Sunday, August 19, 2012

Changelog 2012-08-12, 2012-08-19 and ND Video:

here, I summarize this week's additions to my public naturopathy database.  I also link to an ND's video each changelog, quote from, and tag the video in some detail:

001. added:

the science claims of:

NDs Donovan and Fahoum 

002. video of the week link [not to pun]:


#ISBN07295415179780729541510 #iridology #vitalism #pseudodiagnostics
"[from the description] Clinical Naturopathic Medicine is a foundation clinical text integrating the holistic traditional principles of naturopathic philosophy with the scientific rigor of evidence-based medicine (EBM) to support contemporary practices and principles [...]";

so the foundation of naturopathy is claimed to have, essentially, INTEGRITY.   I don't see how that is possible in the sense of logical integrity when those very principles and their philosophy stuff, and specific practices, actually are REFUTED by scientific analysis!  For instance, as I own this textbook, the books states:

"[location 15967] naturopathic diagnosis [via] iridology: the gallbladder region can be located in the right iris and is positioned at 8 o'clock between the liver and the duodenal areas; all three regions are positioned on a straight radius extending from the pupil to the sclera border.  The realm of iridology does not extend to the ability of being able to identify gallstones as any markings in the iris refer to the tissues of the gall bladder rather than the gallbladder contents" 

but iridology is considered abject NONSENSE.  It also speaks of naturopathy's

"[location 1734] the following three principles are fundamental and are still in place today: [#1] belief in a vital force that underlies all living organisms.  It is this force that unifies all living organisms and is responsible for restoration and preservation of health" and "[location 15421] both the modern and traditional naturopath delivers treatments so that the primary goal of supporting the body's own innate ability to heal (vitality, life force, vis medicatrix naturae) is fostered" 

which is an idea quite science EJECTED.  Claiming, as is claimed above in my view, that naturopathy's foundation has integrity, particularly via scientific rigorous analysis, is quite patently FALSE.

"[from the video...] the best experts in the industry [...] 'a major gap in the market' [...] 'clinical naturopathic medicine was a logical evolution' [...] 'a solid foundation in the practice of naturopathy' [...] 'to properly equip the reader with therapeutic strategies' [...via] 'Elsevier Australia'";

oh how the irony delights me: wherein values are reversed, and what is nonsense is best, logical, solid, proper.  What's really rich is that the book's imprint is "Elsevier Health Science Division" according to
Post a Comment