The 500th Post

It's the 500th post.

It's about science, reason, critical thinking, ethical behavior in terms of the professions, and consumer rights in terms of commerce.

It's about laying bare nonsense disguised as reason- and science-backed, and unfair trade.

It's about the public's right not be be used as cannon-fodder by educational institutions which sell pseudoscience as science and fill their coffers with students' Federal loan money based on those false labels.

It's about recording it all for future engagements, providing an arsenal for whomever ends up needing such.

Nardi on Homeopathy at Miller-McCune

here, I cite from an excellent skeptical article regarding homeopathy nonsense [see 001., below]:

001. Peter M. Nardi writes in "Homeopathy Not All It’s Quacked Up To Be" [2011-03-31]:

"in February, magician James Randi [...] the founder / chair of the James Randi Educational Foundation, which promotes critical thinking by investigating paranormal and supernatural claims [...] offered $1 million in a challenge to the manufacturers of homeopathic products to prove their claims. He also asked major drugstore retailers to discontinue carrying these 'fake medicines' [...] yet, the money remains [...] unclaimed [...] let’s hear from real scientists. Edzard Ernst [...] scientifically reviews and studies alternative practices [...] his 2009 American Journal of Medicine article with Michael Baum claimed that 'homeopathy is among the worst examples of faith-based medicine' [...] the authors concluded after reviewing numerous studies that 'so far homeopathy has failed to demonstrate efficacy in randomized controlled trials and systematic reviews of well designed studies' [...] what are the ethical, moral and public health issues when pushing a homeopathic remedy? [...] being skeptical and thoroughly investigating remedies that defy physics and chemistry can help you avoid taking homeopathic substances that may be safe but not effective. More importantly, these treatments could prevent you from ones that actually work. Figuring out what works best with established scientific methodologies is the million-dollar question worth pursuing."

Note: hear, hear.  The original article has a bunch of hot-links to what is being discussed.

The Vitalism That is The Supernaturalism That Defines The "Medical Science" Known as Naturopathy - ND Paulson and WNPA

here, I cite from a web page of a Wisconsin ND who describes a basic science-exterior premise of naturopathy [see 001., below]; then, from that ND's state AANP-affiliate which broadly labels naturopathy "science" [see 002, below]:

001. Paulson, T. (ND CCNM) states in "What is Naturopathic Medicine?" [vsc 2011-03-31]:

"seven underlying health sustaining systems of our body must function effectively to ensure our well-being, prevent disease and allow a full life[...] the immune system [...] the detoxification system [...] the inflammatory system [...] the metabolic system [...] the endocrine/regulatory system [... ] the regeneration system [...] our life-force (or spirit) [vitalism equated with the supernatural].  Weakness in any of these 7 systems results in susceptibilities that allow most common disease to develop."

Note: these "systems" follow the model of ND Pizzorno's "Total Wellness" book.  You won't find these systems in a physiology textbook, though.  The ND refers us to the Wisconsin Naturopathic Physicians Association [WNPA].

002. WNPA states in "About Naturopathic Medicine" [vsc 2011-03-27]:

"naturopathic doctors cooperate with all other branches of medical science [...and have] a solid foundation in the basic medical sciences [...] these six principles, emphasized throughout a naturopathic doctor’s training, outline the philosophy guiding the naturopathic approach to health and healing and forms the foundation of this distinct health care practice: [#1] harness the healing power of nature [...] your own self-healing abilities of body, mind and spirit [...] your inherent healing power [coded vitalism]."

Note: fascinating.  You got the science-exterior vitalistic and supernatural placed, at an institutional level, falsely within science. I guess if you drink the naturopaTHICK Cool Aide, it's all good within that cultic view.  Me, I see irrationalism and absurdity posing as physicianship and scientific knowledge.

The Panacea-like Craniosacral Claims of Milwaukee's ND Saxe

here, I cite extravagant claims from the web page of ND Saxe regarding craniosacral therapy luncacy:

001. Saxe, K. (ND NCNM) states in "Craniosacral Therapy" [vsc 2011-03-30]:

"'craniosacral therapy is a gentle method of detection and correction that encourages your own natural healing mechanisms to dissipate these negative effects of stress on your central nervous system. You also benefit from better overall health and resistance to disease' - the Upledger Institute [quite a claim].  Craniosacral therapy was developed by osteopathic physician John E. Upledger [...who supposedly] witnessed the rhythmic movement of the craniosacral system during a spinal surgery [...who] went on to research and document the influence of therapy on the craniosacral system [...] in 1985, Dr. Upledger established the Upledger Institute to teach this and other therapies. Craniosacral therapy (CST) is a gentle, light-touch method of evaluating and enhancing the craniosacral system [...] an imbalance or dysfunction in the craniosacral system can cause sensory, motor or neurological disabilities. These problems may include chronic pain, eye difficulties, scoliosis, motor-coordination impairments and learning disabilities, as well as other physical and psychological problems [really]. What conditions does craniosacral therapy address: 

migraines and headaches, chronic neck and back pain, motor-coordination impairments, stress and tension-related problems, infantile disorders, traumatic brain and spinal cord injuries, chronic fatigue and fibromyalgia, scoliosis, central nervous system disorders, emotional difficulties, temporomandibular joint syndrome, learning disabilities, post-traumatic stress disorder, orthopedic problems, and many other conditions.

In my practice, craniosacral therapy may be incorporated as part of comprehensive naturopathic medical care  [...] please contact me to find out if this therapy or naturopathic medicine could be beneficial for you."

Note: wow!  When I was in ND school, at the end of my first year I believe, a naturopathic conference was held on campus and for the first time ever I got to see this so-called therapy.  After laying down on an exam table and having someone hold me head in my hands and perform the therapy, THAT is when I began to realize that I was accidentally now immersed in a cult.

002. some criticism of CST:

here.

Steven Salzberg on TCM Journals: Unproven Superstitions Falsely Labeled Science

here, I cite from a recent Forbes blog post by Steven Salzberg regarding the actual nonscientific context of 'scientifically contextually published' TCM [see 001., below]:

001. Steven Salzberg writes in "Chinese Medicine Infiltrates Scientific Publishing" (2011-03-28)[saved 2011-03-28]:

"Chinese medicine has its own journal [...a] pseudoscience journal [actually...of] journals that promote anti-scientific theories and otherwise muddy the literature [...] published by BioMed Central, a large scientific publisher [...owned by] Springer Science [...covering] 'acupuncture, tui-na, qi-qong, tai chi quan, energy research' and other nonsense [...based on] mysterious energy fields in the body [...] for those with a high tolerance for quackery [...] TCM is a grab-bag of superstitious practices taken from Chinese history [...] what is this doing in a scientific journal? [...] using the term 'medicine' to describe Qi-gong, acupuncture, and 'energy research' is, to put it bluntly, nonsense [...] corporate leaders seem to care more about expanding their stable than about maintaining the integrity of science. Chinese medicine simply does not belong in the company of respectable scientific journals [hear, hear...] forming a scientific journal whose goal is to validate antiquated, unproven superstitions is simply not science."

