Ontario NDs Gignac and Sonnenberg's "Enormous" Evidence / "Science-Based" Claim Upon Naturopathy

here, I cite from the web page of two Ontario NDs [see 001., below]:

001. Gignac, T. (ND CCNM), Sonnenburg, L. (ND CCNM) state in "FAQ's" [vsc 2011-04-27]:

"naturopathic doctors take a minimum of seven years of post-secondary education: three years pre-medical studies at university, followed by four years at one of four recognized colleges of naturopathic medicine. This post-graduate work includes medical science course work such as: anatomy, physiology, biochemistry, pathology, microbiology, immunology, pharmacology, laboratory diagnosis, clinical and physical diagnosis, radiology, minor surgery, obstetrics, gynecology/ women’s health, pediatrics, other clinical sciences [including homeopathy...] is naturopathy scientific? There is an enormous body of evidence supporting naturopathic medicine [...] you’ll be surprised to discover just how practical and scientific our work at the clinic is. We rely a great deal on lab testing and logical, scientific analysis [...embedded Canadian Association of Naturopathic Doctors video] 'science-based natural medicine'."

Note: science, science, science.  The VMN-HPN principle that is described by these NDs is not fully contextualized as the science-ejected sectarian concept that it actually is.  And homeopathy isn't properly contextualized as the science-ejected sectarian 'therapy' that it actually is.

But such opacity is the-reversal-of-all-values that defines naturopathy.