Thursday, March 24, 2011

CAND's New PR Push:

here, I cite from a Canadian Association of Naturopathic Doctor's [CAND] recent press release about naturopathy's / 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. 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 – 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 [  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 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, [...] 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 [] visit"

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

002.a. CNF states:

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

Note: so we go there.

002.b. 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 ['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 ['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?
Post a Comment