Note: naturopathy, too, is published by Elsevier as "science".  And TCM is a subset of naturopathy, which calls itself, overall, a branch of medical science while fundamentally based on the science-ejected.  This is 2011, and STILL you have less rights and protections as an educational consumer in terms of unfair commerce than someone on a used car lot.

Montana's ND Aagenes Admits "Natural" is Meaningless, and Labels Vitalism Science

here, I cite from an ND regarding the label "natural" [see 001., below]; then from her practice's explanation of 'the naturopathic', whereby the profoundly science-ejected is claimed as able to survive scientific scrutiny [see 002., below]:

001. Aagenes, N. (ND Bastyr) states in "Hormone Replacement" [vsc 2011-03-27]:

"'natural' is so poorly defined in medicine that it is virtually meaningless [hear, hear...e.g.] the term 'bioidentical' refers not to plant hormone in the raw [...but to] those taken from plants [...] and acted on with enzymes until they are indistinguishable from human hormone.  The result is a 'natural' hormone, but the process does not occur in nature."

Note: it's somewhat interesting to hear this moment of lucidity, 'in their own words' no less.  Naturopathy trades on this idea of the "natural" / 'the naturopathic' as being distinct, and yet here an ND is quite right in stating that naturopathy truly doesn't limit itself to just the 'distinctly natural' [whatever that means].  Of course, she dares not directly utter what she is actually speaking of: the artificial [whatever THAT means].

002. do I now trust ND Aagenes though?

a big NO, pan-naturopathically speaking.  On the page "Naturopathic Medicine" [vsc 2011-03-27] she and her ND partner collectively state:

'"the practice of naturopathy emerges from six underlying principles of healing. These principles are based on the objective observation of the nature of health and disease, and are continually reexamined in light of scientific analysis. For the naturopathic physician, abiding by these principles forms the basis of all treatment [...#1] the healing power of nature, vis medicatrix naturae [...] nature heals through the response of the life force. The physician's role is to facilitate and augment this process."

Note: ah, the overarching nonsense of labeling the science-ejected as able to survive scientific scrutiny -- as a worldview.  There ain't no life force, and there's no need for it to explain any phenomena.  Such is a medically irrelevant article of faith.  I argue that part of naturopathy's principles is such 'institutionalized falsehood' via knowledge mislabeling, a requisite 'epistemic conflation' that drones out any moments of naturopathic lucidity.  Naturopathy, at its core, destroys knowledge meaningfulness since, essentially, for naturopathy something-is-what-it-is-not.

Schwackupuncture: Acupuncture Has So Little to Offer and is Not Without "Serious Adverse Effects"

here, I cite from the abstract of a recent Edzard Ernst lead-authored review of acupuncture from the journal Pain [see 001., below]:

001. Pain reports in the abstract for "Acupuncture: Does it Alleviate Pain and are There Serious Risks? A review of Reviews" (Volume 152, Issue 4 , Pages 755-764, April 2011):

"acupuncture is commonly used for pain control, but doubts about its effectiveness and safety remain. This review was aimed at critically evaluating systematic reviews of acupuncture as a treatment of pain and at summarizing reports of serious adverse effects published since 2000 [...in sum] numerous systematic reviews have generated little truly convincing evidence that acupuncture is effective in reducing pain. Serious adverse effects continue to be reported [...such as] pneumothorax and infections [...and] fatalities."

Note: and that is the state of the science regarding acupuncture efficacy and safety particularly in terms of something it is supposed to be GOOD at.  I've wondered a lot about these Masters Degrees in Science that LAcs have: a science label marketing a system of belief based on prescientific or even science-refuted ideations about how the body works, and what comprises the world we live in.  I've wondered about the amount of charity that sCAM receives in terms of its commerce and in terms of its educational self-categorization.  A lot of people are being misled by false claims regarding acupuncture's efficacy, safety and science context: claims which have truly now been schwacked.

The Mission and an Upcoming Milestone

here, I reiterate my profile at Blogger.com which has, right now, for some strange reason, exactly 3100 reads since 2006-01 [see below]; also, this month I will reach my 500th post at Naturocrit [but I've not accomplished ANYTHING]:

"About Me:

**********Tá mé in amhras (Gaelic, 'I am skeptical'). [Dr. Bob Ironic was my ND school nickname -- an absurd doctorate I ceased after 4 years due to its unethical, sectarian, pseudoscientific NATURE {wink-wink}. I am not a doctor, of any kind!]. I will gladly testify against any ND / NMD: practitioner, school, State .gov entity, accreditation body, accessory and such.

Interests:

I detail the pseudoscientific claims of the unethical & sectarian medical system known as naturopathy / naturopathic medicine, which I got snookered into studying at the University of Bridgeport between the years 1998-2002.

I also index answers to those claims as provided by national science & medical organizations, & science & medicine Nobel laureates.

Watch out: FNPLA AANMC AANP-CAND & UBCNM naturopathy -- particularly -- claims that 'supernatural, metaphysical, idealistic, teleological, autoentheistic, vitalistic & such unevidenced kind' are scientific, science, & science-based -- which is ABSURD & FRAUDULENT & an exceptional ABUSE of the 'social institution status' of medicine, physicianship & education.

They are amongst "the education robbers."

I enjoy studying the naturopaTHICK: the absurdity, inanity, & sheer stupidity of a 'purposeful life spirit' based system that claims essentially that the scientifically-ejected, the scientifically-unsupported, & the unscienceable are within science; that the sectarian is nonsectarian; & that specific sectarian articles of faith are nonsectarian objective scientific fact [FNPLA naturo. claims that their 'purposeful life spirit ' / 'the Vis' / 'god power within, divine within' is a scientific fact].

Overall, I must engage in this exposé as an extension of my academic duty.

I am a dissident.

I once studied the stuff as an education customer & in the process came to find naturopathic medicine overall to be fraudulent.

When I complained to the State of Connecticut, USDE & others I found I had no rights in the matter – though I was ripped off & the racket continues.

Still I will not pay back my six-figure student debt aggregate induced by naturopathy's academic lies & mislabelings.

I cannot fertilize fraud.

I continue to seek PARITY, JUSTICE, & REPARATION...while I warn others, while I expose them, with whatever time is left.

'Truthfulness is never insolent', to paraphrase Orac."

Note: oh well.  Those words still encompass my ethos regarding naturopathy.  I expect to be a little more shrill in the upcoming weeks, as I've a medical ethics class to teach.  No, nothing has been accomplished but that to me is irrelevant.  

Like in Ben Okri's novel "The Famished Road": though we've only built six inches of the road, we will continue as we have for the past 2000 years building the road.

