law]

here, I comment on the recent Facebook posting of the Colorado Association of Naturopathic Doctors [CoAND; see 001., below]; then, from CoAND and OBNM directly [see 002., below]; then from the -- quite empty -- bill itself [see 003., below]:

001. CoAND states in "Make Your Voice Heard Today in Support of  HB1173 For Licensing NDs" [vsc 2011-02-25][my comments / musings are in bold]:

"[2011's] HB 1173 has been introduced to require the regulation of naturopathic doctors in Colorado [...the] licensing of naturopathic doctors [...this] bill is strictly seeking title protection for the term 'naturopathic doctor' [poor Colorado!...]";

Another attempt in Colorado to license naturopathy, to protect falsehood.  I think "naturopathic medical doctor" and "naturopathic physician" are not possible due to the wording of previously established Colorado law concerning medical practice.

"[to] ensure that patients have a right to know [!!!]";

Wow, I didn't know that naturopaths were so concerned about knowing.  I've often illustrated how naturopaths don't transparently describe the basis and context of naturopathy, and instead falsely label such -- publicly.  I don't see how ND-patient relations can meet the ethical standards of informed consent with such continuing opacity.  Even this post on Facebook is opaque / true-context lacking.  Actually, not only do patients have the right to know, naturopathy has the OBLIGATION to tell them the WHOLE truth.  But, they don't -- which is quite ironic for these people claiming to be 'holistic'.  Licensure, I project, will simply  make sure NDs / NMDs can legally obfuscate [see 003., below].

"[a] naturopathic doctor has attended naturopathic medical school [...and] passed all the  ND medical board exams and requirements, and [...] will be held accountable by the state [...]";

The schools and the examining look like nonsense to this naturopathy-watcher.  I don't see how accountability can happen when the NDs/NMDs will police themselves, from, as Oregon exemplifies, nonsense ideas / a position of falsehood [see 002., below].

"[without it] the public cannot distinguish [...]";

Yet, it is naturopathy that does not distinguish -- 'naturopathy blends' -- the actually science-supported from the truly science-ejected.  It would seem that licensure would allow a muddle without legal recourse.  What are states going to do, prosecute themselves as accomplices to nonsense they permit?

"HB1173 would provide citizen protection by ensuring that those who call themselves naturopathic doctors have met the professional standards for this title [irony meter is exploding, Will Robinson...]";

Hmmm.  Can professionalism happen when the domain is essentially false and opaque regarding that?  Can protection happen when something is so fuzzy that it is equated with what it is not?

"your medically trained naturopathic doctor [...] medically trained ND's [x2 (a medical label)...]";

The last time I checked, medicine is medicine, naturopathy is naturopathy, science is science, the science-ejected is not science.  Naturopathy would like to equate all things irrationally.

"[CoAND members want] a license to practice legally [...]";

Hmmm.  I look at Oregon's example and see sanctioned nonscience and the elevation of the fake and false.  Wouldn't it be legal malpractice and unfair trade?  Not that I'm a lawyer.

"within a defined scope of practice [...] scope of practice very similar to that outlined in the 8 other Western States";

I'll use Oregon in 002. to attest how "defined" naturopathy is [defined by a scope of practice requiring sectarian figmentations as treatment objectives].

"ND's [...] diagnose and treat using  natural  modalities such as [...] homeopathy";

Oooops.  Empty remedies posing as "clinical science" on their board exam of such claimed rigor. ISYN.

Overall note: CoAND's fact sheet on the bill is here.  Not much explained about naturopathy at all.  Not surprising.

002. licensed falsehood via CoAND claims, then OANM specifically:

002.a. naturopathy is claimed as "science" in CoAND's "About Naturopathic Medicine" [vsc 2011-02-25]:

"naturopathic doctors cooperate with all other branches of medical science".

Note: and on that page homeopathy is claimed as "powerful" while CoAND codes naturopathy's primary science-ejected concept all-the-while.  Colorado naturopathy in fact has been very careful apparently  to NEVER have transparently explained the vitalistic science-ejected underpinnings of naturopathy.  What kind of science is so opaque?  And secretly nonscientific?  As OBNM reveals below, quite adequately.

002.b. OBNM states in "Naturopathy":

"the practice of naturopathic medicine emerges from six underlying principles of healing [...] based on the objective observation of the nature of health and disease, and are continually reexamined in light of scientific analysis  [...including] methods of treatments are chosen to work with the patient’s vital force, respecting the intelligence of the natural healing process [coded vitalism...] the healing power of nature, vis medicatrix naturae [vitalism aliases...] the process of healing includes the generation of symptoms, which are, in fact, an expression of the life force."

Note: yes, that is a 'surives scientific scrutiny' claim placed upon the hugely science-ejected vitalistic, supernatural, and HOMEOPATHIC [and kind] essentially naturopathic.  In my view, ND licensure licenses the fake, the false, and the irrational.  It is exceptionally harmful to science standards, the public's understanding of science, and the ethics of the physician-patient professional relationship.  It undoes science, professionalism, and logical thought -- and it's SOOOOO easy to show.  But, now that those standards exist, complaints about this nonsense go to the board who up holds this nonsense, I presume.  Licensure simply makes falsehood and unfair trade LEGAL.

003. the current bill itself is here, and it doesn't state much of anything naturopathic at all, as results from my 'typical' searches of naturopathic documents reveals:

"life force" = 0;
"vital force" = 0;
"scien" = 2;
"based" = 8; 
"medicatrix" = 0;
"power" = 2;
"principle" = 0;
"medical" = 14;

Note: this bill doesn't tell me anything about naturopathy.  It defers to the AANMC-CNME-AANP-CAND educational and political apparatus for specifics.  It truly embodies naturopathy's nonspecific strategy / opacity, and legislates that occultic modus operandi.  You'd have to dig really deep to be informed, overall, and that's quite ethically heinous.
Post a Comment