001.Tom Chivers, "the Telegraph's assistant comment editor", writes in "Huffington Post Explains 'How Homeopathic Medicines Work', Without Bothering to Mention That They Don't" (2012-12-07) [my comments are in unquoted bold]:
"the Huffington Post, one of the biggest political websites in the world. It has more readers than any newspaper website [...] 54 million people a month[...] is a proud supporter of quackery [...]";
this is quite true.
"Dana Ullman, 'the foremost spokesperson for homeopathic medicine in the U.S.', has been writing for the HuffPo for several years [...and is] 'someone who believes that disease can be cured by magic, that water can remember things if you tap it against a horsehair cushion, and that something doesn't need to actually work in order for it to need an explanation for how it works' [...it's] ludicrous nonsense [...] he's a quack [...]";
ouch. True, and truly ouch!
"[bur regarding] the boring details of fact and evidence [...] about homeopathy. First and most important, it doesn't work [...and] explaining how something works requires first that it works. It doesn't work [...] there have been several major trials into homeopathy [...] and at least two meta-analyses [...] they found that homeopathy did no better than placebo [...]";
it doesn't work any better than placebo. Say it one hundred times, Dana Ullman.
"[yet@HuffPo it's] being treated as though it's real medicine [...] the Huffington Post would be the among the first crowing Left-liberal media outlets to leap on a Republican politician, say, who said that the world was 6,000 years old or that Darwin was wrong. They run [...] pieces by Chris Mooney explaining why the GOP denies science [...but] you don't get to pick and choose which bits of science you like [...and] that the Right are all crazy mad science-fearing God-bothering lunatics [...and then promote] some magic medicine that doesn't work works [...] pretend physician, heal thyself";
you said it, brother.
002. and now for North American naturopathyland:
002.a. you have homeopathy welded into the fabric of a fully-government accredited naturopathic education [here are NDs at their schools' consortia. So much homeopathy!; vsc 2012-12-07];
002.b. here it is [vsc 2012-12-07] on the North American licensure exam falsely labeled a "clinical science";
002.c. here you have that consortia claiming that naturopathy's contents overall are indeed "science-based";
I employ the language of Mr. Chivers: pretend physicians, you don't get to select what parts of science are true and what parts aren't, it doesn't work.
but, I'll tell you what does work, in the illegal-smelling states-sanctioned kind of racketeering way:
North American naturopathy, both clinically and academically.