CAND's New PR Push: ExploreYourHealth.ca

here, I cite from a Canadian Association of Naturopathic Doctor's [CAND] recent press release about naturopathy's ExploreYourHealth.ca / Canadian Naturopathic Foundation [see 001., below]; then directly from that CNF site which claims naturopathy is scientific and highly efficacious [see 002., below]; and finally, from CAND's Youtube channel which claims naturopathy is science yet simultaneously is premised on the science-ejected [see 003., below]:

001. marketwire.com states in "The Canadian Naturopathic Foundation [2011-03-23]" [vsc 2011-03-23]:

"Toronto, Ontario [2011-03-23...] the Canadian Naturopathic Foundation (CNF) [more on them below...] a registered charitable organization (B/N118834712RR0001) that supports research and public education for the advancement of naturopathic medicine in Canada [...] is pleased to announce the launch of ExploreYourHealth.ca – Canada's only one-stop online source for naturopathic health information and guidance approved by the Canadian Association of Naturopathic Doctors (CAND) [...]  the national voice of the Canadian naturopathic profession since 1955 [...] CAND membership consists of over 1,900 Canadian naturopathic doctors and naturopathic medical students [...who] undergo training similar to medical doctors [...that] includes basic sciences, clinical sciences, naturopathic disciplines, and clinical experience [...ExploreYourHealth.ca  was] created to provide a reliable and trustworthy resource about the many benefits naturopathic medicine offers in achieving good health, preventing illness and treating disease [...] Dr. Jason Boxtart, ND, Chair of the Canadian Association of Naturopathic Doctors, expressed his strong support for ExploreYourHealth.ca and the Canadian Naturopathic Foundation [...] 'with so much confusing information out there on natural and complementary approaches to health and medicine, we saw a strong need for a resource that was trustworthy and based on the knowledge of educated and accredited professionals' [...] the site's Ask an ND section allows visitors to submit specific questions to naturopathic doctors. Selected questions are then answered through a brief video segment like the one included in this release. Visitors requiring more in depth information and advice can use the Find an ND resource tool to find a naturopathic doctor in their area [...] naturopathic medicine is a distinct primary health care system that blends modern scientific knowledge with traditional and natural forms of medicine [...] for more information, please contact Canadian Association of Naturopathic Doctors: Shawn O'Reilly Executive Director, 416 496-8633, soreilly@cand.ca [...] editor's note: there is a video included with this release [see note below]."

Note: CAND says the new site is reliable.  Well, it's good that CAND -- professionally [wink-wink] -- approves, really.   But is CAND reliable to begin with?  Or nonsensical?  What are CAND standards? Oh, yes, naturopaths love to educate, in that narrow kind of manner that is known as indoctrination and opacity.  "The knowledge of educated and accredited professionals" -- ah, that complete reversal of values regarding knowledge and professionalism!  You could encapsulate naturopathy illogic in many ways, and "distinct primary health care system that blends" is one of my favorites: the delineated-conflated.  My irony meter is exploding.

Yes, there is an embedded / linked video, "Training and Education of a Naturopathic Doctor -- 'What's Up Doc?'" [vsc 2011-02-15] featuring Canada's ND Dempster who states:

"my name is Dr. John Dempster and I'm a licensed naturopathic doctor in Toronto, Ontario [...] what type of education goes into becoming a naturopathic doctor? [...] students enter into an undergraduate degree that is heavily weighted in medical sciences [...then go to a] naturopathic institution [...then take] a rigorous set of board exams [...so] visit www.cand.ca."

Those board exams are actually so rigorous that homeopathy is labeled a "clinical science" on them -- while profoundly considered science-ejected whackoness, truly.  Labeling homeopathy science is as scientifically rigorous as labeling flat-Earth-ism geography.  Sure, they require sciences to get into ND school but not the "medical sciences" that ND Dempster says.  What's needed specifically are prerequisites in the pre-medical sciences sense, duh!  Yet, requiring science as an entrance requirement doesn't make the naturopathic context science! Just like throwing some wine into a whole lot of mud doesn't magically make the whole thing wine.  Furthermore, even if naturopaths later in ND school study a huge amount of medical science, what's overlain / oathed-to truly, is a sectarian ideology / belief system as a required context / naturopathic standard of care that science IN FACT hugely rejects / does not support.  But, anyway...

002. CNF and ExploreYourHealth.ca:

002.a. CNF states:

a Google.com web search led to a CAND page that states: "Canadian Naturopathic Foundation (CNF): please visit ExploreYourHealth.ca for information on the Canadian Naturopathic Foundation".

Note: so we go there.

002.b. ExploreYourHealth.ca states in "Naturopathic Medicine" [vsc 2011-03-25; my comments are in bold]:

"naturopathic medicine is a distinct primary health care system that blends modern scientific knowledge with traditional and natural forms of medicine [...it's] a truly integrative form of health care [...]";

Again, that great oxymorony of 'the blended distinct'.  Illogic is not a virtue, until you cross the border into naturopathyland.

"naturopathic medicine is the art and science of disease diagnosis, treatment and prevention using natural therapies including botanical medicine, clinical nutrition, hydrotherapy, homeopathy, naturopathic manipulation, traditional Chinese medicine / acupuncture, and lifestyle counseling [...these] safe and effective ways to restore health [...it's] very effective in improving quality of life for those with serious and life threatening illnesses [...] patients with chronic illness have found tremendous benefits [...]";

And here we go with the nonsense of a science label upon such bullshit therapeutics as homeopathy and TCM.  Those are some scary-ass efficacy claims on what is truly parlor pseudomedicine: e.g., even today at Science-Based Medicine, Brennen McKenzie writes in "How Popular is Acupuncture?" "a large majority of people who seek acupuncture therapy, regardless of ethnicity or nationality, do so for treatment of musculoskeletal conditions and pain. There is good evidence that the therapeutic ritual of acupuncture has some symptomatic benefit for such indications. This is almost certainly a non-specific treatment effect (aka 'placebo'). It does not seem to matter where needles are inserted or if they are inserted at all, and acupuncture therapy does not appear to measurably affect the course of any actual disease. (The Skeptic’s Dictionary has a clear and concise review)".

"a naturopathic doctor is a primary care practitioner that seeks to restore and maintain optimum health in their patients by emphasizing nature’s inherent self-healing process [...] the naturopathic philosophy is to stimulate the healing power of the body and to treat the root cause of disease [...]";

Coded vitalism.  What kind of profession codes its context and engages in commerce based on such opacity?  What kind of supposed science is, ultimately, founded on science-ejected ideas? This CNF 'naturopathy principles page' also hugely codes naturopathy's HPN-VMN premise.  And so does this one and this one.

"a naturopathic doctor views the individual as an integral whole including the physiological, structural, psychological, social, spiritual, environment and lifestyle factors affecting health [...]";

And presto, supernaturalism / spiritism is now within the category of science by naturopathic word magic.  Hand out the Nobels.

"naturopathic medicine emphasizes disease as a process rather than disease as an entity [...]";

This is a strawman, of sorts.  Pathophysiology is the study of disease processes in medical science.  Medical science does not believe disease is an entity either.  Isn't it ironic that it is naturopathy that conceives 'life' as a dualistic 'intelligent spirit force / energy' entity / geist but reversely accuses modern medicine of holding such a view.

