here, I cite from the naturopathy web page of the National Center For Complementary and Alternative Medicine [NCCAM] which does not accurately contextualize the science-ejected basis of naturopathy, still [see 001., below]; then, I provide some clarity [see 002. and 003., below]:
001. NCCAM writes in "Naturopathy: An Introduction" [saved 2011-03-07]:
"naturopathy [...aka] naturopathic medicine [...is] guided by a philosophy that emphasizes the healing power of nature [the coded science-ejected...] a central belief in naturopathy is that nature has a healing power (a principle practitioners call vis medicatrix naturae) [the coded science-ejected...] practitioners view their role as supporting the body’s inherent ability to maintain and restore health [the coded science-ejected...] the practice of naturopathy is based on principles that are similar to and consistent with the principles of primary care medicine as practiced by conventional physicians [bullshit, truly unless for both 'science and non-science are the same thing'...#5 is] healing power of nature [the coded science-ejected]. Seek to identify and remove obstacles to the body’s natural processes for maintaining and restoring health [the coded science-ejected...] some beliefs and approaches of naturopathic practitioners are not consistent with conventional medicine [duh! Ya think?], and their safety may not be supported by scientific evidence [not merely that, their beliefs' EXISTENCE isn't...] the NCCAM-funded Naturopathic Medical Research Agenda [...] brought together representatives from a broad range of scientific and clinical backgrounds to develop priorities for scientific exploration of naturopathic medical practices and principles."
Note: oh how the SLIME oozes from NCCAM across all that they attempt to discuss. I'd really like to be told THE TRUTH. I'd like a TRANSPARENT definition of 'the essentially naturopathic'. Because even the United Stated Federal Government won't provide such, I'll do so in 002., below. The public deserves transparency.
002. VMN as the science-ejected concept of vitalism, which is at the heart of naturopathy:
read this blog's other posts, I've talked about this simple fact TOO OFTEN. What essentially happens in the naturopathic mindset is that science is so loosely defined that it has lost any meaningfulness because with naturopathy, science is equated with the profoundly science-ejected. Science is a false label placed upon the essentially naturopathic and is used for the purpose of their gaining commerce unfairly and positioning their pseudoprofessionalism.
003. overall comment:
yes, Federal agencies spend tax dollars ludicrously scientifically investigating the profoundly science-ejected. It's akin to money being spent attempting to equate the number two with the number three. Oh, I'd love to know how NCCAM seeks to scientifically gird the supernatural and the vitalistic, both of which are hugely science-exterior [and the gap is only growing; just as something is not what it is not]. I'd love for NCCAM to inform the public that VMN means "life force" or "vital force" and that such is a sectarian science-ejected belief that has no medical relevance. I'd love to hear that naturopathy, as it is, is based on falsehood and that NCCAM has partnered with it.
Slime and further slime; the reversal of all values.
