Saturday, September 24, 2011

Slán Leat / Adios II.

here, I continue a goodbye with a letter I sent in a flurry of certified mail to various education and legal regulatory accomplices that through the years have aided naturopathy in its deceit [I've edited some rather personal information here]:


To all the parties involved in this ONGOING Naturopathic Education Commerce and General Commerce Fraud:

I've received notification that wage garnishment will occur for the education loan debt I have [see copies attached]. I am currently employed as a _______ with an income that is roughly $_2000 a year and I will not voluntarily pay towards this debt.

I will provide some background and because I think this is an issue of consumer fraud / misrepresentation in the area of higher education and fraud / misrepresentation in general in terms of commerce, I've copied this to Pioneer, NYSHESC, NYSAGO, CTDE, NYAGO, CTAGO and USDE:

-I attended CUNY Lehman College from 1990-1994, graduating Phi Beta Kappa, summa cum laude, and with multiple honors. Grants covered my tuition, so I've no debt from my BA.

-I then attended NYU towards an MA, but I ceased this after getting interested in the program in naturopathic medicine at the University of Bridgeport here in Bridgeport, CT.

-I then attended UB's College of Naturopathic Medicine for four years. I ceased this program voluntarily because I came to the conclusion that naturopathy inherently misrepresents itself to education consumers and to society at large.

-I then attended CSU and the State University of CT but neither of those programs ended up being interesting to me and I have no graduate degree.

When I consolidated my debt, I was surprised to find out that since the initial loans for grad school were in NYS at NYU, that apparently my entire aggregate is now NYSHESC. I'd actually take more pleasure if it was CT who had the lot, as they are the greatest accomplices regarding the greatest higher education falsehood I've ever heard of: the false labeling of a doctoral degree as science when HUGELY in content not.

At the core of my debt is the UB naturopathy misrepresentation which enticed me from NYU and which later, after seeing it for what it truly was through the four years of schooling there, messed up my professional path. I now consider myself a whistle-blower and I have been publicly writing about this naturopathic fraud at my blog for 5 years and for more than 500 posts as well as carefully cataloging naturopathy's claims in print, on the web, and specifically from their own textbooks.

Apart from my own 'from the inside' criticisms and compilations, I highly recommend the blog which does an even better job than I do at exposing what is clearly naturopathic misrepresentation, irrationality, quackery, and falsehood.

The documents I have are too numerous to include here, but I've made them all publicly available online through my blogger account . What I'd really like to know is why I have to do all this leg work and consumers are not being properly protected by you all.

Here's a version of what I know about naturopathy fraud if you still don't get it, in terms of general commerce and education commerce:

a) the University of Bridgeport labels its naturopathy science. So, this deals with the education consumer. Here's a picture I just took: 

And here is UB stating their curriculum (see ) and its requisite homeopathy.

b) State-wide clinician groups advertise similarly to the public. So, this deals with general commerce. Here's NYANP telling us naturopathy is science (see ) as they try to get a law written: “[from p.1] naturopathy is a science-based health care practice […and] natural therapies include […] homeopathic remedies.” Here's CT's State ND group (see ) stating science and one of their members practicing homeopathy

c) so , if you are following, the marketing claim is science and the contents are homeopathy amongst other things. I use homeopathy here as a microcosm of naturopathy's false representations, because homeopathy is utterly and truly science-ejected. Here's a link to the recent UK evidence-check that in sum says homeopathy doesn't work, it can't work, and it's actually so scientifically-ejected that NO FURTHER RESEARCH IS RECOMMENDED (see ).

d) but, this fraud gets better. Go to the web site for the North American licensure exam for NDs and you will find homeopathy falsely labeled science (see ).

I have been at this research regarding naturopathy for well over 15 years now. When I first started, I knew little and believed their labels. Here's the document that induced me, safely stashed away at the Internet Archive (see ) wherein we're told “naturopathic physicians are the modern day science based primary care doctor.” And, New York, here's an article written by a NY naturopath and if you know anything about the therapies and methods she is discussing – that is, if you are literate in modern medical science – they are scientifically nonsensical (see ).

But, let me make a prediction: this licensed and soon to be licensed falsehood will continue without investigation, consumers will continue to be fleeced, and I'll become even poorer in the process.

-Rob Cullen.

Note: the next step of this is to post their responses [and lack of response] and I'll take it directly to the media.  Perhaps the best indication that absurdity is now quality is this simple fact: the Princeton Review medical school prep reference claims that the "naturopathic" is amongst "the best medical".  If such a complete reversal of all values isn't remarkable, then I stand corrected in that very Orwellian sense [his 1984]:

peace IS war, ignorance IS strength, truth IS falsehood, science IS nonscience, virtue IS vice...and so on.

and, of course, I highly recommend the 'just published' study "Supported by Science?: What Canadian Naturopaths Advertise to the Public" [PMID 21920039; Allergy Asthma Clin Immunol. 2011 Sep 15;7(1):14; see ] by Caulfield and Rachul which states, for all those who don't get it yet and need to have their heads banged against the arse of Cu Chulainn [see here for this incredibly obscure reference]:

"a review of the therapies advertised on the websites of clinics offering naturopathic treatments does not support the proposition that naturopathic medicine is a science and evidence-based practice."
Post a Comment