"naturopathic doctors [...] cooperate with other branches of medical science [...]";

Wow, that HUGE science claim upon the naturopathic enterprise.

"in Canada, the naturopathic medical profession’s infrastructure includes accredited educational institutions, professional licensing, national standards of practice, participation in  federal health care initiatives, and a commitment to state-of-the-art scientific research [...]";

Ah, profession and science claims.  I'm not sure how standards of practice can exist if, in terms of knowledge, 'anything goes'.

"it is the approach, philosophy and training of naturopathic doctors that sets it apart from other forms of health care [...] a new perspective [...]";

I'll say.  Apart in the padded room kind of way.

"naturopathic medical care [...involves] a clear understanding of the factors that affect health and how to deal with them on a daily basis [...a] broad understanding of health and the relationship between health, life and the environment";

So, in all this muddle they claim that their understanding is clear.  They claim a broadness of knowledge.  I disagree.  I see muddle and quite undeveloped thinking.

003. CAND's overall false claim that naturopathy is science-based [because within that claim is the science-ejected]:

003.a. CAND on Youtube:

that ND Dempster supposed science-context reference reminded me that that CAND's Youtube channel has had up quite a strong 'naturopathic is science-based' claim for some time, three years now and counting [see these two Youtube videos, here and here; both vsc 2011-03-23].

Those two CAND videos describe naturopathy as "science-based natural medicine".

003.b. but, according to CAND's own publication "The History of Naturopathic Medicine: A Canadian Perspective" (ISBN 1552787788, 2009) [I own multiple copies], naturopathy is based on the science-ejected, essentially:

"[amongst many references to naturopathy's defining vitalism] the aim of naturopathic physicians is to treat the patient, not the disease, by directing the vital force and encouraging it with naturopathic therapeutics to stimulate the body’s own defenses [p.031]."

Note: also, CNF states in "Natural Therapies Used by NDs" [vsc 2011-03-25]:

"homeopathic medicine: this powerful system of medicine [...] homeopathic remedies[...] when carefully matched to the patient they are able to affect the body’s 'vital force' and to stimulate the body’s innate healing forces."

004. overall note:

have you ever read and heard such nonsense?

Representations of Naturopathy's Premise: Some NCNM Florida NDs

here, I cite from the web pages of some AANP-referred Florida naturopaths who are NCNM graduates regarding how they express the "healing power of nature" vitalistic premise essential to naturopathy [see 001., below]; then, I return to the alma mater of those NDs and show the Full Monty [see 002., below]:

001. NCNM's graduates:

001.a. Thompson, J. (ND NCNM):

does not define naturopathy on the linked page.

Note: quite disappointing.

001.b. Kalidas, K. (ND NCNM) defines naturopathy in "Naturopathy and Oath" stating:

"naturopathic medicine [...] is founded on the honored medical principal that nature heals [...from the oath] according to my best ability and judgment, I will use methods of treatment which follow the principles of naturopathic medicine [...including] to act in cooperation with the healing power of nature."

Note: that's all you get.  Quite opaque.  This is coded vitalism.

001.c. Rubiales, L. (ND NCNM) defines naturopathy in "Naturopathic Medicine" stating:

"naturopathic medicine  [...] the following are its basic principles: [#1] the healing power of nature: the human body has an innate intelligence that is constantly striving for health."

Note: and that's all you get.  Quite opaque / coded vitalism.

001.d. Lipham, J. (ND NCNM 2005) states in "Naturopathic Medicine":

"naturopathic medicine has a distinct philosophy of healing that sets it apart from other health care systems. This philosophy is based upon the following six basic principles of healing [...#2] harness the healing power of nature [...] these principles are not in themselves amazing nor profound, rather they are merely truths based on common sense and are essential for true healing [sure]."

Note: again, opacity! Coding!

001.e. Visconti, M. (ND NCNM) states in "Naturopathic Medicine":

"naturopathic medicine is a system of medicine whose primary goal is [...] stimulating the body's ability to heal itself [...] naturopathic medicine has 6 principles that guide the direction of the treatment and healing [#1] the healing power of nature [...] by using these principles the naturopathic physician will work to address the underlying causes of imbalance allowing the body to heal itself."

Note: again and again, opacity!  Coding.

002. let's go to their mother ship, NCNM, who states in "Principles of Healing":

"these principles stand as the distinguishing marks of the profession: [#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."

Note: and there you go, science-ejected vitalism.  Why was it so HARD for the Florida NDs to transparently describe HPN?  Of course, NCNM has problems too.  On the same page it labels naturopathy's vitalism and supernaturalism as able to survive scientific scrutiny.  Such can't.

003. so:

no NCNM ND in Florida that I've cited accurately contextualizes naturopathy's science-ejected concept of HPN.  NCNM gets half way in mentioning it, and decodes it, but then undoes that honesty by falsely labeling it as able to survive scientific scrutiny.

Florida's AANP Bunch is In On It! Nonscience Coded and Falsely Labeled Science [Naturopathy's MO Continued]

here, I cite from the web pages of the Florida Naturopathic Physicians Association [FNPA] who claim that naturopathy is science [see 001.a., below] while they code naturopathy's science-ejected essential premise [see 001.b., below]; then, I direct you to a '.gov' page transparently detailing naturopathy's science-ejected contents while simultaneously incorrectly contextualizing same said as science too [see 002., below]: 

001. FNPA states:

001.a1. in "Naturopathic Education" [vsc 2011-03-23]:

"after completion of standard premedical undergraduate coursework, a 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. [...] Bastyr University offers a rigorous, naturopathic medical program emphasizing both the science base of medicine and its clinical application [...] their faculty's commitment to the art and science of healing has made SCNM a leader among the naturopathic medical schools [...] National's N.D. program provides you with a rigorous curriculum that blends thorough scientific foundation with comprehensive training in naturopathic treatments. As a student in the naturopathic physician program at National, you will study the same basic sciences as an M.D."

Note: science, science, science. The "same" science as science sciences by and founds itself by, supposedly.

001.a2. in "FNPA Membership Application 2010" (and here) [vsc 2011-03-23]:

"as per the FNPA by-laws, article III; the mission of the Florida Naturopathic Physicians Association, Inc., is [...] to advance, promote and protect the science of naturopathic medicine and the naturopathic medical profession."

Note: science again.  And a professions claim.

001.b1. on the same 001.a1. page:

"naturopathic physicians work to identify and eliminate the cause of disease, and are guided by six basic principles: do no harm, utilize the healing power of nature, identify and treat the causes, treat the whole person, focus on preventive medicine, practice doctor-as-teacher."

Note: and that's all you are told.  That is quite undetailed and opaque [where is the mention of the science-ejected vitalistic and spiritistic that is at the ROOT of naturopathy?].  Yes, somehow yet, they claim to teach.  Manipulate, more-like.

001.b2. on the page "Naturopathic Medicine" [vsc 2011-03-23]:

"six fundamental principles of naturopathic medicine: [#1] the healing power of nature: naturopathic medicine recognizes an inherent healing process in the person that is ordered and intelligent [hmmmm!]. The body is capable of healing itself. The role of the naturopathic doctor is to remove obstacles to healing and to stimulate this inherent natural tendency of the body [coded vitalism!]; [#2] identify and treat the cause: naturopathic doctors seek to identify and remove the underlying causes of illness, not merely eliminate or suppress symptoms; [#3] first do no harm: naturopathic doctors seek to do no harm by using methods and substances that minimize risks of side effects, using the least force needed to diagnose and treat, avoiding the harmful suppression of symptoms and working with the self-healing process; [#4] doctor as teacher: naturopathic doctors recall that the origin of the word 'doctor' is the Latin word, 'to teach.' A fundamental emphasis in naturopathic medicine is patient education; [#5] treat the whole person: naturopathic doctors attempt to take into consideration all the factors that make up patients' lives and affect their health and well-being; [#6] prevention: naturopathic medicine emphasizes the prevention of disease, assesses risk factors, and makes appropriate interventions with patients to prevent illness."

Note: so, you get a little more detail.  But, I can REALLY get you the detail you need to be an informed consumer.

On Youtube, FNPA states in "Naturopathic Medicine in Florida" [vsc 2011-03-23]:

"[from the description] at the FNPA our goal is to educate the public as to the merits of naturopathic medicine and to create and maintain legislation that supports the qualified practice of naturopathic medicine in Florida. For more information, please visit www.fnpa.org [...from the video] vis medicatrix naturae, the healing power of nature [coded vitalism!...] naturopathic doctors are the physicians who are trained to listen [...] this is a doctor who is trained to use [...such things as] homeopathy [...and] acupuncture [(spelled wrong in the video)...] to restore optimal health [...] naturopathic doctors are your comprehensive physicians [...we are] working hard to educate, lobby, and reach out to make a difference."

knowing what I know, that teaching and that educating and that science are NOT being delivered.   Hell, their own video about naturopathy skirts an actual description of VMN-HPN!

002. I direct you to the Oregon Board of Naturopathic Medicine, which states that naturopathy is based on the science-ejected and that such is somehow [in naturopathy-land, where science is a fiction] indeed science.

Note: is there a greater stupid?

002.b. AANP NDs in Florida:

002.b1. the AANP's "Find a Doctor" states:

"Find a Naturopathic Doctor ('Find a Doctor') is compiled and published by the American Association of Naturopathic Physicians ('AANP') as a reference source of professional information on individual Naturopathic Doctor ('ND') members in the United States and abroad [...] professional and contact information for AANP member NDs."

Note: and then you type in a location and they list members.

002.b2. including:

Nguyen, K. (ND SCNM);

Thompson, J. (ND NCNM);

Swedrock, K. (ND SCNM);

Kalidas, K. (ND NCNM);

Rubiales, L. (ND NCNM);

Lipham, J. (ND NCNM 2005);

Visconti, M. (ND NCNM).

Note: in the next post, I'll look at whether these NDs individually express naturopathy accurately.

ND Maloney on Homeopathy: Whereby the Anecdotal Trumps Profound Scientific Consensus

here, I cite from a recent video up at Youtube by ND Maloney claiming that homeopathy's results are "dramatic and astonishing" [see 001., below]; then from Wikipedia's definition of anecdotal evidence [see 002., below]; and finally from a profound scientific consensus regarding homeopathy bunk [see 003., below]:

001. Maloney, C.L. (ND NCNM) states in his Youtube video "Homeopathy.MOD" [vsc 2011-03-21]:

"[from the description] Dr. Christopher Maloney, N.D., discusses homeopathy. Category: Science and Technology [...from the video] I want to talk to you very very briefly about homeopathy [...] I'm a very aggressive, very acute prescriber [...] I've seen it do things that are only explainable as a result of the homeopathic remedy [working beyond placebo...] I've seen acute infections go away over a three to five hour period.  I've seen ears drain in real time, you know, remedy in [then] ears drain. I have people who get significantly better within an hour of taking a remedy [...] when I'm giving people remedies, I'm expecting a result within 30-60 seconds because it's either going to hit them or not.  I'm not going for placebo effect.  If it doesn't work, it doesn't work.  We'll just try this one, and this one, and this one, and this one [...] I'm giving five, six, seven remedies in a row.  If it's a placebo effect, why didn't the first one, the second one, the third, forth, fifth, why this sixth one suddenly works? [...] the results are variable but they're dramatic and astonishing [...] I've given as far as twenty-one remedies to someone and then the twenty-first remedy kicks over.  I've had a child I've gave remedies to for two weeks and then finally got the right one and the wheeze stops pretty-much within 3 minutes of taking a remedy.  And at that point anyone who is explaining that to me as anything other than effect, I've tried forty other remedies on this kid.  This remedy, somehow my placebo action was just going right on this one?  I don't think so [as in not placebo, he claims].  This is an active pharmacological result [...] it's basically life-altering [...] I think I'm keeping that around."

Note: homeopathy is not a science or technology category, folks.  But anyway, ND Maloney appears quite convinced that homeopathic remedies are 'active pharmacologically', causing "dramatic and astonishing" results.  This is, though, ALL ANECDOTAL, as his account has illustrated.  The repetitive attempts [fails] remind me of a psychic cold-reading their mark.  In so many attempts, that psychic eventually gets a hit and that is what is remembered.  ND Maloney may have some seriously gullible and patient patients if he's being allowed to try forty homeopathic remedies [as if they can be distinguished / are fundamentally different based on their empty contents!] on a child who is ill.

002. a definition of anecdotal evidence via Wikipedia [which is good enough]:

"in science, anecdotal evidence has been defined as: 'information that is not based on facts or careful study, non-scientific observations or studies [...] reports or observations of usually unscientific observers, casual observations or indications rather than rigorous or scientific analysis, information [...] not documented scientifically' [...it's] considered the least credible [...it is never] validating evidence [...as it lacks a] reliability by objective independent assessment [...] the term is [obviously therein] often used in contrast to scientific evidence, such as evidence-based medicine, which are types of formal accounts [...while] anecdotal evidence is not necessarily representative of a 'typical' experience; statistical evidence [quite more formal] can more accurately determine how typical something is [...] in science and logic, the 'relative strength of an explanation' is based upon its ability to be tested, proven to be due to the stated cause, and verified under neutral conditions in a manner that other researchers will agree has been performed competently, and can check for themselves [...e.g.] in medicine [...] only double-blind randomized placebo-controlled clinical trials can confirm a hypothesis about the effectiveness of a treatment independently of expectations [...] anecdotal evidence is often unscientific or pseudoscientific because various forms of cognitive bias may affect the collection or presentation of evidence [...] misuse of anecdotal evidence is a logical fallacy [...] a common way anecdotal evidence becomes unscientific is through fallacious reasoning such as the post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy, the human tendency to assume that if one event happens after another, then the first must be the cause of the second [...or] inductive reasoning [...] a faulty or hasty generalization [...] selected individual cases prove nothing [...because] anecdotes often refer to the exception, rather than the rule [...] 'anecdotes are useless precisely because they may point to idiosyncratic responses [... ] 'the plural of anecdote is not data'."

Note: so, even a guy on Youtube wearing scrubs calling himself doctor, speaking about his own apparently successful clinical experience with a supposedly specifically active therapy such as homeopathy, is relying on THE WORST KIND of support regarding that intervention.

003. that consensus:

the United Kingdom's "Evidence Check" of homeopathy was HUGELY dismissive of the entire homeopathic endeavor.  It stated:

"there has been enough testing of homeopathy and plenty of evidence showing that it is not efficacious. Competition for research funding is fierce and we cannot see how further research on the efficacy of homeopathy is justified in the face of competing priorities."

Note: ouch.  I cannot imagine a greater disparity: ND Maloney says in his experience homeopathy works [anecdote], but the scientific consensus is that it is profoundly bunk [rigor].

004. musing:

I think this is an excellent example of why medicine benefits from EXCLUSION of practitioner and patient informal experience [anecdote] and replaces such with a more rigorous evidence- and science- basis [formal investigation].  Otherwise, crap therapeutics appear to work when if fact they don't. Now, ND Maloney has taken a licensing exam that presently labels homeopathy "science", and his alma mater claims that the science-ejected is indeed within science -- as an overall worldview.  So, in my opinion, ND Maloney's use of homeopathy and his faith in it is merely a symptom of naturopathy's knowledge-basis problems.

would you visit a physician who was trained NOT to distinguish what genuinely has effect from what is an empty pill / bunk, whose knowledge-basis laxly blends the rigorous scientific and the nonsensical science-ejected and then labels the whole thing "dramatic and astonishing" and rigorously scientifically supported [I think that's what is implicit at ND Maloney's alma mater's regulator in Oregon, OBNM]?

The 'Nonscience Labeled Science' of ND Monette

here, I cite from the web pages of Connecticut's ND Monette, who labels naturopathy "science" [see 001., below]; while detailing the nonscience basis of its therapies [see  002., below]:

001. Monette, A. (ND SCNM) states in "Naturopathic Medicine" [vsc 2011-03-20]:

"naturopathic physicians are educated and trained at accredited naturopathic medical schools in the art and science of natural healthcare [...] all NDs graduating from nationally accredited naturopathic medical programs have fulfilled the following criteria [...] two-step licensing exams administered nationally by NABNE: basic science exams in anatomy, physiology, biochemistry, pathology and microbiology."

Note: science, science, science.  That same exam labels homeopathy "clinical science."

002. ND Monette states:

002.a. in "Services > Acupuncture/Traditional Chinese Medicine" [vsc 2011-03-20]:

"naturopaths are trained in this ancient form of medicine, which includes diagnosis and acupuncture [...] the basis of traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) is the concept of qi flowing along invisible meridians in the body. Qi is the energy within that controls our organ functions and helps to prevent illness."

Note: vitalism / the science-ejected.

002.b. in "Services > Homeopathy" [vsc 2011-03-20]:

"based on the principle that like cures like, homeopathic medicines are diluted thousands of times in order to create a compound that, when matched to the symptoms of the patient, can stimulate the body to heal itself.  This form of medicine has been used for centuries in order to stimulate the body to increase its vital force."

Note: vitalism / the science-ejected.

HSNP, Vega Diagnostics, and Naturopathy's Supernatural Physiology

here, I cite from web pages of the Hawaii Society of Naturopathic Physicians [HSNP] regarding naturopathy's primary context, supernatural physiology [see 001.a., below] and a member they promote who uses Vega diagnostically [see 001.b., below]; then, I cite from that ND's own web pages [see 002., below]; then, some words on the nonsense of placing supernaturalism / vitalism within science / physiology, and the use of Vega diagnostically [see 003., below]:

001. HSNP states:

001.a. in "About Us" [vsc 2011-03-18]:

"naturopathic medicine [...] practice us guided by the following principles: [#1] use the healing power of nature [HPN]: the body has the ability to maintain and restore health. Healing occurs as a result of the revival of our 'vital force' [VF] - qi [Q], prana [P], spirit [S]."

Note: so, HPN = VF = Q = P = S.  All those terms, equated, I'll express as vitalism / supernaturalism  -- that is quite ironic for an area claiming to be natural and science based.  So, where is the natural and the supernatural the same thing, the scientific and nonscientific?  The naturopaTHICK.  Therein, naturopathy supernaturalizes physiology with some sort of spiritism -- THAT is a sectarian belief, if even of a nebulous kind.

001.b. in "Dr. Ian Cholewa" [vsc 2011-3-18]:

"Dr. Cholewa provides high quality, consistent electrodiagnostic [Vega] assessments based on the system of German bioenergetic medicine [BM]. He utilized electronic methods of diagnosis [Vega] to identify the underlying causes of ill health and help individuals and families achieve and maintain optimal health."

Note: Vega BM pseudodiagnostics galore!

002. Cholewa, I. (ND Bastyr) [whose web page link is on the above HSNP page] states:

002.a. in "Dr Ian Cholewa" [vsc 2011-03-18]:

"Dr. Ian Cholewa received his bachelor's degree from University of British Columbia and his doctorate of naturopathic medicine from Bastyr University in Seattle [...] Ian Cholewa, ND has been practicing as a naturopathic physician since 2000 specializing in German bioenergetic medicine. He integrates naturopathic medicine with non-invasive and painless electronic method of diagnosis [Vega] based on the German system of bioenergetic medicine [BM]. Dr. Cholewa finds this method extremely useful in identifying the underlying cause of ill health and optimizing your health and well being."

Note: BM again. The claim is that this Vega stuff is "extremely useful." I don't get his listing when I search Bastry's alumni registry.

002.b. in "What is an ND" [vsc 2011-03-18]:

"naturopathic physicians are educated in all basic medical sciences [...and have] medical science education [...] modern naturopathic medicine applies [gram., 'the'] latest scientific methods [...and are] specialists in natural medicine [...using] natural therapies and treatments [...] to support the body's natural healing ability [coded vitalism...offering] safe and effective alternatives [...] naturopathic physicians adhere to rigorous educational and professional standards [...with] rigorous professional board exams [...] rigorous professional board exams administered by the North American Board of Naturopathic Examiners (NABNE) [...] the Council on Naturopathic Medical Education and the North American Board of Naturopathic Examiners set naturopathic education and examination standards. The American Association of Naturopathic Physicians (AANP) sets professional standards to assure public health and safety [...] AANP works to develop and preserve professional standards [...] ensuring public health and safety by developing national education and examination standardized for naturopathic medical colleges [...it's] a distinct health care profession "

Note: science, science, science.  Natural, natural, natural.  Coded vitalism, a claim of safety and efficacy, rigor, professionalism, rigorous professionalism, a claim that health and safety benefit from the essentially naturopathic!

002.c. in "The Practice" [vsc 2011-03-18]:

"Dr. Cholewa's practice incorporates both naturopathic and German bioenergetic medicine approaches with the goal of identifying the underlying causes of ill health. He uses the German VEGA assessment instrument during most visits. This method assesses the body’s autonomic nervous system responses [BANSR] to standardized frequencies that have known relationships to organs, hormones, toxins and allergens [...] performing comprehensive electro-diagnostic assessments [...] German bioenergetic medicine: Dr. Cholewa tests all dispensed medicines and supplements for maximum effectiveness and optimal tolerance using the German bioenergetic medicine Vega Test instrument. This approach helps him to decide what medications to treat with and what proper dose should be used for each individual patient [...] Vega electro-diagnostic assessment [...] accurate diagnosis is Dr. Cholewa’s primary concern. He utilizes the Vega electro-diagnostic method coupled with standard laboratory tests to uncover the underlying causes of your condition. The results of the electro-diagnostic assessment serve as a baseline to monitor your treatment progress [...] his eight-year experience using the German bioenergetic system of electro-diagnosis enabled him to achieve high success rate in helping people uncover and treat the root causes of their conditions. His skill in providing high quality, consistent electrodiagnostic assessments is what makes him excel not only in treating disease but also in helping people build health reserves by finding weaknesses in and optimizing the condition of the key organ systems: digestive, hormonal, cardiovascular, lymphatic, respiratory, nervous and genitourinary [...] 'naturopathic medicine coupled with German electro diagnosis offer a new and unique approach to health care. They provide an efficient way to reveal the underlying imbalances and offer effective health building solutions. My goal is to increase the regulatory and self-healing capacity of the body [coded vitalism] to restore optimal health'."

Note: Vega, BANSR and frequencies, and quite a lot of claims of its accuracy and efficacy.

002.d. in "Frequently Asked Questions" [vsc 2011-03-18]:

"Dr. Cholewa specializes in German bioenergetic medicine and electro-diagnosis. He uses the Vega Test instrument  [...] German electro-diagnosis [...] is a non-invasive, safe and painless electro-diagnostic assessment method that is performed during most first office visits. The instrument measures micro-current electronic changes in the body and provides valuable insights into the most common root causes of ill health such as food and environmental allergies, toxicities and functional organ imbalances. During testing a probe is used to measure the electrical resistance at points on the hand, points similar to acupuncture points [...] during a standard first office visit, Dr. Cholewa will [...] perform appropriate physical exam, and carry out a comprehensive electro-diagnostic assessment [...] some of the conditions Dr. Cholewa treats include: fatigue, digestive and intestinal problems, food and inhalant allergies, mercury and other heavy metal toxicities, yeast/mold related illness, sleep disturbances, depression, headaches, blood glucose imbalance, diabetes, high blood pressure, various skin conditions including eczema, osteoporosis, arthritis, immune dysfunctions including recurrent sinus and respiratory infections, menopause, fibromyalgia, elevated cholesterol, arteriosclerosis, heart disease and more [...] a standard first office visit lasts 60-90 minutes and consists of a naturopathic consultation and a comprehensive electro-diagnostic assessment [...] the following are some of our basic fees: First office visit: $165-245, depending on case complexity and visit length. Return office visit: $75; extended return office visit: $95."

Note: that's quite a lot of treasure. And that's quite a lot of the use of "electro-diagnostic" on one web page.

003. on vitalism, supernaturalism, Vega, and science:

003.a. vitalism is science-ejected:

I've talked about that to death. Check with the national science organizations.

003.b. supernaturalism is science-exterior:

I've talked about that to death.  Check with the national science organizations.

003.c. Vega testing is bunk:

the real energies of science are measurable physical quantities: electricity and skin impedance, in the case of what Vega really is measuring.  It's a parlor trick. We know that there isn't a distinct bioenergy / vital force / spirit running physiology because all the evidence preponderantly points to physio-chemical explanations.  We know there aren't places on the skin where such a bioenergy can be accessed. And we know there aren't routes from those supposed points connecting to organs and whatnot.  That's all fantasy.

004. overall warning:

the homepage of HSNP states [saved 2011-03-18]:

"naturopathic physicians base their medical practice on six proven principles: [#1] the healing power of nature [coded vitalism and supernaturalism...] the Hawaii Society of Naturopathic Physicians (HSNP) is the professional association representing licensed naturopathic physicians in the State of Hawaii [...with] your best interest at heart."

the inaccuracy and irony is killing me.  Naturopathy truly is the reversal of all values: when what's claimed as proven and extremely useful medically is actually what is science-ejected pseudomedical belief / fantasy nonsense.

the buzzer in my head goes off: "Danger, Will Robinson, danger...unethical sectarian pseudoscience."

Ontario's ND Long Says Naturopathy is Rooted in Science and is Sound Reasoning

here, I cite from a blog post of Ontario's ND Long who labels naturopathy science and professional, and claims critics are merely uninformed and thoughtless [see 001., below]; then I cite from the Canadian Association of Naturopathic Doctor's [CAND] publication that defines naturopathy [see 002., below]; I'll also cite from AANMC schools in 003.  and the web pages of ND Long and partner ND McKeown in 004.:

001. Long, M. (ND BINM 2010) states in "What Is[n't] Naturopathic Medicine?" [vsc 2011-03-16; my comments are in bold]:

Note: the title of the post says a lot about naturopathy's M.O.  Naturopathy wants to have it both ways, be what it is and what it isn't: pose itself as distinct, transparent, objective and be held to high scientific standards [what it isn't / epistemically demarcated], and yet remain undefined, vague, opaque and relative / subjective to maintain its contents [what it is / epistemically conflated].  That knowledge-type duality-posed-as-unity is the slime marinade that naturopathy wallows in.

"in actuality, we are rooted in science, requiring bachelor of science degrees as a prerequisite for entry in to naturopathic doctor programs [...we] use the latest natural evidence-based medicine with our patients.  Natural medicine is not stagnant, grasping on the whim of historical findings -- just like all branches of medicine, trusted therapies of old are refined continually as the evidence evolves -- out with the old, in with the new [...and speaks of the] available evidence [...] the actual evidence [...about] the profession [...] real naturopathic doctors [...of] the Association of Accredited Naturopathic Medical Colleges [variety...] we are deeply trained in clinical sciences [...] our education is not a joke [...I] only use interventions strongly supported by the peer reviewed evidence [...] most of naturopathic medicine is of sound reasoning [...]";

science, evidence, science, evidence, science, reasoning. Hmmmm.  In actuality, such is NOT rooted in science or even what's rational, but I'll get back to the central Canadian naturopathy textbook of "real" naturopathy [in 002., below].  There's talk of evidence and being progressive but that CAND textbook -- which summarizes naturopathic thought -- indicates naturopathy is quite preponderantly OTHERWISE, really.  As this blog states, 'in their own words': science is a garnish for a bunch of science-ejected and science-unsupported sectarian beliefs and methods unsoundly / falsely labeled science-based objective fact.  That is the ACTUAL evidence: the false / unsound position of labeling as science that which HUGELY is not.  This precludes naturopathy from using the label "profession" because professions are not based on falsehood and manipulative opacity.

"prereflective judgment is the most rudimentary type of thinking where a person merely assumes, as they are either unable to differentiate fact from belief [...] reflective judgment is considered the most advanced form of rational thinking [...where] opinions are critical assessments, formulated by weighing all available evidence before reaching a conclusion [...]";

I prereflectively TRUSTED the naturopathy apparatus to be telling the truth when I financially engaged with the AANMC school I attended as a career path.  The AANP Alliance had termed naturopathy "science based" and "not a belief system".  Later, with MORE EVIDENCE accumulating as I went through ND school, I found that the area is at its core -- upon a DECADE plus of REFLECTION -- nonsense.  I prereflectively assumed, I'll admit, that a University that was fully regionally accredited and State sanctioned wouldn't be based on nonsense and that '.gov' type oversight wouldn't be either.  Now, reflectively, I can parse naturopathy's deceptive M.O. using ALL the evidence I've acquired over more than 15 years of study of naturopathy.  The "fact from belief" mention has my irony meter destroyed: it is precisely naturopathy's labeling of belief [no science] as fact [scientific] that IS its knowledge-type muddle.  As a proponent of "science based medicine" and not merely "evidence based medicine", I do appreciate the ethos of looking at "all available evidence."  I have, particularly plausibility.  I know more than most NDs / NMDs about naturopathy, actually, and naturopathy's relation to science and the science-ejected.

"we cannot easily define naturopathic medicine based on what it is [...] I am going to define it based on what it isn’t [...] we are not witch doctors, quacks, hippies, or miracle curers.  We do not have voodoo dolls, cauldrons, or potions [...]";

you will have to do better than that, if you are going to use the labels "science" and "profession"!  Part of the purpose of this blog is to do better than that.  Here's an example: when I was in ND school, an ND instructor diagnosed patients with a pendulum and applied kinesiology, and treated people with homeopathy, UNDA numbers, and acupuncture.  Sounds a lot like what's done in the later part of the citation directly above.  So, therein I just described part of what naturopathy IS.  Since ND Long doesn't have the ability [or perhaps desire] to pin-down 'the essentially naturopathic', I will, in part, below.

002. CAND's textbook (ISBN 9781552787786 2009, by ND Lloyd):

I highly recommend this book as a 'key' to the contents of naturopathy, from the Canadian side.  You can buy it directly from CAND for not very much money.  It's also at Amazon. Here's some of it:

"vitalism and holism represents the philosophy of naturopathic medicine [p.029...] the aim of naturopathic physicians is to treat the patient, not the disease, by directing the vital force and encouraging it with naturopathic therapeutics to stimulate the body’s own defenses [p.030...] modern day science recognizes that the concepts of vitalism and holism are as integral to understanding health and disease as the concepts of reductionism and mechanism. The true picture, and hence the answer to health promotion and disease prevention, lies in the blending of all the knowledge."

Note: so, there you go.  Vitalism, which is hugely science-ejected actually, claimed as science. And science, which is a knowledge-type demarcation, blended with the nonscientific and then falsely labeled science --  overall a knowledge-type conflation,  the 'we must blend knowledge' yet claim that as unblended science naturopathic M.O.  When is knowledge demarcation equated with knowledge conflation -- naturopathy.  When is science nonscience -- naturopathy.  So, I don't see the accuracy of ND Long's claim of being "rooted in science", "out with the old", "rational thinking", "all available evidence", and "profession".

03. AANMC schools:

003.a. NCNM:

ah, the mother ship.  Wherein the hugely science-exterior vitalistic and supernatural is claimed to survive scientific scrutiny.   Blogged this so often it's mundane.

003.b. BINM, ND Long's alma mater:

on the other hand, is cryptic / opaque / manipulative / incomplete about the essentially naturopathic.   Their definition page of naturopathy, "Naturopathic Medical Training" [vsc 2011-03-16] states:

"naturopathic medicine is a distinct primary health care profession founded on the time honored belief in vis medicatrix naturae, 'the healing power of nature' [...] the body's inherent healing abilities [...] it is a holistic [coded vitalism, supernaturalism and kind and meaningless vagarity...] the following is a list of treatments commonly provided or prescribed by naturopathic physicians [...] homeopathy: the use of minute amounts of natural substances to stimulate the body's self-healing abilities [coded vitalism]."

Note: oh, how opaque.  I wish I could be told the full picture: that naturopathy is based on vitalism and kind, and that vitalism and kind is science-ejected AND naturopathy falsely labels the science-exterior science and trades on that irrationality.  But, that's asking too much!  So, the supposedly rooted-in-science cannot do what science must do always: be transparent, use only that which is based upon evidence, not include the science-exterior and science-ejected [like vitalism and kind in all its guises] and such science-ejected bunk as homeopathy.

004. ND Long and McKeown, K. (ND BINM)'s practice [linkedin.com says they are co-owners of the practice]:

004.a. describe naturopathy in "Optimum Integrative Philosophy" [vsc 2011-03-16]:

"at Optimum Integrative we [...use] the latest in evidence-based medicine."

Note: so you'd think the context of naturopathy is scientific and evidence-based as a FOUNDATION or ROOT.

004.b. in "Naturopathic Philosophy" [vsc 2011-03-16]:

"the principles of naturopathic medicine are the foundation for naturopathic practice [...including #2] vis mediatrix [sp., 'medicatrix'] naturae - the healing power of nature [...] naturopathic doctors are compelled to act morally, ethically, and professionally in accordance with the Naturopathic Physicians Oath: I dedicate myself to the service of humanity as a practitioner of the art and science of naturopathic medicine [...] I will honor the principles of naturopathic medicine [...including] to cooperate with the healing powers of nature [...and] to heal the whole person  [...] I pledge to remain true to this oath."

Note: ah, the foundation that dare not speak its vitalistic science-ejected context clearly and instead falsely labels it science.  That is the ROOT / foundation of naturopathy: an irrational knowledge-type muddle.  How can you engage in a professional relationship with such opacity / falseness / irrationality?  Naturopathy's supposed 'oath-bound' ethical posture is hilarious, in that light: by oath, I'd argue, they are committed to the context of the science-ejected vitalistic, supernatural and kind, and then by that oath's example / mode also to a mannerism of manipulative opacity that doesn't transparently state 'the essentially naturopathic is the science-ejected falsely and irrationally claimed as science'.

Overall note:

and that is my reflective judgment: naturopathy is QUITE an absurdity.  This is from someone STEEPED:  who went to an AANMC school for four years, and has continually studied this junk thought.